Collective Resistance: We the unorganized, and organized/well-regulated militia

[Crafty_Dog]

3/14/25

Prompted by my post today on this thread, I have just circled back here and modified the subject line to what you now see.

For my fellow Americans:

Regarded the phrase "well regulated militia":  Obviously it comes from our Second Amendment.  Due to the change in meaning of the term "well regulated" since the Bill of Rights was passed, the term is currently usually misunderstood as a call for lots of regulations.  Not so!  At the time the BoR was passed the meaning of the term was "smoothly running".  For example a "well regulated watch" (keep in mind the technology of the time) was one that ran smoothly and accurately.

Thus the vision for a "well regulated militia" was one that arose sua sponte of American Citizens getting together with their friends and neighbors to train and practice so that they could serve effectively as "minutemen" in the event of some sort of attack.

Think of who it was that fought the British and the Battle of Lexington and Concord.  They were the men who already had fought together against the French and Indians in the border wars of a couple of decades prior-- and that is why they had the cannons (!!!) and guns that the British were coming to confiscate.

Their collective resistance to being disarmed was the beginning of America.

Similarly, think of the phrase in the Constitution about "Letters of Marque"-- again a vision of citizenry with their own cannons (on ships in this case) in order to be able to defend themselves on the high seas.

In neither case was it necessary that the citizens be trained or regulated by the State governments.  Witness Title 10 USC Section 311.

In my considered opinion, there is a substantial possibility that massive civil unrest and disorder may come to America sometime soon.  Note my words here are NOT a prediction, merely a calculation of possible outcomes.

====================
Woof All:

This thread is for stories of citizen's stepping forward:

Crafty Dog
------------------------

CRIMENETDAILY
Bank robber caught
by fed-up customer
Man who witnessed previous holdup
now chooses to act, pounces on thief

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: July 27, 2003
6:42 p.m. Eastern



? 2003 WorldNetDaily.com



 

As Yogi Berra might say, it was a case of deja vu all over again.

Last month, Andrew Green was inside the Riverside National Bank in Jensen Beach, Fla., when the establishment was robbed. He stood by helplessly as a witness to the crime. In an incredible coincidence, Green was inside the same branch when it was robbed again yesterday morning. But this time, there was a different outcome, as Green decided to take action and get involved by pursuing the alleged robber.

"At first I just wanted to follow him, so I could identify him to the police," Green told the Stuart News. "He was walking across the parking lot so nonchalantly and was changing his clothes as he walked."

Green watched as the suspect removed his hat and shirt, stuffing them into a plastic Wal-Mart bag. That's when he decided to pounce, tackling Thomas Poisal.

"He struggled a little on the way down," Green told the Palm Beach Post. "He looked a little shocked. He hadn't looked behind him a single time in the parking lot. It felt great," he added to the Post. "All my frustrations just went out of my body."

Deputies from the Martin County Sheriff's Office arrived to find Green and another witness holding Poisal in a bear hug, with $2,000 on the suspect.

"It was bibbity-bam, bibbity-boom," Lt. Mike McKinley told the Stuart News. "[Poisal's] got to know he had a very poor decision-making process today."

Poisal is being charged with armed robbery after telling the bank teller he had a gun, though none was recovered.  On June 2, Richard Mandile allegedly robbed the same bank after giving the teller a note, leaving Green amazed by the coincidence.

"What are the odds of this happening twice?" Green asked the Stuart News. "The first time I was really frustrated for not helping," he said. "But this time was great. Your adrenaline really gets pumping and you don't realize what you're doing."

[Mike]

Respect to Andrew Green for his civilian courage.

Greetings from germany, Mike

[Crafty_Dog]

CLIFTON, N.J.  ? A 15-year-old boy foiled an apparent abduction attempt when he pulled out his cell phone camera and snapped photos of a man trying to lure him into a car, police said.

The teen also photographed the vehicle's license plate and gave the evidence to police, who arrested a suspect the next day.

"It's surprising the kid had the presence of mind to use the technology under duress," Detective Capt. Robert Rowan told The Record of Bergen County (search) in Friday's editions.

The teen, whose name was not released by police, was walking home at about 7 p.m. Tuesday when a man, later identified by police as William MacDonald, pulled up beside him, Rowan said.

He offered to drive the boy to another town to look for girls, and then began "engaging in a sexually explicit conversation," Rowan said. The teen told him he wasn't interested, but MacDonald, 59, continued to follow him.

At that point, the boy took the pictures, and MacDonald got out of his car and grabbed him by the arm, Rowan said. A struggle followed, but the boy was able to break free and run away.

MacDonald was charged with attempting to lure a juvenile into a car, criminal restraint and simple assault. If convicted, he could face up to five years in state prison. He is being held on $25,000 bail.

A spokeswoman for Sprint (search), whose phone the boy used, said she had never heard of someone using the new technology to catch a criminal.

[milt]

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/Northeast/10/31/crime.girls.reut/index.html

Girls pummel man who exposed himself

PHILADELPHIA, Pennsylvania (Reuters) -- A man described by authorities as a known sexual predator was chased through the streets of South Philadelphia by an angry crowd of Catholic high school girls, who kicked and punched him after he was tackled by neighbors, police said Friday.

Rudy Susanto, 25, who had exposed himself to teen-age girls on as many as seven occasions outside St. Maria Goretti School, struck again on Thursday just as students were being dismissed, police said.

But this time, a group of girls in school uniforms angrily confronted Susanto with help from some neighbors, police said.

When Susanto tried to run, more than 20 girls chased him down the block. Two men from the neighborhood caught him and the girls took their revenge.

"The girls came and started kicking him and punching him, so I wasn't going to stop them," neighbor Robert Lemons told The Philadelphia Inquirer.

Susanto was later treated for injuries at a local hospital. Police said he would be charged with 14 criminal counts including harassment, disorderly conduct, open lewdness and corrupting the morals of a minor.

[David]

An interesting thought came to mind as I read the above article...not that I in any way agree with Susanto's behavior, I don't...but what do you imagine 20 teenage boys would do if a 25 year old woman exposed herself to them?  Beat the woman up?  What accounts for the difference in reactions?  

On yet another note, "corrupting the morals of a minor" sounds a bit scary.  I remember seeing on the back of a customs form when entering a communist country, that it is illegal to import materials that "corrupt the morals of a minor", or something to that effect.  

David

[milt]

An interesting thought came to mind as I read the above article...not that I in any way agree with Susanto's behavior, I don't...but what do you imagine 20 teenage boys would do if a 25 year old woman exposed herself to them?  Beat the woman up?  What accounts for the difference in reactions?  

David

It isn't obvious? How about the fact that teenage girls have good reason to feel threatened by such behavior from a man, while boys wouldn't feel a similar threat from a woman?  Or are you wondering why this is so?

A better question would have been "What do you imagine 20 teenage boys would do if a 25 year old man exposed himself to them?"

And the answer is that they would have done the same thing those girls did in response to the unwanted attention.

Or is your point that since boys would have presumably enjoyed being flashed by a woman, that these girls should have enjoyed it also?

What are you getting at?

-milt

[Crafty_Dog]

Milt, you beat me to it with that one!

And this from Tampa FL:

 Confronted with an armed intruder in their home, two women plied  him with a ham sandwich and rum until he became groggy and passed out.

Police arrived and arrested Alfred Joesph Sweet, 52, to end the 5 hour episode.  Cathy Ord, 60 and Rose Bucher 63, said they tried to befriend the man after he burst through their kitchen window with a sawed-off shotgun Tuesday night.

[David]

Milt,

My point was certainly not that the girls should have enjoyed what this man did.  And I agree with you that boys would most likely also beat up a man who did the same thing.  

My point is that teenage girls do have good reason to feel threatened by men, and that IS obvious.  I'm not wondering why, because that's also obvious, but how this might change the way women are trained in MA's or self defense.  Also, why does it seem that men expose themselves much more than women?  I'm sure this is probably a power issue.  Should that be addressed in SD training, or will the training bring about a change that addresses it?

[Crafty_Dog]

Guardian Angles
 
By Nikki Usher, Times Staff Writer


They were wearing their trademark red berets, white shirts and combat boots. But on Hollywood Boulevard, amid the throngs of tourists and street performers impersonating Marilyn Monroe, Superman and Batman, they barely stood out.

"I want a picture of you guys!" said Mike Cow, a tourist from San Diego. He turned to a bystander and added: "They're weird. I've never seen them before."


It was perhaps not the most auspicious reintroduction for the Guardian Angels, who this summer returned to the streets of Los Angeles for the first time in a decade.

The volunteer citizens brigade, using martial arts and citizen's arrests, gained national attention in the 1980s by patrolling inner-city neighborhoods that are plagued by crime.

While the Angels made their greatest mark in New York City, the group also had several hundred members in seven branches that patrolled neighborhoods from Venice to the San Gabriel Valley in the 1980s and early '90s. They left amid complaints from police and after several members had been attacked ? one fatally.

Back then, the Los Angeles Police Department "would treat us like we were the Bloods or the Crips. And since the police didn't respect us, the gangs didn't," said Curtis Sliwa, the group's founder.

Now they're hoping for a renaissance. The group has come back to a Los Angeles different from the one it left, where community policing has taken root and crime rates are generally lower. Sliwa said the Angels have changed with the times, working more closely with police and conducting more training for volunteers.

Sliwa said the group decided to come back to Southern California because of LAPD Chief William J. Bratton, who worked with the group when he was chief of the New York Police Department in the early '90s.

Bratton, who became L.A.'s chief two years ago, has offered a conditional welcome to the Guardian Angels. He said his experiences with the group in New York were largely positive.

But he's reluctant to see the Angels in some L.A. neighborhoods. He said patrolling Los Angeles is much more challenging because the city is spread out and there are fewer officers to back up the Angels. Moreover, he said, the group's conspicuous presence and aggressive tactics could backfire in the city's strongest gang enclaves.

"If they wear those red berets in the wrong area, the gangs will shoot them in a second," he said.

So far, about a dozen Guardian Angels have begun regular patrols along Hollywood Boulevard and at MacArthur Park.

Bratton said he's comfortable with the group's presence in Hollywood, a tourist district that already has strong police staffing.

"The visibility and eyes and ears they provide is fine, but just don't do it in areas where they are going to be in great risk and danger," the chief said.

Others aren't so sure.

L.A. City Councilman Bernard C. Parks, the police chief from 1997 to 2002, said that he couldn't support the Angels, and that professional police officers should be the only ones doing law enforcement work.

"It's hard enough to train police and keep them abiding by the law," he said. "These were people we knew nothing about."

Since the Guardian Angels left Los Angeles, the LAPD has tried to work more closely with community leaders to identify and target high-crime areas. Los Angeles also established a network of neighborhood councils that have a voice in law enforcement and other city policies.

But the Angels have yet to establish ties with the councils, according to community leaders in Hollywood and at MacArthur Park, who said they were surprised to hear that the group was back in town.

Sylvia Valle, a MacArthur Park neighborhood activist, said she worries that the patrols might make the situation in her neighborhood west of downtown less stable.

"There are four gangs in the radius of two blocks. This is just going to add fuel to the fire," she said.

Hollywood community activist Ferris Wehbe worked with the Angels when they helped patrol the Yucca Street area in the 1980s. He said that effort was effective because the group worked with neighborhood groups. This time, however, he doesn't see that partnership.

"We don't really need them here," he said. "The reason they worked in Hollywood was that they were connected to what the community was doing and really knew us?. I have had no indication of that happening this time."

In the 1980s, when the group was most active in Los Angeles, it had a decidedly mixed record.

It garnered praise when members patrolled the 1984 Summer Olympics. But a few years later, Sliwa was arrested for allegedly clubbing a man in an area of Hollywood the group had sealed off in an unofficial drug sweep. In 1993, in one of several attacks on group members, Angel Glenn Doser was shot to death when he tried to stop a robbery in Hollywood.

The Guardian Angels of the past, Sliwa and others said, could be aggressive and intimidating. They'd march into high-crime areas and ask tough questions, look for confrontations and try to break up drug deals.

"They were just these young guys and women, many of them ex-gang members, looking to rough someone up, get into a little trouble and feel like they were on the side of the right," said Todd Clear, a professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York.

The L.A. group has so far been drawn from veteran Southern California Angels and a few new recruits. There's a mix of young and old, and a few women. Sliwa says they're better trained than the Angels of old.

Under new policies, recruits undergo three months of standardized training, during which they learn martial arts and how to make citizen's arrests. They are also subjected to verbal abuse to see how they respond. Guardian Angels are not armed, though many carry handcuffs and cellphones.

Though they've been absent from Los Angeles, the Guardian Angels have remained a force in other cities, mostly on the East Coast. In Washington, D.C., members are working so closely with police, patrolling gang and drug areas, that the department gave them police radios.

Sliwa said the Angels want to pick "mild" targets in Los Angeles, building a record of success, before going into more hostile gang areas. So far, he said, members have encountered little action.

During a recent evening patrol in Hollywood, members didn't make any arrests or break up any drug deals, but they did help an elderly woman and her caretakers push a wheelchair over the curb at Hollywood Boulevard and Ivar Avenue.

An appreciative Vernadette Rebold smiled from her chair and thanked them. "We remember you from 20 years ago, in New York," she said.

Patrol leader Dave Eagle shrugs when asked about the lack of public memory about their Los Angeles days.

"Sure, we're remembered for New York, and maybe people don't remember us here, but we were here and we are here," said Eagle, who was with the group during its Los Angeles heyday. "It's hard to compete with where you started."

If you want other stories on this topic, search the Archives at latimes.com/archives.

[Russ]

This article was brought to my attention by Seth Kanner of Atienza Kali.  "Which one are you?"  It's a good question to ask yourself and at the crux of what the DBMAA is all about.

On Sheep, Wolves and Sheepdogs
By LTC. Dave Grossman, USA (Ret)
Author of "On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society."

