Category: Self Defense

Burglar Shot By Homeowner During Break-In, Resident Also Shot

PRINCE GEORGE’S COUNTY, MD — A break-in Tuesday shortly after midnight led to a homeowner shooting the intruder and a resident of the home being shot during the incident, too, police say.

At approximately 12:20 a.m., officers with the Hyattsville Police Department were dispatched to the report of a burglary in progress at the home in the 5600 block of 30th Avenue. When officers arrived, they saw a car attempting to leave the residence. Officers stopped the vehicle and found a man in the car with a gunshot wound. He was taken by ambulance to the hospital where he later died. He has been identified as 23-year-old Giovanni Hayles and was a resident of the home.

The preliminary investigation reveals a suspect broke into the residence shortly after midnight. Officers found the suspect still in the home with a gunshot wound. He was pronounced dead on the scene. A gun was recovered near his body. He has not yet been identified by the police department.

Colleton homeowner shoots, kills one of two armed intruders

A Colleton County [South Carolina] homeowner who shot and killed an intruder last week is not facing any criminal charges for the incident.

This criminal investigation is still underway, and local authorities say it is not likely that the victim/homeowner will be charged. The victim /homeowner’s identity has not been released.

On Sept. 14th, the homeowner was inside his Madison Street house near Walterboro at about 10 p.m. when two armed men tried to break into his home. The homeowner shot one of the men: authorities who arrived to the scene found the suspect dead on the victim’s front porch.

When we arrived to the victim’s house, the “homeowner exited the home, unarmed, and confirmed he shot the man when he and another individual tried to break down his door,” said Shalane Tindal, spokeswoman for the Colleton County Sheriff’s Office.

Both of the suspects were armed with a handgun, said Tindal.

The second would-be-intruder fled from the scene in a dark-colored sedan. He has not yet been found, as of press deadline.

The suspect who was shot to death is identified as 25-year-old Brandon McDonald-Sharmk, of Colleton County, according to Colleton County Coroner Richard Harvey.

McDonald-Sharmk died at the scene from a gunshot wound, said Harvey.

“The homeowner cooperated with detectives, citing the location of the used firearm and providing footage from a home security camera. Detectives worked through the night to process the scene,” said Tindal, in a written statement. “This is still an active investigation and is believed to be an isolated incident.”

The Colleton Sheriff’s Office is asking anyone with information about this incident to contact their Criminal Investigations Division at 843-549-2211. Tipsters can also leave an anonymous tip by emailing submit-a-tip@colletoncounty.org.

This incident is not tied to another fatal home invasion that occurred two weeks ago in Cottageville. In that case, the suspect shot and killed the male homeowner. The suspect fled the scene, but was later captured in Georgia.

Denver Gazette: Gun control hits a wall in Colorado

Gun-control measures enacted in Boulder County have been placed on hold by the federal courts; left in doubt by a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling, and, as reported in The Gazette last week, stymied even more amid further court developments here in Colorado.

All of which should prompt advocates of more restrictions on firearms to ponder shifting tack in the campaign to curb gun violence. If the courts are turning out to be no friends of more gun control, perhaps it’s time for policy makers to move beyond tilting at the Second Amendment.

How about focusing instead on steps that likely would draw little opposition while making a real difference — like beefing up security at our children’s schools? Let’s have more police deployed as school resource officers. And tighter limits on access during the school day. There’s even a program that has been training faculty and staff in firearms use if needed to defend kids at dozens of participating school districts around the state.

Such alternatives to more gun control make all the more sense considering the inherent futility of attempting to legislate an end to gun violence. Rebranding firearms as “assault rifles” and banning them; limiting the capacity of gun magazines, and other knee-jerk responses were always more about sending a message in the wake of a shooting tragedy than about providing any realistic hope of heading off the next one.

Last Friday, a federal judge declined to combine four different lawsuits brought by right-to-arms advocates against Boulder County and the cities of Boulder, Louisville and Superior. The local governments had enacted similar firearms regulations, including bans on large-capacity magazines and on so-called assault weapons.

U.S. District Court Judge Raymond P. Moore, whose court is handling the lawsuit against Superior, declined that city’s request to merge all the court actions. The result could be conflicting rulings between various judges as to whether the local ordinances violate the Second Amendment. But as Moore observed, “if anyone thinks the district court is going to have the last say on this, they’re kidding themselves.” Perhaps there’s no harm, then, in giving each lawsuit its full day in court in light of the long legal journey that lies ahead.

The laws are not in effect thanks to court-issued restraining orders. That’s pending further proceedings and maybe even the resolution of the entire court challenge. Which could take years.

Underlying all of it is the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in June in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, which set a higher bar for gun restrictions to pass constitutional muster.

Given a new prevailing philosophy on the Second Amendment at the nation’s highest court — and lower courts’ pragmatic deference to it — the prospects for imposing new restrictions gun ownership appear a lot dimmer than they used to. Gun control could become the dog that won’t hunt.

Coloradans across the political spectrum should resolve to lower the odds of random violence where they can, in ways that actually work. Our schools — the scene of some of the worst shooting tragedies in Colorado and across the country — are a good place to start.

Denver Gazette Editorial Board

Murphy Blocking Cruz School Security Bill Says It All

United States Senate – -(AmmoLand.com)- The next time some anti-Second Amendment extremist claims that those of us who object to gun control aren’t trying to prevent school shootings, the objection of Senator Chris Murphy to Ted Cruz’s School Security Enhancement Act should be thrown in their face.

Second Amendment supporters are all too aware of how anti-Second Amendment extremists weaponize mass shootings in general and mass shootings at schools in particular against our rights. Cruz’s legislation would allow current Student Support and Academic Enrichment grant programs to be used to improve the security at schools.

This sort of thing is – or should be – a no-brainer all around. Who doesn’t want safe schools? Chris Murphy, for one, it seems. What could he find so objectionable about Cruz’s legislation, which doesn’t even permit the use of the grants to arm teachers or train them?

We can quibble whether or not Cruz should have allowed the grants to be used to arm teachers. On the one hand, arming teachers does generate controversy (a voluntary program really shouldn’t, but we’re not in an ideal world). On the other hand, if Murphy won’t even support measures to improve school security that don’t involve guns… what do we have to gain by taking armed teachers off the table? That can be discussed later.

The topic for now, must be Murphy’s decision to object to even bringing such a measure up for debate. This is a no-lose proposition for Second Amendment supporters, especially if we make a lot of noise about it now. If we are seen working on efforts to deter, prevent, or mitigate mass shootings – including efforts that don’t involve guns – we have a chance to head off attacks.

