Senate Democrats Move to Reverse Supreme Court’s Heller decision

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), was a landmark case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects an individual's right to possess a firearm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.

Anti-Gun senate Democrats want to stack the Supreme Court so they can reverse that decision.

Senate Democrats Move to Reverse Supreme Court’s Heller decision
by GunOwners.org


Reid-Leahy move would gut the Second Amendment in the eyes of the courts

Having failed to get gun control passed in the Senate, Democrats are now making a last ditch effort to reshape the Supreme Court.

Well, we hate to say it, but we predicted this would happen.

You remember when Harry Reid was threatening to destroy the Senate filibuster in January -- and later in July -- in order to approve Leftist Obama-supported nominees?

You remember, at the time, we said that, if Reid “pulled the trigger” on this so-called nuclear option to destroy the filibuster in some cases -- thus eliminating the need for Reid to garner 60 votes some of the time -- there would be no impediment to Reid doing anything he wanted with 50 votes (plus Biden) in other cases?

And you remember we said that it wouldn’t take long before Reid tried to limit the filibuster and use a mere 50 Democratic votes to approve other things as well -- like an anti-gun Supreme Court justice to replace Supreme Court “swing vote” Anthony Kennedy?  The immediate ramification of such an appointment would be to overturn the Heller case (which held that the Second Amendment is an “individual right,” not just the right of a state to raise a militia).

Finally, you remember that Harry Reid said, at the time, that his shady precedent would just apply to Executive Branch nominees, not judges?

Well, it hasn’t taken long for his lie to be exposed.

The anti-gun Democratic Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Patrick Leahy (D-VT), has just called for blowing up the Senate rules to approve judges with 50 votes.  See Roll Call, “Leahy Eyes ‘Nuclear Option’ Threat to Confirm Judges,” (August 2, 2013).

Although Leahy doesn’t explicitly say so, this would eventually include Obama’s prospective anti-gun replacement to the 80-year-old Kennedy -- and would mean that the Second Amendment, in the eyes of the courts, would no longer exist.

Again, Justice Kennedy cast the deciding vote on the 5-4 Heller decision.  So, if he is replaced by an anti-gun Obama nominee, Heller is gone.

http://gunowners.org/alert08142013.htm

ATF Backdoor Rule To Ban Gun And Ammo Imports

by Stranger

The Obama Regime, through its Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco And Firearms, has put in place a “final rule” that would allow the ObamaBots to ban the importation of all firearms, ammunition, and related defensive articles.

This “rulemaking” gives the regime the power to stop almost half of all gun and ammunition sales in the United States. It is also a key part of the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty. A treaty that the overwhelming majority of the Senate has vowed to block. And Obama has slipped the UN ATT in as part of a Federal rulemaking, in defiance of Congress.

In addition, the Regime has moved to erase privacy laws in order to make all health records available to the FBI’s NICS system.

It is time for Congress to convene and overturn the regime’s high handed gun control initiatives. But given the fact that Harry “the gun owners friend” Reid is Senate Majority leader, and that gun bans are a part of Democratic Dogma, that will not happen.

We are going to have to replace the anti’s in Congress one at a time, the old fashioned way. Vote them out. Starting September 10 in Colorado.

http://extranosalley.com/?p=48329

The AR-15: What are they afraid of?

Guest post by Bill Pecos


The Ar-15 is a civilian version of the military's M-16 rifle that has the "assault" taken out of it.  In order to sell it on the civilian market, they remove the ability to fire in automatic mode (rapid fire).  Civilian models are strictly semi-auto and can not be converted; Though military style full auto versions are available to the public with special permitting and licensing.

The Ar-15 is a scaled down version, of an already scaled down version of a "real" battle rifle.  And politicians are still scared of it.

Additionally, the military M-16 rifle is already a scaled down version of battle rifle.  While they are still in use by the US military in some areas, for the most part, the larger caliber rifles (like the 7.62) which are still in primary use by Soviet, South African, and middle-east troops, were replaced in the US military with a rifle that fires smaller 5.56mm ammunition.

The 5.56 is a Geneva convention round specifically designed to cause fewer fatalities but more serious wounds thus taking other active soldiers out of the game while they try to save their fellow soldier.

The 5.56 round, or (.223 remmington) is a relatively small rifle round, only slightly larger than the "kids learning tool" the .22 LR  (only .003 inches difference).  The 5.56mm was adopted by NATO (and therefore the US) to increase the amount of ammunition troops can carry, because it is smaller and lighter weight.  If you look on a game weight chart, the 5.56mm (223 Remington, there) is varmint-game weight rated, and is good for seventy pound game at one hundred yards.  A strike by the round is typically not fatal unless it hits a vital organ, or unless it fragments on impact.  In order to get up to speed to be frangible upon impact, it needs to travel a distance of about seventy yards out of a sixteen inch barrel or two hundred and fifty out of a twenty inch barrel.  Lower than that speed, and it doesn't happen; the result is far less stopping effectiveness.

Likewise, the smaller 5.56 round does not have the same prenetration power that larger rounds have.  A typical 5.56mm round will not penetrate a brick wall, but thw 7.62mm round most definately will.  This is one reason why you will often see US soldiers, deployed military contractors, and special forces carrying an "enemy" AK-47 rifle instead of, or in addition to the M-16.

So the Ar-15 is a scaled down version, of an already scaled down version of a "real" battle rifle.  And politicians are still scared of it.

Assault rifle.  black rifle.  Ar-15.  Ban assault weapons.  full-auto.  Assault rifle.  black rifle.  Ar-15.  Ban assault weapons.  full-auto.  Assault rifle.  black rifle.  Ar-15.  Ban assault weapons.  full-auto.  Assault rifle.  black rifle.  Ar-15.  Ban assault weapons.  full-auto.  Assault rifle.  black rifle.  Ar-15.  Ban assault weapons.  full-auto.  

You need to see this painting of Zimmerman shooting Trayvon that was unveiled in Florida's state capitol

You need to see this painting of Zimmerman shooting Trayvon that was unveiled in Florida's state capitol.  

Unlike the real life scenario, where Zimmerman is flat on his back, bloody & beaten, and firing upwards in desperation at his assailant,  this one has Zimmerman shooting an unsuspecting Trayvon in the back of the head, and splattering blood all over martin Luther King Jr.

Race bait in your paintings much?

http://www.ijreview.com/2013/08/72191-we-are-all-trayvon-mural-unveiled-in-florida-state-capitol/

by Michael Miller

The Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman docudrama continues. This time, in the Florida State Capitol Building, where Friday, a 10-foot mural was unveiled. It carries the message: “We are all Trayvon Martin.”