One Vietnam veteran, an old retired colonel, once said this to me: "Most of the people in our society are sheep. They are kind, gentle, productive creatures who can only hurt one another by accident." This is true. Remember, the murder rate is six per 100,000 per year, and the aggravated assault rate is four per 1,000 per year. What this means is that the vast majority of Americans are not inclined to hurt one another. Some estimates say that two million Americans are victims of violent crimes every year, a tragic, staggering number, perhaps an all-time record rate of violent crime. But there are almost 300 million Americans, which means that the odds of being a victim of violent crime is considerably less than one in a hundred on any given year. Furthermore, since many violent crimes are committed by repeat offenders, the actual number of violent citizens is considerably less than two million.Thus there is a paradox, and we must grasp both ends of the situation: we may well be in the most violent times in history, but violence is still remarkably rare. This is because most citizens are kind, decent people who are not capable of hurting each other, except by accident or under extreme provocation. They are sheep. I mean nothing negative by calling them sheep. To me it is like the pretty, blue robin's egg. Inside it is soft and gooey but someday it will grow into something wonderful. But the egg cannot survive without its hard blue shell. Police officers, soldiers, and other warriors are like that shell, and someday the civilization they protect will grow into something wonderful. For now, though, they need warriors to protect them from the predators.

"Then there are the wolves," the old war veteran said, "and the wolves feed on the sheep without mercy." Do you believe there are wolves out there who will feed on the flock without mercy? You better believe it. There are evil men in this world and they are capable of evil deeds. The moment you forget that or pretend it is not so, you become a sheep. There is no safety in denial. "Then there are sheepdogs," he went on, "and I'm a sheepdog. I live to protect the flock and confront the wolf."

If you have no capacity for violence then you are a healthy productive citizen: a sheep. If you have a capacity for violence and no empathy for your fellow citizens, then you have defined an aggressive sociopath, a wolf. But what if you have a capacity for violence, and a deep love for your fellow citizens? What do you have then? A sheepdog, a warrior, someone who is walking the hero's path. Someone who can walk into the heart of darkness, into the universal human phobia, and walk out unscathed.

One career police officer wrote to me about this after attending one of my Bulletproof Mind training sessions: I want to say thank you for finally shedding some light on why it is that I can do what I do. I always knew why I did it. I love my folks, even the bad ones, and had a talent that I could return to my community. I just couldn't put my finger on why I could wade through the chaos, the gore, the sadness, if given a chance try to make it all better, and walk right out the other side.

Let me expand on this old soldier's excellent model of the sheep, wolves, and sheepdogs. We know that the sheep live in denial, that is what makes them sheep. They do not want to believe that there is evil in the world. They can accept the fact that fires can happen, which is why they want fire extinguishers, fire sprinklers, fire alarms and fire exits throughout their kids' schools. But many of them are outraged at the idea of putting an armed police officer in their kid's school. Our children are thousands of times more likely to be killed or seriously injured by school violence than fire, but the sheep's only response to the possibility of violence is denial. The idea of someone coming to kill or harm their child is just too hard, and so they chose the path of denial.

The sheep generally do not like the sheepdog. He looks a lot like the wolf. He has fangs and the capacity for violence. The difference, though, is that the sheepdog must not, can not and will not ever harm the sheep. Any sheep dog who intentionally harms the lowliest little lamb will be punished and removed. The world cannot work any other way, at least not in a representative democracy or a republic such as ours.


Still, the sheepdog disturbs the sheep. He is a constant reminder that there are wolves in the land. They would prefer that he didn't tell them where to go, or give them traffic tickets, or stand at the ready in our airports in camouflage fatigues holding an M-16. The sheep would much rather have the sheepdog cash in his fangs, spray paint himself white, and go, "Baa." Until the wolf shows up. Then the entire flock tries desperately to hide behind one lonely sheepdog.

The students, the victims, at Columbine High School were big, tough high school students, and under ordinary circumstances they would not have had the time of day for a police officer. They were not bad kids; they just had nothing to say to a cop. When the school was under attack, however, and SWAT teams were clearing the rooms and hallways, the officers had to physically peel those clinging, sobbing kids off of them. This is how the little lambs feel about their sheepdog when the wolf is at the door.

Look at what happened after September 11, 2001 when the wolf pounded hard on the door. Remember how America, more than ever before, felt differently about their law enforcement officers and military personnel? Remember how many times you heard the word hero?

Understand that there is nothing morally superior about being a sheepdog; it is just what you choose to be. Also understand that a sheepdog is a funny critter: He is always sniffing around out on the perimeter, checking the breeze, barking at things that go bump in the night, and yearning for a righteous battle. That is, the young sheepdogs yearn for a righteous battle. The old sheepdogs are a little older and wiser, but they move to the sound of the guns when needed right along with the young ones.

Here is how the sheep and the sheepdog think differently. The sheep pretend the wolf will never come, but the sheepdog lives for that day. After the attacks on September 11, 2001, most of the sheep, that is, most citizens in America said, "Thank God I wasn't on one of those planes." The sheepdogs, the warriors, said, "Dear God, I wish I could have been on one of those planes. Maybe I could have made a difference." When you are truly transformed into a warrior and have truly invested yourself into warriorhood, you want to be there. You want to be able to make a difference. There is nothing morally superior about the sheepdog, the warrior, but he does have one real advantage. Only one. And that is that he is able to survive and thrive in an environment that destroys 98 percent of the population.

There was research conducted a few years ago with individuals convicted of violent crimes. These cons were in prison for serious, predatory crimes of violence: assaults, murders and killing law enforcement officers. The vast majority said that they specifically targeted victims by body language: slumped walk, passive behavior and lack of awareness. They chose their victims like big cats do in Africa, when they select one out of the herd that is least able to protect itself. However, when there were cues given by potential victims that indicated they would not go easily, the cons said that they would walk away. If the cons sensed that the target was a "counter-predator," that is, a sheepdog, they would leave him alone unless there was no other choice but to engage.

One police officer told me that he rode a commuter train to work each day. One day, as was his usual, he was standing in the crowded car, dressed in blue jeans, T-shirt and jacket, holding onto a pole and reading a paperback. At one of the stops, two street toughs boarded, shouting and cursing and doing every obnoxious thing possible to intimidate the other riders. The officer continued to read his book, though he kept a watchful eye on the two punks as they strolled along the aisle making comments to female passengers, and banging shoulders with men as they passed. As they approached the officer, he lowered his novel and made eye contact with them. "You got a problem, man?" one of the IQ-challenged punks asked. "You think you're tough, or somethin'?" the other asked, obviously offended that this one was not shirking away from them. "As a matter of fact, I am tough," the officer said, calmly and with a steady gaze. The two looked at him for a long moment, and then without saying a word, turned and moved back down the aisle to continue their taunting of the other passengers, the sheep.

Some people may be destined to be sheep and others might be genetically primed to be wolves or sheepdogs. But I believe that most people can choose which one they want to be, and I'm proud to say that more and more Americans are choosing to become sheepdogs.

Seven months after the attack on September 11, 2001, Todd Beamer was honored in his hometown of Cranbury, New Jersey. Todd, as you recall, was the man on Flight 93 over Pennsylvania who called on his cell phone to alert an operator from United Airlines about the hijacking. When he learned of the other three passenger planes that had been used as weapons, Todd dropped his phone and uttered the words, "Let's roll," which authorities believe was a signal to the other passengers to confront the terrorist hijackers. In one hour, a transformation occurred among the passengers - athletes, business people and parents. -- from sheep to sheepdogs and together they fought the wolves, ultimately saving an unknown number of lives on the ground. "Do you have any idea how hard it would be to live with yourself after that?"

There is no safety for honest men except by believing all possible evil of evil men. - Edmund Burke

Here is the point I like to emphasize, especially to the thousands of police officers and soldiers I speak to each year. In nature the sheep, real sheep, are born as sheep. Sheepdogs are born that way, and so are wolves. They didn't have a choice. But you are not a critter. As a human being, you can be whatever you want to be. It is a conscious, moral decision. If you want to be a sheep, then you can be a sheep and that is okay, but you must understand the price you pay. When the wolf comes, you and your loved ones are going to die if there is not a sheepdog there to protect you. If you want to be a wolf, you can be one, but the sheepdogs are going hunt you down and you will never have rest, safety, trust or love. But if you want to be a sheepdog and walk the warrior's path, then you must make a conscious and moral decision every day to dedicate, equip and prepare yourself to thrive in that toxic, corrosive moment when the wolf comes knocking at the door.

For example, many officers carry their weapons in church. They are well concealed in ankle holsters, shoulder holsters or inside-the-belt holsters tucked into the small of their backs. Anytime you go to some form of religious service, there is a very good chance that a police officer in your congregation is carrying. You will never know if there is such an individual in your place of worship, until the wolf appears to massacre you and your loved ones.

I was training a group of police officers in Texas, and during the break, one officer asked his friend if he carried his weapon in church. The other cop replied, "I will never be caught without my gun in church." I asked why he felt so strongly about this, and he told me about a cop he knew who was at a church massacre in Ft. Worth, Texas in 1999. In that incident, a mentally deranged individual came into the church and opened fire, gunning down fourteen people. He said that officer believed he could have saved every life that day if he had been carrying his gun. His own son was shot, and all he could do was throw himself on the boy's body and wait to die. That cop looked me in the eye and said, "Do you have any idea how hard it would be to live with yourself after that?"

Some individuals would be horrified if they knew this police officer was carrying a weapon in church. They might call him paranoid and would probably scorn him. Yet these same individuals would be enraged and would call for "heads to roll" if they found out that the airbags in their cars were defective, or that the fire extinguisher and fire sprinklers in their kids' school did not work. They can accept the fact that fires and traffic accidents can happen and that there must be safeguards against them.

Their only response to the wolf, though, is denial, and all too often their response to the sheepdog is scorn and disdain. But the sheepdog quietly asks himself, "Do you have and idea how hard it would be to live with yourself if your loved ones were attacked and killed, and you had to stand there helplessly because you were unprepared for that day?"

It is denial that turns people into sheep. Sheep are psychologically destroyed by combat because their only defense is denial, which is counterproductive and destructive, resulting in fear, helplessness and horror when the wolf shows up. Denial kills you twice. It kills you once, at your moment of truth when you are not physically prepared: you didn't bring your gun, you didn't train. Your only defense was wishful thinking. Hope is not a strategy. Denial kills you a second time because even if you do physically survive, you are psychologically shattered by your fear, helplessness and horror at your moment of truth.

Gavin de Becker puts it like this in Fear Less, his superb post-9/11 book, which should be required reading for anyone trying to come to terms with our current world situation: ...denial can be seductive, but it has an insidious side effect. For all the peace of mind deniers think they get by saying it isn't so, the fall they take when faced with new violence is all the more unsettling.

Denial is a save-now-pay-later scheme, a contract written entirely in small print, for in the long run, the denying person knows the truth on some level. And so the warrior must strive to confront denial in all aspects of his life, and prepare himself for the day when evil comes. If you are warrior who is legally authorized to carry a weapon and you step outside without that weapon, then you become a sheep, pretending that the bad man will not come today. No one can be "on" 24/7, for a lifetime. Everyone needs down time. But if you are authorized to carry a weapon, and you walk outside without it, just take a deep breath, and say this to yourself... "Baa."

This business of being a sheep or a sheep dog is not a yes-no dichotomy. It is not an all-or-nothing, either-or choice. It is a matter of degrees, a continuum. On one end is an abject, head-in-the-sand-sheep and on the other end is the ultimate warrior. Few people exist completely on one end or the other. Most of us live somewhere in between. Since 9-11 almost everyone in America took a step up that continuum, away from denial. The sheep took a few steps toward accepting and appreciating their warriors, and the warriors started taking their job more seriously. The degree to which you move up that continuum, away from sheephood and denial, is the degree to which you and your loved ones will survive, physically and psychologically at your moment of truth.

[Crafty Dog]

Woof All:

Although "the Unorganized Militia" is a reference to American law, the following article about things in Mexico covers matters of interest.

Crafty
=======================

THE WORLD
In Mexico, Vigilantism Rises on Surge of Crime, Public Disgust
As faith in the police declines, townspeople increasingly mete out their own justice.
   
By Chris Kraul, Times Staff Writer


SANTA ROSA XOCHIAC, Mexico ? Maria del Refugio Perez is a 60-year-old street vendor who says she abhors violence. But this month, she joined a raging mob that corralled, pummeled and hog-tied a suspected thief and almost burned her alive.

Drawn by a butcher's shouts that she had caught the woman grabbing money from a cash drawer at her shop, Perez and other neighbors quickly seized her. Once the church bells in this Mexico City suburb started ringing, signaling a town emergency, the mob grew in size ? and anger.

"These things happen because the authorities don't do anything," Perez said, recalling days later how the woman, Juana Moncayo, was tied to a flagpole in the town plaza for several hours as the crowd of 200 insulted and beat her. "Some were yelling, 'Burn her! Burn her!' " when the police finally came to take her away, Perez said.

"I don't like that people act that way, but so what, if it is the only way that delinquents know what they are risking," Perez said.

She and others here said they were fed up with a recent plague of break-ins, assaults and vandalism, and decided to take justice into their own hands ? just like other communities across Mexico have in recent weeks.

"People are very united here. Since the police don't do anything, it's up to us to show the criminals, and others thinking of doing the same thing, what happens when they are caught," said Jose Vargas, a clothing vendor in the town plaza.

Although statistics on mob justice aren't kept, experts agree that vigilantism is rising across Mexico in step with public disgust over violent crimes and the government's inability to stop them. It's the same disgust that sent a quarter of a million marchers into Mexico City's streets two months ago.

Since the march, politicians at all levels have promised to do something about the problem. President Vicente Fox unveiled a 10-point plan last week that includes $100 million in anti-crime funds by the end of the year ? in addition to the $250 million he had budgeted for security. Fox also has promised to increase the federal budget for security next year to $500 million.

Three days earlier, Fox accepted the resignation of the nation's top federal law enforcement officer, Alejandro Gertz Manero, who said he was quitting because he was approaching retirement age.