As has been discussed on these pages earlier, Murphy has pushed legislation that would prohibit any sort of federal funding for law enforcement in schools. In other words, what he is proposing would actually make repeats of Sandy Hook, Parkland, and Uvalde not only much more likely to happen but also to rack up the kind of body counts that force us into a major action in defense of our rights.

Why would he remove something that could deter or mitigate attacks? That is a question we’d see him asked if the vast majority of media outlets were honest. We don’t have that world today, so much of it could end up needing to be done by Second Amendment supporters at town meetings. Those in Connecticut should press Murphy on this and demand an explanation.

Remember the time it took for cops to arrive at Sandy Hook? It was ten minutes – 600 seconds. The long periods of inaction by law enforcement at Parkland and Uvalde also should be kept in mind. Murphy’s past track record of smearing Second Amendment supporters means he has forfeited any claim to receiving the benefit of the doubt from Second Amendment supporters on this matter as well.

One final thing: Working to prevent school shootings with legislative proposals like what Senator Cruz proposed is not being a “Fudd.” The fact is, we should be trying to head off these shootings – it’s in our interest to do so, just look at the aftermath of Parkland.

Second Amendment supporters have a chance to immunize themselves to some degree from attacks in the wake of the next school shooting. If they can seize this chance, it will help efforts to defeat anti-Second Amendment extremists at the federal, state, and local levels via the ballot box.

Woman shoots, kills man who tried to break into her north Phoenix home

PHOENIX – Police say a man who tried to break into a north Phoenix home has died after being shot by the homeowner.

Phoenix Police say officers responded to reports of a burglary near 23rd Avenue and Bell Road just before 10:30 p.m. on Sept. 18.

Investigators say when the man tried to get into the home and was shot by the female homeowner.

The man was taken to a hospital with critical injuries where he later died.

The woman was interviewed by police and claimed self-defense in the shooting. She was released.

The case will be submitted to the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office for review.

“If you break in my house, my privacy, I do anything to defend myself, and if I gotta kill you, I will do it too. I’m sorry, that’s how I feel,” one neighbor said in reaction to the shooting.

And he’s dead, Jim.

Mugger who died trying to rob two men with a fake gun on Staten Island was out on parole

A man who died when he tried to rob two men on a Staten Island street with a fake gun was out on parole for attempted robbery at the time.

Robert Compton, 33, pulled a phony handgun on two 33-year-old men near Pacific Ave. and St Albans Pl. in Eltingville as they walked home from a bar around 1:55 a.m. Sunday, police and sources said.

Compton allegedly approached the men and told them to “give me all your s—t,” sources said.

One of the would-be victims grabbed the fake gun and the men fought back, tussling with the mugger and restraining him.

One of the men got behind Compton, grabbed him around the neck and pulled him to the ground while the other called 911, sources said.

During the struggle, Compton fell unconscious.

“He robbed us at gunpoint,” one of the men told responding officers.

Police performed CPR on Compton before he was rushed to Staten Island University Hospital North, where he died.

The two other men were taken to the same hospital to be treated for minor injuries.

Compton had a lengthy rap sheet, including for grand larceny, robbery and assault, sources said.

He spent over four years behind bars for an attempted robbery charge and was paroled in December 2019.

A neighbor of one of Compton’s targets believed he was in the “wrong place, wrong time.”

“I’ve known him since he was a little boy,” said Richard Vitale. “He’s a stand-up guy. I heard a rumor that he took karate. He’s outgoing, he has a lot of friends.

“He gets along with everybody,” the man continued. “He’d be the last person I would think would be connected to this.”

The victims’ attorney said the men were “clearly acting in self defense.”

“Our clients, two hard working young men, were the victims of a terrifying armed robbery by a career criminal,” said Louis Gelormino. “We are grateful that the District Attorney’s Office and the NYPD conducted a complete and thorough investigation of this matter. Our prayers go out to the family of the deceased.”

The city Medical Examiner performed an autopsy on Compton’s body, but said more tests would need to be done to determine his exact cause of death.

Homeowner kills intruder in struggle in Kenosha

KENOSHA, Wis. — A homeowner shot and killed an intruder during a struggle inside their home, according to Kenosha police.

Police say they got a call around 7:20 p.m. about a man damaging cars at random and trying to break into houses near 64th Avenue and 69th Street.

They say the man did force his way into a house, where he got into a physical struggle with the homeowner, who shot and killed the intruder.

Police are not releasing any details about the man who was killed. They say there is no threat to the community.

Armed man shot, killed after breaking into Burke County home

Investigators said a man shot and killed a home intruder early Friday morning in Burke County [North Carolina].

Deputies responded to 2902 Flat Gap Road in Valdese after a report of shots fired around 3 a.m., according to a release from the Burke County Sheriff’s Office.

When deputies arrived at the scene, they found Howard Gene Cook, 37, dead at the scene, the release said.

Authorities said Cook had broken into the home and got hold of a gun there.

Cook pointed the gun at the homeowner, who also was armed, and the homeowner fired his weapon and hit Cook, the release said.

Detectives with BCSO’s criminal investigations division will finish the investigation and submit their findings to the district attorney’s office, who will decide whether there should be any charges.

 

Analysis: How 50 Million Defensive Gun Uses Played Out According to a Massive Survey

The largest-ever scientific survey of gun owners found Americans used a gun in self-defense at least 1.67 million times per year. But the poll did a lot more than just count defensive uses; it also detailed how, when, and where they happened.

The National Firearms Survey, conducted by Georgetown University Professor William English, presented a ton of information on key questions surrounding guns in America. It found gun ownership is diversifying and gun carry is broadly popular. It found about a third of gun owners have owned an AR-15 or similar rifle and 50 percent have owned magazines holding more than ten rounds–key information for the legal battles over whether they can be banned.

And, of course, it also found a large number of American gun owners report using their guns to protect themselves. 31.1 percent of gun owners said they’d used a gun in self-defense. That equates to about 25.3 million Americans, according to English.

While a plurality of respondents said they’d only been involved in a single defensive gun use, the majority said they’d used a gun for self-defense more than once. That’s how English determined there were about 50 million reported defensive uses. He found the yearly rate of 1.67 million by dividing that total by the number of adult years the respondents had lived.

English said he did it that way to address one of the critiques of previous survey-based estimates of defense gun uses, which relied on people recounting not only that they used a gun in self-defense but that it happened in the last year.

However, that doesn’t mean it perfectly captures defensive gun uses. Critics have long questioned the validity of survey-based estimates altogether. Often they argue people who self-report using a gun to defend themselves are often misrepresenting what happened and may have even broken the law during the incident. Another common critique is the number of defensive gun uses doesn’t square with the number of justifiable homicides or criminals treated for gunshots.

Similarly, surveys of self-identified crime victims show a lower rate of self-reported gun defensive uses.

