Massad Ayoob's Blog, page 123

THE CHRISTMAS GUN

A police chief friend sent this along from the UK.

What evoked horror in the Brits who published that, evoked nostalgia in me…and, undoubtedly, in many of the men and women of the well-established English shooting community.  I don’t just remember those old ads…I remember opening guns under the Christmas tree.  I think the coolest Christmas present I ever received was my first Colt .45 automatic pistol, at age twelve.  (Yeah, I know, but even Colt called it “automatic” instead of “semi-automatic.”)  The same was true for my kids’ generation, at least in my family and my circles.

Buying guns for Christmas presents is not as casual as it once was.  There is a fear of being accused of a “straw man” purchase. That is, buying a gun for someone else but signing on that ominous Form 4473 that you are buying it for yourself.  While you can still give a gun (under Federal law, anyway; check the local law where you are) many find it easier to simply get a gift certificate at the gun shop to put under the tree.  Not quite the same, but reassuring to some.

Ain’t much time left to buy one, and none at all in which to take possession of it and wrap it up in states with waiting periods.  But in those places, there is still time to lay the money down, take title if not physical possession, and put the receipt in a gift card for the recipient.

I discussed this with my buddy Steve Denney, general manager of the gun shop where I most often hang out, ProArms. Steve had this to add: “Aside from the time convenience of a gift certificate, it also gives a person the chance to choose a different gun than the giver may have imagined the person would like, or even change their mind if the gun they thought they wanted wasn’t the one they actually liked after getting their hands on a particular model.  That may be more detail than you want to get into, but you know the ‘If I like it the little woman must like it’ syndrome.  I guess it depends on how much pre-planning has gone into the decision.  Also, with gun availability as spotty as it is right now, a gift cert. would allow for time to find the make and model gun that a person really wants.  Finally, if you want to give a gun to someone who doesn’t live in the same state, a gift certificate can still cross state lines without the need for, or encumbrance by, Federal regulations.”

To give a firearm is to give the gift of responsibility.  It sends a message of trust.

If the gift is going to a first time shooter/gun owner, the gun itself should be only part of the present. Give it with the understanding that the recipient will go to the range with you and learn safe handling.  Otherwise, it’s like giving a chain saw to someone who has no idea how to run it.  If you going to the range with them isn’t in the cards, a gift certificate for a local firearms safety class would be an excellent accompaniment.

Finally, the Christmas or birthday gun can become the gift of survival.  I rather like this commercial from Glock:

You’re invited to share memories of guns of Christmases past, here.

Share or Bookmark

MORE GOOD GUN-RELATED BOOKS FOR CHRISTMAS

In “Guns Across the Border,” Mike Detty gives the inside story of having been a firearms dealer working at the request of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives in what was supposed to be an undercover sting against Mexican drug cartels.  The resultant “gunwalking” scandal became a horrendous failure that undercover police officers will be warned against forevermore.  The program, like the guns themselves, “went south.” Some of those weapons were used to commit murder, including the death of a Border Patrolman named Brian Terry.  The government, all the way to Washington, didn’t handle the aftermath as ethically as I would like to have seen, either.  In four decades of working within the criminal justice system, I never saw cops publicly proclaiming against their chief law enforcement officer, the Attorney General of the United States, until this case.  But today I see cops who post on the internet over a “sig line” that says “Eric Holder lied, Brian Terry died.”  I know Mike Detty, and I trust him.  His insider account is “must reading” on this topic, whether you are a law enforcement officer or a concerned citizen.

“Cornered Cat,” the classic blog  turned book, is now available as an audiobook in time for a Christmas download, on Audible.

While Cornered Cat is a great resource for defensively-oriented gun people of all genders and experience levels, its greatest strength is that it’s written by a woman, for women, and particularly valuable to entry level shooters.  Author Kathy Jackson is a friend and fellow instructor…she knows her stuff, and is a tremendous role model.

Independence Institute is, until New Year’s Eve, running a fabulous offer on Steve Halbrook’s books. Steve is one of the all-time great legal scholars of the Second Amendment, and was a major player in recent SCOTUS decisions in that regard. When he and I taught at a recent Texas Bar Association symposium, I managed to pick up an autographed copy of his “Securing Civil Rights: Freedmen, the Fourteenth Amendment, and the Right to Bear Arms.”  Very much on point to recent dialogues we’ve had here.  The Independence Institute package represents a great value on Christmas gift books for those in your life who are interested in all manner of civil rights issues.