Mexico City Mayor Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador has also taken action, cracking down on panhandlers, street vendors, windshield washers and prostitutes and promising a 15% reduction in the crime rate over the next year.

Reliable crime statistics are hard to come by, but experts agree that violent crimes, especially kidnappings, have increased in Mexico in recent years. With abductions expected to rise past 3,000 this year, Mexico could replace Colombia as the country with the most cases, victim advocacy groups say.

"It will be difficult to improve things in the short term, but at least the government has made this a top priority, which is a change," said Jorge Chabat, a professor at the Center for Economic Research and Teaching in Mexico City. "The added money will help. That is a real advance. [Fox] put his money where his mouth is."

But people in towns such as Santa Rosa Xochiac remain deeply skeptical that crime will recede anytime soon. Distrust of the local police, seen as being in cahoots with criminals, runs deep.

Several townspeople here said the mob didn't want to give Moncayo up to the police because they feared that she would bribe them and they would set her free.

"We knew once she left in the patrol car, they weren't going to do anything because they never do with the corrupted ones," said homemaker Consuelo Garcia, 44. "But at least in the end, the thieves know they can't play with the people of Santa Rosa, that here they face consequences."

In the meantime, they vow they will continue to take the law into their hands, as have several communities recently:

?  A crowd of 100 in the town of San Juan Chamula in Chiapas state threw their mayor and three members of his staff in jail for allegedly misappropriating funds.

?  Enraged residents of San Pablo Oztotepec, a suburb of Mexico City, beat two suspected car thieves to unconsciousness. Only the intervention of an assistant city prosecutor saved them from being bludgeoned to death, authorities say.

?  A crowd in the Cuajimalpa section of the capital severely beat a policeman after he lost control of his patrol car, killing one person. The officer was rescued, but not before the crowd burned his vehicle.

?  Residents of a small town in Campeche state burned several vehicles belonging to a visiting circus after one of the employees was suspected of sexually molesting a 6-year-old girl.

?  A man in Yucatan state was doused with gasoline and nearly set on fire after a crowd accused him of torching 15 houses.

Some people also have taken police work into their own hands, frustrated by the authorities' shortcomings in carrying out basic crime investigations. Guadalajara businessman Juan Manuel Estrada started the privately funded Stolen and Disappeared Children Foundation five years ago and has since recovered 47 minors, he said, including several abducted for sexual exploitation

"Yes, I am a kind of vigilante who takes justice in my own hands, but always within a framework of legality," Estrada said, adding that his group concentrates on sexually exploited minors because police tend to shy away from such cases, believing that the victims somehow are responsible for their own abductions.

Estrada said his network has helped uncover an illegal adoption racket in Canada dealing in Mexican babies; exposed a child abuse ring in Puerto Vallarta; and dismantled a child pornography ring operating out of Guadalajara and Colima.

"Society is meeting a void the authorities aren't filling," Estrada said. "That's why we are doing this."

Security expert Ana Maria Salazar said vigilantism is a symptom of the increasing lack of faith Mexicans have in the authorities.

"This has happened in the past, but more so now. People don't feel protected," said Salazar, who is also a newspaper columnist. "There is a general perception that if you go out and commit a crime, nothing is going to happen. And that goes for the vigilantes as much as for the criminals. So there is no incentive not to go out after the criminals."

Maria Elena Morera, a dentist who also leads the citizens advocacy group Mexico United Against Crime, which helped organize the massive June march, said vigilantism works against any reduction in crime.

"What we demand is that the authorities do their job," Morera said. "The citizens can't do what they aren't trained for."

Morera's group and others, including Coparmex, Mexico's largest business owners association, have called on the government to use the added anti-crime funds to "professionalize" the nation's police forces by offering better training and better salaries to make police less susceptible to corruption.

U.S. law enforcement officials and even top Mexican prosecutors routinely say that Mexican police on the local, state and federal levels are by and large contaminated by corruption, which stems from abysmally low salaries, poor-to-nonexistent benefits and weak powers.

"Who can expect a policeman who makes $300 a month, as most municipal police do, to do a good job?" Morera said.

Renato Sales, a deputy attorney general of Mexico City, said more money is only part of the solution. The country, he said, is in need of sweeping judicial and penal reforms to go after criminals.

"We are aware that citizens have little faith in the state," he said. "But to make significant changes, we need more resources and we need better laws."

Some human rights officials said that vigilantism only makes a lawless society worse.

"This is nothing new in Mexico, this collective rejection of the law in search of something more overwhelming and immediate," said Jose Luis Soberanes Fernandez, president of the National Human Rights Commission. "But it can't hide what it represents ? an ignorance of legality and of civilized forms built over thousands of years of human history."

But people are less philosophical in San Mateo Tlaltenango, another Mexico City suburb, where a mob recently set fire to a patrol car after a drunken policeman rammed into two taxis and then tried to drive away.

"The problem is the police here are corrupt, they never come to protect us, and when they do come they only cause problems," shopkeeper Alberto Gonzalez said. "Community justice isn't going to stop until we have good police and good leaders. Until then, the people are going to have to take their own measures."

Vargas, the Santa Rosa Xochiac clothing vendor, agreed. "If someone does something bad here, the community will grab him," he said. "We'll defend ourselves because there is no one else to do it."

*


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Times researcher Cecilia Sanchez in Santa Rosa Xochiac and special correspondent Sean Mattson in Guadalajara contributed to this report.

[Crafty_Dog]

Another case from Mexico.  I am much less in touch with matters in Mexico than I used to be, but have heard of cases of kidnapping gangs involving police.  This may or may not be a part of the dynamics of this affair.
============================

THE WORLD
Angry Mob Kills 2 Police Officers in Mexico

Crowd upset about child abductions attacks three undercover agents taking students' photos.
 
From Associated Press

MEXICO CITY ? A crowd angry about recent child kidnappings cornered plainclothes federal agents taking photos of students at a school on Mexico City's outskirts Tuesday and burned the officers alive.

Officials said two agents were killed and one was hospitalized.
 
Federal police director Adm. Jose Luis Figueroa told local media that the three agents went to the school in an unmarked car as part of an anti-drug-dealing operation.

The killings, filmed and broadcast on local television stations, were carried out by a crowd of people who cheered, chanted and shouted obscenities as they kicked and beat the agents. The mob then dowsed two officers with gasoline and set them ablaze.

Police didn't make any immediate arrests; officials said they were investigating.

In the video, the agents, blood streaming down their faces, spoke into the cameras before the burning, saying they were federal anti-terrorism agents who had been sent to the area on official business.

The mob held the agents for several hours before killing them. Figueroa said heavy traffic and residents who blocked authorities from moving kept police from responding in time.

The surviving agent, badly beaten, was rescued by police.

Images taken from a helicopter showed dozens of residents milling around the two burned bodies left in a street. Dozens of police in riot gear moved in more than an hour later and dispersed the crowd.

The violence began in the early evening, when several people collared three men staking out a school in the San Juan Ixtlayopan neighborhood.

The area has been tense since two youngsters disappeared and were feared kidnapped from the school. Some in the crowd appeared to believe the agents were kidnappers.

When asked about complaints that authorities had failed to respond to demands to investigate the disappearances, Figueroa said a full schedule had prohibited federal authorities from concentrating on the case.

[Dog Pound]

I would imagine that during the hours the federal agents were held, they must have identified themselves as Mexican law enforcement.

According to the story they were openly taking pictures of children (probably adults too) as part of an anti drug operation not pretending to be drug dealers.  I would presume Mexican federal agents carry badges or some other form of ID.

Appearently being a federal cop in Mexico is not enough to convince people you are not involved in the child kidnapping.  Was "Man on fire" a documentary?  Maybe the crowd knew exactly whay they were doing?  I wonder how many children have been abducted since this happened.

[Crafty_Dog]

There is more about this incident on our Spanish language forum.  Several of the articles are in English.

Changing subjects, here's this from about 2 miles from my house:
===============

Diners bolt from breakfast to chase down a thief
Police praise two men who were eating at Rod's Charburger on Artesia Boulevard when they ran after a man seen stealing from an "older gentleman."

By Larry Altman
Daily Breeze

Kevin Jeanotte sat enjoying a plate of pork chops and eggs for breakfast Monday morning. And then he took a bite out of crime.  The termite inspector chased a suspected robber in Redondo Beach, tackling him on the sidewalk and holding him until police arrived.

"I saw an older gentleman getting jumped and it's not right," Jeanotte said. "I saw it happen and I took off after him."

Police credited Jeanotte and Redondo Beach street maintenance worker Gosford Tukutau with grabbing the suspect and subduing him. Jose Manuel Jimenez, 19, of Carson was arrested on suspicion of robbery.

"They did an excellent job and I'm sure they can expect some commendation from the city," Redondo Beach police Sgt. Phil Keenan said.

The robbery occurred at 9:30 a.m. outside Rod's Char-burger, 2600 Artesia Blvd., as Nick Kelesidis, 71, left the business with $7,200 in a bag, said police and the restaurant's manager, Dino Fotoulos.  Jimenez pushed Kelesidis to the ground, snatched the money bag and ran, Keenan said.  Jeanotte, 36, of Cypress said he saw the attack through the window, saw the older man fall and leaped from his breakfast table to help.

"I took off after the guy and tackled him about two blocks down the road," Jeanotte said.

Tukutau, who was eating a burrito on his break, saw Jeanotte run, looked out the window and saw Kelesidis on the ground.  Kelesidis said he had been robbed, so Tukutau took off to help Jeanotte.  Tukutau helped detain Jimenez after Jeanotte had tackled him.

"I grabbed him and there were some contractors and they called the cops for us," said Tukutau, a 25-year-old Hawthorne resident.

Jimenez told the men he was hungry, but Jeanotte said he had $100 shoes and a cellular telephone.  

Tukutau said he believed the crime was a set-up.

"We told him if he wanted food, he should have come into the restaurant," Tukutau said.

"We wouldn't have given him money, but we would have bought him a burrito."

Jimenez was held at the Redondo Beach jail on $100,000 bail. Police gave the money back to the restaurant.  Fotoulos, who is Kelesidis' nephew, said his uncle suffered a few scratches but was fine. He appreciated the good work of his customers.

"They are good guys," the manager said.

"I tell them, 'Thank you, I have to do something for you guys.' They said, 'Don't worry. Don't worry.' "

Both men were nonchalant about hero status.

Jeanotte said he was just a man who "tried to help out an old man."

Tukutau said people need to help others when they are in need. He said the thought occurred to him that the thief might have had a weapon.

"But if you think about that you are just going to let him go," he said. "You have to put that out of your mind and do what's right.  What's right is chasing him down."

[Body-by-Guinness]

Anyone having trouble sleeping may want to check out this memo written for the US Attorney General earlier this year:

http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm

It's pretty pedantic--Stephen Hallbrook's That every man be armed: the evolution of a constitutional right is far more readable. Still, it's refreshing to see the DOJ acknowledge the obvious.

[Crafty_Dog]

Family Captures Suspected Stalker

(original article here) http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=409745

The quick action of a teenage girl's family may have saved her from being abducted as she waited for a school bus this morning, police said.

A man suspected of stalking the 14-year-old at her bus stop was caught and beaten by two members of her family, police said.

Several hours later, the suspect was still in the hospital while neighbors were crediting the family with possibly saving the girl's life.

Investigators told ABC News affiliate WFTS-TV in Tampa the teenager said she had seen the same man drive past her bus stop several times over the last few weeks, both in the mornings and afternoons. She said he sometimes stopped to ask her where she was going or to tell her how nice she looked, police said.

On Wednesday, the girl told her parents that the man had become more aggressive, pulling in front of her and opening the door in an attempt to get her to go with him.

Based on that, the girl's father and uncle accompanied her to the bus stop today, where they spotted the suspect at the intersection of Ola Avenue and Indiana Street.

While they called police, the girl's family tried to restrain the man, who tried to get away, police said. A scuffle ensued, but the suspect, later identified as Alfredo Rivera, 45, of Spring Hill, got the worst of it, investigators said.

"I thought that it was school kids having a fight," one neighbor told WFTS-TV. "The guy was on the ground already. Every time he moved, he got kicked again."

Knife, Duct Tape Found in Vehicle

By the time police arrived, Rivera's face was bloodied badly enough to require treatment at Tampa General Hospital.

Police said they are not sure what his plans for the girl were, but they found a knife, duct tape, and pillows in the back of his station wagon.

He was charged with aggravated stalking and attempted armed kidnapping.

Police say they don't encourage people to take the law into their own hands, but neighbors were very supportive of the family.

"I'd have probably been out there kicking him too if I'd have known what was going on," another neighbor added. "I think [the family] did right. Street justice." [ABC News]

[Crafty_Dog]

Here's a news story to analyze. What would you have done? His granddaughter was living in the residence that was being burglarized. The article does not mention that Glenn Adams is also a correctional officer.

Another news article ends with the following:
Adams says his only regret is that he was unarmed during the chase.

"I wish I'd just had my gun," he said.


Man Chases Burglary Suspects
(Dunn Daily Record)
Jon Soles, Reporter
A watchful Johnston County resident braved gunfire to fight back at crime in his neighborhood Monday. Glenn Adams chased a minivan after seeing its occupants on his property, finally ramming it with his own truck until the van lost control and crashed.

The incident happened just after noon Monday and attracted at least two dozen law enforcement officers from the Johnston County Sheriff?s Office and the N.C. Highway Patrol.

Two men who were suspected of breaking into a mobile home near Blackmon?s Crossroads escaped on foot after the minivan wrecked on Godwin Lake Road. Deputies combed woods in the vicinity with dogs while a helicopter hovered overhead. The two suspects were finally located, after about three hours, hiding in a van behind a house near the scene where the van stopped. Edward Duncan of Dudley and Jeremy Faison of Goldsboro, both 21, were arrested by deputies. Both men were recently released from prison after serving sentences for property crimes.