English said his estimates square with reported rates of hospital visits for gunshot wounds if you take the most common form of reported defensive gun use into account: incidents where no shots are fired. The more limited estimates, which put self-defense incidents in the tens of thousands rather than millions, do not account for defensive gun uses where nobody is injured. That’s a subset of events that English’s survey found was massive.

“[I]n the vast majority of defensive gun uses (81.9%), the gun was not fired,” he wrote in the preprint paper on the survey. “Rather, displaying a firearm or threatening to use a firearm (through, for example, a verbal threat) was sufficient. This suggests that firearms have a powerful deterrent effect on crime, which, in most cases, does not depend on a gun actually being fired or an aggressor being injured.”

The survey includes stories from a number of respondents who recount their self-defense encounters, including many who did not fire a shot.

Continue reading “”

Jury finds Alabama man acted in self-defense in Midvale [Utah] murder case

SALT LAKE CITY — A jury has acquitted a 27-year-old man of murder, concluding that he acted in self-defense when he killed another man following an hours long argument in Midvale last year.

Shortly after moving from Alabama to Utah for work at Kennecott Copper Mine, Lorenzo Parker was staying at a Motel 6 when he got into a fight with Tyler Williams, 30, on the evening of June 26, 2021. Police say the initial fight ended with Parker being punched but started up again several hours later when Williams came back with others. Surveillance video presented at the trial showed Williams hitting Parker with a metal pipe before Parker shoots him. Parker is also seen running away as he was pointing a gun at Williams.

A jury ruled on Sept. 2 that Parker was not guilty of the charges against him. Parker’s attorney, Rudy Bautista, said his client was released from jail that night and is back in Alabama with his family.

“He was ecstatic and relieved,” Bautista said. “He was very scared. He’s been scared throughout this entire process.”

What happened that night?

Bautista said Williams initially approached Parker with an offer to sell drugs and Parker refused. A 13-year-old witness reported seeing Williams punching Parker to the ground earlier before Parker said he didn’t want to fight and the conflict ended.

Later in the evening, Parker’s cousin arrived and the two eventually heard Williams make some gang noises, Bautista said. That led the cousin to give Parker his firearm. The 13-year-old witness said Williams came back with others in the early morning hours of June 27, and that Parker told Williams he shouldn’t have punched him earlier — which led to another fight.

The teenager’s testimony varied regarding when Parker pulled out a gun, according to Bautista — the teen could not remember if the gun was pulled out before or after Williams got out a metal pipe. Bautista said, however, the video of the event shows Williams hitting Parker multiple times with the pipe.

Bautista said when Parker realized Williams would not stop, he pointed the gun at him. Williams then threw a metal pipe, missed, and took a step toward Parker.

At that point, Parker fired one shot, hitting Williams, and then Williams ran away. Bautista said the bullet went through Williams’ arm and chest. Doctors performed surgery in an attempt to save Williams’ life, but he ultimately died.

He said Williams was found to have methamphetamine in his system that would make him act violently or irrationally.

“While (drug use) wasn’t medically attributable to the cause of his death, we argue that it was because he was acting irrationally and violent … and his actions, unfortunately, led (Parker) to have to defend himself,” Bautista said.

The jury trial

Bautista said Parker’s family was present in the courtroom throughout the trial. He said Williams’ family may have been attending remotely but did not show up in person.

The jury ruled Parker acted in “perfect self-defense,” deciding against an option to determine the act was imperfect self-defense, which would mean the murder charge would be sentenced as a reduced manslaughter charge.

At the trial, prosecutors argued Parker was the initial aggressor because when Williams came back, Parker said, “Dude, that wasn’t cool that you punched me,” according to Bautista. But Parker’s attorney argued those aren’t fighting words.

Bautista said after firing the gun, his client unloaded it, put it on the ground, waited for police with his arms up, and complied with everything they asked, which police at the trial said is not typical in similar instances.

Salt Lake County District Attorney Sim Gill said there was enough video evidence to support charging Parker. He said the video showed there was a back-and-forth conflict, that Parker had a weapon and that someone had been shot.

“We thought … this was something that needed to be brought to a jury,” Gill said. “Certainly, there was sufficient evidence that it needed to be filed and prosecuted.”

He said at the time, prosecutors thought the charges were appropriate but understands that the jury ultimately makes the decision. Gill said he was proud of prosecutors for treating the case seriously.

Justification hearings

This not guilty verdict comes after 3rd District Judge Paul Parker decided in a justification hearing that the prosecutors in the case had proven Lorenzo Parker did not act in self-defense and was the aggressor.

Under a state law that took effect in May 2021, a person charged with a crime of unlawful use of force who claims self-defense can request a justification hearing in front of a judge up to 28 days before a case goes to trial. The law shifts the decision about whether someone acted in self-defense from a jury to a judge, who might have to rule based on limited pretrial evidence.

If a defendant is able to bring credible evidence he or she acted in self-defense, prosecutors must prove with “clear and convincing evidence” — a high legal bar — that the person did not act in self-defense or was not justified in the use of force. If prosecutors are not able to meet that burden of proof, the judge must dismiss the charges with prejudice, meaning they cannot be refiled.

In this case, prosecutors met that burden, according to the judge, who ruled the charges should stand because he determined Lorenzo Parker was the initial aggressor.

Bautista argued that pulling a gun out and holding it by your side is a sign that you are prepared to defend yourself, not a threat, and that Parker did not say any fighting words.

“I really thought … he was going to prevail at a justification hearing. But after we didn’t, I don’t have any faith in those and I don’t intend to do them very often. I think juries get it better than judges,” Bautista said.

Gill said he thinks justification hearings are an “unnecessary process” that create a burden on the judicial system without providing any additional constitutional right that would not be available through the normal process, and this is just one example of that.

“I am adamantly supportive of protecting everybody’s constitutional right, OK? And under our current system, that right can be protected and is protected and preserved,” Gill said.

He said in some instances, a justification hearing takes family members of the victim through another hearing, lengthening the time they need to be involved in the judicial process.

“It just creates an extra, unnecessary step and, (from) what I’m hearing from victims, an unnecessary emotional roller coaster that they don’t need to go through,” Gill said.

The district attorney said a self-defense argument can always be brought up at trial, and if a judge rules in favor of the prosecution on self-defense at a justification hearing, he believes it should become the law of the case and should not be revisited. But that is not how the current law works. He said he would be more OK with the justification hearing process if it had some permanence. While there could be ways to improve to the process, right now it is causing more harm than good, he said.

“It was a solution in search of a problem, and the collateral consequence is a disproportionate revictimization and emotional abuse of victims who go through this process. It’s ridiculous,” Gill said.

