Greenwood homeowner shoots, kills alleged burglar overnight
Seattle police said the homeowner reported the alleged burglar had climbed a fence in his backyard sometime before 2:30 a.m. Saturday and that he confronted him.

SEATTLE — A homeowner shot and killed an alleged burglar in Seattle’s Greenwood neighborhood early Saturday morning, according to the Seattle Police Department.

At around 2:30 a.m., a resident near the 900 block of North 101st Street called 911 and reported a disturbance at a neighbor’s house and that they heard someone say to call 911.

Arriving Seattle police officers found a man with a gunshot wound in a backyard and gave first aid. Seattle Fire Department medics also arrived and gave first aid but the man was eventually transported to Harborview Medical Center.

The man later died from his injuries, according to the Seattle Police Department.

Seattle police said the homeowner reported the man had climbed a fence in his backyard and that he confronted him. The alleged burglar refused to leave once confronted, according to the homeowner. The homeowner then shot the alleged burglar, Seattle police said.

Seattle police said homicide detectives will continue to investigate the shooting. Investigators were at the scene Saturday morning collecting evidence.

Seattle police did not say whether or not there will be charges related to the incident. No arrests have been made.

Intruder shot in chest after attempting to break into home in central Wichita

WICHITA, Kan. (KWCH) – Update: WPD confirmed that around 5:15 p.m. Saturday a man attempted to break into a house near east 12th street and north Broadway. The homeowner then shot the intruder leaving him critically injured.

The intruder was transported to a nearby hospital, but his current condition is unknown. The homeowner was uninjured.

The Wichita Police Department (WPD) confirms that one man was shot multiple times in the chest just after 5 p.m. near east 12th street and north broadway.

He is in critical condition but is expected to survive. He was transported to a nearby hospital for his injuries.

No, We Don’t Want Women to Have the Same Rights as Guns

Nearly every time the pro-life movement achieves a significant legislative or judicial victory, progressives create either memes or protest signs riffing on conservatives’ commitment to gun rights. These takes were out in full force after the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health, both because of the magnitude of that ruling and because the previous day, in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen, the Court struck down a New York law that required individuals to demonstrate a need to carry guns outside the home.

Leftists on Twitter said they wished that “women in America had the same rights as a gun.” They must have tweeted these wishes in fits of passion without really thinking about them, because putting women on the same legal footing as guns would be pretty sexist. If Democrats had their way in Bruen, women would have to demonstrate to the government a need to leave their homes. Here’s what else would happen if we were to treat women like guns:

Men would need a permit to bring women outside the home. While Bruen made it unconstitutional for the government to require people to demonstrate a need to carry guns beyond their doorstep, most states in the union require gun-owners to possess concealed-carry permits. The requirements for these permits vary from state to state, but most require applicants to be a minimum age (usually 18 or 21) and take a class on firearm safety. Putting such regulations on women going beyond their doorstep would seem more fitting for a country like Afghanistan than for the United States.

Women would not be allowed to attend school. We often hear about gun-free zones after school shootings. The Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 criminalizes the possession or discharge of a firearm in a school zone. If we were to treat women like guns, K–12 schools would become “woman-free zones.” Similarly there are many college campuses that do not allow students to carry on campus. There were times in our country’s history when men and women were not allowed to attend school together, and those were not good times. Progressives describe the decision in Dobbs as “going backwards,” but that would be more apt if we treated women the same as guns.

Women could be bought and sold. If we are worried about objectifying women, calling to give them the same rights as literal objects is not helpful.

In short, this idea that “women should have the same rights as guns” would be more like The Handmaid’s Tale than any pro-abortion caricature of pro-life legislation ever imagined. Our political slogans are not meant to be the height of discourse, but we should expect them to be minimally coherent.

Biden advisor on Thursday:
Americans Need To Pay More for Gas To Defend ‘Liberal World Order.’

Today, from the senile clabberhead

Fatal shooting near Cave Junction investigated as self-defense

CAVE JUNCTION, Ore. — One man is dead after a shooting near Cave Junction Thursday morning.

