If you are anti-guns, or afraid of guns, or just don't like them and don't want them in your house, then this blog is for you.
(It might just change your mind)

Monday, May 28, 2012

Cops Accused of Stealing Citizen's Guns

By Drew Zahn

A pair of California cities and the state’s Department of Justice are facing a federal lawsuit today because, plaintiffs claim, the police confiscated firearms during investigations but now refuse to return them – even after the subjects of the inquiries were cleared of any wrongdoing.

The Second Amendment Foundation, which has joined gun owners Douglas Churchill and Peter Lau in the lawsuit, say the cities are engaging in "deliberate theft of personal property."

We saw this sort of property theft following Hurricane Katrina,” SAF Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb recalled in a statement, “and we took that case to federal court and won. Government agencies simply cannot seize private property and refuse to give it back by playing bureaucratic games.”

Gene Hoffman, chairman of the Calguns Foundation, which has also joined the case, explains, “Law-abiding Californians should not be forced to seek out expensive legal representation just to get back what is rightfully theirs in the first place.”

According to court documents, Lau’s firearms were confiscated by the Oakland Police Department when authorities were investigating his brother’s suicide. Eventually, his guns were returned, all except one rifle the police deemed an “assault weapon.” Lau’s attorneys dispute the classification.

Churchill’s firearms were confiscated by the San Francisco Police Department in January 2011 as part of an investigation, but the district attorney dismissed charges less than a month later. Nonetheless, police refuse to return seven of Churchill’s weapons – including a Remington .22-caliber rifle and a Winchester 20-guage shotgun, among others.

Police, court documents suggest, are relying on a letter from the California Department of Justice instructing the police not to return firearms unless the alleged owners can present “proof of ownership,” though the same letter admits the state may have no official records for “long guns” like Churchill’s Remington.

In Churchill’s case, however, police officers presented him with a receipt for the firearms they confiscated. Churchill’s attorneys argue that’s good enough and the police need to return the weapons they took.

“In California, the Evidence Code makes it clear that simple possession is proof of ownership of almost all types of common property, including firearms,” claims Don Kilmer, counsel for the plaintiffs. “The California Department of Justice is misleading police departments in such a way that they violate the rights of gun owners who were investigated and found to have not violated the law.”

“What the police departments are doing is a deliberate theft of personal property, and they know it,” added Gottlieb.

In addition to the landmark McDonald v. Chicago Supreme Court case, SAF has been involved in a number of cases in recent years.


Tuesday, May 15, 2012

Quote of the day

"A gun is like a parachute. If you need one, and don't have one, you'll probably never need one again."
- Author unknown

Phony Police officer could be killing Mississippi drivers

By Lateef Mungin, CNN

 Someone who may be posing as a police officer is pulling cars over on Mississippi highways and then shooting drivers dead, authorities said.

After two such shootings this month, the Mississippi Bureau of Investigation is asking for the public's help to find the person.

"There are some similarities between the two incidents, mainly the fact they happened alongside a Mississippi highway," said MBI Director Lt. Col. Larry Waggoner on Monday. "The concern is that someone is posing as a law enforcement officer and that is how these vehicles end up on the side of the road."

The first shooting occurred on May 8. Thomas Schlender, 74, was found dead in his car in the median of southbound Interstate 55 about 1:30 a.m.

On Friday, Lori Anne Carswell, 48, was found dead outside her car on the shoulder of Mississippi State Highway 713 about 2:15 a.m.

The shootings took place about 55 miles apart, and the victims did not know each other, authorities said.

Authorities are asking citizens to be careful if they are pulled over and feel uneasy. They advise drivers to call 911 and verify that a legitimate officer is pulling them over or drive to a well-lit, crowded place before stopping, actions permitted under Mississippi state law


Detroit groundskeeper fired after finding loaded gun, handing it to cops

A Detroit groundskeeper, who turned in a loaded handgun he found hidden in weeds while working, was fired by the Wayne County Department of Public Services, MyFoxDetroit.com reports.

John Chevilott, who is just two years shy of retirement, found the loaded snub-nosed revolver on May 3 when he and his crew were mowing a lawn in Wayne County. Chevilott secured the gun, waiting for police to drive by so he could hand it over to them.

But, according to the station, the Detroit police never did pass by, so Chevilott finished his work that day, drove the gun home and later that same evening turned it into his local police department.

He says the cops ran the gun and discovered the weapon had been stolen from St. Clair Shores in 2005.
"They said I did the right thing getting it off the street," Chevilott told MyFoxDetroit.com.

