Massad Ayoob's Blog, page 124

NOT TO GET ALL ANAL, BUT…

There was much furor this past week about a case in which police officers became suspicious that a man they’d stopped had stuffed drugs up his rectum. So, they got a warrant which led to a medical search that began with a cavity search and progressed to X-ray, multiple enemas, and finally a colonoscopy (all in a hospital environment). Turned out he didn’t have any drugs after all.  Across the country, cries of jack-booted thuggery were excreted, and the involved officers (and medicos) became the butt of many inflamed and flatulent complaints. Many wanted to see the officers jammed up.

I don’t want to get all anal about this, but it was pretty crappy for everyone to dump on the cops before hearing their side.  It turns out that the officers in question had reason to believe their suspect had done this before:  http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/11/07/new-details-emerge-about-new-mexico-man-at-center-of-police-departments-anal-probing-controversy/

If we can get serious for a minute, it’s well known in law enforcement that drug mules often hide their contraband in their rectums, just as some will swallow the baggie or condom full of cocaine when police approach.  There are numerous cases where these things have ruptured inside one or the other end of the alimentary canal, resulting in the untimely death of the suspect.  The cops are responsible for the person in their custody, even if that “custody” merely takes the form of investigative detention.  Thus, in all seriousness, they had a duty to, uh, probe the matter more deeply.

I hope this little tour through the bowels of legal responsibilities serves as a reminder to always get the other guy’s side of the story before trying to stuff a complaint up his nether regions. I will now clench this blog entry tightly shut, in hopes that, in hind-sight, we’ve gotten to the bottom of things.

Share or Bookmark

PREDICTABLE DRONING V. MEANINGFUL LESSONS

There are some starkly contrasting lessons in the recent LAX shooting.

Dianne Feinstein trots out her old “I’ll introduce a bill to ban assault rifles” line, as boringly predictable as Harold Stassen throwing his hat in the Presidential election ring in the old days. Some people’s egos just can’t let them see that they’re trying to sell something people are too smart to buy.

Yet another lesson from that incident goes almost unnoticed.  The family of the young man with the broken mind, as soon as they saw signs that he was seriously going to snap, called authorities.  LAPD took it seriously.  They went to the young man’s apartment, and missed him by only minutes.  The miss was not their fault, just a matter of timing and Fate.

Not long after the Columbine atrocity, a young man at a Catholic high school in Concord, New Hampshire made noises about killing his classmates.  The kids he expressed that to took him seriously, and reported him. A search of his locker turned up a stolen .22 revolver and a 500-round brick of ammunition.

Ideal outcome. No shots fired, no blood on the floor.  The kid with the messed-up head got the psychiatric care he needed.

Why? Within the society of that school, administrators and teachers had fostered an attitude of mutual responsibility for safety.  It over-rode the currently widespread “don’t snitch” mentality. We’ll never know how many lives it saved there…and elsewhere, since that scene has been quietly repeated around the country.

Your thoughts?

Share or Bookmark

A GREAT BOOK

I recently had the pleasure of reading Gila Hayes’ new book from the Gun Digest folks, “Concealed Carry for Women.”  A long-time pistol-packer herself, Gila teaches with her husband Marty at the Firearms Academy of Seattle.  I’ve seen her teach, and I can tell you she’s one of the best instructors of either gender in this business.  Like her friend and colleague Kathy Jackson, www.corneredcat.com, she has written her book primarily for women but the contents are of great value to men as well.

 I’ve seen her win open championships at matches, shooting against the men and beating them at their own game. But, more important, I’ve seen her inspire the helpless to learn to protect themselves.  Her book covers everything from the foundational element of mindset, to the selection of equipment, to the techniques that work best for developing skill with that equipment.  The new book is full of good advice that will save reinventing the wheel.

For a free taste of Gila’s writing, go to www.armedcitizensnetwork.org

. Gila edits the online Journal of the Armed Citizens Legal Defense Network. She is in touch daily with some of the most experienced attorneys in the country who specialize in defending armed citizens after they have defended themselves.  Read a few months worth of the Journal. It will give you a good sample of the logic, reality, and solid background that she brings to the table.

And get the book, “Concealed Carry for Women” by Gila Hayes.  I thought it was great, and I think you will, too.  Christmas is coming, and it might make a nice gift for some of the ladies in your life.

Share or Bookmark

SUBJECTIVE CHOICES

Ever pick a gun to take on a hunt or carry for protection, not so much out of cold practicality but with a little warm sentiment thrown  in?