The two suspects pointed a gun at Mr. Adams and then shot the front of his pickup as he chased them down N.C. 96 and Godwin Lake Road. Mr. Adams said he did not actually cause the van to wreck, but watched it careen out of control and into a ditch at the intersection of Godwin Lake and Golda roads.

The incident started when Mr. Adams, who is 64 and said he often stays alert for suspicious activity in his neighborhood, noticed an unfamiliar blue minivan at the mobile home he rents to his granddaughter on Adams Road.

?What happened was I was in my house and saw a vehicle. I went and parked behind them. In my mind, I thought they were breaking in,? Mr. Adams said. ?I opened my door to say something and they pointed a gun.?

Mr. Adams said the two men got into the minivan and rushed off. Mr. Adams followed, even though he saw the gun.

?I knew they had a gun but I kept going,? he said.

Mr. Adams saw the gun up close when the passenger in the van crawled to the back seat and pointed a handgun out a broken rear window. Mr. Adams said he heard the shots fired at him. What he didn?t realize until he stopped was that a bullet pierced the hood of his truck, right in front of the driver?s seat.

Mr. Adams rammed his sturdy pickup into the van several times, causing both vehicles to swerve and shudder, he said.

Tried To Stop Them

?I hit them, bumped trying to stop them,? Mr. Adams said. ?I made contact every place I could.?

The van finally stopped when it hit the ditch on Godwin Lake Road, not far from the Sampson County line. Mr. Adams kept going until he reached a home where he could use the phone to call 911.

When sheriff?s deputies arrived, they found the van wedged in the ditch with a television in the back seat. The two suspects were not around, but were seen by a motorist who said they asked him for a ride.

The minivan, with faded blue paint, rust spots and a broken rear window covered with plastic, was familiar to Bobby Johnson of Mamie Road.

?I?ve seen that van 10 or 15 times riding up and down the road,? he said. ?I told my wife one day, ?Them people is up to something.? ?

Mr. Adams said he was proud of his pickup, which has a recently-rebuilt engine. He said, despite the danger, he was determined to stop the van.

?I wanted to stop them because if they had broken in one time, they were going to do it again,? he said.

[Body-by-Guinness]

As the saying goes "God created man, Mr. Colt made them equal."


Gamage gets his guns back
By Stacey Creasy/Editor

MACOMB - Nearly two months after 87-year-old Leonard Gamage fought off an intruder, McDonough County Sheriff Mike Johnson gladly returned the gun that saved Gamage's life.

On Dec. 4, Gamage used his .22 caliber rifle to shoot 20-year-old James Vanderveen of Geneva, in the foot after Vanderveen allegedly attempted to force his way into Gamage's residence.

Gamage said the ordeal began just after 9 p.m. while he was sitting in his home, watching television. He does not know why Vanderveen was trying to break into the house, but he wasn't going to take any chances. After Gamage and the suspect struggled twice, Gamage spotted an opportunity to grab the gun.

"I seized the moment," Gamage said in a previous interview. "I didn't know if the gun was loaded or not, but I was sure it would change his (Vanderveen) mind about getting into the house."

Even though Gamage had Vanderveen in his gun sights, Gamage said the young man continued to threaten to harm Gamage. That is when Gamage fired a warning shot. When Vanderveen refused to back off, Gamage said he shot him in the foot.

While Gamage called a neighbor, Vanderveen fled. Gamage went after him and located Vanderveen next to the garage, near the barn.

"I snuck up on him and told him, 'move an inch and I'll kill you,'" Gamage told the Journal. Gamage said Vanderveen then begged him not to shoot him. Gamage held Vanderveen in that spot until his neighbor, Tom Friday arrived.

Gamage was shaken up, but not injured. Gamage said he was surprised at the amount of strength and energy he had during the ordeal.

Officers from the McDonough County Sheriff's Department arrived at Gamage's residence and sent Vanderveen to the hospital. He was charged a few days later with felony trespassing, and was released from jail after posting a $25,000 cash bond.

During the investigation, the police officers learned Gamage did not have a current Firearms Identification Card, so they confiscated the rifle and second gun in the home. Gamage said the guns have been in the family for years.

Johnson told Gamage once he received a new FOI card, he would return his guns. Johnson kept his word.

The ordeal evolved into Gamage's proverbial 15 minutes of fame. Gamage was invited to talk about the ordeal on a number of radio talk shows. During the talk shows people gave Gamage nicknames like "lock and load Leonard."

The story the Journal broke was also picked up by newspapers and magazines coast to coast.

"You would not believe how many people have called me about this," Gamage said. "I've talked to people in New York and Texas and about every place in between."

A number of people were outraged the police took Gamage's guns, but they were simply abiding by Illinois law.

Gamage said he hopes the story deters would-be burglars from breaking into homes.

"You never know, someone might be there," he added.

http://www.macombjournal.com/articles/2005/02/01/news/news2.txt

[Body-by-Guinness]

Several of my interests overlap and coalesce in the following article from Reason online. The concept of "gun control," and its disparate effect on those on the lowest rungs of the socio-economic ladder, is certainly nothing new.


The Klan's Favorite Law


Gun control in the postwar South


Dave Kopel

If you believe everything that Michael Moore says in Bowling for Columbine and his books, then you would think that "pro-gun" people are white racists, and that "gun control" would be a wonderful way to help minorities. But a look at America's past reveals what historian Clayton Cramer has accurately called "The Racist Roots of Gun Control."

After the Civil War, the defeated Southern states aimed to preserve slavery in fact if not in law. The states enacted Black Codes which barred the black freedmen from exercising basic civil rights, including the right to bear arms. Mississippi's provision was typical: No freedman "shall keep or carry fire-arms of any kind, or any ammunition."

Under the Mississippi law, a person informing the government about illegal arms possession by a freedman was entitled to receive the forfeited firearm. Whites were forbidden to give or lend freedman firearms or knives.

The Special Report of the Anti-Slavery Conference of 1867 complained that freedmen were "forbidden to own or bear firearms and thus.rendered defenseless against assaults" by whites. Or as a letter printed in the Jan. 13, 1866 edition of Harper's Weekly observed: "The militia of this county have seized every gun found in the hands of so-called freedmen in this section of the county. They claim that the Statute Laws of Mississippi do not recognize the Negro as having any right to carry arms."

Congress' "Report of the Joint Committee on Reconstruction" set forth the factual case for the need for a 14th Amendment to protect the liberties enumerated in the federal Bill of Rights. At the Committee's hearings, General Rufus Saxon testified that all over the South, whites were "seizing all fire-arms found in the hands of the freedmen. Such conduct is in clear and direct violation of their personal rights as guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States, which declares that 'the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.'"

Despite the statutes, and at the suggestion of Reconstruction governors and other leaders, blacks often formed militias to resist white terrorism. For example, in June 1867 in Greensboro, Alabama, the police let the murderer of a black voting registrar escape; in response, a freedman who would later serve in the Alabama State Legislature urged his fellow freedmen to create a permanent militia. "Union League" militias were formed all over central Alabama.

The freedmen slipped from white control. One planter protested that his workers were "turbulent and disorderly," coming and going when they wished, as if they had a choice whether or not to work. The Union League, protested another ex-master, was advising freedmen "to ignore the Southern white man as much as possible...to set up for themselves."

The next spring, the Ku Klux Klan came to central Alabama. The Klansmen, unlike the freedmen, had horses, and thus the tactical advantages of mobility. In a few months, the Klan triumph was complete. One freedman recalled that the night riders, after reasserting white control, "took the weapons from might near all the colored people in the neighborhood."

The same dynamic existed throughout the South. Sometimes militias consisting of freedmen or Unionists were able to resist the Klan or other white forces. In places like the South Carolina back-country, where the blacks were a numerical majority, the black militias kept white terrorists at bay for long periods.

While many blacks participated in informal, local militias, most of the reconstruction governors set up official state militias that were racially integrated. Like many other facets of the reconstruction governments (and the racist governments which followed them), the integrated "black" state militias were corrupt. The state militias, which sought to protect the state governments and the election process, were frequently in conflict with informal white militias. Arms shipments from the federal government to arm the militias were often intercepted and seized by white militias.

Official or unofficial, the black militias were the primary target of the white racist resistance. "Pitchfork" Ben Tillman, the U.S. Senate advocate of racism for many decades, joined a "Sweetwater Sabre Club" whose members seized control of South Carolina's Edgefield Country from a black militia in 1874-75, and attacked a black militia at Hamburg, South Carolina in 1876.

In areas where the black militias lost and the Klan or other white groups took control, "almost universally the first thing done was to disarm the negroes and leave them defenseless," wrote Albion Tourge? in his 1880 book The Invisible Empire. (An attorney and civil rights worker from the north, Tourge? would later represent the civil rights plaintiff in Plessy v. Ferguson.)

The Klan's objective in disarming the blacks was to leave them unable to defend their rights, a Congressional hearing found. Afraid of race war and retribution, whites were terrified at the mere sight of a black with a gun. As legal historian Kermit Hall notes, "From the southern white's point of view, a well-armed Negro militia was precisely what John Brown had sought to achieve at Harpers Ferry in 1859."

The Vicksburg white riot of 1874 typified the problem. According to a Congressional investigation, the whites conducted, "Unauthorized searches by self-constituted authority into private homes, searches for arms converted, as is unusual, into robbery and thieving...." The Congressional Report detailed one arms roundup:

One poor old man, half crazed, but harmless, sitting quietly in a neighbor's house, is brutally shot to death in the presence of terrified women and shrieking children. He gained his wretched living by hunting and fishing, and had a shot-gun. No one pretended that Tom Bidderman had anything to do with the fight, but he was black, and had a gun in his house, and so they murdered him for amusement as they were going from the city to restore order in the country.

The Radical Republican Congress observed the South with dismay. The Republicans intended to use federal power to force freedom on the South. One of the Radical Republicans' most important tools was the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which required states to respect basic human rights. While the vague language of the amendment has produced disagreement about exactly what is covered, the Congressional backers of the amendment seem to have intended, at the least, protecting the core freedoms listed in the national Bill of Rights. Announced Representative Clarke of Kansas: "I find in the Constitution an article which declared 'the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.' For myself, I shall insist that the reconstructed rebels of Mississippi respect the Constitution in their local laws."

The earlier Freedman's Bureau Bill had also been squarely aimed at protecting the right to bear arms. The bill guaranteed federal protection of "the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of person and estate, including the constitutional right of bearing arms."

The Amendment was quickly emasculated by the United States Supreme Court in The Slaughter-House Cases and United States v. Cruikshank, The Supreme Court understood the social realities of the South. The Cruikshank decision gave the green light to the Klan, unofficial white militias, and other racist groups to forcibly disarm the freedmen and impose white supremacy.

One state at a time, white racists took control of government by using armed violence and the threat of violence to control balloting on election day. Freedmen and their white allies also resorted to arms. But white Republican governors were usually afraid that employing the black militias fully would set off an even broader race war.

The white South, while defeated on the battlefield in 1865, had continued armed resistance to Northern control for over a decade. When the North, an occupying power, grew weary of the struggle and abandoned its black and Republican allies in the South, the white South was again the master of its destiny.

In deference to the Fourteenth Amendment, some states did cloak their laws in neutral, non-racial terms. For example, the Tennessee legislature barred the sale of any handguns except the "Army and Navy model." The ex-Confederate soldiers already had their high quality "Army and Navy" guns. But cash-poor freedmen could barely afford lower-cost, simpler firearms not of the "Army and Navy" quality. Arkansas enacted a nearly identical law in 1881, and other Southern states followed suit, including Alabama (1893), Texas (1907), and Virginia (1925).

As Jim Crow intensified, other Southern states enacted gun registration and handgun permit laws. Registration came to Mississippi (1906), Georgia (1913), and North Carolina (1917). Handgun permits were passed in North Carolina (1917), Missouri (1919), and Arkansas (1923).

As one Florida judge explained, the licensing laws were "passed for the purpose of disarming the negro laborers... [and] never intended to be applied to the white population."

That gun control has a very unsavory past does not, in itself, prove that all modern gun control proposals are a bad idea. But it does offer reasons to be especially cautious about the dangers of disarming people who cannot necessarily count on their local government to protect them.

Dave Kopel is Research Director of the Independence Institute. This article is based on his book The Samurai, the Mountie, and the Cowboy: Should America Adopt the Gun Controls of Other Democracies? The book contains citations to numerous secondary sources discussing the issues in this article.

http://www.reason.com/hod/dk021505.shtml

[Crafty_Dog]

http://wm.gannett.speedera.net/wm.gannett/wkyc/050219pizzaassault.wmv

[Crafty_Dog]

Sparks store clerk hurt after battling robber
Staff Report RENO GAZETTE-JOURNAL
4/20/2005 12:23 am

advertisement

 Multimedia and Related links Below
Related links & stories

--- --- ---
Other news stories

 Vandals spray paint 2 Lake Tahoe schools
 
 Hearing set for Carson day-care operator suspected of taping kids? mouths shut
 
 DNA links inmate to 1988 slaying; he?s sentenced to his fourth life term
 
 Police arrest man who allegedly exposed himself in park
 
 Police helicopter nabs three teen taggers
 
 
 

A store employee was injured Tuesday during what appeared to be an attempted robbery at the Dhaka Convenience Store in the 2100 block of Victorian Avenue, Sparks police said.

The employee suffered head injuries and was transported by REMSA to Washoe Medical Center, where he was in the intensive care unit, police said.

It?s unclear whether any cash or merchandise was taken during the incident that happened about noon, police said.

An investigation found that a man allegedly took an aluminum baseball bat into the store with the intent of robbing it, police said.

The store employee also had a bat behind the counter and the two began fighting, police said.

Police said an employee from a neighboring business chased the man to a getaway car parked around the corner and provided a license plate information to a police dispatcher.

A 19-year-old man was being sought, police said. A warrant had not been issued Tuesday night.

Anyone with information is asked to call the Sparks police at 353-2225 and reference case No. 05-4877 or Secret Witness, which is anonymous and translates most languages, at 322-4900.