However, Chevilott's superiors at the Wayne County Department of Public Services had a much different opinion. His foreman, who had knowledge of the situation, was suspended for 30 days, and after 23 years on the job, Chevilott was fired for violating department policies.

According to a Wayne County spokeswoman and the rules, employees aren't allowed to possess a weapon on work property.

Chevilott says he didn't bring a weapon to work. He found it on the job.

"There is no policy. I've never seen a policy what to do if we find a gun out here. So, all I did was secure the situation to make sure nobody else got hurt or killed."


Injured vet’s guns stolen by D.C.

 By Emily Miller

After being injured on his second tour of duty in Afghanistan, Lt. Augustine Kim spent the night in a D.C. jail for possessing "unregistered guns". 

kimMr. Kim was transporting his firearms from his parents’ house in New Jersey to South Carolina when he stopped at Walter Reed in Washington for a medical appointment in the summer of 2010.

After being pulled over, handcuffed, arrested, thrown in jail overnight, his guns were confiscated by the city.

In the end, the charge was later dismissed, but the District still refuses to return to him $10,000 worth of firearms and parts.

Before deploying, the soldier had taken his gun collection to his parents’ house in New Jersey for safe storage. At the end of his recovery, he drove to the Garden State to pick up the supply and transport it to his home in Charleston.

Arrested Driving Through D.C.

Returning to South Carolina on June 30, 2010, Mr. Kim was pulled over by police.

Then the cops asked Mr. Kim if they could search his vehicle. The lieutenant agreed because his guns were properly locked in a case in the trunk, in compliance with federal firearm transport laws. Mr. Kim was handcuffed and told to sit on the curb during the search.
He recalled that the officers inspected the collection and “were upset about the fact that I had the AR-15, which D.C. considers to be an ‘assault weapon.’” The model of rifle is illegal in the District, but not in his home state.

The officers then told Mr. Kim he was in violation for the carrying firearms outside the home (in his vehicle) in the District.  The nation’s capital does not acknowledge the right to bear arms, so there are no carry rights.

“I told them I had been under the impression that as long as the guns were locked in the back, with the ammunition separate, that I was allowed to transport them,” Mr. Kim told me in an interview. “They said, ‘That may be true, however, since you stopped at Walter Reed, that make you in violation of the registration laws.” 

Mr. Kim’s attorney, Richard Gardiner, said his client was lawfully transporting the firearms, and that would have been his defense if the matter went to trial. “The mistake he made was agreeing to a search of his vehicle,” the attorney explained in an interview. “If the police ask for consent to search, the answer is ‘no.’ If they ask, ‘why not?’ The answer is, ‘no.’”

Jail Time

After loading the gun cases into the squad car to be used as evidence, the police took Mr. Kim to police headquarters. He was booked on four felony counts of carrying outside the home. The maximum penalty for all these charges would be a $20,000 fine and 20 years imprisonment.

The veteran spent a “few hours in the drunk tank,” then was moved to the central jail. It was cold on the steel slab, so he asked the police guard for a blanket. “He was surly with me and sarcastic. He said, ‘Oh you want blankets? Well they’re back ordered,’” Mr. Kim recalled. “I remember thinking, we treated detainees in Afghanistan better than this.” He didn’t get much sleep that night.

In the morning, the national guardsman was given a public defender and taken to arraignment. He called his squad leader at Walter Reed to pick him up and get his car.  Mr. Kim was more concerned about his career. “I asked him for his opinion on how this would affect my getting subsequent security clearance,” he recalled. “The JAG eased his concerns: ‘You got arrested for carrying guns. That’s what you get paid for.’”

So Mr. Kim went online to find a firearms’ attorney in the area. He asked for recommendations on the gun forum AR15.com and was quickly referred to Mr. Gardiner. “The posters said, ‘Don’t accept anyone else,” Mr. Kim recalled. “I didn’t know he was part of the Heller case.” The lawyer represents Dick Heller in his second lawsuit against the District for its unconstitutional firearms laws.

The Courts

The feds knocked the original felony charges down to four misdemeanors of possession of unregistered firearms. In May 2011, that charge was dismissed. His record, however is not expunged. It still shows he was arrested on four firearms charges, which were later dismissed.

D.C Refuses to Return His Guns

Three weeks after the charges were dropped, the U.S. attorney’s office sent a form to the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) property clerk certifying that Mr. Kim’s guns were no longer needed for evidence. Still, MPD would not release the guns.