As reported by clickorlando.com, the mural shows a man who looks similar to George Zimmerman, with gun blazing, shooting a person wearing a hoodie – in the back of the head. Trayvon – er – “the person wearing a hoodie” – is standing next to Martin Luther King, Jr.

In place of the (Trayvon) face is a mirror. You know, so we can all be Trayvon. There are also blank spaces where members of the public can share their thoughts. Oh, and MLK has blood flowing down his head.

The mural, of course,  is a complete fairytale. But, hey – so has been the entire story in the minds of some from the very beginning.

We are all Trayvon Martin.  We are all Trayvon Martin.  We are all Trayvon Martin.  We are all Trayvon Martin.  Zimmerman shooting Trayvon.  Zimmerman shooting Trayvon.  Zimmerman shooting Trayvon.  Race baiting.   Race baiting.   Race baiting.   Race baiting.

After gun enthusiast’s arrest, rifle-toting protestors gather outside McAllen PD

BY Dave Hendricks

McALLEN — Nearly 70 people — many carrying assault weapons, hunting rifles and shotguns — gathered outside the McAllen Police Department on Saturday afternoon, demonstrating their open carry rights.

If you have the right to open carry a rifle, but you’re too afraid to actually do it, haven’t they passed a law without actually doing anything?

Open Carry Texas, which advocates for gun rights, organized the peaceful protest two days after police arrested Zach W. Horton, 37, of Little Elm, for carrying an assault-style weapon near the McAllen Public Safety Building. Police charged Horton with carrying a weapon where prohibited, a third-degree felony.

The 70-odd person crowd included gun owners from the Rio Grande Valley and across Texas.

“We are good, decent people,” said Feliciano Cuadra, 65, a retired teacher who taught biology and photography at Harlingen High School. “If we don’t stand up for what we believe, we don’t have it anymore.”

Cuadra stood outside the Public Safety Building, which holds the city jail, police department and municipal court, with a Colt Sporter rifle slung across his back. Around him, others carried assault-style rifles and the occasional shotgun.
Pistols were notably absent.

Generally, Texas law forbids anyone, including people with concealed handgun licenses, from openly carrying a handgun. By contrast, Texas places few restrictions on the ability to carry so-called “long guns” designed to be fired with both hands.

On Saturday, though, the demonstration was narrowly focused on Wednesday’s arrest.

Horton, the open carry advocate, visited the Public Safety Building on Wednesday afternoon and told police he wanted to take a photograph of himself holding an assault-style rifle, according to police. Officers warned Horton not to bring weapons onto the premises and he left. Horton returned later, apparently intending to photograph himself holding an assault-style rifle. Officers arrested him for trespassing and carrying a weapon where prohibited, according to the news release.

Police later dropped the trespassing charge and Horton was released on a $25,000 bond. By then, Open Carry Texas had already organized the demonstration, which drew open carry advocates from across Texas.

“All the people that carry guns are not bad guys,” said Jeff Witt, 58, of Simonton, a small town near Houston.

Witt and his son, Jeremy, left Simonton early Saturday morning for the 320-mile drive to McAllen. Both brought Saiga assault-style rifles to the demonstration.

“If you have the right to open carry a rifle, but you’re too afraid to actually do it, haven’t they passed a law without actually doing anything?” Witt said.

http://www.themonitor.com/news/local/article_cc3e95e4-01f3-11e3-a064-0019bb30f31a.html

Five shot, wounded at fast food drive-through in North Dallas

By Tristan Hallman

 gunman opened fire early Sunday morning and wounded five men who were sitting in a McDonald’s drive-through lane in North Dallas, police said.

Police said the shooting might have been sparked an argument earlier in the night at a nearby night club.

Around 12:30 a.m. Sunday, the men — all ages 18-21 — were in a car outside the fast-food restaurant in the 2400 block of Royal Lane. One man told police that a man opened the trunk of an old, white Chevrolet Impala and pull out a large gun that was covered in a towel. The gunman then began shooting at the group’s car, according to a police report.

Four of the men took bullets below the waist. Another was hit in the neck, police said.

The shooter hopped into a newer model red Impala, according to the report.

The men were taken to hospitals and treated for their injuries.

There were three different caliber rounds recovered from the scene, police said. Our Robert Wilonsky reported hearing more than a dozen gunshots from a few miles away.

http://crimeblog.dallasnews.com/2013/07/police-five-shot-wounded-at-fast-food-drive-through-in-north-dallas.html/

What Every Firearms Instructor Needs to Know About the Recent Legislative Session

The great State of Texas has survived yet another legislative session, and the recent legislative typhoon has greatly changed the landscape for CHL instructors. While there were quite a few beneficial bills that died in committee, there are more and plenty that made it through and are becoming the law, with the vast majority altering the licensing process. This isn't just a legislative update; this is what every firearms instructor needs to know about the recent legislative session. As always, if any of our Texas Law Shield instructors need more information, please feel free to call any of your firearms program attorneys, or you can email the author at cooper@texaslawshield.com.