According to State Police, Josephine County Sheriff’s deputies responded to shooting around 3:30 Thursday morning at a home on Browntown Road near Cave Junction. When deputies arrived, they found 42-year-old Jacob Benson dead. Investigators say 47-year-old William Illingworth had shot Benson when Benson entered Illingworth’s home after a verbal argument.

The OSP Major Crimes Team was called in who are investigating the incident as a self-defense shooting.

OSP was assisted by the Josephine County Sheriff’s Office, Josephine County District Attorney’s Office and the OSP Forensic Lab.

 

Hmmmm. Didn’t know they had one. Oops! I been a baaaad boy.

The Second Amendment Isn’t Only Guns: Virginia’s Switch Blade Ban Died Today.

Knife Rights’ Virginia Switchblade Ban Repeal Bill, SB 758, is effective today (July 1). The possession, carry, sale, purchase and manufacture of automatic (switchblade) knives will be legal in the state.

NOTE: The concealed carry knife bans in Virginia, including of switchblade (automatic) knives, will still remain in effect: “If any person carries about his person, hidden from common observation, (i) any dirk, bowie knife, switchblade knife, ballistic knife, machete, razor, … or (v) any weapon of like kind as those enumerated in this subsection…”

Holding a Virginia Concealed Handgun Permit doesn’t allow concealed carry of an automatic (switchblade) knife.

Knife Rights will never stop until all archaic knife restrictions in Virginia are repealed.

With the repeal in Virginia, only five states remain with a complete ban on civilian possession of switchblade (automatic) knives. Knife Rights has led the effort to repeal switchblade bans or restrictions in 19 states, starting with New Hampshire in 2010. Repeals have since been enacted in Alaska, Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, Ohio, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin.

Altogether, Knife Rights’ efforts have resulted in 39 bills repealing knife bans in 25 states and over 150 cities and towns since 2010.

Poll finds opposition to SCOTUS’ Second Amendment ruling

The reason the Supreme Court is appointed for a lifetime term is so they won’t have to consider public sentiment on controversial issues like, say, guns. Once they’re confirmed, they can’t be removed simply because their findings aren’t popular.

Yet that won’t stop some from looking to see how people feel about rulings made by the Court.

In a recent poll, there appear to be some interesting takes regarding guns.

The Monmouth poll shows just what restrictions people favor, including 60 percent saying they support a national gun registry, as one example.

It also found 83 percent support, to some degree, universal background checks.

Now, in the past, I’ve been critical of how these questions are asked, but Monmouth phrased it as, “Do you support or oppose requiring comprehensive background checks for all gun purchasers, including private sales between two individuals?”

That, at least, removes any ambiguity, so while I oppose the policy, I can at least accept the number.

The poll also argues that most disagree with the Bruen decision.

They asked respondents, “Do you agree or disagree that individual states should be allowed to limit who can carry a concealed handgun by requiring permit applicants to demonstrate that they need the weapon for their work or for protection?”

It found that 56 percent agree that states should be able.

On this, though, there is some ambiguity. The problem is that the phrase “for protection” isn’t quite how things worked. You had to show a specific reason why you needed to be able to protect yourself, as opposed to everyone else.

I suspect at least some of that 56 percent are supportive of a more general idea of “for protection” than the now overturned law allowed.

But not all of the poll’s findings are distinctly anti-gun.

Meanwhile, they also found that 63 percent feel that the law will either make them safer or have no impact on public safety, with just three percent saying they don’t know.

As for the subject of mass shootings, Monmouth asked, “Do you think the number of recent mass shootings in the U.S. is due more to the ease of getting guns or due more to a mental health crisis in the country?”

55 percent said it was the result of a mental health crisis compared to just 33 percent who blamed easy access to firearms, with 9 percent saying it was both.

The poll also looked at why those who admitted to having a gun decided to have one, with “personal safety” and “protect my property” both being a major reason for most of the respondents.

“[D]efend again possible government tyranny” was only a major reason for 28 percent. Yet it was noted as a minor reason for another 23 percent.