After waiting six months, Mr. Gardiner wrote to the District’s property clerk, Derek Gray, in Dec. 2011 to ask for Mr. Kim’s property to be returned. Neither Mr. Gray nor anyone from MPD has responded to the request.

“This is legalized theft,” Mr. Gardiner said. “The charges were dropped, and they don't give you your property back? The Constitution requires that if the government takes your property, it has to do something to keep it. They can’t sit around twiddling their thumbs.

"I’m out ten grand worth of guns.”

A valiant soldier who proudly serves our country is being treated like a criminal by the District. The nation owes him gratitude, not harassment for safely transporting guns through the nation’s capital. The lieutenant’s firearms should be returned to him by overnight express -- with a note of apology.


Wednesday, May 9, 2012

New Georgia law requires police to return weapons after seized

SB 350 mandates municipal, county and state police authorities return all seized firearms, not currently being held as evidence in a criminal investigation, to the lawful owner.

On May 3, Georgia Governor Nathan Deal (R) signed SB 350 into law.  Senate Bill 350, which went into effect immediately upon the Governor’s approval, ensures protection for seized firearms.

 If the lawful owner is not found or unable to take possession of the firearm, SB 350 requires these agencies sell these firearms at a public auction to licensed firearms dealers.  Previous Georgia law allowed for seized guns to be immediately destroyed. SB 350 prevents the wasteful and expensive practice of destroying firearms that could be sold to federally licensed firearms dealers.

Thank you to NRA members across the Peach State who contacted their elected officials in support of SB 350. 


Red State "Stand your Ground" self-defense laws at risk at Federal level

House to vote on "Trayvon" amendment

House Democrats will offer an amendment to push to overturn stand-your-ground self-defense laws in states like Florida.The amendment would withhold some grants from states that have such laws.

"'Shoot-first' laws have already cost too many lives. In Florida alone, deaths due to self-defense have tripled since the law was enacted. Federal money shouldn't be spent supporting states with laws that endanger their own people," said Reps. Raul Grijalva of Arizona and Keith Ellison of Minnesota

With all (un)due respect; Correction to reps Grijalva & Ellison:  Deaths of BAD GUYS due to self defense may have tripled since the law was enacted.  Deaths of VICTIMS have probably decreased TEN FOLD.  Those are stats we like!

Keep your federal funding!  Red states don't need your blood money.  Go pay for some more government entitlements with it!  Or better yet, start paying down the debt and defect!

Gun carriers from other states welcome in Okla.

New law in Oklahoma allows residents of other states to carry concealed handguns in OK.  The bill, which was signed into law by Gov. Mary Fallin allows gun owners from other states that DON'T require a permit to carry, to also carry (albeit concealed) in OK.


LOL of the day: Free Ammo - Govnerment handouts!

Right to free ammo!
By mawmd @ TypicalShooter

Dear President Obama,

I applaud that chic who testified before the world that the right to free abortion drugs and contraception is more important than the right to free expression of religion. It helps us see clearly the only other problem that is actually more important: the right to free ammunition.

Let me be clear, it is a God given right to keep and bear arms, and that right shall not be infringed. Well, with the recent price increases of all ammunition, including practice grade, that right is almost gone. I personally know students who can no longer afford to load their primary magazine to full capacity, let alone carry spares!

Now what about safety? Clearly a person who keeps and bears arms but cannot afford to practice is much more dangerous than one who hits what she’s aiming at. This economic issue has potential to result in increases in collateral damage during self defense shootings. Nine out of ten doctors surveyed prefer to keep the innocent bystanders from getting injured.

I’m also thinking of the poor innocent animals. PETA agrees they have a right to a clean humane one shot instant kill when being hunted. But with the skill of hunters slowly eroding due to the unjustifiable cost of practice rounds, they will be more likely to merely wound their intended prey, leaving them to die slowly and painfully.

Now an important point is that both cases underscore the right to personal protection. Contraception in the form of a barrier such as a condom protects against unwanted sexually transmitted diseases as well as pregnancy- most of the time. Unfortunately, even if you can convince the rapist to use a condom, there’s still the rape part.. NOW agrees properly loaded and available firearm also protects against unwanted sexually transmitted diseases in the case of attempted rape, but is more efficient in that the rape itself is prevented. That’s a good thing. And the bad guy gets to have his potential to rape again prevented should the firearm be used towards the offending area…

There are other economic impacts as well. Katherine Sebelius, secretary of health and human services recently pointed out that preventing a baby more than makes up for the cost of taking care of that baby. Indeed, preventing a violent criminal from going to jail is much more economically efficient than taking care of that murderer for life, even with the high cost of ammo. But of course, should the ammo be provided free by the government, the widespread use of defensive rounds will more than make up for the cost through the decrease in prison overcrowding. And of course that is more humane to the less violent felons who will have better accommodations and smaller classes which train them to reintegrate into society in meaningful ways and to vote Democrat.