Changes to Procedure  CHL Process Modifications Starting September 1, 2013, the process for instructing a new applicant for a concealed handgun license, as well as that for renewals, will undergo significant modifications due to recent legislative action. New applicant classes (not including range time) have been reduced to a minimum of 4, and a maximum of 6 hours. New applicants will still have to show up in person, as opposed to going online, to take this reduced class, and they can take it with whatever firearm they wish while not being stuck into a firearm categorization. Effective immediately, there is no longer a rule that qualifying with a revolver means you can only carry a revolver. Classes for renewals are going away completely. All those renewing a CHL will have to do is go online, submit an application, pay a fee, and sign an acknowledgement of the law. There is no requirement to re-qualify in a class or at the range. There is also no longer a requirement for social security numbers for new applicants or renewals, and no longer does a person need to send in passport photos as their driver's license picture will be used instead. The department is also supposed to create procedures for those who live in a county of 46,000 people or less, with no facility capable of processing digital or electronic fingerprints within a 25-mile radius. There could have been some perceived conflict between two bills, SB 864 and HB 48. These two bills looked as if they modified the same sections, yet provided for different procedures. SB 864 states that there are renewal classes but they can be taken online, while HB 48 states that there is no longer a requirement for renewal classes at all. Based on how the two bills are written and the order in which each passed, it appears that HB 48 would be controlling with regards to renewals. In other words, there is probably no longer a CHL renewal class requirement. Texas Representative Flynn's office confirmed that this is how the two bills are intended to reconcile; Flynn was the author of HB 48, and a sponsor of SB 864. Unfortunately, these laws leave plenty of space for the high strangeness that is real life to wriggle in. Since the new applicant class has been reduced to a minimum of 4 hours, and a maximum of 6, what happens if a class goes above 6 hours? When contacted regarding this matter, the Texas Department of Public Safety stated that there is no penalty for going over the 6 hour mark, and to quote their representative, "We encourage people to go over the time limit." How this will balance out with the real world practical business problem of having an appealing class length to attract customers remains to be seen. Regrettably, not everyone is up to date on the law. There may be students who haphazardly wander into a facility and ask for a renewal class, without the knowledge that there is no longer a requirement for such a class. What are you to do in that situation? The DPS indicated that it is the individual's responsibility to understand the requirements for their renewal, and that they would not punish an instructor if they gave such a class. However, if an instructor charges a student for a class under the guise that it is required by law to renew, there's a very high probability you could be committing an intentional fraudulent act, and even possibly be at risk for damages under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practice and Consumer Protection Act. With regards to the curriculum, although the time allotted for instruction was shortened, there was no bill that modified the Administrative Code's requirements of what must be covered in the class. The DPS indicated that naturally the curriculum will most likely be pared down, however there is no official finalized document as of yet. The final set of oddities that one could face would be timing. For example, if a person with a CHL that expires in December was to try to renew right now, what happens? Or, what is the result of someone that completes their paperwork to renew now but takes the renewal class September 3rd? Does the bill apply to licenses issued only after September 1st, or anybody that needs to renew? This is solved by the final paragraph of HB 48. Section 7 of HB 48 states that the law applies only to applications submitted to the department on or after September 1, 2013. Therefore, the only question at that point is when the application was submitted to the department. We can use this information to solve the thought experiments above. With regard to the CHL holder whose license expires in December, should they choose to renew right now, they would face the current law because their application to the DPS was submitted before September 1st, and the renewal class would still be required. In the second scenario, if the paperwork is submitted now, they will still need to take the class to renew their CHL, even if the class is scheduled to be after September 1st. However, if they have not sent their application in to the department but merely filled it out on paper, then they could be governed by the new laws. The final question is answered easily; it applies to any CHL holder, regardless of the date their license was issued, so long as the application is submitted to the department on or after September 1st. SB 864, which changes things for new applicants, applies similarly. Applicants who submit their application to the department before September 1st must take the 10 hour minimum class. Those who apply afterwards need only take the 4 hour minimum class. The only possible strangeness here is the applicant that takes the 10 hour class August 31st, but doesn't submit their paperwork until after September 1st. However, this is not as difficult a situation as it first appears; the department takes no issue with a class exceeding its maximum guidelines, and therefore the 10 hour class completion certificate should be fine for the new applicant. Accordingly if someone submits their application August 31st, no matter how long they wait, they will have to take the 10 hour minimum class. Changes to Law Failure to Conceal The failure to conceal law has received some attention during the legislative session as well. The current phrase of "intentional failure to conceal" will be changed to "intentional display of the handgun" in plain view of another person in a public place. While it may seem a victory at first, the statute is unclear as to how this substantively changes the current law by failing to define what constitutes a "display" or "plain view of another person." Only time and the courts will show us how this change will affect our lives. On a positive note, SB 299 also reconciles the "display" of a handgun with the use of force statutes by stating that the justification for use of force, not just deadly force, would be a defense to this crime. The statute formerly limited justifiable failure to conceal to only those situations where the use of deadly force was justified. Hotels With the passing of HB 333, hotels will be required to tell its guests up-front of any restrictive firearms policies prior to booking the rooms. Furthermore, they must receive an affirmative acknowledgement of their firearm policy. In other words, they couldn't hide a TPC §30.06 notice in the second to last page of their impossible to find policy document without telling their guests about it. Seizure and Disposition of Weapons For better or for worse, one of the first bills to be signed by the governor was the bill regarding the auctioning of seized weapons, HB 1421. This bill allows law enforcement agencies to sell seized weapons that are not claimed by the owner at public auctions. Only licensed firearms dealers are allowed to purchase these seized firearms at such an auction, and the proceeds of the sale would go directly to the law enforcement agency. Previously the only options available to the police were destroying the gun, or keeping it for police use. There are also new procedures for the seizure of weapons by police officers from the mentally ill, described by SB 1189. If the officer has reason to believe and does believe that the person is mentally ill, and that because of the mental illness there is a substantial risk of harm unless the person is immediately restrained, then the officer may seize any firearm found in possession of that person. The police have to follow a certain procedure in giving the receipt of the seizure, and informing the person how they can get their firearm back once they've received treatment or been released. Of note is the fact that, after a person has been released, the law enforcement agency will conduct a background check to verify whether or not the person can still lawfully possess the firearm. Firearms and Schools A few bills related to educational institutions and carrying did not pass the legislative session. Campus carry did not pass in time in the regular session, and though it had been proposed in the first special session it again did not pass. The governor vetoed SB 17, which would have required employees that had a CHL and authorization from the school to carry to undergo special training before being allowed to carry on the school property. However, there were two important bills that did pass. The first is SB 1857. The legislature created an optional training program for employees of school districts, who are also CHL holders, to receive specific and appropriate training for their environment. SB 1857 lets the DPS establish a process to enable qualified handgun instructors to obtain an additional certification to instruct the school safety course, and outlines the requirements for a school safety course. This course can be provided by qualified instructors to CHL holders that are employees of a school district or an open-enrollment charter school. Note that this doesn't affect the fact that CHL holders need written authorization to carry in educational institution buildings. The other bill that passed, SB 1907, makes it illegal for campuses to institute discipline policies against students and employees who are CHL holders that have firearms in their vehicles in the parking lots or streets. Keep in mind, both before and after this bill, it was legal for a CHL holder to leave his firearm in the vehicle on a college campus; however, some campuses adopted rules that would allow them to take disciplinary action against students who brought firearms into these legal areas. Now, they have received explicit instructions to no longer try to side step the law by having stringent and restrictive policies on firearms in the vehicles of CHL holders. With all of this said, the statute does not provide a penalty for college campuses that violate the law, nor does it prescribe a remedy for those affected by campuses who ignore SB 1907. Even though we've made it through the numerous legislative sessions, we must remain ever vigilant and observant of our rights, lest we lose them. Texas Law Shield will keep a watchful eye out for how these bills are applied by the courts, and will be sure to keep you updated. Sincerely, Texas Law Shield, LLP

Colorado landlord tries unsuccessfully to ban residents from having guns

Apartment's controversial policy banning firearms is thrown out


A controversial gun policy at an apartment complex for seniors has been thrown out.

The Douglas County Housing Partnership, a multi-jurisdictional housing authority, held an emergency board of directors meeting late Wednesday afternoon.

Board members decided that the policy, which would have prohibited residents from having firearms in their homes, will not go into effect.

The Douglas County Housing partnership owns Oakwood Apartments in Castle Rock. It was purchased with federal funds and is supported by local, state, and federal tax dollars.