How Hochul’s gun laws will make churches less safe

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul has been on an anti-gun tirade pretty much since she took office. Any hopes she’d be a smidge better than her predecessor on the Second Amendment have been well and truly dashed. The only thing she may be better on is not sexually harassing her female subordinates.

Following New York’s epic smackdown by the Supreme Court, Hochul and the legislature rushed through a measure seeking to try and adhere to the letter of the Bruen decision only as much as they felt they had to.

Yet that law includes a prohibition of guns at any place of worship.

As noted at our sister site PJ Media, that’s going to make those places of worship a lot less safe.

For your consideration:

  • On June 17, 2015, a man walked into the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, S.C., where a prayer meeting was being held. He shot and killed nine people, including the pastor, State Senator Clementa Pinckney. The shooter was charged with a hate crime.
  • November 5, 2017 — a man entered the Sutherland Springs First Baptist Church in Texas. He was dressed in black and wearing tactical gear. By the time he finished shooting, 26 were dead and 20 were wounded.
  • On a Sunday morning in December 2019, a man walked through the door of the West Freeway Church of Christ in White Settlement, Texas, and opened fire during services. Two victims died in the attack. The gunman was killed by two parishioners, one of whom was the security guard.
  • October 27, 2018 — a man came into the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh. After shouting “All Jews must die!” he shot and killed 11 people. Six others were wounded. He was known for posting anti-Semitic rants on Gab.
  • One person was killed and three were injured when a man entered Chabad of Poway in California and opened fire with a semiautomatic rifle in April 2019.
  • In January of this year, a man held four people, including the rabbi, hostage at Congregation Beth Israel in Colleyville, Texas, for 10 hours before being killed by police. The suspect said that he had hidden bombs in undisclosed locations.
  • In May 2022, the New York Post reported a rise in anti-Semitic activity in the city. This included vandalization of synagogues and attacks on individual people.

It should be noted that if you want to go further back, you can find still more places of worship being targeted.

What’s more, many churches and synagogues can’t afford to hire professional armed security, yet there’s no provision in state law for volunteers to step in if the church so desires.

Look, one area where I tend to infuriate my fellow Second Amendment supporters is that I think a property owner has the right to ban guns on their property. I’m fine with laws that give signs the force of law, even. I want to know where I’m not welcome, after all.

But the flip side of that is that I cannot tolerate laws that tell property owners that they can’t make that determination for themselves. That’s precisely what Hochul’s law does since the churches and synagogues are, in fact, property owners in most cases.

Looking at this list, it’s easy to see that places of worship get targeted by maniacs looking to kill as many people as possible.

Hochul and folks like her probably think this law will stop that, but it won’t. I mean, if a law would stop such a thing, then wouldn’t the laws against murder do the trick on their own?

They don’t, though.

Instead, these places of worship cannot allow their congregations to be lawfully armed as a defensive measure. That means these very places become better targets for the deranged.

And when it happens in New York, remember that it was Hochul and her buddies who made that target so attractive.

Tactical gear for women to carry arms

Vicky Johnston, the owner and designer of Her Tactical, joined the show today to talk about her business.

Johnston encourages women to be prepared, be aware, and be ready for anything they may encounter. She shares her self defense skills with others through her company, offering a workshop to help build confidence.

Johnston tells of her story finding items to conceal a gun that work well for women. In her experience, every store she went to only had products for men, so she started her own company specifically tailored for women.

Her Tactical is putting on a workshop in February, and is offering a 15% discount on any concealed carry product purchased using the coupon code “ABC4” on her website.

Concealed Carry Products: https://hertactical.com/

Workshop Registration: https://hertactical.com/workshop/

The Most Important Shot
While some matters of self-defense have changed throughout history, getting that first round on-target remains important.

On July 21, 1865, in Springfield, MO, James B. Hickok and Davis Tutt were about to have what, at the time, was generally called a difficulty. Some claim it was over a woman; others claim it concerned a gambling debt, whatever. As was the custom of the day, the two men met to settle their differences.

Tutt, possibly acting a bit hastily, got off the first shot while Hickok was still 75 yards away. Tutt missed. Hickok, who might have been expecting such a move, braced his Colt Navy across his left forearm and fired before Tutt could trigger a second shot. Hickok’s bullet took Tutt in the left side and penetrated his heart. Davis Tutt expired shortly thereafter. As an interesting aside, I would note that Hickok made this 75-yard, one-shot stop with a revolver in the same power and terminal-performance level as a modern .380 ACP.

Fast forward to Dec. 29, 2019, and some folks were worshiping in a church in White Settlement, TX. The service was interrupted when a deranged gunman came in and started shooting people with a shotgun. In a matter of seconds, he killed two men and was about to shoot more when Jack Wilson (no relation to me) responded accordingly. Wilson, part of the church security team, fired one shot from his SIG Sauer P229 from about 15 yards and stopped the lunatic immediately with a head shot.

The significance of these two shootings, 154 years apart, is that some things change in this whole business of personal defense, and some things never change. Let’s take a look at some of each.

During Hickok’s day and for many years to come, it was considered acceptable for a man to arm himself and go confront another who was making threats against him. In addition, there are numerous “Not Guilty” verdicts on file when the deceased was not armed at all … “Well, he usually carried a gun and I saw him reaching for his hip pocket, where he usually carried his gun …”  Of course, there was the argument that was often made: “He needed killing.”

One should also realize that the local saloon was the men’s social club of the day. The fact that gambling, guns and booze were all together in one building didn’t seem to bother anyone too much. Apparently, the important thing was to protect one’s honor in spite of how much one had to drink or how many aces one might be holding.

Nowadays, none of that is OK with most of us who teach defensive techniques. We encourage the armed citizen to be a reluctant participant. If threats are being made, the thing to do is to file a police report and let the authorities handle it. And the best idea is to respond when you see your attacker is armed, not when you think he is armed. Today, the responsible armed citizen doesn’t shoot because they can; they shoot only because they have to.

Some things change and some things never change. For all that, you will note that Hickok and Wilson both solved the problem with a single shot from a .36-caliber pistol.

However, I sometimes wonder if we may sometimes be doing a disservice to today’s armed citizens. Personal-defense training has become a business for some folks, and they vie with each other for the customer’s attention. And maybe some things get complicated when there is really no need for it to be.

A good example would be the late Jeff Cooper’s Color Code. He came up with it to help his students understand and define levels of their own preparedness in the face of potential danger. It wasn’t long at all before others started adding colors to the scheme and using them to define what the attacker was doing instead of the mindset of the armed citizen. This led to confusing the whole thing, because they probably didn’t understand it in the first place.