I’ll confess to it.  In fact, I already have, in this month’s Backwoods Home, here: http://www.backwoodshome.com/articles2/ayoob144.html .

Your experiences and thoughts in this vein are solicited.

Share or Bookmark

SIGHTING IN

Hunting season is upon us.  Be sure to sight in!  The deer rifle that was spot on last year may not be so as of now.  Moisture getting into a wooden rifle stock, swelling the wood so that it applies pressure on the barrel…a bump to the scope or the iron sights between last season and now can throw shots of the course of aim…a change in ammo can alter elevation and even windage…there are lots of things which can mess up point of aim/point of impact coordinates.

I was reminded of this some ten days ago in Arkansas, when I was testing a new pistol and teaching a first-level class simultaneously.  Using the test gun to teach with seemed like a good idea.  I sneaked onto the line with the new 9mm Walther (the PPQ M2, a pretty cool little gun, actually) and put a few shots downrange offhand with 115 grain ammo.  It shot where it looked. I figured it would do to demonstrate the qualification course to the class on the last day.

When that day came, I loaded the Walther with 147 grain ammo I grabbed out of the back of my van.  All went well until we hit the 15 yard line, and after the first six shots I noticed the group was going way high.  I corrected with “Kentucky windage,” holding proportionally low, and finished with a 298 out of 300 possible points.  Four of the rising six had gone into the upper part of the eight-inch circle in the center of the IDPA (International Defensive Pistol Association) target, but two had gone just over, costing me one point down apiece.

The deal I make with my students is that I and the staff will demonstrate the course of fire they’re expected to perform, to “model” it so they have a fresh mental image of what is expected of them in the next few minutes, and to “set their internal clock” as to the time frames in which they’ll have to perform the sequences of fire.  If they tie my score, they get an autographed dollar bill that says “You tied me at my own game,” and if they beat me, an autographed five dollar bill inscribed, “You beat me at my own game.”

Out of 40 or so shooters, that 298 cost me four five dollar bills and change.  It’s more than worth the money to have graduates who can shoot like that.  Still, as much as it pleases me to give out the $1 bills, I confess to mixed feelings about the $5s.

In the advanced course that followed, on the first day when that crew of students was watching the mandatory safety film, I slipped out to the range and tested the Walther on a bench rest.  Interesting thing: that particular pistol put its shots center at 15 and 25 yards with 115 grain ammo, but sent them way high at both distances with the 147 grain rounds I used in the qual. I should have done that part of the test before the first qualification.

Nobody’s fault but mine: I had not tested that gun with that ammo at “predictable using distance” before shooting it for anything serious.

There’s a lesson there.

The price I paid was cheap compared to losing the winter supply of elk meat because I had sighted in with a different load than the one I took into the hunting field. And a whole lot cheaper than if I had been shooting for survival instead of a “fistful of dollars.”

Learn from my mistake.  Get sighted in.

And if you have any experiences in this vein, please post them here, so others may learn in time to prevent poor shot placement.

Share or Bookmark

A MAN OF THE GUN PASSES

I first met Reeves Jungkind in 1976, at Dr. Robert Burgess’ first Shoot For Loot match in Laramie, Wyoming.  Long since a Texas state champion, Reeves was still a helluva good shot with his trademark Colt Python .357 Magnum.

Reeves passed last week at age 86, in the Lone Star State where he spent a long career as a Texas highway patrolman.  My friend Grant Cunningham offers an excellent eulogy.

Reeves was your quintessential Texas lawman.  Laid back and easy going, but not someone in front of whom you’d want to try to harm an innocent person.  A wry sense of humor.  And an absolute mastery of his particular skill set.

Many years ago, I was attending a national firearms event where several people were lamenting the recent death of Reeves Jungkind.  I took it at face value and wrote a eulogy in one of the gun magazines for which I did a regular column.  When the magazine came out, I got a call at home from Reeves.   I told him how glad I was that he was still alive.

“Yeah,” he drawled, “but not as glad as I am.”

I will cherish all the more two guns he did for me, a short barrel Python .357 and a Colt Official Police .38 made into a PPC gun years ago, with a heavy barrel and sight rib installed by the late Austin Behlert and of course, the incomparable Reeves Jungkind action job.

Reeves was a giant in his world, and he will be missed.