[jayceblk]

I remeber as a kid somebody in a Brooklyn junkyard caught a burglar and through a chase in the junkyard the burglar had something fall on him and it paralyzed him from the waist down. He then sued the chaser (owner ) of the place and wound up taking the guy for all he was worth.

[Crafty_Dog]

Woof All:

Our editor, Ron "Night Owl" Gabriel tells me the hero here used to be a bodyguard for Marcos.

Crafty Dog
====================================


LOS ANGELES; Alleged Carjacker Meets Match; [Home Edition]
Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles, Calif.: Sep 7, 2001. pg. B.5
 Full Text (204   words)
(Copyright (c) 2001 Los Angeles Times)
A stranded motorist apparently got more than he bargained for when he allegedly tried to rob a 65-year-old good Samaritan who stopped to lend him a hand in West Covina, the Los Angeles County district attorney's office said Thursday.

Authorities said Anthony Salinas, 19, of Azusa ran out of gas in a stolen car on a West Covina street Wednesday and was trying to push it to a gas station when Elio Bongon, a janitor from Fontana, happened by in his pickup truck. Bongon offered Salinas and his girlfriend a ride to the station and gave them $10 to buy gas.

At the gas station, according to police, Salinas pulled what turned out to be a BB gun and ordered Bongon to give up his money and his truck. Bongon refused and attempted to disarm Salinas, they said. The gun discharged during the struggle, with a BB striking Salinas in the shoulder, police said. They said Bongon wrestled the gun away from Salinas and began hitting him on the head with it.

Salinas fled but was arrested a short distance away.

The district attorney's office Thursday charged Salinas with carjacking, along with attempted carjacking and second-degree robbery in connection with the encounter with Bongon.

San Gabriel Valley Tribune (West Covina, CA)

==============

Same story as covered by a more local paper
December 13, 2001
Carjacker gets 5 years in prison
Victim says he does regret trying to help Salinas
Author: Bill Hetherman Staff Writer
Section: Local
 

POMONA - An Azusa man who allegedly tried to rob a good Samaritan was sentenced Wednesday to five years and 10 months in prison.

Pomona Superior Court Judge Jack P. Hunt imposed the term on Anthony Salinas, 19. Salinas pleaded guilty Wednesday to charges of carjacking and attempted carjacking. An attempted robbery count was dropped.

The good Samaritan, 66-year-old Elio Bongon, was once a bodyguard for then-Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos.

Using his training in the martial arts, Bongon, of Fontana, disarmed Salinas after the defendant pointed a weapon at him that turned out to be a BB gun.

Bongon had a mixed reaction Wednesday to the sentencing.

"Actually, I forgive him, but he has to pay for what he has done," Bongon said. "I hope he will repent and not come out trying to get revenge against me."

Salinas' lawyer, Joseph Gibbons, said Wednesday his client is sorry for what he did and that he was under t! he influence of methamphetamine at the time.

"I've seen so many young people with drug problems," Gibbons said. "My client is not really a violent guy."

Three days before the attack on Bongon, Salinas stole a car from Javier Gonzales in the parking lot of a convenience store on Gladstone Street in Azusa, police said.

Salinas had one hand on what appeared to be the handle of a gun in his pocket, Gonzales told Azusa police.

Salinas was driving Gonzales' car when it ran out of gasoline on Sunset Avenue about 1 p.m. Sept. 5. Bongon, a janitor at Piano City at 210 N. Sunset Ave. in West Covina, helped Salinas push the car into the parking lot of the business.

"He told me he had no money to buy gasoline, so I gave him $10," Bongon testified at an earlier preliminary hearing.

Bongon said he drove Salinas to two places to buy a gas container. Without warning, Salinas pulled out a gun and pointed it at Bongon's right side, he said.

Bo! ngon said he grabbed Salinas' arm, got the gun away and beat him with the weapon until he ran away.

Police caught Salinas a short distance away on Yaleton Avenue when he pretended to be visiting someone and knocked on the door of a home he chose randomly, officers said.

Bongon said Wednesday he does not regret trying to help Salinas and will come to the aid of someone else in need if it happens again.

"I surely will," Bongon said. "I don't think everyone would, but in my opinion I have to do it."

-- Bill Hetherman can be reached at (626) 962-8811, Ext. 2236, or by e-mail at <A
HEF=mailto:bill.hetherman@sgvn.com/>bill.hetherman@sgvn.com[/url] .
(c) 2001 San Gabriel Valley Tribune. All rights reserved. Reproduced with the permission of Media NewsGroup, Inc. by NewsBank, Inc.
Record Number: 1253649

[argyll]

From the San Mateo (California) Daily Journal:

Murder charges sorted

The man who stabbed another man to death Saturday in Millbrae while defending his wife will not face murder charges. Instead, the friends of the dead man may face murder charges since they were committing a felony when he was killed.

Police questioned and released the husband Saturday. The man?s wife was repeatedly hit in the head with The Club, an anti-theft device used to lock car steering wheels, after being asked to buy the three underage men alcohol at Safeway. She is out of the hospital after receiving stitches.

The bizarre Saturday morning incident had police at two crime scenes with two victims. After sorting out evidence, police arrested the friends of Dwayne Beverly, 20, of San Francisco who was stabbed to death. Marco Bolanos, 19, of Sacramento, and Michelle Cardarelli, 18, of Daly City were booked into San Mateo County Jail on attempted murder charges.

However, their charges could include murder when they are arraigned today.

The unidentified man stabbed Beverly in self defense when he found him and his two friends allegedly beating his wife near a bus stop in front of Safeway on El Camino Real in Millbrae. Since Bolanos, Cardarelli and Beverly were committing a felony by allegedly beating the woman, the friends can ultimately be held responsible for Beverly?s death.

Millbrae police Capt. Mike Grogan reports Bolanos and Cardarelli were arrested on charges of attempted murder and murder. However, they were only booked into San Mateo County jail on attempted murder charges, said Chief Deputy District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe.

Official charges will be filed during their arraignment this morning in San Mateo Superior Court.

The incident leading up to the stabbing still remain foggy.

At about 6:45 a.m., police responded to two reports ? one at the bus stop near Safeway and the other at the Millbrae Avenue overpass.

Police reports indicate Beverly, Bolanos and Cardarelli approached the woman and asked the woman to buy alcohol for them. When she refused, they began beating her with The Club.

Her husband had just dropped the woman off and went into Safeway for a moment. He saw the trio beating his wife when he exited the Safeway. In an act of self defense, the man stabbed the 20-year-old Beverly in the chest, Grogan said.

The three friends drove off, but stopped on Millbrae Avenue when Beverly couldn?t continue to drive due to excessive bleeding.

Both Beverly and the woman were taken to San Francisco General Hospital. Beverly was pronounced dead upon arrival, Grogan said.

http://www.smdailyjournal.org/article.cfm?issue=05-10-05&storyID=42778

Another version from the San Francisco Chronicle:

MILLBRAE
2 teens arraigned in attack on couple
Adults at bus stop refused to buy alcohol for youths

Two Daly City teenagers who allegedly attacked a Millbrae couple after they refused to buy them alcohol were arraigned Tuesday on charges of attempted murder, assault and battery for their roles in the Saturday morning incident that left a third accomplice dead from a stab wound.

Authorities say Marco Bolanos, 19, Michelle Cardarelli, 18, and 20-year- old Dwayne Beverly were driving down El Camino Real at 6:45 a.m. after a night of partying when they pulled over at a Safeway supermarket. They asked an unidentified Millbrae couple waiting for a bus to buy them alcohol, said Martin Murray, a San Mateo County prosecutor.

When the couple refused, the three suspects got out of the car and began attacking the man and woman, Murray said. He said it was unclear what words had been exchanged, but the suspects indicated they felt disrespected by the couple.

"It's a senseless crime," Murray said. "You're at a bus stop at 7 a.m. on your way to work. You don't expect that kind of violent reaction. It's not the kind of activity we expect to see in sleepy Millbrae on a Saturday morning."

Murray said Beverly and Bolanos had begun attacking and punching the male victim, who responded by brandishing a 3 1/2-inch pocket knife. He said the suspects then retrieved a Club, a device used to prevent auto thefts.

During the ensuing fight, the male victim, who was hit with the metal club, stabbed Beverly in the chest, authorities said. Sometime during the incident, Bolanos also used the Club against the female victim, hitting her over the head numerous times, Murray said. He said Cardarelli had punched the female victim and held her down while Bolanos attacked her.  

A short time after Beverly was stabbed, the three suspects got back into their bronze Toyota Camry and fled with Beverly at the wheel, Murray said. Police found the trio on the Millbrae Avenue overpass at Highway 101 after Beverly collapsed. He was taken to San Francisco General Hospital, where he was pronounced dead.

The female victim was also taken to San Francisco General with head injuries but was released later that day. Her husband, who sustained injuries to his arms, will not be charged in the case, Murray said.

"At this point we don't anticipate filing charges against him unless new information develops," Murray said. "At this point it appears to be self- defense."

Police said they would not release the names of the two victims out of fear for their safety.

"There is some gang-related information we are looking at, possibly that the suspects are affiliated with a gang out of San Francisco," said San Mateo County Sheriff's Lt. Lisa Williams.

Bolanos was arraigned in San Mateo County Superior Court on charges of attempted murder, assault with a deadly weapon and battery. He did not enter a plea. Cardarelli was arraigned on one count of battery and pleaded not guilty Tuesday. Both were assigned attorneys through the county's private defender program.

Bolanos, who faces up to life in prison if found guilty on all counts, was in San Mateo County Jail without bail. The bail for Cardarelli, who faces up four years if convicted, was set at $25,000.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/05/11/BAGUHCN1DM1.DTL&type=printable

Best regards,

Argyll

[argyll]

DAYTON

Two teens with guns approached a 40-year-old man at Riverview Avenue and Catalpa Drive early Friday. The man backed away, with outstretched hands.
Then things changed swiftly.

The targeted man, Mark Hill, pulled out a Glock 23 handgun ? he has a concealed-carry permit ? and fired several shots, hitting one of the gunmen, a Dayton police report said.

It was Dayton's first shooting by a holder of a concealed weapons permit, according to Sgt. Dennis Chaney.

Police went to the 2000 block of West Riverview about 12:45 a.m. in response to numerous calls about the shooting.

Police found Mark Hill at his residence. He told them he was walking west on Riverview when two teenage males in dark clothing approached him from Catalpa. One shoved him, he turned around and both flashed handguns, a police report said.

Hill "began to back away in a bent-over position with his hands outstretched," according to the report. Then he pulled out a Glock 23, a .40-caliber handgun, and fired, hitting one of the gunmen several times.

The two ran off, the report said.

Shortly after the shooting, a 17-year-old showed up at Good Samaritan Hospital. He was admitted with gunshot wounds to his leg, abdomen and arms, Chaney said. Hospital officials called police.

He was with two 16-year-olds. Police said all three matched the description of the gunmen and a male seen by the man in an alley north of the Riverview and Catalpa during the robbery attempt.

Police arrested the younger teens as they tried to leave the hospital, Chaney said.

The three had shown up in a Jeep Cherokee stolen Thursday on Lakeview Avenue, Chaney said.

"We don't know if they stole it (originally)," Chaney said.

The 16-year-olds were in the Family Court Center, pending delinquency charges of aggravated robbery and receiving stolen property.

Chaney said Hill, who has both a Dayton Firearms Owner's Identification Card and Montgomery County Concealed Carry Card, acted in self-defense.

http://www.daytondailynews.com/localnews/content/localnews/daily/0604robfoil.html

Best regards,

Argyll

[Body-by-Guinness]

Hmm, interesting. Other versions I've read about the above incident have an exchange of gunfire initiated by the bad guys. . . .

[Crafty_Dog]

Well, we the Unorganized Militia did NOT come through on this one , , ,
 

http://wm.gannett.speedera.net/wm.g...izzaassault.wmv

[Body-by-Guinness]

'He walked into a hornet's nest'
  posted: 06-14-2005


A would-be robber got a hard lesson at a beauty school in Shreveport Tuesday: Don't mess with a class of aspiring hair stylists.

The man went into Blalock's Beauty College in the 5400 block of Mansfield Road around noon intending to rob it.

Instead, he wound up on the receiving end of fists, curling irons, a table leg and a 2-by-4 when the 18 women and two men in the class fought back, beat him up and held him until police arrived.

"He walked into a hornet's nest," Police Officer E.J. Swartout said.

The students said the man had ordered everyone to lie on the floor. But instructor Dianne Mitchell tripped him when he came out of a back room. He fell onto a chair and the students went after him.

"I was getting up and saying, 'Get him! Get him!' And everybody started charging him," Mitchell said.

"I've been out on the streets eight years and this is one of those deals when he walked into the wrong place at the wrong time," Officer Swartout said.

Police said the would-be robber, identified as Jared Gipson, 24, was carrying an unloaded gun.

Three people at the school suffered cuts and bruises. Gipson was taken to LSU Hospital to get stitches. He was in a maximum-security cell by himself today at City Jail. Bond has not been set.

Roberts' mother, Verline Norris, waited outside the school while police investigated.

"They should have whipped him," she said of what happened inside. "That will stop a lot of this robbery that is going on in Shreveport."

http://www.ktbs.com/news-detail.html?cityid=1&hid=26380

[Crafty_Dog]

Cop Stabbed During Dunkin' Donuts Heist

Tuesday, June 28, 2005

By Jamie Schram, John Mazor and Andy Geller
New York Post

BROOKLYN, New York ? A heroic off-duty cop was slashed yesterday in a fierce struggle with a vicious punk who was holding up a Brooklyn Dunkin' Donuts (search), cops said.

Officer Vincent Schiavelli, 24, who has made 64 collars in his two years in the NYPD, walked into the shop just as the heist was going down, cops said.

Dramatic surveillance photos show the robber ? who wore a Yankee cap and was later identified by cops as 22-year-old Shron Killings ? jumped on top of the counter and lunged at the clerk, trying to slash him with a folding knife.