And, as I have said previously, I think we put too much emphasis on gear. The suggestion, maybe only implied, is often that you won’t survive without this gun, that ammo or a particular holster. Students want to know what we carry and why. I wonder if they always get an honest answer. Too often, we may just be gun enthusiasts interacting with other gun enthusiasts, as opposed to being focused on helping those who are new to personal defense.

In addition to going into all the various defensive stances, techniques and philosophies, we might better spend our time teaching students how to avoid violence whenever possible. Perhaps we would be better off telling our students the importance of learning to handle their chosen gun quickly, efficiently and accurately.

In those two shootings, Hickok and Wilson each took care of business by delivering one well-placed shot to the threat. And that, I think, is the lesson for all of us. For all we can acquire, for all we can learn, for all we can cuss and discuss, the real challenge is to stand as calmly as possible, make a smooth, quick draw and deliver that first, fight-stopping shot.

Retailers are turning to good guys with guns

Mass shootings happen in grocery stores and malls. We’ve seen way too many of those cases over the years to think otherwise.

Further, a lot of these places don’t play well with the idea of good guys with guns. They are often gun-free zones, after all.

Yet after mass shootings in Buffalo, Colorado Springs, and El Paso, among others, it seems that retailers are thinking just a bit differently. They’re hiring armed security.

While a national debate rages over whether armed guards should be stationed at public places like schools, retailers around the country are beefing up armed security presence in stores, mostly using ex-police and military. Since July 2021, there’s been a 108% increase in demand for armed guards at grocery stores, according to Allied Universal, one of the world’s largest security staffing firms, which works with many of the nation’s biggest retailers and shopping malls.

“There’s been an absolute distinct change in security and the challenges” facing retailers since the pandemic, said Steve Jones, Allied Universal’s CEO. “All of them have had to relook at their security posture and all of them have had to add additional layers of security.”

In December, Iowa-based grocery chain Hy-Vee said it would be adding armed guards to its stores. The move was intended to “provide another layer of safety and security for our customers,” chief operating officer Jeremy Gosch said in a statement. The 285-store grocer released a video that shows security staff in black uniforms roaming the aisles, appearing to have badges, guns, handcuffs and pepper spray. The decision was not prompted by any one incident, the company said, but rather a rise in retail theft nationwide.

Another grocery chain, ShopRite, added armed guards at some stores in the early innings of the pandemic when it faced a crush of customers rushing to stock up on items for quarantine. Guards patrolled the aisles and stood at the front door.

Now, understand that these guards are there for far more pedestrian violent crimes than mass shootings. That’s also a good thing since those crimes are also far, far more common than mass shootings as well.

For any violent crime, though, what you need to prevent such things is good guys with guns, even if that means hiring one of your very own.

And that’s really what armed security is supposed to be. While they’re meant to be deterrents, it’s not because of a shiny badge that looks like a police badge if you don’t look too closely. It’s because there’s a good guy with a gun on the premises.

However, these stores should also remember that this isn’t a universal solution.

Private, armed security is a good thing, don’t get me wrong, but they’re not going to necessarily be able to stop all such violent crimes. After all, look at Buffalo. That store had armed security. The guard was killed early in the attack.

A uniformed, armed guard is a deterrent, but also a target for those who truly want to unleash horrors upon the world. What we need is more than just armed guards.

We need good guys with guns across the board.

We need average Americans to be not just allowed to carry but encouraged to do so. We need a legion of armed citizens–good guys with guns–who can go about their lives and, in the process, provide herd immunity from violence.

Armed guards are good. They’re not perfect, so why pretend this is enough? It’s not, so let’s do what we can to make sure they’re not someone’s only line of defense.

Stopping An Attack: Stopping an attacker as soon as possible is critical to surviving a criminal encounter.

Regardless of your state of residence, the justification for using deadly force is to stop someone who is placing people’s lives in immediate, serious danger. Of course, it is up to you to know the exact wording and particulars of your state law and abide by them. But, essentially, if we hadn’t taken immediate action, an innocent person would have been killed or sustained serious bodily injury.

It is important to understand that killing the bad guy is not, nor should be, our goal. We are acting because we want to stop the attacker right now, before any further damage is done. By the same token, if the bad guy dies because of our defensive response, that is unfortunate, but it is something he should have considered before placing others in danger.

And, in order to get him to stop as quickly as possible, we place our shots in what we call the vital zone. Rounds fired to the upper chest area are the easiest to make because the target is large. And these shots rely on the loss of blood and drop in blood pressure to incapacitate the criminal. As most deer hunters know, even a heart shot is not an instant stopper. Activity stops when fresh blood is no longer getting to the brain.

The more immediate stop comes from a head shot that impacts the brain or brain stem. The problem here is that the head is a much smaller target and is generally a moving target, as any turkey hunter can testify.

The current trends in thinking are that caliber doesn’t matter nearly as much as penetration. The bullet has to drive deep enough to impact the vitals in such a way as to cause the criminal to stop the attack. Okay, I’ll buy that, up to a point. A large hole in the heart or a major blood vessel is going to leak more blood than will a small hole in the same location.

For this reason, I still recommend the minimum defensive round to be 9 mm/.38 Spl. in size. And the defensive handgun should be loaded with premium bullets from a major manufacturer to insure that it will expand and penetrate in an appropriate manner. There is really no justification for going to a smaller caliber unless the person has some sort of physical problem that prevents it.

Essentially, the smaller the caliber and the lighter the load means that it is going to be even more difficult to get the crook to stop right now. And, remember, that is our goal. If your attacker dies from all those .22 bullets next week, or even in a couple of hours, there’s still plenty of time to continue this grievous attack. It is that attack that we want to stop … and we want to stop it right now!

17-year-old shoots, kills 2 armed men during attempted home invasion in Channelview

CHANNELVIEW, Texas (KTRK) — Two armed men were shot and killed by a 17-year-old while they attempted a home invasion, according to Harris County Sheriff Ed Gonzalez.

On Friday at about 10:40 p.m., deputies with the Harris County Sheriff’s Office responded to an in-progress shooting call in the 16000 block of 1st Street.

Upon arrival, deputies said they located two men with apparent gunshot wounds on the lawn along the side of a residence.

Both men were pronounced dead at the scene by paramedics, according to Gonzalez.

Investigators said the two men and a third unidentified suspect were armed and wearing masks during an “attempt to force entry” into the home.

A woman, a 12-year-old boy, and two 17-year-old men were inside the home during the attempted home invasion but were not injured, according to Gonzalez.

Deputies said one of the 17-year-olds retrieved a shotgun and discharged it several times, striking the two intruders.

The third suspect fled the scene in an unidentified dark-colored, 4-door sedan.

There were no other reported injuries.

This is an ongoing investigation.