"These community policy changes were distributed without the knowledge or authorization of the Board of Directors of the Douglas County Housing Partnership or its staff," a Douglas County Housing Partnership release said. "This board does not support any action that infringes on an individual's rights and will not allow Ross Management to implement these changes. 

The notice was informing residents of an updated policy, banning all firearms and weapons from the property effective October 1.

There is no gun language in the lease

"It's unconstitutional to prohibit the legal possession of a gun or a firearm on public housing property," a DHA spokesperson said. 

The company wouldn't talk about the gun ban via phone or in person. So it's not clear the motivation behind the company's decision.


http://www.9news.com/news/local/article/349123/222/Apartments-firearm-policy-thrown-out

GUN SALES RISE, CRIME FALLS

VIRGINIA: GUN SALES RISE, CRIME FALLS
by AWR HAWKINS


In a real life demonstration of scholar John Lott's maxim "more guns, less crime," violent crime has dropped in Virginia as gun ownership has increased.

According to a Fox News report, firearms sales in Virginia were 16 percent higher in 2012 over 2011 and violent crime went down by 5 percent.

Amid calls nationwide for stricter gun control laws, Virginia is experiencing a unique trend: the state's gun-related crime is declining but firearms sales are increasing. 

Perhaps the significance of this is best seen in the raw numbers: In 2012 licensed gun dealers sold 490,119 guns in their state, while the number of violent crimes for the same time period was 4,378.

Virginia Commonwealth University assistant professor Thomas R. Baker commented on the numbers: "This appears to be additional evidence that more guns don't necessarily lead to more crime." 

Baker referred to this as "an interesting trend given the current rhetoric about strengthening our gun laws and the presumed effect it would have on violent crime." And although he stressed that this increase in gun ownership and the corresponding decrease in violent crime do not necessarily prove people ought to reject future gun control laws, he said that the drop in violent crime "really makes you question if making it harder for law-abiding people to buy guns would have any effect on crime."

". . . all those extra guns can actually work to lower crime . . ." - Philip Van Cleave, president of the Virginia Citizens Defense League

Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter @AWRHawkins

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/08/04/Violent-Crime-Drops-As-Gun-Sales-Rise-In-Virginia

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/08/04/virginia-gun-crime-drops-as-firearms-sales-soar/

Armed citizens force officials to back down

By Anthony Martin


A group of 160 citizens, many if not most of whom were armed, confronted government officials Tuesday who had attempted to have a wounded Army veteran kicked out of a meeting due to the fact that he carried a gun. The veteran has a state license for concealed carry, which means that he was carrying the gun to the meeting within the boundaries of the law.

The story of the incident, which occurred at a city council meeting in Oak Harbor, Wash., made national news three weeks ago.

But Tuesday evening the citizens of Oak Harbor, Wash. showed up to confront its city council and demand that the council rescind a local ordinance prohibiting guns from being carried on public property. The citizens also wished to show their support for Lucas Yonkman, the Army veteran who showed up at the previous meeting armed.

One citizen told the council that if the fact that citizens who are merely exercising their right to keep and bear arms intimidates city officials, then they need to look within to determine why the rights of the people are so intimidating to them.

Another citizen addressed the council and stated that his mother was a Jew and that his parents had died in Hitler's gas chambers. "I will not go into the night quietly while these two ask me to board the train," he said.

The man was carrying an M-1 rifle on his shoulder.

Lucas Yonkman, the wounded Army veteran whom the council wished to kick out of the previous meeting, also addressed the gathering:

"I come to you tonight with a heavy heart," Yonkman said. "I see a beautiful country divided and conflicted. I see a constitution being eroded, and the rights so many have fought and died for totally lost. I see men and woman who are elected leaders pushing personal agendas."

Apparently the display of force by the citizens and the passion with which they spoke of their Constitutional rights paid off. The council voted to remove the ban on guns in public parks and other public areas.

One gun rights activist who became aware of the incident today stated that perhaps the show of force by the citizens of Oak Harbor needs to be replayed over and over again in towns and cities across America, even Washington, D.C.

"Government entities need to know that the 100 million citizens who own 300 million guns are not going to back down and that we will hammer them every chance we get to prove our resolve," he said.

http://www.examiner.com/article/armed-citizens-force-officials-to-back-down

Texas man shoots 2 bank robbery suspects who kidnapped him, his wife

by Andrew Horansky

COLUMBUS, Texas -- Two bank robbery suspects were shot in Colorado County Thursday night by a man who said they kidnapped him and his wife, a bank employee.

According to the Colorado County Sheriff’s Office, the couple had been held at gunpoint by the suspects inside their home just north of Columbus. They were then forced to drive to the First National Bank of Eagle Lake in Columbus.

The suspects then forced the woman to take out an undisclosed amount of funds, investigators said.

“We believe they had knowledge that she was an employee of the bank for them to be at the residence and to take her back,” Sgt. Andrew Weido with the Columbus County Sheriff’s Office said.

He said the suspects then forced the husband to drive them in his truck south down Highway 71, and that's when the husband of the bank employee was able to gain access to a firearm inside the vehicle.

He fired at the suspects near County Road 101. Authorities then responded to a 911 call from the scene at 7:30 p.m. with the Columbus Police Department arriving first.

When they arrived, officers found the two suspects with gunshot wounds lying on the ground near a pickup that was parked in a ditch.

One of the wounded, 20-year-old Jordan Kutach, was airlifted to Memorial Hermann Hospital in critical condition. The other, 21-year-old Preston Kutach, was taken by EMS to the Columbus Community Hospital, where he was pronounced dead.

Both suspects lived in the community of Rock Island and neighbors said they were brothers.

The bank’s president, Sam Kana, tells KHOU 11 News he is thankful and blessed that the couple was not hurt.

Those who know them said the husband is a reserve officer with the sheriff’s department and that the community has their back.

“I’m sure that they’re both going to be upset for awhile,” resident Brenda Buehler said. “It’s a frightening thing to have happen, but I think everybody’s going to tell them good job.”

“It’s very positive to a community to hear that the good guy does win in the end,” resident Evan Mullins said.

“It could have turned out so much worse,” store owner Debbie Damon said.
Investigators said the couple did not know their attackers, and it is unclear how they became targets.

They are not releasing their names, or surveillance video, which they said captures some of the crime still in progress.

The Texas Rangers will be assisting with the sheriff’s investigation

http://www.wwltv.com/news/Texas-man-shoots-2-bank-robbery-suspects-who-kidnapped-him-his-wife--218284541.html

Terrified Couple shoot dead one of three home intruders

Dead home intruder suspect identified
BY DAVID G. PALACIO

The Bexar County medical examiner's office has released the name of the man shot and killed after allegedly invading a North Side home Tuesday.