Share or Bookmark

“CONSTITUTIONAL CARRY”

For longer than anyone reading this has been alive, the state of Vermont has allowed its citizens and its visitors to carry loaded, concealed handguns in public with no permit required. The Michael Bloombergs of the world fear that such a practice will make the proverbial blood run in the streets…but history has shown us the reverse.  Every year, Vermont is one of the LOWEST violent crime states in the nation.  In recent years Alaska and then Arizona adopted the same thing.  So did Wyoming, though that state limited permitless carry to Wyoming residents. Whaddaya know: rivers of blood haven’t swept through any of their streets, either.  I’m happy with these results: an old New Englander, I believe “if I ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”  Allowing good people to carry guns without permits, and merely forbidding convicted criminals, adjudicated mentally incompetent people, and others to do it, has worked out surprisingly well.

One suggestion, though.  Many on the gun owners’ civil rights side have come to call this “Constitutional Carry.”  Having been in a lot of different kinds of fights over the years, I’ve learned not to give advantages to my opponents, or leave openings through which they can hurt me.  I believe referring to lawful permitless carry as “Constitutional Carry” gives the prohibitionists such an opportunity.

Why? Any fifteen-year-old kid taking high school Civics 101 knows that the arbiter of Constitutional law in this country is the Supreme Court of the United States.  In two recent decisions which are landmark victories for our side – Heller v. District of Columbia and McDonald, et. al. v. Chicago – SCOTUS has confirmed that the right to keep and bear arms in the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights is indeed an individual right.  However, both of those decisions have also made it clear that the states have the right to regulate the practice.

Which means that while the right to keep and bear arms is indeed Constitutional, to be technically correct the right to carry without a permit in the above-named states flows from the wise majority in their state legislatures, and not directly from the Second Amendment.

Words mean things. If we use the wrong terms, we compromise our credibility, and our factual credibility is our strongest weapon in this polarized debate.  That’s why I for one do not describe permitless  carry as “Constitutional carry.”

If we need a term with a catchy ring to it, we can simply invoke the peaceful valleys of the Green Mountain State and very appropriately call it … “the Vermont Model.”

Share or Bookmark

WHICH LONG GUNS FOR HOME DEFENSE?

Am finishing up a third level armed citizen class this week. Second level and higher, we add long guns to the handguns. My own view is that if I can only have one firearm for home defense, I want it to be a handgun for reasons of versatility, but if possible I’d rather have one handgun and one long gun readily available to each person in the household who’s likely to be using deadly force to protect self and family.

I teach the handgun as “infantry,” the long gun as “artillery.” If I have to go mobile, I want a hand free to work communications, illumination, doorknobs, etc. If I have to scoop a little kid and carry same to a safer position, a handgun will be more workable. Same if I have to answer an insistent 3 AM pounding at the door…which might just be a cop, who won’t take it well if I open the door holding a 12-gauge or a .223 rifle. But if the whole family is barricaded in the safe room and criminals are kicking down the door, it’s probably shooting time, and a .223 class autoloading rifle or a fast-firing shotgun gives way more power and hit potential on multiple targets in unforgiving circumstances.

For a very long time, the shotgun has been the traditional choice of long gun for defense inside the house. In recent years, though, .223 rifles such as the AR15 have become hugely popular for this function. In this week’s class, two thirds of the students are using shotguns, and one third, autoloading rifles.

Symposium time: readers, what are your choices of home defense firearms? Handgun, or long gun, or both? And if there’s a long gun in the defense plan, did you choose shotgun, rifle, or both?

And – most important, and most interesting – why did you choose as you did?

Share or Bookmark

DON’T MESS WITH TEXAS

The old guy here is about to finish four days in one of my favorite states, Texas.  The first was spent in Fort Worth with friends, and the second at the Texas State Bar Association’s Firearms Law Seminar in the same city.  The third was in Houston at the 28th Annual Gun Rights Policy Conference, as will be the fourth.

Some 180 attorneys, with a few firearms instructors, attended the TBA event. I learned from every speaker I heard.  Many of those lawyers were gun-owners and pistol-packers, and enough of the speakers were into competitive shooting on their own time to form a kick-ass gun team at the range.  We learned that, thanks largely to the Texas State Rifle Association, the Lone Star state has made some great strides in legislation that’s friendly to firearms owners’ civil rights.

330 or so stalwarts attended the GRPC.  We heard from top lawyers like Alan Gura about what’s going on at the point of the spear on the Federal level, and from Julianne Versnel and others on the state of the UN small arms treaty.  (Short report: the heavy hitters on the inside are concerned about the UN treaty, but not terribly worried about it.) From the state level, we learned of the travails of the states which have had losses recently in this respect, such as California, Colorado, and New York, and from the states where our side is winning.  We got the inside scoop on the Colorado Recall, where our side was outspent five to one by the prohibitionists and still kicked out two powerful state legislators who had ignored the mandate of their constituents.  And much more…and more to come tomorrow, when the conference closes.