 

This being on a Bloomberg site, I can’t tell if this is a “*gasp*! Horrors!” article or not.( I hope it is, and that Bloombutt gets more indigestion)

Judge’s Ruling Maps Strategy for N.Y. Concealed-Carry Gun Cases

A federal judge has written what could become a blueprint for challenging New York’s concealed-carry law.

New York and other states including California, rushed to pass legislation after the US Supreme Court threw out a century-old law that limited who could carry a handgun in public.

New York banned concealed weapons in most public places. Private business owners can opt to allow concealed weapons in their establishments under the law and must post signs saying so.

Though US District Judge Glenn T. Suddaby denied a request last week to stop the law from taking effect, his 78-page decision described at length why the law could be found unconstitutional.

Among his reasons:

  • The new law omitted the phrase “other than in self-defense,” which could create a Second Amendment problem;
  • The state’s list of “sensitive places” is extensive, and automatically declaring private property a restricted location usurps private property rights;
  • The law’s social media and character reference requirements grant too much discretion to licensing officers and risk punishment for political speech in violation of the First Amendment;
  • Fifth Amendment concerns stem from an applicant having to incriminate themselves by providing all the information required for the permit.

Attorneys involved in other cases are sure to notice Suddaby’s contention that the plaintiffs would have had a “strong likelihood of success” on several of their claims, noted Margaret Finerty, co-chair of the New York State Bar Association’s Task Force on Mass Shootings.

“I think they’ll learn from the judge’s ruling,” said Finerty, a partner with Getnick and Getnick LLP and member of the American Bar Association’s Standing Committee on Gun Violence.

“The judge basically said we were right,” said William Robinson, communications director for Gun Owners of America New York.

The state Republican Party said it plans to take the judge’s decision into consideration as it prepares a suit to be filed jointly with the Conservative Party.

“As the judge stated, Kathy Hochul’s law is blatantly unconstitutional and we have full confidence that it will ultimately be overturned,” GOP Chairman Nick Langworthy said in an emailed statement. “We are working with top legal experts to ensure that when filed, our case moves forward successfully.”

Concealed Carry Permits

The New York law increased requirements for obtaining a concealed carry permit—for example by requiring a list of former and current social media accounts from the past three years, seeking four character references who can attest to the applicant’s good moral character, and requiring 16 hours of in-person training and two hours of live-fire training.

The law followed two shootings on New York City subway trains that injured dozens and left one man dead. A racist gunman also killed 10 Black people in a mass shooting at a Buffalo, N.Y., supermarket May 14.

“Responsible gun control measures save lives and any attempts by the gun lobby to tear down New York’s sensible gun control laws will be met with fierce defense of the law,” State Attorney General Letitia James (D) said. “We will continue to defend the constitutionality of our laws to protect all New Yorkers.”

Case Dismissed

Gun Owners of America, its New York branch, and Ivan Antonyuk, a member of the gun owner group, filed suit July 11 alleging the new concealed-carry law is unconstitutional. He took issue with several aspects of the legislation, including the extensive list of sensitive places, and “incredulous demands for carry license applicants.”

The judge dismissed the case, largely because Antonyuk didn’t specify that he intended to carry a concealed weapon after the law took effect, only that he would like to.

Intent to carry and evidence of an imminent threat of arrest or prosecution by law enforcement would have been required to seek an injunction, Suddaby wrote.

Suddaby also took particular issue with a part of the law that says no license will be issued or renewed unless the person is an applicant of “good moral character” with the judgment necessary to only use the weapon in a manner that does not endanger oneself or others. The legislation didn’t include the phrase “other than in self-defense,” and without it, New York residents are left with a statue “plagued by a profound Second Amendment problem’,” he said.

The plaintiff would have had a “strong likelihood of success” in challenging that omission and also could have prevailed on their excessive training claims, he said.

“We will be back in court,” said Robinson. “The US Constitution is on our side, so we’re going to win this.”

Pending Cases

Buffalo real estate developer Carl Paladino on July 11 filed suit contending that the provision making private businesses automatically off-limits to concealed weapons violates the US Constitution.

A concealed-carry license applicant also has filed suit contending the law’s social media, character reference, and training requirements violate the right to free speech, to bear arms, and to due process.

The New York State Jewish Gun Club has said it, too, plans to file suit, taking issue with banning guns from houses of worship.

It’s understandable why the state wanted stricter gun laws, more training, and scrutiny of social media, Finerty said, noting that the Buffalo shooter posted his plans online and then live streamed the attack.

“I think the state has a lot of good arguments they can make to support the law,” Finerty said. “Many people feel it’s just overbroad, and it will be very interesting how it plays out in court.”

Everytown for Gun Safety advocates for universal background checks and other gun control measures. Michael Bloomberg is the majority owner of Bloomberg Government’s parent company and serves as a member of Everytown’s advisory board.

The cases are Antonyuk et al. v. Bruen, N.D.N.Y., Case 1:22-cv-00734-GTS-CFH, Decision 8/31/22; Paladino v. New York State Police Superintendent Et al., W.D.N.Y., Case 1:22-cv-00541, Complaint 7/11/22; and Jonathan Corbett v. Kathleen Hochul, S.D.N.Y., Case 1:22-cv-05867, Complaint 7/11/22.

Get the Word Out About Kyle’s Law

A prosecutor who uses his or her authority to virtue signal to the public to advance his or her political career is more dangerous to society than all but the most violent criminals.

Insurance will cover many forms of property crimes, and you can legally use deadly force against somebody who menaces you with death or serious bodily injury.

A prosecutor, though, can bankrupt most people by filing unfounded criminal charges against them, ruin their lives with prison time and criminal records. Unless the case is particularly egregious like that of Mike Nifong (D-NC), or with crooked judges like Mark Ciavarella (D-PA, a.k.a., federal inmate #15008-067) or Mike Conahan (D-PA, home arrest), there is little or no recourse against these “jurists.”

To put this in perspective, Pennsylvania attorney Frank Fina was suspended from the practice of law for his role in convicting Penn State President Graham Spanier of putting children at risk. Pennsylvania’s current Attorney General, and gubernatorial candidate Josh Shapiro (D-PA), worked hard to reinstate Spanier’s conviction while tweeting that Spanier had been told that Jerry Sandusky was sexually assaulting children on the Penn State campus. The witness, Mike McQueary, testified, however, under oath, that he did not see Sandusky do anything he deemed reportable to police while his father and a family friend, both of whom are mandated by law to report abuse, did not encourage him to report to child protective authorities whatever he thought he might have possibly heard.

I believe that Shapiro, like Scott Harshbarger (D-MA) and Martha Coakley (D-MA) who ruined the lives of the Amiraults, used his position to “virtue signal” his concern for the children prior to the election. The latter is my perception of Shapiro, Harshbarger, and Coakley rather than a statement of fact because I cannot read their minds.