Rashad Wilson, 23, and two unidentified persons invaded the home of Dmitri Brown, 21, and his fiancée, Evangeline Tubig, 49, at 3 a.m., according to a police report.

Both were held by the neck as their apartment was robbed, with four children — nieces and nephews — present.

Brown was able to get his gun as the robbers fled and shot at Wilson, according to police. He pursued the other intruders and fired several shots, but they escaped in a car, police said.

Wilson had a criminal record including four arrests on robbery charges from 2008 to 2010.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local/article/Dead-home-intruder-suspect-identified-4699697.php

One reporter's experience in a CHL class

Learning (not) to Shoot
By David White

Seven years ago, only 1.6 percent of eligible Texans had a concealed handgun license (CHL) doubling to 3.1 percent today. During the first six months of 2013, the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) issued 84,640 new CHLs, compared to 35,071 issued during the same time period in 2012 – a trend showing this number will more than double by the end of 2013.

Why the spike? Perhaps it’s relevant to mention that since 2006, the United States has experienced some of the worst mass shootings in its history, including one at a Connecticut elementary school in December.
Are Americans feeling more need for protection? Is there cause for concern with an increased number of Texans carrying concealed weapons?

According to CHL instructor and National Rifle Association (NRA) activist Mike Cox, everyone should take comfort in the fact that more responsible citizens are learning gun safety.



Cox teaches a 10-hour CHL course from his home in Driftwood and at Cabela’s. On July 13, Cox taught a class of seven students.

“Take a look at the people around you. These are responsible upstanding citizens that want to know how to protect themselves,” he said. “We’re not just a bunch of Joe Six-Packs brandishing guns.”
Cox says his students come from all walks of life.

“Some are retired people, some are recent widows, some are school teachers, some are businessmen that have to travel,” he said.

His CHL course concentrated on three basic areas: the ever-changing laws regarding handguns, conflict resolution and avoiding conflict altogether. Cox also shared his passion about protecting Americans’ second amendment rights.

A lot of myths about gun laws were dispelled that day as the class discussed various scenarios. Questions arose about when it’s okay to shoot someone.

According to Cox, “It’s against the law to shoot somebody… It is illegal!”

Displaying a handbook containing Texas concealed handgun laws, Cox said “… but these give you a defense against prosecution if it does happen.”

Cox warned that if anyone is involved in a shooting, even if they are acting within their rights, that person should expect to be arrested, spend at least one night in jail and face a long legal battle. He cautioned that even if a jury finds someone not guilty, civil suits may be brought on by others involved.

The best weapon in your arsenal is your brain,” Cox said. “Just avoid the whole situation if you can.”
Texas has what’s called a “Stand Your Ground” law giving individuals the right to use reasonable force to defend themselves without any requirement to evade or retreat from a dangerous situation.

But Cox stressed, “If you can retreat, you should. Never shoot to protect your stuff… You’ll get over your missing stuff faster than you’ll get over having shot someone over it.”

Cox also said that in most cases when people use firearms to protect themselves, they are within arms reach of the attacker and are usually already under attack. He said 68 percent of Texans who used a handgun for self-defense shot their attacker from the ground.

At the end of the10-hour course, a couple of students questioned whether they would even apply for a CHL, because of the responsibility and liability involved. Without a CHL it is still legal to carry a concealed handgun in a car or home.

Number of Texas Concealed Handgun License Owners from 2002-2012

Year                 CHL Licenses          Percentage of Adult Population Adult Pop. with CHL
2012                584,850 18,840,803          3.1%
2010               461,724 17,501,310             2.6%
2008              314,574 16,899,229             1.86%
2006              258,162 16,212,627             1.59%
2004              239,940 15,500,225            1.55%
2002              224,172 14,959,247             1.5%


http://haysfreepress.com/2013/08/01/learning-not-to-shoot/

Summaries of the new laws in effect Sept. 1 that deal with CHL holders

Summaries of the new laws in effect Sept. 1 that deal with CHL holders

• SB 1907 – Students with a CHL may have firearms in their personal locked vehicle when parked on a private or public university or college parking lot. A student with a CHL could not be prosecuted but they are subject to the rule-making authority of the school and could be expelled.

• SB299 – Provides language to clarify the unintentional display of a firearm by a concealed handgun licensee. The language changed from “failure to conceal” to “intentional display of a weapon in a public place” when force or deadly force is not authorized.

• SB 864 – Reduces the number of hours for the initial CHL class from 10 to 4 hours.

• HB 48 – Allows CHL holders to renew their license online without taking a renewal class.

• HB 698 – Requires DPS to provide alternate methods of digital fingerprinting for CHL applicants if the required facility is more than 25 miles away from the applicant’s residence, provided that the county has a population of  46,000 or less

• HB 3142 – Repeals the SA/NA (semi-automatic/non-automatic) designation from the CHL license. All CHL holders are licensed to carry either type of handgun.

• HB 1421 – Allows law enforcement agencies an option to sell confiscated firearms to a federal firearms dealer instead of destroying them. After the cost of the sale and other related charges, funds could stay with that law enforcement agency.

• HB 333 – Requires hotels and motels to provide advance notice to customers if they prohibit firearms.

Prominent Texas Democrat let off easy on multiple drunken gun crimes, felonies

Prominent Texas Democrat arrested on gun charge, public drunkenness

The 53-year-old was scheduled to appear at the Guinn Justice Center on Monday morning as the legal representative for a man who was facing felony chargers.  But when Conover attempted to enter the building, the metal-detector sounded off.

Security guards found that Conover was carrying a loaded Ruger LC9 semiautomatic 9mm handgun in a hollowed-out case designed to resemble an antique book, Johnson County Sheriff Bob Alford told The Crowley Star.

Conover does not have a concealed carry permit, but even if he did, it would have been against the law for him to carry it inside the courthouse, noted Johnson County Justice of the Peace, Ronny McBroom.

When sheriffs arrived on the scene they also discovered that in addition to carrying a concealed firearm without a permit, Conover’s blood-alcohol content exceeded the state’s legal limit, 0.08.  In short, he was drunk.

According to the police report, Conover said that he often carries a loaded firearm because he “had been threatened by former clients.”

However, in this particular instance, he simply forgot he had the pistol with him, Conover told the sheriffs.

Conover’s story was later reiterated by LuAnne Leonard, the secretary for the Johnson County Democrat Party, who said in a statement, “Today was an unfortunate mistake, coupled with poor judgment. The gun was located in a book that was in his attache case. He forgot the gun was there and inadvertently took it into the courthouse.”

So, it appears that Conover broke several laws: carrying concealed without a permit, carrying concealed while drunk, trying to carry a concealed firearm into a prohibited place, which is a third degree felony, and public intoxication — it appears he was only officially charged with the last two.