I was leaving tonight when I chatted with an attendee from British Columbia. (Canadians don’t suffer under the Obama administration, and we were told they can buy imported American M-1 Garands for $350.  Almost made me want to shoot a maple leaf just out of jealousy.)  The brother from BC told me how good it felt to be in the presence of like-minded people, and to be authoritatively reminded that we are winning on many fronts.  We persecuted minorities need to hear that, especially when it’s true.  I have tried over the years to get to the GRPC whenever possible. It’s a recharging of the batteries of the spirit for us “gun people.”

Ace trial lawyer (and skilled pistolero) John LeVick lectures on how insurance ties in with shooting cases at TBA seminar.

Sean Healy supervises the Firearms Law Seminar in Fort Worth.

Emily Miller talks about the travails of armed citizens in DC.  Check out her new book, “Emily GetsHer Gun” at GRPC.

Valinda and Mike Rowe of IllinoisCarry.com received kudos at GRPC for their work in getting concealed carry in their state.

Alan Gura, the master lawyer who won the landmark Heller and McDonald decisions, tells the GRPC audience what’s next in pro-gun litigation.

Some old guy talks to attorneys about trial tactics in self defense cases for continuing legal education class…

…and to gun owners’ civil rights activists about Stand Your Ground laws at Gun Rights Policy Conference.

Share or Bookmark

CHICKS RULE AT IDPA NATIONALS

The 2013 National Championships of IDPA, the International Defensive Pistol Association, locked into shooting history this past Saturday night.  My teammate on Team Panteao, was overall winner once again, the incomparable Bob Vogel.  Bob

has won this title several times, and he wrote on Facebook yesterday, “I am thankful for a solid performance. Ninth year in a row I’ve shot the match, and overall I think this was the hardest.”

Another teammate, Tom Yost, was National Senior Champion (age 50 and over) and First Master in Stock Service Pistol, shooting a Smith & Wesson M&P 9mm.  There were many fine men there, who did much fine shooting.

What struck me, though, was the performance from the distaff side of the house.

Randi Rogers is barely getting to her mid-twenties. She was a young teen when she dominated the Cowboy Action shooting game, kicking male butt all over the place in what looks on the surface like the most male-oriented of shooting sports, which generally are male-dominated across the board.  She won the IDPA National Woman’s Champion title, and not for the first time.  But she also came in extraordinarily high overall, which to the best of this old testosterone creature’s memory is the highest that someone of her gender has yet placed in that sport.  She shot for many years on the Glock factory-sponsored pistol team, and just recently changed allegiance to Team Smith & Wesson. She has, no pun intended, started that new position with a bang.  I’ve long considered Randi to be a role model in every respect: my girlfriend thinks she’s adorable and would adopt her if she could.  Frankly, so would I.

The high junior was Ashley Rheuark (at the awards ceremony, they pronounced it “Roark”). Ashley is 16 year old.  She beat most of the men, too…and remember, at a national championship, you’re shooting against the cream of the nation’s crop.

This young woman’s rise in the sport is nothing short of meteoric. In the summer of last year she was a novice. The month before the Nationals she earned Master ranking.  Shooters will be hearing more about Ms. Rheuark.

I would be remiss if I didn’t mention my own significant other, who tied for third place on hit value in the 42-shot Standards stage of the Nationals, with only two points down from a perfect score.  “Yeah, but I shot it slower than I wanted to,” she said. I replied with the advice my mentor Bill Jordan passed along from a veteran of some 26 gunfights, Texas Ranger John Hughes: “Speed’s fine, but accuracy’s final.”

(I should not have had to say this to a woman who constantly reminds me, “You can run, but you’ll only die tired.”)

I enjoy hell out of IDPA, and you probably will too if you give it a try.  You can find local matches near you through www.idpa.com.  It pleases me when I win, and when I don’t do well my excuse is that for me, IDPA stands for “I Don’t Practice Anymore.”

For the 2013 Nationals, though, my excuse is:  I obviously didn’t have enough estrogen.

IDPA head Joyce Wilson, left, a past National Champion herself, presents the National Junior Champion award to Ashley Rheuark, right.

 

 

 

My own Evil Princess completes her Standards stage, flanked by perfect-score targets on either side, and only two points down on the one behind her.

 

 

Share or Bookmark