The robber was reaching into the cash register when Schiavelli ? wearing a white T-shirt ? grabbed him from behind and the two began struggling. The punk, a suspect in two other Dunkin' Donuts robberies with two prior arrests, lunged at the hero cop with his knife but missed.

Schiavelli then got the thug in a bear hug and tried to subdue him. That's when Killings slashed the hero cop in the left side and ran outside, police said. He drove off in a red Kia SUV and was being sought yesterday.

Schiavelli, unaware of his wounds, ran outside and gave chase, but collapsed in pain. He rushed back into the store and called for help.

Schiavelli, who suffered a cut about an inch long where the chest meets the abdomen, was taken to Kings County Hospital, where he was in stable condition. He was kept overnight for observation.

Schiavelli was visited by his parents, Paul and Kathy, and by a steady stream of fellow officers.

"I've been proud of my son since the day he was born," said Kathy as she left the hospital.

Police Commissioner Ray Kelly was effusive in his praise of the brave officer. Schiavelli "did a terrific job. We're proud of him. He took immediate action without concern for his own safety," Kelly said.

His actions "represent the finest traditions of the NYPD. If he wasn't there, the clerk may very well have been wounded."

Mayor Bloomberg said, "Although we have come to expect this kind of heroism from our police officers, what makes Officer Schiavelli's actions so exceptional is that he was off duty at the time.

"This young officer, out of uniform and without a partner, didn't hesitate to put himself in harm's way to protect a fellow New Yorker."

The drama at the store at 40 Empire Blvd. in the Prospect Lefferts Gardens (search) section unfolded at 6:40 a.m. as Schiavelli was heading to work at the nearby 71st Precinct in Crown Heights (search).

The surveillance video showed the robber walking into the shop carrying a dollar in his left hand and ordering a French cruller. No one else was there.

When the clerk turned to get the doughnut, Killings took the folding knife out of his right pocket but held it under the counter.

He gave the dollar to the clerk, who opened the register. At that point, he lunged at the clerk and Schiavelli grabbed him.

As the suspect fled, a witness copied the license plate of the SUV and cops traced it to Killings' mother, who said she lent it to her son.

Cops said Killings was a suspect in a $300 stickup at the same store on May 17 and a $400 holdup at a Dunkin' Donuts on Utica Avenue on May 25.

An accomplice, Jims Medy, 18, was arrested on June 11 in connection with the first robbery.

Killings' prior arrests are for criminal possession of a weapon and unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle.

Shalha Khairkhah, the manager of the Prospect Lefferts Gardens shop, said: "We were very lucky the officer was there. Otherwise I don't know what would have happened."

Demetrius Hinson, 23, who works at a Wendy's next door to the doughnut shop, said he moved to Brooklyn two weeks ago from Charlotte, N.C.

"This is all shocking to me," he said. "This doesn't make me want to stay in New York City. It makes me want to grab my things and get out."
__________________

[Body-by-Guinness]

COMMENTARY
The Big Lie of the Assault Weapons Ban
The death of the law hasn't brought a rise in crime -- just the opposite.

By John R. Lott Jr.
This wasn't supposed to happen. When the federal assault weapons ban ended on Sept. 13, 2004, gun crimes and police killings were predicted to surge. Instead, they have declined.

For a decade, the ban was a cornerstone of the gun control movement. Sarah Brady, one of the nation's leading gun control advocates, warned that "our streets are going to be filled with AK-47s and Uzis." Life without the ban would mean rampant murder and bloodshed.

Well, more than nine months have passed and the first crime numbers are in. Last week, the FBI announced that the number of murders nationwide fell by 3.6% last year, the first drop since 1999. The trend was consistent; murders kept on declining after the assault weapons ban ended.

Even more interesting, the seven states that have their own assault weapons bans saw a smaller drop in murders than the 43 states without such laws, suggesting that doing away with the ban actually reduced crime. (States with bans averaged a 2.4% decline in murders; in three states with bans, the number of murders rose. States without bans saw murders fall by more than 4%.)

And the drop was not just limited to murder. Overall, violent crime also declined last year, according to the FBI, and the complete statistics carry another surprise for gun control advocates. Guns are used in murder and robbery more frequently then in rapes and aggravated assaults, but after the assault weapons ban ended, the number of murders and robberies fell more than the number of rapes and aggravated assaults.

It's instructive to remember just how passionately the media hyped the dangers of "sunsetting" the ban. Associated Press headlines warned "Gun shops and police officers brace for end of assault weapons ban." It was even part of the presidential campaign: "Kerry blasts lapse of assault weapons ban." An Internet search turned up more than 560 news stories in the first two weeks of September that expressed fear about ending the ban. Yet the news that murder and other violent crime declined last year produced just one very brief paragraph in an insider political newsletter, the Hotline.

The fact that the end of the assault weapons ban didn't create a crime wave should not have surprised anyone. After all, there is not a single published academic study showing that these bans have reduced any type of violent crime.

Research funded by the Justice Department under the Clinton administration concluded only that the effect of the assault weapons ban on gun violence "has been uncertain." The authors of that report released their updated findings last August, looking at crime data from 1982 through 2000 (which covered the first six years of the federal law). The latest version stated: "We cannot clearly credit the ban with any of the nation's recent drop in gun violence."

Such a finding was only logical. Though the words "assault weapons" conjure up rapid-fire military machine guns, in fact the weapons outlawed by the ban function the same as any semiautomatic ? and legal ? hunting rifle. They fire the same bullets at the same speed and produce the same damage. They are simply regular deer rifles that look on the outside like AK-47s.

For gun control advocates, even a meaningless ban counts. These are the same folks who have never been bashful about scare tactics, predicting doom and gloom when they don't get what they want. They hysterically claimed that blood would flow in the streets after states passed right-to-carry laws letting citizens carry concealed handguns, but that never occurred. Thirty-seven states now have right-to-carry laws ? and no one is seriously talking about rescinding them or citing statistics about the laws causing crime.

Gun controllers' fears that the end of the assault weapons ban would mean the sky would fall were simply not true. How much longer can the media take such hysteria seriously when it is so at odds with the facts?




John R. Lott Jr., a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, is the author of "More Guns, Less Crime" (University of Chicago, 2000) and "The Bias Against Guns: Why Almost Everything You've Heard About Gun Control Is Wrong" (Regnery, 2003).

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-lott28jun28,0,4447615.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions

[Body-by-Guinness]

79-Year-Old Shoots Two Intruders, Police Say

Homeowner Says Men Kicked In His Back Door At 5 A.M.

POSTED: 12:09 pm EDT July 9, 2005
UPDATED: 11:13 pm EDT July 9, 2005

DRY RIDGE, Ky. -- A 79-year-old man armed with a .357 magnum revolver shot two men after they broke into his home overnight, News 5's Bina Roy reported.

Police answering a call about a break-in and burglary found two men shot outside a home on Ellen Kay Drive in Grant County.
The homeowner told police the two men kicked in his back door just before 5 a.m. Saturday. They tried to flee after being shot.
Police said they found one wounded man in the driveway and followed a trail of blood to the other man nearby.

Nearby residents were stunned but supported their neighbor's actions.
"At that time in the morning, if I was in that situation, I might try to do the same thing," Everett Musgrave told News 5. "I am glad he was able to protect himself. That's the big thing. At least he's not hurt."
"He's old school," Lisa Garner said of her neighbor. "My grandfather would have done the same thing.

"It bothers me because we have children. It bothers me that anybody would intrude into your home," Garner said.

Musgrave had a message for anybody thinking about breaking into somebody's home.

"Yeah, don't pick the wrong door," Musgrave said.

AirCare helicopters flew the men to Grant County Hospital. Their names and conditions have not been released.

[Body-by-Guinness]

64-Year-Old Central Fla. Woman Fatally Shoots Home Intruder

Local 6 News( Central Florida ) ^ | May 30, 2005 | staff

A 64-year-old Central Florida woman killed an intruder in her home over the weekend with a single shot from her .38-caliber revolver, according to police.

The woman shot the unidentified man in the chest from about 10 feet, sheriff's authorities said. The man ran out the back door and collapsed, Local 6 News partner Florida Today reported. He was declared dead shortly after he was found in the yard of the home in an unincorporated beachside neighborhood north of U.S. 192.

Agent Lou Heyn of the Brevard County Sheriff's Office said the woman heard a window break and hid behind her bed, according to Florida Today.

"That woke her up," Heyn said. "She can't I.D. him. Never seen him before.''

Heyn said the case is considered self-defense.

"The bottom line is that when somebody enters your home like that, it's self defense," Heyn said. "Breaking into the house obviously shows some intent."

Sheriff's investigators hope somebody will come forward with information about the intruder. He had dark brown hair, a dark brown mustache and was wearing a dark blue Champion T-shirt, light blue swim shorts and tennis shoes. He also had a tattoo of a cross on his right hand, between his index finger and thumb. He also had a tattoo of a Harley Davidson on one arm and several female names tattooed on his other arm.

"It's very rare. Occupied burglaries are rare in of themselves," Heyn said.

"This just underscores how dangerous those are."

[Body-by-Guinness]

Tuesday, September 06, 2005
What Michael Moore and Liberals Don?t (and Will Never) Understand About the Second Amendment
Armed citizens protecting their neighborhoods from marauders. [link]

Some of the most heartening tales coming out of the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina are the tales of Americans standing up and taking responsibility for their own safety and survival rather than whining about ?the government? not taking care of them.

The Washington Post reports that in Popps Ferry Landing, a neighborhood near Biloxi, Mississippi, the local neighborhood watch is keeping an armed night watch to prevent looters from invading the neighborhood. Following the looting of the local Dollar Store, neighbors who very rarely spoke to each other, got together to protect their own. They?re not going out hunting down anyone; they?re just camping out at their houses with their constitutionally protected firearms preventing the roving bands of criminals from destroying their peaceful middle class neighborhood.

It is times such as these, for which the Second Amendment is so important. In the aftermath of the greatest natural disaster in the history of this nation, it is the citizen himself that must stand in the breach of the wall of civilization, created by the storm and the consequent disorganization and lack of police presence, to protect himself from the anarchy which reigns in the world outside. These are the minute men of the 21st Century. These are ordinary middle class men, plumbers, engineers, managers, carpenters, and salesmen who have gotten out of their easy chairs and off their sofas, gone out into their neighborhood and introduced themselves to their neighbors. They have, in this time of danger decided, not to wait around to become a victim and then whine about why our government hasn?t done something to protect them, but to take responsibility for their own safety. Our Founding Fathers would not be proud of these men they would merely nod their heads in acknowledgement of men doing what should be expected of them.

It is precisely this for which the Second Amendment was designed. I know it?s difficult for Liberals to understand, but as we are seeing currently, we can?t always depend on the police. The Second Amendment is not, much to the chagrin of Liberals like Michael Moore, Al Gore, and John Kerry, about a person?s right to hunt; it is about the American citizen?s right to feel safe in their own residence. This fact which so sadly escaped the two last Democrat candidates for President is what made the images of John Kerry traipsing around in borrowed jacket with borrowed gun attempting to look like a hunter so hysterical to the gun owners of America. The N.R.A. is not about arming criminals like Michael Moore has inappropriately and inaccurately tried to portray in his crassly exploitive movie ?Bowling for Columbine,? it is about educating the American citizen on the rights and responsibilities of gun ownership, the proper use and care of those firearms, and the protection, from those who would usurp those rights under the misapprehension that a gun-free state is a safe state, of those rights as guaranteed in the Bill of Rights.

It is true that guns are designed for the purpose of killing. They are the most efficient form of killing that the average citizen has available to them. They are also the most effective form of self defense the average citizen has available to them. In their absence, individuals, men, women, and children are at greater risk. To an unarmed man, alone on a road or in his house, a group of four or five (or even a couple) burly men intent on evil represent a real life threatening situation; to an armed man, or women, properly trained in the use of firearms, they become a manageable threat. In a society in which the criminal frequently has more rights than the victim, being armed should be, as the Second Amendment intends, an untouchable right. Carrying a firearm, whether concealed of openly, should not only be allowed, it should be encouraged. The fact of the matter is, the better armed the citizens of a community, the lower the crime rate, particularly the violent crime rate, of that community. Those cities like Washington D.C., New York, and possibly soon to be San Francisco, have the highest per capita violent crime rate in the nation.

As can be seen in the Popps Landing example, total dependence upon government agencies for our safety can quickly turn into a liability, if those agencies are overwhelmed by circumstances beyond anyone?s control. At a time when police response to emergency calls can be five to ten minutes (if not much longer) it is ludicrous for the American people to be forced to rely on the government for their protection, as the anti-gun lobby would have us do. That is a real path to the imprisonment of the average citizen inside their houses. In Britain, certainly there is a lower murder rate than in the U.S.A., but the overall violent crime rate is considerably higher than in America. Groups like Handgun Control International, Center to Prevent Handgun Violence, and Common Cause would have Americans surrender their rights to self-defense for the illusory concept of complete safety. There is no such thing as complete safety, and a person can be as easily and more surely killed by a knife as a gun. It has been stated by the Second Amendment lobbying groups so often as to become a trite saying, ?if guns are outlawed; only outlaws will have guns.? Trite maybe, but also true, so true that it becomes a profound statement of universal truth. By definition, an outlaw, a law breaker, a criminal, does not care whether or not he is breaking the law by carrying a firearm. If a person has criminal intent, he will find a means to implement it.

These people, people of the left like Mr. Moore, are the same people who would have had us unilaterally disarm during the cold war in the face of a growing Soviet Nuclear threat. President Reagan, proved how mistaken the unilateralist?s position was by presiding over the first stages of the complete dismantlement of the Soviet Union. Unilateral disarmament in the face of a known threat is an invitation to victim hood. It is only by show of strength that threat can be countered. This is not some new ?off-the-wall? concept, this is human nature at its very core. The anti-gun forces exhibit the same Pollyannaish naivet? of human nature that the Marxists do. There are and always will be predators in our society. It is the human nature of some to covet more than their ?fair share.? The entire concept of ?fair share? is faulty thinking based on the mistaken concept that material wealth is a zero sum game. It is also human nature for some in our society to desire that for which they are not willing to work. They are the predators which must be confronted in everyday life. If relying on the police was a successful concept, there would be no crime. No one would have to lock their door and a woman walking downtown after dark by herself would neither be uncommon nor foolish. Since not even the most rabid Liberal in society would consider that situation reasonable behavior, the basic premise of their arguments against guns is false. I dare say that Sarah Brady would not feel comfortable walking the dark alley ways of D.C. even though there are extremely strong anti-gun laws in place there.