But Conover’s attorney, Ben Hill Turner, worked his magic and Conover was let off easy.  He paid a $300 fine for the public intoxication charge and in exchange for having the gun-related charges dropped volunteered to go to a treatment center.

http://www.guns.com/2013/08/02/prominent-texas-democrat-arrested-on-gun-charge-public-drunkenness-video/


Lesson learned:  If you're an elitist Democrat, you can commit multiple drunken gun related crimes, including felonies, and get off for a $300 fine and a vacation at club AA.  The rest of us have to be smarter than that, or face extended jail time.

The truth about civilian gun ownership

No offense to the police department.  They are doing what they can.  And the situations are often vastly different.  But still, these stats speak for themselves.



Police Officers:                          794,300 in USA
Civilian gun owners               90,000,000 in USA
Police error rate:                               11%
Civilian error rate:                               2%
Police  - Criminals killed /yr             606
Civilians  - Criminals killed /yr       1,527

And most importantly - average deaths of innocent civilians in a rampage before the criminal is stopped:

By Police:                                       14.3
By Civilians:                                      2.3


Becoming a CHL is more than just about protecting yourself and your family.  At some point, we need some ratio of CHLs in circulation just as a matter of simple Civic Duty, Social Responsibility, and Good Citizenship.

Star of the Week

Jacqueline Janes is a second-generation native Arizonan currently living in Mesa, Arizona with her fiancé, Robert Messenger. She is a digital marketing strategist and a blogger who writes about Second Amendment issues, recreational and competitive shooting and local and national politics.

Jacqueline has been an outspoken advocate for Second Amendment rights since she learned to shoot in 2009 and has become a very active competitive shooter. She currently competes in the practical pistol sports of IDPA and USPSA and has recently started shooting in 3-Gun competitions. As a certified IDPA range safety officer and NRA basic pistol instructor, Jacqueline provides training and assistance to those interested in learning to shoot in a safe environment. 

Got CHL insurance?

I assume you've heard of Texas Law Shield before.  Insurance for legal defense should you need to defend yourself in court after defending yourself on the street. They do a fair amount of advertising.  But they are kind of expensive, and don't cover you in the event of a CIVIL lawsuit, as well as in several other situations.

USCCA offers less expensive alternative and also covers civil suits.  Plus it comes with a subscription to Concealed Carry magazine.

I cannot vouch for their services, but they are BBB accredited with an A+ rating

https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/membership/aff_special_offer.asp?id=affiliate&sid=ho29&offer_id=29&aff_id=2550&trans_id=1026923cfdf8310ee7817d67233ed5&ip=76.183.92.82&type=

Guns in school: Ark. district arming more than 20 teachers, staff

Guns in school: Ark. district arming more than 20 teachers, staff
By Andrew DeMillio

 

In this photo taken July 11, a Clarksville schools faculty member, wearing a protective mask, rear center, carries a practice handgun toward a classroom in the city's high school in Clarksville, Ark.

CLARKSVILLE, Ark. - As Cheyne Dougan rounded the corner at Clarksville High School, he saw three students on the floor moaning and crying. In a split-second, two more ran out of a nearby classroom.

"He's got a gun," one of them shouted as Dougan approached with his pistol drawn. Inside, he found one student holding another at gunpoint. Dougan aimed and fired three rounds at the gunman.

Preparing for such scenarios has become common for police after a school shooting in Connecticut last December left 20 children and six teachers dead. But Dougan is no policeman. He's the assistant principal of this school in Arkansas, and when classes resume in August, he will walk the halls with a 9 mm handgun.

Dougan is among more than 20 teachers, administrators and other school employees in this town who will carry concealed weapons throughout the school day, making use of a little-known Arkansas law that allows licensed, armed security guards on campus. After undergoing 53 hours of training, Dougan and other teachers at the school will be considered guards.

"The plan we've been given in the past is 'Well, lock your doors, turn off your lights and hope for the best,'" Superintendent David Hopkins said. But as deadly incidents continued to happen in schools, he explained, the district decided, "That's not a plan."

After the Connecticut attack, the idea of arming schoolhouses against gunmen was hotly debated across the country. The National Rifle Association declared it the best response to serious threats. But even in the most conservative states, most proposals faltered in the face of resistance from educators or warnings from insurance companies that schools would face higher premiums.

In strongly conservative Arkansas, where gun ownership is common and gun laws are permissive, no school district had ever used the law to arm teachers on the job, according to the state Department of Education. The closest was the Lake Hamilton School District in Garland County, which for years has kept several guns locked up in case of emergency. Only a handful of trained administrators - not teachers - have access to the weapons.

Clarksville, a community of 9,200 people about 100 miles northwest of Little Rock, is going further.

Home to an annual peach festival, the town isn't known for having dangerous schools. But Hopkins said he faced a flood of calls from parents worried about safety after the attack last year at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Conn.

Hopkins said he and other school leaders didn't see why the district couldn't rely on its own staff and teachers to protect students rather than hire someone.

"We're not tying our money up in a guard 24/7 that we won't have to have unless something happens. We've got these people who are already hired and using them in other areas," Hopkins said. "Hopefully we'll never have to use them as a security guard."

Participants in the program are given a one-time $1,100 stipend to purchase a handgun and holster. Hopkins said the district is paying about $50,000 for ammunition and for training by Nighthawk Custom Training Academy, a private training facility in northwest Arkansas.

The Nighthawk training includes drills like the one Dougan participated in, with various role-playing scenarios involving shooters on campus. Dougan and other teachers in the program practiced using "airsoft" pellet guns, with students wearing protective facemasks and jackets.

"There's pressure on you, because you're shooting real bullets if this actually happened," said Dougan, who has three children attending Clarksville schools. "I was nervous to start, but once it started and I was going through what they had taught us, it just took over."

The training is narrowly tailored for teachers to respond to shooters on campus.

Sydney Whitkanack, who will enter seventh grade this fall, said she's grown up around firearms and doesn't mind if teachers or staff are armed at school.

"If they're concealed, then it's no big deal," said Whitkanack, who was an actor in the training scenario. "It's not like someone's going to know 'Oh, they have a firearm.'"

The district will post signs at each school about the armed guards, but the identities of faculty and staff carrying weapons will be kept secret, Hopkins said.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/07/30/19771320-guns-in-school-ark-district-arming-more-than-20-teachers-staff?lite

Black Neighborhood Watchman Kills White Teen Boy: The Black George Zimmerman You’re Not Allowed To Know About

Black Neighborhood Watchman Kills White Teen Boy: The Black George Zimmerman You’re Not Allowed To Know About


Roderick Scott (black) killed Christopher Cervini (white) under very similar circumstances as George Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin, yet the administration and the media didn't bat an eye.  And there were no riots.