Prevention of crime will also rise for all the poor and disenfranchised in the inner cities who have to pay a premium for ammo. It is truly racist that ammunition costs more in the areas where it is needed the most. I’ve taken the liberty of contacting the Reverend Jackson and he’s all in. The redistribution of ammunition from the rich 1% to the needy 99% is truly the highest form of social justice. If ghetto dwellers were able to afford ammo, the criminals would move away to other countries where they stand a better chance of perpetrating their crimes without the annoyance of risking injury. Like England.

Obviously, more ammunition available means more workers to manufacture it. People have to make the ammo. That translates into more green jobs. Recycling will increase for the brass that goes into the shell casings, so it is a green endeavor that will save the planet and decrease greenhouse gasses since no coal is used in the manufacturing process. Think Greenpeace.

So I think we can clearly see the multiple societal benefits from social justice, eliminating the debt crisis, all the way to saving the planet from one simple government program, and the full spectrum of special interest groups who will be grateful for your courage to lead in this area. I thank you for your agreement and hope to see the “Heaven on Earth through ballistic redistribution” bill passed real soon.


Monday, May 7, 2012

Rice University gun-point robbery just further proof that "gun free zone" laws only prohibit the honest citizen from defending themselves.

Rice University student robbed at gunpoint

Rice University police are trying to track down two suspects who robbed a student at gunpoint late Sunday.

The Rice U. student told police that two black men in their early 20s took his cash and keys about 9 p.m. near Entrance 23 on Sunset Boulevard, according to a crime alert issued by the Rice University Police Department.

The first robber was described as being about 5-feet-10, and was wearing a dark hood and high-top tennis shoes. His accomplice was about 200 pounds and wore a black hood with white logo, and dark pants.
The suspects fled on foot after taking the student’s cash and keys.

“This one (robbery) was unusual because most crime reported on campus are property crimes,” Rice U. Police Chief Johnny Whitehead said. “We are in a major city and we want to remind our students to be aware of their surroundings and to be conscious.”

Anyone with information about the case is asked to call Rice University police at 713-348-6000.

Rice university is a so called "gun-free zone."  By law, no one may carry a gun on campus.  But this robber did anyway.  This is just further proof that such laws only prohibit the honest citizen from defending themselves.  Criminals will carry guns there anyway.

Now can we get this law repealed??


The top 10 questions that the ATF gets asked


When the Jury gets it wrong

20 Years for Standing her Ground:  A Florida woman faces prison after firing a warning shot to scare off an abusive husband.


"I got five baby mammas, and I put my hands on every last one of them except for one," Rico Gray confessed during a November 2010 deposition. "The way I was with women…they had to walk on eggshells around me." He recalled punching women in the face, shoving them, choking them, and tossing them out the door.

Yet somehow, after one of those women fired a warning shot into the ceiling of her Jacksonville, Florida, home to scare him away during yet another violent outburst, prosecutors managed to convince a jury that Gray was the victim. As a result, Marissa Alexander, a 31-year-old mother of three, faces 20 years in prison for standing her ground against an abusive husband.

Gray has been arrested twice for domestic battery, including an assault that sent Alexander to the hospital. In September 2009 Alexander obtained a protective order against Gray that was still in effect on August 1, 2010, when he flew into a jealous rage after discovering, while poking through her cellphone, that she had sent pictures of their newborn daughter to her first husband.

Alexander was in the master bathroom at the time, and Gray tried to force his way in. When she came out, he screamed and cursed at her while preventing her from leaving the bedroom. "I was like forcing her back with my body," reported Gray, who is seven inches taller than Alexander and outweighs her by 100 pounds.
When Alexander managed to get by, she ran through the kitchen to the garage, where she says she realized she did not have the keys to her car, could not call for help because she had left her cellphone behind, and could not escape because the garage door was not working. Instead she grabbed her handgun from her car and headed back through the kitchen, where Gray confronted her again.