Kyle’s Law

Attorney Andrew Branca, whose opinions often appear on William Jacobson’s blog Legal Insurrection, has proposed what he calls Kyle’s Law due to what he and I both regard as a politically motivated prosecution of Kyle Rittenhouse for what was obviously self-defense.

“Too often, rogue prosecutors bring felony criminal charges against people who were clearly doing nothing more than defending themselves, their families, or others from violent criminal attack. …The only motivation of the prosecutor is personal aggrandizement and political capital.” Kyle’s Law would sanction not only the jurisdiction but also the prosecutor who brings a junk case, to be defined as one in which the prosecutor lacks even preponderance of evidence rather than beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did anything wrong.

The American Bar Association’s Rules of Professional Conduct state meanwhile, “A lawyer shall not bring or defend a proceeding, or assert or controvert an issue therein, unless there is a basis in law and fact for doing so that is not frivolous…” and also “The prosecutor in a criminal case shall: (a) refrain from prosecuting a charge that the prosecutor knows is not supported by probable cause…” and probable cause requires a “reasonable belief” that the defendant has committed a crime.

If, for example, a video of a self-defense shooting shows clearly that the person who was shot initiated a deadly confrontation, perpetuated it by not allowing the subject of their attack to retreat in complete safety, and menaced the shooter with immediate deadly force, as did all three of Rittenhouse’s assailants, that’s proof beyond a reasonable doubt in favor of the shooter that the shooting was justified. If we look within the four corners of the charges against Rittenhouse, the prosecutors did not contest this version of the events.  Joseph Rosenbaum initiated a confrontation in which he attempted to strong-arm rob Rittenhouse (a violent felony by itself) of a firearm he could have turned against Rittenhouse on the spot and also one which, as a convicted felon, it was unlawful for Rosenbaum to handle. Anthony Huber the domestic abuser was a member of a mob (which constitutes disparity of force and therefore deadly force) that pursued Rittenhouse while yelling violent threats, thus putting Rittenhouse in reasonable fear for his life and denying him the opportunity to retreat in complete safety. He then menaced and struck Rittenhouse with a deadly contact weapon when Rittenhouse was on the ground. The third man, Gaige Grosskreutz, pursued Rittenhouse with a drawn handgun, which again constituted an implied threat, along with the immediate means of carrying it out.

Another example would be, for example, if a politically ambitious prosecutor had tried to show his “woke” credentials by charging the officer who shot Hakim Littleton even though the latter was on bodycam video firing a handgun at the head of another officer at roughly three paces. It was fortunate that Littleton was a bad shot or it would have been “end of watch” for that officer or, as Black Lives Matter and Antifa would put it, he would have “oinked his last.” This did not, however, happen because the local prosecutors saw the open and shut case of self-defense.

Poster Children for Kyle’s Law

  • The Amiraults were convicted on the basis of “evidence” that included, among other things, accusations that one of them sexually assaulted a boy with a butcher knife that somehow left no injuries, along with a “secret room” and a “magic room” that were never found.
  • Police officer Grant Snowden was railroaded to prison on the watch of Janet Reno (D-FL).
  • Police officer Garrett Rolfe was charged with murder for shooting Rayshard Brooks after Brooks took an officer’s Taser, which the prosecutor stipulated is a deadly weapon under Georgia law, and discharged it at the officers. The charges were finally dropped but should have never been filed.
  • Nikolas Fernandez was charged with felony assault for shooting Daniel Gregory, who reached through the window of Fernandez’s car to punch him. Gregory even admitted openly, “I catch him, I punch him in the face.” He claims that he was trying to stop Fernandez from running over “demonstrators” but the video shows clearly that Fernandez had come to almost a complete stop by the time Gregory reached into his car. Note also the barrier that another “demonstrator” shoves in front of the car which a reasonable person would construe as a prelude to a carjacking or Reginald Denny-style beating.
  • Here is a long list of wrongful convictions in the United States, some of which involved willful prosecutorial misconduct and/or misconduct by rogue police officers eager to get convictions no matter what.
  • Prosecutors should not be afraid to do their jobs just as police officers should not be afraid to do their jobs. Kneeling on a helpless suspect’s neck as Derek Chauvin was convicted of doing is not, however, a police officer’s job, and Chauvin is now in prison as a result. Junk prosecutions whose sole identifiable purpose, at least from the perspective of a reasonable person, noting that nobody can read the prosecutor’s mind, is to advance a prosecutor’s legal and/or political career, should similarly bring the consequences recommended in Kyle’s Law and maybe professional disciplinary action as well.

Largest-Ever Survey of Gun Owners Finds Diversity Increasing, Carrying Common, and More Than 1.6 Million Defensive Uses Per Year

A survey of 16,708 gun owners provides updated answers to some of the most pressing questions surrounding guns in America.

The National Firearms Survey, conducted in 2021 and updated earlier this year, examines the breadth of gun ownership and the use of guns throughout the country. It found more minorities and women own guns than previous surveys indicated, half of gun owners report carrying a handgun for self-defense, and nearly a third report having used a firearm to defend themselves–a number that translates to over 1.6 million defensive uses per year. William English, the Georgetown University professor who created the survey, told The Reload it is the most comprehensive look at American gun ownership yet produced.

“The biggest difference between the results of this survey and many earlier ones is that this survey goes into greater depth regarding types of firearms owned, the details of defensive gun uses, and frequency of defensive carry of handguns,” Professor English said. “This survey is also the largest survey of gun owners ever conducted, providing more statistical power than earlier surveys and much more information about the demographics of gun ownership and use. Its results are largely consistent with other recent survey work when it comes to general ownership estimates, which increases the confidence in its accuracy, but it goes into greater depth with regard to many details of interest.”

The sweeping survey will likely influence both the political and legal landscape surrounding firearms. The debate over guns has primarily centered on how common the ownership of guns is and how often they are really used to protect people rather than endanger them. Much of the evidence cited in that debate is decades old. So, the introduction of not just more thorough but more recent evidence may disrupt the decades-old conversation on guns. Its effect may be particularly stark in federal courts where the Supreme Court has placed significant weight on protecting guns in “common use for lawful purposes.”

The survey could also shake up how academics study guns in America. Up to this point, most gun ownership surveys have not been much larger than traditional public opinion polls. That means their samples can not be generalized down from their nationwide scope to more specific areas, such as the state level, without introducing further uncertainty. Most studies have attempted to control for that uncertainty by relying on indicators of gun ownership, including local suicide rates, rather than direct measurements.