It all goes to prove that there is an ADGENDA behind the Zimmerman publicity.  it was not about race at all.

Does the mainstream media in America have an agenda in the Trayvon Martin – George Zimmerman case? There was certainly a media influenced uproar surrounding the case; why didn’t they pay as much attention when a black neighborhood watchman shot and killed a white teen boy? 

This is the story that the mainstream media in America doesn’t want you to know about, the story of a black man who, when attacked by a 17 year old white boy, did what he felt like he had to do to survive and shot and killed the unarmed teen.  

Mr. Roderick Scott is the size of an NFL linebacker. Christopher Cervini was a skinny, 17-year old kid. Mr. Roderick Scott was found innocent for reason of self-defense. The must watch videos below tell the story, a sickening story of a mainstream media in America with an agenda, a story that they don’t want you to know about.

Link to the video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1NoQgCNNJE

Link to the video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FaLZc_alGI

http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/2013/07/black-neighborhood-watchman-kills-white-teen-boy-the-black-george-zimmerman-youre-not-allowed-to-know-about-2537178.html

George Zimmerman Trayvon Martin Justice for Trayvon racist racism riots adgenda
George Zimmerman Trayvon Martin Justice for Trayvon racist racism riots adgenda
George Zimmerman Trayvon Martin Justice for Trayvon racist racism riots adgenda
George Zimmerman Trayvon Martin Justice for Trayvon racist racism riots adgenda
George Zimmerman Trayvon Martin Justice for Trayvon racist racism riots adgenda
George Zimmerman Trayvon Martin Justice for Trayvon racist racism riots adgenda

Warning: Concealed Carry in Post Office Parking lot STILL ILLEGAL !!

Court Decision applies to Colorado only

By Jeff White and Texas Law Shield

Folks there is a rumor going around about the federal courts passed a law to carry firearms on postal property.... This is not for Texas.... there was a decision made from supreme court in Colorado that passed to allow the carry on parking lots... NOT Texas... if your caught carrying on postal property in Texas you could get 2 to 10 years in prison...Please do not carry on their property... here is a letter I got...

Recently, either in the media, the Internet, or elsewhere, you may have heard about a court decision regarding possession of a firearm in a post office parking lot. Some news outlets have titled their stories "YOU CAN CARRY IN THE POST OFFICE PARKING LOT - NEW COURT DECISION!"

We at Texas Law Shield wanted to give you a closer look at the decision, and what this means for you. To provide a short answer, this heavily fact based opinion of a U.S. District Court in Colorado does not currently provide any legal protection for those of us in Texas. 

At best, it provides an argument that can be used should you get arrested and hauled into court. To provide a greater understanding of what happened, we first need to understand the court decision itself, and the legal concept of precedence.

The Colorado Federal District Court Decision

The case in question is Bonidy, et al. v. USPS. In this case, the court was asked to make a very specific ruling. A man named Tab Bonidy wanted a ruling as to whether or not it was legal to keep a gun in his car while he was at the post office. He was challenging the application of 39 CFR Part 232.1(l), which reads as follows:

Weapons and explosives. No person while on postal property may carry firearms, other dangerous or deadly weapons, or explosives, either openly or concealed, or store the same on postal property, except for official purposes.

In light of the law above, one should consider the very peculiar circumstances of Avon, Colorado:

- The post office does not provide delivery to the public
- They provide free post office boxes to Avon residents
- These post office boxes are the only method of retrieving mail

The judge recognized these facts in his decision which only applies to this post office's particular facts, and none others - yet. Further, the judge pointed out additional factors to consider in determine whether or not to allow firearms in car trunks, such as: does the post office parking lot have restrictions (i.e., is it fenced in with a gate, are there signs imposing time limits or stating that vehicles are subject to search), are there outside mail receptacles for patrons, what type of government business is done there (loading of post office vehicles), and do high numbers of people congregate in the post office for other purposes?

The U.S. District Court of Colorado held that concealed carry license holders are allowed to have a firearm in their locked trunk, or have it otherwise secured in their vehicle under these circumstances. 

This does not mean a person can concealed carry on their body in the parking lot, or open carry.

For those not visiting this post office in Avon, the decision made by the court definitely does not set the law of the land. It repeatedly touched on the fact that there should be no general rules (either for or against firearm carrying). Until the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals issues an opinion, there is no general rule or guidelines for the Colorado Post Offices other than the current federal law in 39 CFR 232.1(l).

Precedent: Does the ruling set any legal precedent for other parts of the country? NO.

Precedent is going to be a rule, guideline, or other legal principle established by case law that is binding on other courts when there is a case with similar issues or facts. To put it another way, precedent is best illustrated when a court makes a decision guided by previous rulings. With that said, there are two types of precedent: horizontal and vertical.

Vertical is the traditionally considered concept of precedent; when a higher court dictates their interpretation of the law in a certain fact scenario, a lower court may not overrule their decisions. For example, the Texas Supreme Court is the highest civil state court, and any precedent set at that level must be followed by the Courts of Appeal and the trial courts in Texas. Similarly, decisions by the Courts of Appeal are binding on the Texas trial courts. Federal courts are similarly structured; District Courts should respect the precedence of the Circuit Courts of Appeal, and both must follow the precedence set by the United States Supreme Court.

However, this is where things can get complicated. Federal appellate level courts are divided into different circuits. To illustrate, Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi are in the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, while Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, Kansas, Oklahoma, and New Mexico are in the 10th Circuit. A decision in a circuit is binding only on federal courts in that circuit. So, a case that originates in Louisiana is taken to the 5th Circuit; the decision of the 5th Circuit in that case is then binding on Federal district courts in Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi.

Horizontal precedence is the relation (or lack thereof) between courts on the same level. The decisions made by different circuits, while they can be used as persuasive arguments, are not binding on other circuits. Therefore, a decision made by the 10th Circuit will not bind the 5th Circuit; similarly, federal district courts in Texas will not be bound by the decisions made in the 10th Circuit or U.S. District Courts in the 10th Circuit.

Those are a lot of words, but what do they mean for us in this situation? The decision made by the Colorado federal district court is not binding on a Texas federal district court, nor on any other district courts. If the 10th Circuit makes a decision, however, it will be binding on federal district courts in Colorado, Kansas, Utah, Wyoming, Oklahoma, and New Mexico. This Colorado case can only be used as an argument in other courts, including those in Texas.

Conclusion

Ultimately, this decision is a fantastic first step in possibly expanding a right that seems to shrink more and more every day. The case has already been appealed to the 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, as Mr. Bonidy was not content with just the parking lot and wants to pursue open carrying in the actual building of the post office. We will keep you informed of how this case turns out, and whether or not you'll see any expansion on where you can legally carry your concealed handgun in Colorado and beyond.