There are no reasonable arguments in favor of gun control, only emotional ones. That is why one so often hears bogus statistics coming out of the anti-gun lobbyists. Thankfully, most Americans understand this concept and reject the irrational policies recommended by the gun haters. You will also hear them claim that they are not anti-gun, rather that they are only seeking to impose ?reasonable? restraints on gun ownership. This is an evolutionary principle for them brought about through their numerous defeats, by gun owners, in their legislative endeavors. You will often hear them use the phrase ?I am a hunter myself...? or ?We?re not talking about taking away a hunter?s guns...? invariably followed by the word ?but.? They then will use the phrase, ?reasonable people,? or ?reasonable restrictions,? so as to make it clear that only an ?unreasonable? person would object to their efforts to restrict gun ownership.

In a society of law-abiding citizens, we have nothing to fear from an unrestricted right to gun ownership. Law-abiding citizens are by definition going to obey the law. By restricting their ?right to keep and bare arms,? we only encourage law breaking by those same citizens. Laws are intended to preserve freedoms, not restrict them. In committing a crime, someone is infringing on the rights and freedoms of another. In an armed society, those who would seek to impose their will on another are significantly less inclined to do so. It is for that reason, that the citizens of Popps Ferry Landing will not have to worry about having their property destroyed or stolen, their families killed or injured by marauding bands of criminals. And the authorities will not be additionally burdened in the exercising of their duties responding to this crisis.

An armed citizenry is a safe and fearless citizenry.
posted by Will Malven at 10:17 AM

[Guard Dog]

A special will be on the Discovery Channel Sept. 11th at 9PM ET about Flight 93.

http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence/flight/flight.html

Gruhn

[Body-by-Guinness]

I've been shocked at what seems to me to be extra legal confiscation of firearms in New Orleans. Indeed, I was left agog by a photo published in yesterday's Washington Post where two SWAT garbed men identified as "drug enforcement officers" armed with sub-machine guns were using entry tools to force open a door of a private residence so they could "search for weapons."

I've heard a quote over the years to the effect that no urban area is more than 48 hours away from food riots. It also seems no jurisdiction is more than 72 hours away from the suspension of all constitutional protections by extra legal methods.

[David Kopel, September 9, 2005 at 9:57pm]
New Orleans Gun Confiscation is Blatantly Illegal:
On Monday, I'll have an article on the New Orleans gun confiscation on Reason.com. But there's one part of the story that's too important to wait: the confiscation is plainly illegal. I realize that there are plausible arguments that the house-to-house break-ins and gun-point confiscations violate the Second, Fourth, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution, as well as numerous provisions of the Louisiana Constitution, including the right to arms. Indeed, the confiscations are inconsistent with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and with natural law. But my point is much more specific. The particular Louisiana statute which allows emergency controls on firearms also clearly disallows the complete prohibition being imposed by the New Orleans chief of police.

The relevant statute is La. Stat., title 14, ? 329.6. It provides:

?329.6. Proclamation of state of emergency; conditions therefor; effect thereof
A. During times of great public crisis, disaster, rioting, catastrophe, or similar public emergency within the territorial limits of any municipality or parish, or in the event of reasonable apprehension of immediate danger thereof, and upon a finding that the public safety is imperiled thereby, the chief executive officer of any political subdivision or the district judge, district attorney, or the sheriff of any parish of this state, or the public safety director of a municipality, may request the governor to proclaim a state of emergency within any part or all of the territorial limits of such local government. Following such proclamation by the governor, and during the continuance of such state of emergency, the chief law enforcement officer of the political subdivision affected by the proclamation may, in order to protect life and property and to bring the emergency situation under control, promulgate orders affecting any part or all of the territorial limits of the municipality or parish:

(1) Establishing a curfew and prohibiting and/or controlling pedestrian and vehicular traffic, except essential emergency vehicles and personnel;

(2) Designating specific zones within which the occupancy and use of buildings and the ingress and egress of vehicles and persons shall be prohibited or regulated;

(3) Regulating and closing of places of amusement and assembly;

(4) Prohibiting the sale and distribution of alcoholic beverages;

(5) Prohibiting and controlling the presence of persons on public streets and places;

(6) Regulating and controlling the possession, storage, display, sale, transport and use of firearms, other dangerous weapons and ammunition;

(7) Regulating and controlling the possession, storage, display, sale, transport and use of explosives and flammable materials and liquids, including but not limited to the closing of all wholesale and retail establishments which sell or distribute gasoline and other flammable products;

( Regulating and controlling the possession, storage, display, sale, transport and use of sound apparatus, including but not limited to public address systems, bull horns and megaphones.

(9) Prohibiting the sale or offer for sale of goods or services within the designated emergency area for value exceeding the prices ordinarily charged for comparable goods and services in the same market area at, or immediately before, the time of the state of emergency. However, the value received may include reasonable expenses and a charge for any attendant business risk in addition to the cost of the goods and services which necessarily are incurred in procuring the goods and services during the state of emergency, pursuant to the provisions of R.S. 29:701 through 716.

B. Such orders shall be effective from the time and in the manner prescribed in such orders and shall be published as soon as practicable in a newspaper of general circulation in the area affected by such order and transmitted to the radio and television media for publication and broadcast. Such orders shall cease to be in effect five days after their promulgation or upon declaration by the governor that the state of emergency no longer exists, whichever occurs sooner; however, the chief law enforcement officer, with the consent of the governor, may extend the effect of such orders for successive periods of not more than five days each by republication of such orders in the manner hereinabove provided.

C. All orders promulgated pursuant to this section shall be executed in triplicate and shall be filed with the clerk of court of the parish affected and with the secretary of state of this state.

D. During any period during which a state of emergency exists the proclaiming officer may appoint additional peace officers or firemen for temporary service, who need not be in the classified lists of such departments. Such additional persons shall be employed only for the time during which the emergency exists.

E. During the period of the existence of the state of emergency the chief law enforcement officer of the political subdivision may call upon the sheriff, mayor, or other chief executive officer of any other parish or municipality to furnish such law enforcement or fire protection personnel, or both, together with appropriate equipment and apparatus, as may be necessary to preserve the public peace and protect persons and property in the requesting area. Such aid shall be furnished to the chief law enforcement officer requesting it insofar as possible without withdrawing from the political subdivision furnishing such aid the minimum police and fire protection appearing necessary under the circumstances. In such cases when a state of emergency has been declared by the governor pursuant to R.S. 29:724 et seq., all first responders who are members of a state or local office of homeland security and emergency preparedness, including but not limited to medical personnel, emergency medical technicians, persons called to active duty service in the uniformed services of the United States, Louisiana National Guard, Louisiana Guard, Civil Air Patrol, law enforcement and fire protection personnel acting outside the territory of their regular employment shall be considered as performing services within the territory of their regular employment for purposes of compensation, pension, and other rights or benefits to which they may be entitled as incidents of their regular employment. Law enforcement officers acting pursuant to this Section outside the territory of their regular employment have the same authority to enforce the law as when acting within the territory of their own employment.

F. Notwithstanding the provisions of this Section, except in an imminent life threatening situation nothing herein shall restrict any uniformed employee of a licensed private security company, acting within the scope of employment, from entering and remaining in an area where an emergency has been declared. The provisions of this Subsection shall apply if the licensed private security company submits a list of employees and their assignment to be allowed into the area, to the Louisiana State Board of Private Security Examiners, which shall forward the list to the chief law enforcement office of the parish and, if different, the agency in charge of the scene.

First, there are the procedural issues. According to subsection B, emergency orders must be published in a newspaper in the jurisdiction; the Times-Picayune is heroically publishing on-line, but I did not find any evidence, on Friday night, of any publication of the gun confiscation order, whose implementation had already begun on Thursday. According to subsection C, an emergency order must also be filed with the court in the relevant parish (impossible under current conditions), and with the Secretary of State (whose office in Baton Rouge is entirely functional). The Secretary's website gives no indication that a gun confiscation order has been filed.

The more serious issue is the substantive one. The emergency statute creates authority for "prohibiting" some things, and for "regulating" other things. The statute uses "prohibiting" in subsections (A)4, 5, and 9. The statute uses "regulating" in sections (A)3, 6, 7, and 8. Quite clearly the legislature meant to distinguish "prohibiting" authority from "regulating" authority. In the context of the statute, it is not plausible to claim that "prohibiting" means the same as "regulating."

"Prohibiting" authority applies to the sale of alcohol, presence on public streets, and the sale of goods or services at excessive prices. "Regulating" authority applies to firearms, flammable materials, and sound devices (such as megaphones). The "regulating" authority is undoubtedly broad. But it is not equivalent to "prohibiting." The statute does not authorize the New Orleans Police--abetted by the National Guard and the U.S. Marshalls--to break into homes, point guns at people, and confiscate every single private firearm--or every single private bullhorn or private cigarette lighter.

Yet New Orleans' lawless superintendant of police, P. Edwin Compass, has declared, "No one is allowed to be armed. We're going to take all the guns."

The Compass order appears to be plainly illegal. Under section 1983 of the federal Civil Rights law, any government employee who assists in the illegal confiscation would appear to be personally liable to a civil lawsuit. Moreover, higher-ranking officials--such as the National Guard officers who have ordered their troops to participate in the confiscation--would seem to be proper subjects for impeachment or other removal from office (and attendant forfeiture of pensions), depending on the procedures of their particular state.

All police officers, National Guard troops, and U.S. Marshals take an oath to uphold the Constitution and the laws. It appears that carrying out an illegal order to confiscate lawfully-owned firearms from homes would be inconsistent with the oath, contrary to sworn duty, and perhaps a criminal act.


UPDATE: Orin's response to my post (above) contains several misunderstandings, in my view:

1. The most serious problem is that he reads the power of "regulating and controlling" as equivalent to the power of "prohibiting and controlling." By his theory, the Louisiana legislature could just as well have said "controlling" instead of "prohibiting and controlling" and the legislature still would have granted the power of prohibiting. In an abstract semantic sense, Orin's theory is not implausible. But the Louisiana legislature obviously used the words more precisely; the repeated shifts from "regulating" to "prohibitting" plainly show that the two words are not identical, and that adding "and controlling" after each word does not create identical phrases. If the Louisiana legislature meant to convey the same powers over each of the items in subsection (A), the legislature would have used the same operative words in each subsection.

2. He's right that the statute doesn't specify whether proper publication and filing are necessary for the emergency orders to be lawful. (And as my original post indicated, it's not absolutely certain that proper publication and filing have not occured, although it would be odd for the Louisiana Secretary of State not to post the filing of such an important order.) At least in some circumstances, strict adherence to the provisions of subsections (B) and (C) would be impossible. For example, the Secretary of State's office might be closed; indeed, the courts in Orleans Parish are currently closed. However, if the police chief failed to file the proper notice with the Secretary of State, even when the Secretary of State's office is open, the failure to file indicates, at the least, a disregard on the part of the chief for proper legal procedure.

3. Note subsection (B)'s rule that "Such orders shall be effective from the time and in the manner prescribed in such orders... Such orders shall cease to be in effect five days after their promulgation..." Has the police chief ever promulgated a proper emergency order about firearms? Sending police officers out to confiscate guns is not "promulgation." For the order to be valid, there must, at least, be some form of proper order to the public, not merely to the police. The "promulgation" must, at the least, include a date on which the order goes into effect, because a legal start date is necessary to calculate the automatic expiration date five days thereafter. It seems unlikely that a press conference merely announcing--after the confiscations and break-ins have already begun--the confiscations are taking place, consistutes the promulgation of an "order." The only Louisiana case law definitions of "promulgate" come from election law cases; they rely on the dictionary definition of "promulgate" as "To make known or announce officially and formally to the public." The cases further specify that "promulgate" should be understood in its specific statutory context. E.g., LeCompte v. Board of Sup'rs of Elections of Terrebonne Parish, 331 So.2d 173 (La. App. 1976). And it appears that the chief of police has not complied with any of the statute's specific standards for promulgation (newspaper, parish court, Secretary of State).

4. Violation of a person's state constitutional right to keep and bear arms is a violation of her 14th Amendment rights, and gives rise to a cause of action under section 1983. Kellogg v. City of Gary, 562 N.E.2d 685, 696 (Ind. 1990):
For all of the foregoing reasons, we now hold there is a state created right to bear arms which includes the right to carry a handgun with a license, provided that all of the requirements of the Indiana Firearms Act are met. This right is protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and is both a property and liberty interest for purposes of ? 1983.
If the confiscation of firearms is illegal under Louisiana statute, then the confiscation is very likely a violation of the right to arms under the Louisiana constitution. Moreover, pursuant to United States v. Emerson, the Second Amendment is recognized as an individual right in the Fifth Circuit, which includes Louisiana. The Second Amendment, even if unincorporated, would be the basis of a section 1983 claim against any federal employees involved in the confiscation. Also, the warrantless entry into homes and illegal confiscation of property might give rise to section 1983 claims premised on the Fourth and Fifth Amendments.

5. In response to some of the issues raised by comments on related posts...the President of the United States probably has the power, as Commander in Chief, to order the confiscation of firearms from areas in actual rebellion, following a proclamation of martial law. Martial law has not been declared. The "standard of scrutiny" question for the deprivation of state or federal constitutional rights is irrelevant here; the question would be relevant if there were a challenge to the constitutionality of the Louisiana emergency statute. When the police chief exercises power which he was never granted by law, then his act is ultra vires, and necessarily illegal.

http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2005_09_04-2005_09_10.shtml

[SB_Mig]

Buz,

I think it's becoming clear that when "things fall apart" and the government steps in to "help" as they did in the hurricane-striken areas, ALL of our rights seem to evaporate...and there ain't a damn thing we can do about it.