Share or Bookmark

REMEMBERING NEWTOWN

I’m writing this on Friday, December 13, 2013.  I feel a sense of foreboding that has nothing to do with Friday the thirteenth. It has everything to do with the fact that tomorrow will mark one year since the atrocity in Newtown, Connecticut at the Sandy Hook Elementary School that left twenty little kids and six innocent adults dead before the monster responsible blew his own brains out.

My first thought, and still the strongest, was the horror of it all: I have grandchildren the age of the victims.  But I cannot escape the firestorm of hate that came down on law-abiding gun owners in the wake of it.  Sandy Hook became a handy hook for a newly re-elected anti-gun President to take off his mask of neutrality on Second Amendment rights, and lead an unprecedented assault against them.

That assault gained ground in some places: California to some extent, Colorado, Connecticut, and New York, for example.  Nationally, though, it largely fizzled. My friend Richie Feldman analyzed the situation well yesterday in his op-ed piece in USA Today.

But on the fourteenth, we can expect the Prohibitionists to dance until they’re exhausted in the blood of the innocent dead, pushing their class warfare against gun owners and ignoring the remedies that CAN prevent such atrocities. That would be measures in place on the ground allowing the next such monster to be interdicted before he can build his sick “body count.”  There has been some positive movement in that direction in the year since, but not nearly enough.

Expect a media gun control circus, despite counter-efforts by pro-gun groups to make it a day of education on safety. Another old friend, Dave Workman, makes some good points on that topic.

Mourn the dead, as we will on this end.  If something meaningful comes from those heartbreaking deaths, it will be a push for on-the-ground measures to interdict mass murderers a’ la’ the Israeli Model, not punishment of more innocent people with Draconian laws born in empty symbolism.

Share or Bookmark

GUNS AND COLOR LINES

Hanza, a regular commenter here, alerted me to the following from Huffington Post:

O…M…G.  If that had made my eyes roll any more, I would have needed an emergency appointment with an ophthalmologist.

Hanza notes that it does not seem to mention that white racism in the South was associated more with Democrats than Republicans.

I couldn’t help but notice that the African-American reporter himself was suspicious of the story.  Nor that our peace-loving friends at Huffington Post begin with an ad for Call To Duty, at least when I saw it. (They apparently rotate the ads.)

Study is HERE.  A study by the same folks saying why you can’t trust research like this is HERE.

Open for discussion.

Share or Bookmark

GUN BOOKS FOR UNDER THE CHRISTMAS TREE

When I was a little boy, reading matter was a staple on the family list of Christmas presents.  As both primary gifts and “stocking-stuffers,” I did the same with my kids, and they do the same with theirs.  This being mainly a gun blog, let’s look at some good reading for “gun guys and gals” on your gift list.  Be warned: there will be some degree of controversy in each.

“Gun Guys: A Road Trip.” Author Dan Baum is a self-described left-wing liberal gun owner, who I think did his best to take an unprejudiced look at the whole gun ownership controversy.  The book is insightful interviewing and participatory journalism in which the reader hears from those of us who carry, as well as those who hate guns.  Like most impartial views of this complicated topic, he will manage to anger the hard-core advocates on either side, but I think a dispassionate reading will show that logic brought him, for the most part, to our side.  (Which seems to be the usual outcome in unprejudiced analysis of this topic, but I digress.)  Wherever the reader personally comes down on the issue, no one can expect to defeat an opponent they don’t understand, and Baum gives insight into the thinking of pro-gun and anti-gun people alike.

“The Third Bullet.” Stephen Hunter is one of my very favorite novelists.  His fictionalized account of the JFK assassination, while I don’t see it as a template for reality, may be the most believable “conspiracy theory” yet to see print.  I think it’s appropriate that it’s presented as fiction.  It is, simply, a great read brought to us by a master of the writer’s craft.

“Dangerous Men.” Scott Ferguson is a lifelong student of human conflict in general and gunfighters of the Old West in particular. He is also a deeply-experienced instructor of defensive shooting and police officer survival tactics.  Blending vocation with avocation, “Dangerous Men” is a study of gunfights and the people who fought them. From the OK Corral to the infamous “FBI Firefight” of 4/11/86, Scott reminds us that different historians have different takes on these events, but the takeaway lessons of tactics and the psychology of coping with mortal violence remain the same over the centuries.  Excellent, insightful reading for anyone who keeps or carries a gun.

The first two are now out in paperback for affordable stocking-stuffers, as well as hardcover, Kindle and Audio.  I’ve seen the first two on the rack at Barnes & Noble.  Amazon has “Dangerous Men” in eBook form at their Kindle Store.

Share or Bookmark

IT’S THAT TIME OF YEAR AGAIN

Having just finished three non-stop Shark Week months, I find myself where many others are now: Good Lord, it’s Christmas shopping time! 