In his deposition Gray admitted he "had told her if she ever cheated on me I would kill her" and during the fight said, "If I can't have you, nobody can." He conceded he "was going towards her" when Alexander fired a single shot, high and to his right, that went through the kitchen wall and lodged in the ceiling of the living room. Finally he left, along with his two sons.

"The gun was never pointed at me," Gray said. "She just didn't want me to put my hands on her anymore, so she did what she feel like she have to do to make sure she wouldn't get hurt." If his sons hadn't been in the house, Gray said, "I probably would have tried to take the gun from her," and "I probably would have put my hand on her."

But at the July 2011 hearing where Alexander argued that the charges against her should be dismissed because she had acted in self-defense, Gray—who immediately after the fight portrayed her as the aggressor, then said in his deposition three months later that he had lied out of anger—changed his story again, saying he had lied in his deposition to protect her. Circuit Judge Elizabeth Senterfitt rejected Alexander's motion to dismiss, saying she could have escaped through the front or back door instead of going to the garage.

Yet Florida's self-defense law says "a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat" if "he or she reasonably believes" it is necessary to prevent "imminent death or great bodily harm" or "the imminent commission of a forcible felony." In 1999, furthermore, the Florida Supreme Court ruled that a woman attacked by her husband in the home they share has no duty to flee.

On March 16, after deliberating for 12 minutes, a jury convicted Alexander on three counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. Although she injured no one, she faces a 20-year mandatory minimum sentence unless she can win a new trial.


The right to keep and bear arms preceded the Second Amendment

A recent article in The New Yorker titled “American Battleground,” by Harvard’s Jill Lepore, has been gnawing at me ever since I critiqued it last week for The Daily Caller. As I wrote then, it is a convoluted piece of quasi-academic work that is intended to make gun owners question the founders’ position on private gun ownership and, if possible, open 21st-century American minds to the idea of more gun control.

Lepore does this via subtle and not-so-subtle attacks on the Second Amendment throughout the article. By attacking the Second Amendment, she hopes to somehow convince us that we really don’t have an individual right to keep and bear arms. Rather, we were only intended to have a right to form militias to use guns in that capacity when emergencies arise.

In an attempt to prove her point, she quotes FDR’s solicitor general, Robert H. Jackson:
[The Second Amendment] is restricted to the keeping and bearing of arms by the people collectively for their common defense and security, [and that right] is not one which may be utilized for private purposes but only one which exists where the arms are borne in the militia or some other military organization provided for by law and intended for the protection of the state.

This brings me to what has been gnawing at me so badly for the past week. Lepore has made a mistake that’s all too common with anti-gunners and even with some staunch defenders of the Second Amendment. That mistake is to look at the Second Amendment as the source of our right to keep and bear arms.

You see, in Lepore’s mind, if she can just disprove the “perceived meaning” of the Second Amendment, gun owners across the country will sell their gun safes, throw away their ammo and let Obama collect all the guns so we can have safer streets. But in reality, the Second Amendment is only a reflection of the dictates “of nature and of nature’s God.”

Ultimately, we don’t have rights because the Bill of Rights says so. Rather, the Bill of Rights says so because we have rights intrinsic to our very beings: rights with which we were endowed by our Creator. 

One of the reasons Lepore and her fellow academics don’t teach students about natural law anymore is that they don’t want students to understand that long before the U.S. government existed, God had endowed his creatures with rights. These rights were explained and defended at length by men like John Locke and William Blackstone long before ideas like the U.S. Constitution or the Bill of Rights were even passing thoughts.

Recent Supreme Court decisions like District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) and McDonald v. Chicago (2010) have upheld and incorporated the Second Amendment. But what happens when an academic or two with the mindset of Lepore gets appointed to the Supreme Court and pro-Second Amendment decisions become a thing of the past? At that point it will be crucial that every American understands that our right to keep and bear arms does not rest in the Second Amendment, but in the God who endowed us with rights which the founders dutifully expressed in the Bill of Rights.

The bottom line: Had the Bill of Rights never been written, the fact that God endowed us with certain inalienable rights would remain a fact that academics like Lepore could never change.


Tuesday, May 1, 2012

Slashing The AFT Red Tape

by: dabneybailey

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) and the US Department of Justice (DOJ) plan to remove the cumbersome required signature of the Chief Law Enforcement Officer (CLEO) from NFA firearms transfer requests.

WTF, that's a lot of acronyms. What's it all mean? It's pretty simple: this is going to make it easier to acquire weird guns.