More Chicago Idiocy - beefing up the assault weapons ban

Chicago lawmakers unanimously vote to beef up assault weapons ban

Chicago's City Council unanimously voted Wednesday to beef up its assault weapons ban with new measures that add strict penalties, prohibit more weapons and define "student safety zones," changes that come in the wake of Illinois' new concealed carry law.

Illinois lawmakers approved a state law last week outlining who can carry concealed weapons in public after a federal appeals court ruled Illinois' last-in-the-nation concealed carry ban unconstitutional. The new state law gave local entities 10 days to come up with new or updated gun laws of their own.

Mayor Rahm Emanuel called a rare special session Wednesday to deal with guns, the same day Cook County commissioners voted to strengthen the county assault weapons ban with tougher penalties.

Chicago already prohibits the sale and possession of the weapons and of high-capacity magazines. City council members approved measures Wednesday that outline more than 150 specific weapons that are prohibited, including any shotgun with a revolving cylinder and any semi-automatic rifle with a fixed magazine that can hold more than 10 rounds.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/07/17/chicago-unanimously-votes-to-beef-up-assault-weapons-ban/

Now THIS is how you do a "Gun Buy Back"

The Armed Citizen Project has expanded its Redistribution of Firepower Program to Texas and Florida, the group announced this week.

The Redistribution of Firepower Program, put simply, takes donations of unused firearms and gives the guns, as well as training, to background-checked, high-vulnerability Americans such as single women and the urban poor.

“We’ve combined Joe Biden’s love of shotguns with Obama’s love of redistribution,” - Armed Citizen Project Executive Director Kyle Coplen

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/17/armed-citizen-project-sponsors-gun-buyback-to-arm-more-people/#ixzz2ZP8kynQH

Attempts to repeal "Stand Your Ground Laws" are Ridiculous.

Attempts to repeal the "Stand Your Ground Laws" over Zimmerman are boldfaced in their ridiculousness. 

Firstly, proponents of the repeal claim that it hurts African Americans, and is unreasonable.  The reality is that SYG laws help innocent civilians - especially African Americans, and only hurt criminals.  

Secondly, the SYG law was not even used in the Zimmerman trial - it had nothing to do with Zimmerman.

Thirdly, SYG laws MAKE SENSE.  If you are an innocent civilian minding your own business in a place where you have a legal right to be, you should be able to defend yourself from an attacker without being legally required to run away to someplace else that you have a legal right to be.

Blacks benefit from Florida ‘Stand Your Ground’ law at disproportionate rate

By Patrick Howley 

African Americans benefit from Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” self-defense law at a rate far out of proportion to their presence in the state’s population, despite an assertion by Attorney General Eric Holder that repealing “Stand Your Ground” would help African Americans. 

Black Floridians have made about a third of the state’s total “Stand Your Ground” claims in homicide cases, a rate nearly double the black percentage of Florida’s population. The majority of those claims have been successful, a success rate that exceeds that for Florida whites. 

Nonetheless, prominent African Americans including Holder and “Ebony and Ivory” singer Stevie Wonder, who has vowed not to perform in the Sunshine State until the law is revoked, have made “Stand Your Ground” a central part of the Trayvon Martin controversy. 

The law was not invoked by Zimmerman’s defense team but was included in instructions to the jury.

http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/16/blacks-benefit-from-florida-stand-your-ground-law-at-disproportionate-rate/

To all those people wanting "Justice for Trayvon"

Guest post by Nancy Westheimer 

To all those people wanting "Justice for Trayvon"

To all those people who can't believe that they found Zimmerman innocent.

Really?  Did you actually follow the evidence of the trial?  Did you read or watch anything other than the incredibly arrogant shameless and downright criminal bias of NBC reporting?  They criminally altered the video surveillance tapes - tampering with evidence. And the rest of the main stream media wasn't far behind.  So if that's all you heard, then I don't blame you for thinking this way.

There was no case, no evidence, no reason to find guilt.  There was no way that the jury could find him guilty, much less "beyond a reasonable doubt".

YES Zimmerman was an IDIOT.  He made STUPID and regretful mistakes.  And he should REALLY SERIOUSLY rethink his "job" as a neighborhood patrol AND rethink his role and responsibility as a CHL carrying a gun.   But he didn't do anything criminal. If stupidity were a crime, there'd be more people in jail than out.

Trayvon didn't deserve to die, but he actually WAS a criminal.  He committed crimes in Miami-Dade, including graffiti and burglary, and was expelled from school - which is why he was in Sanford FL.   He was a young and naive racist who was full of himself and  hated authority and whites.  

The legal defense team purposely (and criminally) withheld exculpatory evidence on Martin's character.  His parents purposely published pictures of a younger and more innocent boy, and the Main Stream Media purposely (and criminally) distorted facts to make Zimmerman look hateful violent, and racist.  All lies.  But the public bought it - including most of the now violent protesters.

In fact, I suspect that Martin was also a "person of interest  in several home burglaries in that area which Zimmerman was patrolling  burglaries that started about the same time Martin arrived in Sanford. Martin may have been acting suspiciously because it was habit.  

But Zimmerman didn't know any of that.  And he didn't racially profile Martin.  Heck, Zimmerman took up black causes regularly - helping black youth, taking a hard line against police for their treatment of a homeless black man. He was definitely not racist.  Zimmerman didn't even realize Trayvon was black until he doublechecked when 911 asked him.

Zimmerman  profiled Martin by Martin's actions - That's what an LEO or Security person is supposed to do.  Zimmerman should not have overreacted, he should not have followed Martin further, and he should not have gotten out of the car. But he didn't follow or confront Martin after exiting the car. 

Martin had a chip on his shoulder - as many young men of all races do - and jumped Zimmerman first.  He was beating him to death and Zimmerman fired ONLY ONE shot to get him off of him.  CHLs are typically taught to fire twice, reassess the threat, and repeat if necessary.  Zimmerman used minimum necessary force to save himself.

Yes, Zimmerman was an idiot.  And Martin was just Young and brash with too little mentoring. 

So, no, Martin didn't deserve to die, it is a sad and tragic outcome.  But the Jury got it right - Zimmerman doesn't deserve to go to jail either.

George Zimmerman Trayvon Martin Justice for Trayvon racist racism riots adgenda
George Zimmerman Trayvon Martin Justice for Trayvon racist racism riots adgenda
George Zimmerman Trayvon Martin Justice for Trayvon racist racism riots adgenda
George Zimmerman Trayvon Martin Justice for Trayvon racist racism riots adgenda
George Zimmerman Trayvon Martin Justice for Trayvon racist racism riots adgenda

George Zimmerman Trayvon Martin Justice for Trayvon racist racism riots adgenda