Forced evacuation, forced detention, forced disarmament. Pretty f*ing scary if you ask me...

[Body-by-Guinness]

Oh my god. Watch brave California Highway Patrolmen whup on an armed, older woman who does not want to leave her home. Un-freaking-real:

http://www.ktvu.com/news/4936363/detail.html#

Go to the story near the bottom of the page titled:

CHP Takes Part In Door-To-Door Search

[Guard Dog]

Oh my god. Watch brave California Highway Patrolmen whup on an armed, older woman who does not want to leave her home. Un-freaking-real:

http://www.ktvu.com/news/4936363/detail.html#

Go to the story near the bottom of the page titled:

CHP Takes Part In Door-To-Door Search

Personally I think they handled it very well.  I was expecting a clip of a LEO using unnecessary force to control her.  By the looks of it, it seems that the officer reached for her weapons to control them before controlling her and she fell to the ground.  It is interesting that the reporter asked ?will they use deadly force? and personally I could see that situation turning deadly quite quickly.



Gruhn

[Crafty_Dog]

Ryan:

Disagree with you on this one.  I don't have audio on my system at the moment, but my memory of this footage is that they entered her home to "persuade" her to leave.  Holding a gun by the barrel (unloaded IIRC) she showed them she had the means to protect herself.  Then this.

All:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Defenseless On the Bayou
New Orleans gun confiscation is foolish and illegal

Dave Kopel



In the nearly two weeks since Hurricane Katrina, the government of New Orleans has devolved from its traditional status as an elective kleptocracy into something far more dangerous: an anarcho-tyranny that refuses to protect the public from criminals while preventing people from protecting themselves. At the orders of New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin, the New Orleans Police, the National Guard, the Oklahoma National Guard, and U.S. Marshals have begun breaking into homes at gunpoint, confiscating their lawfully-owned firearms, and evicting the residents. "No one is allowed to be armed. We're going to take all the guns," says P. Edwin Compass III, the superintendent of police.

Last week, thousands of New Orleanians huddled in the Superdome and the Convention Center got a taste of anarcho-tyranny. Everyone entering those buildings was searched for firearms. So for a few days, they lived in a small world without guns. As in other such worlds, the weaker soon became the prey of the stronger. Tuesday's New Orleans Times-Picayune reported some of the grim results, as an Arkansas National Guardsman showed the reporter dozens of bodies rotting in a non-functional freezer.

In the rest of the city, some police officers abandoned their posts, while others joined the looting spree. For several days, the ones who stayed on the job did not act to stop the looting that was going on right in front of them. To the extent that any homes or businesses were saved, the saviors were the many good citizens of New Orleans who defended their families, homes, and businesses with their own firearms.

These people were operating within their legal rights. The law authorizes citizen's arrests for any felony, and in the past (in the 1964 case McKellar v. Mason), a Louisiana court held that shooting a property thief in the spine was a legitimate citizen's arrest.

The aftermath of the hurricane has featured prominent stories of citizens legitimately defending lives and property. New Orleans lies on the north side of the Mississippi River, and the city of Algiers is on the south. The Times-Picayune detailed how dozens of neighbors in one part of Algiers had formed a militia. After a car-jacking and an attack on a home by looters, the neighborhood recognized the need for a common defense; they shared firearms, took turns on patrol, and guarded the elderly. Although the initial looting had resulted in a gun battle, once the patrols began, the militia never had to fire a shot. Likewise, the Garden District of New Orleans, one of the city's top tourist attractions, was protected by armed residents.

The good gun-owning citizens of New Orleans and the surrounding areas ought to be thanked for helping to save some of their city after Mayor Nagin, incoherent and weeping, had fled to Baton Rouge. Yet instead these citizens are being victimized by a new round of home invasions and looting, these ones government-organized, for the purpose of firearms confiscation.

The Mayor and Governor do have the legal authority to mandate evacuation, but failure to comply is a misdemeanor; so the authority to use force to compel evacuation goes no further than the power to effect a misdemeanor arrest. The preemptive confiscation of every private firearm in the city far exceeds any reasonable attempt to carry out misdemeanor arrests for persons who disobey orders to leave.

Louisiana statutory law does allow some restrictions on firearms during extraordinary conditions. One statute says that after the Governor proclaims a state of emergency (as Governor Blanco has done), "the chief law enforcement officer of the political subdivision affected by the proclamation may...promulgate orders...regulating and controlling the possession, storage, display, sale, transport and use of firearms, other dangerous weapons and ammunition." But the statute does not, and could not, supersede the Louisiana Constitution, which declares that "The right of each citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be abridged, but this provision shall not prevent the passage of laws to prohibit the carrying of weapons concealed on the person."

The power of "regulating and controlling" is not the same as the power of "prohibiting and controlling." The emergency statute actually draws this distinction in its language, which refers to "prohibiting" price-gouging, sale of alcohol, and curfew violations, but only to "regulating and controlling" firearms. Accordingly, the police superintendent's order "prohibiting" firearms possession is beyond his lawful authority. It is an illegal order.

Last week, we saw an awful truth in New Orleans: A disaster can bring out predators ready to loot, rampage, and pillage the moment that they have the opportunity. Now we are seeing another awful truth: There is no shortage of police officers and National Guardsmen who will obey illegal orders to threaten peaceful citizens at gunpoint and confiscate their firearms.




Dave Kopel is Research Director of the Independence Institute


http://www.reason.com/hod/dk091005.shtml

[Guard Dog]

Crafty,
  May I ask what part you disagree with?

Gruhn

[Body-by-Guinness]

Mr. Gruhn:

Doubtless I'm seeing things through a Libertarian lens, but the events shown in the clip in question give me the willies on several levels. First, there are CA cops enforcing LA emergency directives of dubious origin (see above Kopel piece). It's hard to imagine a coherent statutory mechanism that gives CA police the power to enforce directives contrary to the LA, and US, constitutions. Authority is exercised nonetheless.

Second, it's quite clear to me that the homeowner doesn't want the cops in her home, nor does she want to leave it. Though it's hard to know the exact circumstance of the area from viewing the clip, there doesn't appear to be any imminent danger. There have been a lot of contradictory statements out of LA about just how vigorously, and by which legal mechanism, evacuation can be forced. Despite many a gray area by all reports, the CA cops enforced evacuation with a vigor that spooked me.

Finally what the fornication was a news crew doing in the mix? What, the area is too dangerous for homeowners, but camera crews can intrude where they will? Though I suppose some would argue we should count ourselves lucky for having the fourth estate there to bear witness, I can't help but wonder how the observers impact the observed. It's not like some omniscient eye just happened by, rather a reporter, producer, cameraman, and perhaps sound man managed to attach themselves to a group of police doing a sweep. The all trundled into a private residence, and perhaps served as a moderating influence, or perhaps served to exacerbate things. What cop wants to be filmed turning tail on an older woman; if his buddies saw the tape he'd never live it down.

Bottom line for me is that here's a woman who's survived a pretty horrific event coming into contact with agents of the government ostensibly there to help her. The result? She is wrestled to the ground by an out of town cop, disarmed, and evicted. Perhaps I'm more idealistic than I let on, but I can't help thinking it wouldn't take much official effort to produce a far more desirable outcome.

[Crafty_Dog]

That's close to what I would say but IMHO gets involved in a couple of tangents.

She didn't want to leave her home.  She didn't want the police in her home.   The police came into her home anyway.  They told her it wasn't safe for her to stay.  She showed them that she had a gun with which she could defend herself.  She is disarmedby force and taken from her home by force.

The willies indeed.

[Guard Dog]

I was under the impression that it was a mandatory evacuation and that no one was permitted to stay.  Now that I see it through different eyes I can see the ethical questions that were brought up.  The news crew definitely brings confusion into the mix and I understand the legal questions of the whole ordeal.


Gruhn

[Crafty_Dog]

Yes, the idiot mayor announced a mandatory evacuation, but he or someone else that no one would be forced to leave.  WTF?  

[prentice crawford]

Yes, the idiot mayor announced a mandatory evacuation, but he or someone else that no one would be forced to leave.  WTF?  

                        ( WTF? ) Why Think First?  
                                 
                                   Woof P.C.

[Szymon]

Woof All:

This thread is for stories of citizen's stepping forward:

Crafty Dog
------------------------

CRIMENETDAILY
Bank robber caught
by fed-up customer
Man who witnessed previous holdup
now chooses to act, pounces on thief

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: July 27, 2003
6:42 p.m. Eastern



? 2003 WorldNetDaily.com



 

As Yogi Berra might say, it was a case of deja vu all over again.

Last month, Andrew Green was inside the Riverside National Bank in Jensen Beach, Fla., when the establishment was robbed. He stood by helplessly as a witness to the crime. In an incredible coincidence, Green was inside the same branch when it was robbed again yesterday morning. But this time, there was a different outcome, as Green decided to take action and get involved by pursuing the alleged robber.

"At first I just wanted to follow him, so I could identify him to the police," Green told the Stuart News. "He was walking across the parking lot so nonchalantly and was changing his clothes as he walked."

Green watched as the suspect removed his hat and shirt, stuffing them into a plastic Wal-Mart bag. That's when he decided to pounce, tackling Thomas Poisal.

"He struggled a little on the way down," Green told the Palm Beach Post. "He looked a little shocked. He hadn't looked behind him a single time in the parking lot. It felt great," he added to the Post. "All my frustrations just went out of my body."

Deputies from the Martin County Sheriff's Office arrived to find Green and another witness holding Poisal in a bear hug, with $2,000 on the suspect.

"It was bibbity-bam, bibbity-boom," Lt. Mike McKinley told the Stuart News. "[Poisal's] got to know he had a very poor decision-making process today."

Poisal is being charged with armed robbery after telling the bank teller he had a gun, though none was recovered.  On June 2, Richard Mandile allegedly robbed the same bank after giving the teller a note, leaving Green amazed by the coincidence.

"What are the odds of this happening twice?" Green asked the Stuart News. "The first time I was really frustrated for not helping," he said. "But this time was great. Your adrenaline really gets pumping and you don't realize what you're doing."

[Szymon]

"At first I just wanted to follow him, so I could identify him to the police," Green told the Stuart News. "He was walking across the parking lot so nonchalantly and was changing his clothes as he walked."

Green watched as the suspect removed his hat and shirt, stuffing them into a plastic Wal-Mart bag. That's when he decided to pounce, tackling Thomas Poisal.

"He struggled a little on the way down," Green told the Palm Beach Post. "He looked a little shocked. He hadn't looked behind him a single time in the parking lot. It felt great," he added to the Post. "All my frustrations just went out of my body."

Deputies from the Martin County Sheriff's Office arrived to find Green and another witness holding Poisal in a bear hug, with $2,000 on the suspect.

"It was bibbity-bam, bibbity-boom," Lt. Mike McKinley told the Stuart News. "[Poisal's] got to know he had a very poor decision-making process today."

Poisal is being charged with armed robbery after telling the bank teller he had a gun, though none was recovered.  On June 2, Richard Mandile allegedly robbed the same bank after giving the teller a note, leaving Green amazed by the coincidence.

"What are the odds of this happening twice?" Green asked the Stuart News. "The first time I was really frustrated for not helping," he said. "But this time was great. Your adrenaline really gets pumping and you don't realize what you're doing."[/quote][/quote]

I'm here new.My traning is at start.So therefore i have so many questions.What exactly the dog brothers are?And what is the unorganized millitia??If you will answer I will be very thankfull.Greetings to all:)

[Crafty_Dog]

Woof Szymon:

The American ear recognizes the phrase "a well-regulated militia" from the second amendment to our Constitution, which is the one guaranteeing the right of the people to bear arms.  There is argument about whether this right is that of the individual (the correct position in my opinion) or of the "militias", which are now held to be the "National Guard" of the various states of the United States.

There is also the "unorganized militia".  For a good legal discussion of this see:

http://dogbrothers.com/wrapper.php?file=savedbythemilitia.htm&osCsid=2fb71eaeda1710704825c5d440d40b9a

This page is the "Flight 93 Memorial", a button for which can be found towards the bottom on our front page.

For the role of all this in the concept of Dog Brothers Martial Arts go to the clip on our opening page titile "The Unorganized Militia"

Your post is a perfect example of what we are talking about.  Thanks for sharing it with us.

Hope this helps.

[prentice crawford]

Woof Szymon:

The American ear recognizes the phrase "a well-regulated militia" from the second amendment to our Constitution, which is the one guaranteeing the right of the people to bear arms.  There is argument about whether this right is that of the individual (the correct position in my opinion) or of the "militias", which are now held to be the "National Guard" of the various states of the United States.



Hey Guys,
  The argument that the anti-gun/anti-personal defense/anti- individual rights, crowd likes to think negates our god given, individual, constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms, is that the second admendment was intended for a state militia and a state militia only. They have been proven wrong by constitutional lawyers and historians time and time again. They believe that if they repeat a lie long enough, often enough, that they will imprint this lie into the minds of the American public as being fact. They are close to doing that. Most Americans do not understand what their rights are or why they have them. Many Americans don't know that our form of government is a constitutional republic.
                              Woof P.C.

[Szymon]

Hi It's me again:)Thank you very much for your answer and opinion.I am also very thankful toTomek Jurczyński for training us.Dog Brothers are changing my life I hope for good.Big thanks to all the dogs.I am starting training but I'll stay for good.It's some kind of spiritual healing for me I can train my body and mind,senses,my soul.as You have sad"Higher Counsciousnes trough harder contact"
In poland also it is forbiden to wear weapons,even like ticks or knives.I also think people have right to protect themselves.So therefore I will train as hard as I can.I'll do my best.Big Greetings from Poland.Woof:d

Hope this helps.[/quote]