Right now, Uncle Sam has a regulation system for all of your basic firearms like hunting rifles, pistols, and shotguns. Things get a little bit tricky when you're talking about NFA firearms or Any Other Weapons (AOW... yes, that's the official term). NFA firearms include machine guns or some short-barreled shotguns, while AOWs include cane guns, umbrella guns, or cigarette lighter guns.

If you want to own any NFA firearms, you're required to register them with the federal government. Transferring these devices requires the owner to submit forms to the NFA asking for permission. The big wrench in the plans is that the CLEO needs to sign off on both of these forms before your request can be approved.

Worst of all, CLEOs are under no obligation whatsoever to sign the documents, and they are fully in their right to just outright refuse. So, if your winning charm and a "pretty please with a cherry on top" isn't enough to sway your local CLEO then you're SOL.

But not for long! Once this pesky barrier gets removed, you'll automatically be one step closer to owning that machine gun you've been dreaming about for all these years. It also opens up an interesting loophole with AOWs. States generally prohibit AOWs, but in states like California it's actually legal to posses AOWs if you acquire them through an NFA transfer.


City Wants Executive Order to Ban Concealed Carry in Tampa During RNC

By Paul Joseph Watson

Tampa’s City Council wants Governor Rick Scott to pass an executive order banning concealed carry rights to coincide with protests at the Republican National Convention later this year.

“The Tampa City Council wants Scott to issue an executive order, preventing people with concealed weapons permits from carrying guns.”

The executive order is required because according to Florida law, local officials are prohibited from pre-empting state gun statutes.

This move represents yet another effort to turn a right into a privilege and creates the pretext that fundamental liberties can be revoked by local bureaucrats when the mood takes them.

Council member Lisa Montelione’s claim made in a letter to Scott that the gun ban is necessary to “prevent a potential tragedy” is completely at odds with the facts which show Florida’s total violent crime rate has dropped 32% and its homicide rate has dropped 58% since enacting concealed carry, figures mirrored across the rest of the country.

Authorities in Florida are relying on the fallout from the Trayvon Martin case to push their anti-Second Amendment policies despite the fact that evidence clearly indicates George Zimmerman properly exercised his right to self-defense after being attacked.

The use of executive orders to crush constitutional rights and undermine the democratic process is a trend that has emanated from the federal level.


Home invader beats elderly couple - kills wife

By Nina Golgowski

An 85-year-old woman was sexually assaulted and battered to death by a home invader who also shot her 90-year-old husband in the face with a BB gun.

Nancy and Bob Strait, who had celebrated their 65th wedding anniversary in December, were discovered by their daughter at their home in Tulsa, Oklahoma.

Both the pensioners were rushed to hospital where Mrs Strait, who was nearly blind, died from her injuries.

Mr Strait, who served in the 101st Airborne Division in World War II, suffered a broken jaw, broken ribs and severe bleeding. He is in a serious condition in hospital.

Police have arrested 20-year-old Tyrone Dale David Woodfork in connection with the case.


Gun carrying man ends stabbing spree at Salt Lake grocery store

Gun carrying man ends stabbing spree at Salt Lake grocery store

SALT LAKE CITY (ABC 4 News) - A citizen with a gun stopped a knife wielding man as he began stabbing people Thursday evening at the downtown Salt Lake City Smith's store.

Police say the suspect purchased a knife inside the store and then turned it into a weapon. Smith's employee Dorothy Espinoza says, "He pulled it out and stood outside the Smiths in the foyer. And just started stabbing people and yelling you killed my people. You killed my people."

Espinoza says, the knife wielding man seriously injured two people. "There is blood all over. One got stabbed in the stomach and got stabbed in the head and held his hands and got stabbed all over the arms."

Then, before the suspect could find another victim - a citizen with a gun stopped the madness. "A guy pulled gun on him and told him to drop his weapon or he would shoot him. So, he dropped his weapon and the people from Smith's grabbed him."

By the time officers arrived the suspect had been subdued by employees and shoppers. Police had high praise for gun carrying man who ended the hysteria. Lt. Brian Purvis said, "This was a volatile situation that could have gotten worse. We can only assume from what we saw it could have gotten worse. He was definitely in the right place at the right time."

Dozens of other shoppers, who too could have become victims, are also thankful for the gun carrying man. And many, like Danylle Julian, are still in shock from the experience. "Scary actually. Really scary. Five minutes before I walk out to my car. It could have been me."

Police say right now they have no idea what caused the suspect to go on the dangerous rampage. (We will update as soon as we learn new information.)

So far, police have not released the names of the suspect, the victims or the man who pulled the gun.