However, Professor English’s survey established a representative sample of gun owners in all 50 states. He said the estimates in his survey are similar to the Rand Corporation’s widely-cited estimates on some of the more populous states but vary significantly in smaller states. The new data has the potential to upend the results of many studies that have relied on less straightforward ways of estimating gun ownership in the area they’re studying.

The survey also advances the understanding of defensive gun use. It shows many American gun owners report actually using their firearms to defend themselves.

“Given that 31.1% of firearms owners have used a firearm in self-defense, this implies that approximately 25.3 million adult Americans have defended themselves with a firearm,” English wrote in a preprint report on the study published on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN). “Answers to the frequency question suggest that these gun owners have been involved in a total of approximately 50 million defensive incidents. Assuming that defensive uses of firearms are distributed roughly equally across years, this suggests at least 1.67 million defensive uses of firearms per year in which firearms owners have defended themselves or their property through the discharge, display, or mention of a firearm (excluding military service, police work, or work as a security guard).”

However, English noted it also paints a more realistic picture of defensive gun use than what’s often shown in movies or TV. Instead of an altercation with many shots fired and the assailant ending up shot, the vast majority of defensive gun uses did not involve the defender firing any shot at all. Brandishing a gun was enough to end the threat to the gun owner in 81.9 percent of cases.

In cases where defenders did fire, a single shot was enough to end the confrontation in nearly half of the cases. Taking two shots was the next most common outcome, with each additional shot becoming less common.

Gun-control advocates and researchers have critiqued survey-based defensive gun use estimates, including the oft-cited work of criminologists Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz, as overestimates and elevated estimates in the tens-of-thousands range, calling into question the primary practical benefit of gun ownership. English said the paradoxically non-violent nature of most self-defensive use of firearms is why survey-based estimates like his differ significantly from those that use more restrictive metrics, such as the number of justifiable homicides or emergency room visits for gunshot wounds. He said his survey’s estimate aligns well with estimates for the number of emergency room visits once you factor in how few shots defenders say they fire and factor in the likely hit rate of those shots.

“The key to the puzzle is the fact that shots fired in self-defense rarely hit their target,” English told The Reload, citing studies from 2008 and 2018. “Studies of police have found that something like 65-85% of shots fired by officers miss. Note that these are trained professionals, and if they are engaged in a shooting incident, this will typically be pursued at close range until the perpetrator has been apprehended or incapacitated, meaning it’s not sufficient to simply fire a shot to scare an aggressor away. I wouldn’t be surprised if more than 90% of shots fired in self-defense by ordinary people didn’t hit anyone. Ordinary people should be less accurate, on average, than professional police officers. And, in most cases, the spectacle of gunfire is likely enough to get an aggressor to flee, which is sufficient for protecting a victim.”

English said his survey addressed another common critique of previous work in the field. He said previous studies that tried to estimate yearly defensive gun uses relied on respondents not only remembering that they used a gun in self-defense but also that it happened within the previous year. English designed his questions to avoid that pitfall, betting people are more likely to remember if they experienced a traumatic defensive encounter rather than the exact timeframe it happened in.

“My survey took a different approach, asking about defensive use at any time, not simply the last year,” he told The Reload. “The results show that this is not a rare event at all, with something like a third of gun owners reporting having used a gun in self-defense. Because of how the question was asked, I don’t have to engage in the exercise of extrapolating out estimates from measures of rare events in a restricted window of time.”

There are other potential weaknesses of English’s approach, though. He noted the survey only asked questions about defensive gun use to those over 18 years old and those who self-identified as gun owners. He said that might explain why his yearly estimate is on the lower end of Kleck’s previous estimates, which topped out at 2.5 million per year.

“There are also reasons to think that the [defensive gun use] estimates of this survey are conservative,” English said. “Kleck had found that a large proportion of those who had used guns in self-defense did not personally own a gun.”

English also looked at areas beyond what other researchers had attempted to survey at scale before. The survey found that AR-15s and similar rifles are in the hands of a wide swath of American gun owners, as are magazines that hold more than ten rounds of ammunition. What’s more, it found carrying pistols for protection is commonplace as well.

“In sum, about 31.9% of U.S. adults, or 81.4 million Americans, own over 415 million firearms, consisting of approximately 171 million handguns, 146 million rifles, and 98 million shotguns,” English said in his report. “About 24.6 million individuals have owned a up to 44 million AR-15 and similarly styled rifles, and 39 million individuals have owned up to 542 million magazines that hold over ten rounds. Approximately a third of gun owners (31.1%) have used a firearm to defend themselves or their property, often on more than one occasion, and guns are used defensively by firearms owners in approximately 1.67 million incidents per year. A majority of gun owners (56.2%) indicate that they carry a handgun for self-defense in at least some circumstances, and about 35% of gun owners report carrying a handgun with some frequency.”

The survey of over 44,000 Americans, from which 16,708 gun owners were identified for further questioning, was conducted through the internet between February 17th and March 23rd 2021 by the polling firm Centiment. It is part of a larger research project by English on guns in America. He said he plans to publish several more academic papers on it in the coming months, ultimately culminating in a book on the topic.

Intruder Shot In Face While Climbing Through Woman’s SE OKC Bedroom Window

OKLAHOMA CITY – Two scenes, which are four miles apart, are involving two Oklahoma City metro police departments.
Oklahoma City police are investigating after a man was shot in the face Tuesday while climbing into a woman’s bedroom window.

Police said the alleged intruder managed to drive himself to a friend’s home in Del City. The man was taken to a local hospital with a serious gunshot injury to his face.

“It was early this morning when police responded to an apartment complex,” Oklahoma City Police Department Master Sergeant Gary Knight said.

The shots fired call came from the Cherry Hill Apartments near Southeast 44th and Sunnylane Road. A man and woman told officers they were asleep when they heard a noise around 2:55 a.m. coming from their bedroom window.

“They heard the window air conditioning unit being removed,” Knight said. “Looked up and saw a man climbing into the residence.”

Police said the man inside the apartment grabbed a gun and shot the intruder in the chin. The injured suspect ran to a white truck and drove away while the armed man with the shot at the truck three times.

Several minutes later, Del City police were called to a home near Delmar Road and Bryant Avenue.

“A person at that home called police and said, ‘Hey, I just had someone show up at my house, a friend of mine, and he’s been shot in the face,’” Knight said.

Meanwhile, Del City and Oklahoma City police were tying the pieces of the shooting together. The suspect was allegedly breaking into his ex-girlfriend’s apartment where he lived at one time.

The woman’s new boyfriend shot at him, not realizing who he was.

“There have been no arrests at this point,” Knight said.

Oklahoma City police will turn their investigation over to the Oklahoma County District Attorney’s Office.

Prosecutors will determine if anyone will be charged.