Testing assorted gun-related products as part of my work, I run across some pretty cool stuff now and then.  One line I’ve had great luck with is the Scott-e-Vest series, at www.scottevest.com.  Since being introduced to this stuff a few years ago, I’ve found myself wearing pants, shirt, vest and jacket and just bought a new vest for my Significant Other, who prefers this design to anything else on the market.

Top-quality material and manufacture combine here with ingenious hidden pocket designs. The Scott-e-Vest line began, as its name implies, with gear for geeks.  Pockets for all your iSfuff…and, it turns out, useful pockets for gun stuff.  These garments have tunnels for wires and other cool features.

Check out the website.  We pistol-packers find much of interest, but for even the non-gun people on your list, the whole techno-pocket theme will appeal to giftees who share my Significant Other’s ethos: “ iPod, iPad, iPhone, therefore I am.”

Share or Bookmark

ON THANKSGIVING…

It looks as if some will be experiencing rough weather on Thanksgiving…for some folks, in more ways than one.

We’ll all be giving thanks for different things.  A couple of weeks ago, my good friend Dan was stricken with a massive heart attack that almost killed him.  Great docs brought him back, and he’s now at home recovering from a quad bypass.  Best of luck, bro.

The grieving of others makes our own thanks more solemn.  Yesterday, a good friend buried his wife of many, many years.  He nursed her to the end while pancreatic cancer ravaged her.  Shortly before that, another old friend lost his only son at age 40 in a tragic car crash.

Like anyone else, I’m grateful for my loved ones, my friends, and my colleagues.  I’m grateful also to the readers here, for their spirited discussions. And I’m grateful to the extended families of my three friends mentioned above, who gave them support in a time when they needed it most.

We could all do worse than aspire to be the people for whom others give thanks on Thanksgiving.

I wish a safe, pleasant and meaningful Thanksgiving to you all.

Share or Bookmark

NOVEMBER 22, 1963-2013

It will be a rare American who isn’t reminded of the fiftieth anniversary of the JFK assassination today, unless they’re out in the deer woods.  That’s where my future father-in-law was when it happened, along with his daughter, my future wife, who was helping him drag his whitetail buck home.

I was home from school, sick with mono, and ironically reading a LOOK magazine article about the President and his son, when the first news flash came over the TV.

Those of us sentient then remember where we were when we heard the news.  We’ve lived to see half a century of assorted conspiracy theories.  And, on that day, we saw the birth of the late 20th Century’s fixation on “gun control.”

There will be many memories and many thoughts among you all today.  Feel free to share here.

Share or Bookmark

RESCUING SOMEONE YOU LOVE

Sounds like a movie script, doesn’t it?

Family of Bethany Arceneaux will not face charges for shooting kidnapper dead in dramatic rescue, police say.

As always, we have to wait for all the facts to be in. At this time, authorities are indicating there will be no charges.

Brings us to an interesting theory, though.

If you are present, without society’s designated protectors there, or likely to get there in time, that’s when you become the “first responder” to the emergency, and you might be the only one there who can determine whether the innocent victim survives or not.

 

That’s why we encourage every responsible person to know first aid, in case there are now emergency medical professionals there when it happens.  To save life and ward off the death of the innocent, until the designated paramedics or emergency medical technicians have too long an ETA (estimated time of arrival) when the victim is going to die unless they’re treated NOW.

That’s why we encourage every citizen to have fire extinguishers, and know how and when to use them, when the conflagration is right here, right now, and the firefighters are ETA distant. So innocent victims are saved from things that will kill them or horribly maim them unless they are protected NOW.

And that’s why, when the monster is about to kill someone you love, you need an emergency rescue tool to stop that from happening, if the police aren’t there NOW to stop them for you and time has run out.

This is why I have, for decades now, taught that the defensive firearm is directly analogous to the fire extinguisher you’d find in any well prepared home in the civilized world.

There will be those who will say that the rescuers in this case “took the law into their own hands.”  Well, when a person with a compound fracture of the leg lies in front of you and the medics aren’t there yet, is it not right and just to lay hands on the inured limb, apply traction, and take the injury “into your own hands”?  If the fire is burning now and you can stop it with the extinguisher, are you wrong to pick up that device and smother the deadly fire “with your own hands”?

And if the law lies broken in front of you, should YOU not take it into your own hands to apply the equivalent of life-saving direct pressure or the agony-reducing traction with those very hands?

Discussion is invited…

Share or Bookmark

UNDERSTANDING BOTH SIDES

In the blog entry below this one, I touched on an incident that occurred in New Mexico which has set a fire in the blogosphere.  That entry drew a lot of criticism from folks who want the involved officers, and their little dog too, to be hung out to dry because they took a guy to the hospital for a rectal exam because they thought he had hidden drugs up his butt.  The examination found no drugs. The examination went to an extraordinary degree: multiple digital anal probes, multiple enemas, and finally, a colonoscopy, all without the suspect’s consent.

A disproportionate number of the critics were first time posters here, generally an indication that they read somewhere else that I disagreed with them, and just had to fight.  No comments on that last blog entry here have been deleted at this writing; I encourage debate here, unlike the anti-gun blogs.  I do, however, appreciate it if those with opposing views at least know what they’re talking about.

Let me address some of the issues.

“They didn’t find drugs, so they were wrong. Punish them.” Sorry, folks, that’s not how it works. To make a long story short, “You don’t have to be right, you have to be REASONABLE.” Do a Google search for Graham v. Connor. The suspect, with a long record of drug arrests, was known to one officer to have stuffed drugs up his butt before; the drug-sniffing dog alerted to the driver’s seat where he had been sitting; and, what first alerted the officers to that area of his body, he was visibly clenching his buttocks tight.”

“They based it on an anonymous tip! Punish them!” No. ONE basis of multiple bases was that another officer said the suspect was known to put drugs up his butt. The fact that the officer giving that information was not named in the warrant does not make it an “anonymous tip,” and only someone with a child-like grasp of the criminal justice system would think so. It’s more like “transferred probable cause.”

“He was anally raped by the authorities! Punish them!” Uh, no.  Any cop with experience and good training, like any experienced medical professional who works the emergency room, knows of cases where drug suspects have hidden the dope in their body cavities and died from that act.  It normally comes from swallowing a baggie of heroin or a balloon full of cocaine, but anally-inserted drugs can act even faster than those taken orally. If these officers AND medicos had failed to investigate this and the man died, the same anti-authoritarians would be calling for all their heads for letting him die untreated and unexamined. The cops followed the protocol: when there’s a medical issue, turn it over to the medical people.  No cop held a gun to the head of the physician who ordered the more extensive and invasive testing.  When digital examination and X-ray were done, don’t you think there was SOMETHING that made the medical professionals involved continue the testing?  Some considerable time elapsed between the arrest and the colonoscopy: by that time, any physician would have to consider the possibility that the drugs had already been absorbed, and might reasonably do the colonoscopy to detect other signs of that having happened.

I have to note that, to my knowledge, none of the bloggers who fueled the flames for outraging the public even considered any of this when they made their initial inflammatory posts.

But one other hospital refused to do it! That’s the way it looks. However, I also know of one hospital whose policy is that if they have reason to believe that the conscious adult patient has swallowed poison and he refuses to be examined and treated, personnel are under orders not to examine or treat. Was that policy in place at the first hospital? I don’t know.  I do think that in any hospital with that policy, Risk Management needs to cross-pollinate with the Ethics Committee.

But the warrant was from another jurisdiction, and had timed out. If there is good reason to believe there may be life-threatening substances inside the patient’s body, exigent circumstances (look it up) have kicked in. That triggers the doctrine of competing harms/doctrine of necessity/doctrine of two evils. (Look those up, too.) The importance of the warrant now pales.

We all need to apply common sense. One commentator in the last blog entry noted the striking comparisons of this case to Florida v. Zimmerman.  In many respects, I have to concur. Each trope came first from plaintiff’s counsel, unanswered by the defense (and the involved authorities) until much later. In this case, the defense (the police and the medicos) have not yet put their defense forward. We’ve seen their warrant from before the fact of the examination, but not their reasoning for what they did next. Doctors are constantly under siege from bogus malpractice complaints, cops likewise with false excessive force allegations, and lawyers tell their defendant clients “We won’t try the case in the press.”  Thus, only one side gets heard.

It’s laughable that the cops did that for the suspect’s safety, according to one critic. And, cops have no responsibility for our safety. BS and more BS.  A “special relationship” existed between the officers and the suspect the moment the investigative detention began. Once they came to believe he may have stuffed enough drugs up his butt to kill him, they had both legal and ethical duties to seek further examination.  And if, when the docs caught the ball and did the examinations, they didn’t see some reason to continue looking, why on earth would they have done so?  Cui bono? What would the docs who did the exams have possibly had to gain at that point, if those medical professionals DIDN’T have reason to think it was necessary?

The medical records and testimony will come out at trial, if not before. Don’t judge based on one side, get outraged at what that one side told you, and then feel a need to defend it so you won’t be embarrassed by being on the wrong side when the truth comes out.

Let’s wait to hear from both sides.

Share or Bookmark