So what does any of this mean?

Well, for one thing, we haven’t done a good enough job educating the general populace about the benefits of firearm ownership, nor of the fact that gun control simply does not work. We also haven’t done a very good job of educating people about the importance of their rights as a whole. Far too many are apparently willing to deal their rights away for the illusion of safety, not recognizing that the illusion masks something far more sinister.

We all–and I’m looking at myself–need to do better about that.

93-year-old homeowner shoots, critically injures intruder in Moreno Valley

MORENO VALLEY, Calif. (KABC) — A 93-year-old homeowner took matters into his own hands when he shot and critically injured a suspect who authorities say broke into the home in Moreno Valley.

The incident happened in the 24300 block of Eucalyptus Avenue around 12:30 a.m. on Wednesday, according to the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department. When deputies arrived, they found one person with a gunshot wound. Investigators then determined that the homeowner was the one who opened fire.

A man whose wife is related to the homeowner told Eyewitness News the elderly man’s property has been broken into a number of times. He identified the elderly man as Joe.

“He was tired because every time he calls the police, (they took) forever to come and assist him,” said Oscar Malma. “He took the law into his own hands… He’s been working all his life and whatever little things he has, he’s (protecting).”

Malma said it’s possible that Joe was targeted by the same culprits on several occasions.

“It happened once on Friday. On that bright day, they went (broke) into the house. And now this happens in the middle of the night. They were looking for him. He’s an old, retired plumber. He has a lot of tools…he’s a musician as well, so he’s got a lot of musical instruments. Little by little, they’ve been ripping him off,” Malma said.

Authorities have not confirmed how many reported break-ins there have been at that home.

Law enforcement officials were seen investigating a black Audi near the home, but they did not disclose who the vehicle belonged to. The vehicle was eventually loaded onto a flatbed and taken away.

The suspected intruder was taken to the hospital in critical condition.

Malma said the homeowner was taken to the police station for questioning. He said he doesn’t believe Joe will be arrested, because “he was defending his property. That happened inside his house. So I don’t think there’s any reason for him to be arrested.”

NPR finally realizes that when seconds count, police are minutes away

When your society has reached a point where you can’t agree on whether or not a man can get pregnant, you know that rational discourse based on shared underlying facts is extremely difficult if not impossible. Generally speaking, but especially so in a society that has reached such a point, the government ought to stay completely out of the news business. Yet, unfortunately, we have taxpayer-funded left-wing propaganda in the form of National Public Radio (NPR).

NPR’s far-Left bias is well-known. Still, it’s amusing to see them finally realize something that gun rights advocates have said all along, that when seconds count, the police are minutes away.

The tragic history of police responding too late to active shooters

Confusion, chaos and wrong information appear to have contributed to law enforcement’s delay in stopping the gunman at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas.

The gunman spent more than an hour inside the school while police waited outside, authorities say. This was because the incident commander, school district police chief Pete Arredondo, treated the scene as a barricaded-person situation rather than as an active shooter situation.

Details of exactly what went wrong are still hazy as the investigation is ongoing.

Law enforcement experts say what happened in Uvalde is reminiscent of what occurred in prior mass shootings, including the attack at Columbine High School in 1999 and at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in 2018.

As shown by the Uvalde shooting and others before it, police are still making tragic missteps in the most critical moments of active shooter situations — regardless of training.

Police are human beings like the rest of us. They are not supermen or demigods. Exclusively depending on the police for one’s protection is a bad idea because of the fallibility of our fellow humans in uniform.

“Columbine changed everything,” Joseph Giacalone, an adjunct professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice and a retired New York City Police Department detective sergeant, told NPR. “When you have an active shooter, you have to end the threat. Because if you don’t, the person continues on killing.”

Cullen went on to say that this protocol has worked. During the 2007 Virginia Tech shooting, he wrote, “it probably saved dozens of lives.”

This is something that the gun rights community has been screaming from the rooftops for a long time. Stopping aggression that’s imminent or already underway requires the immediate reciprocal use of defensive force.

Calling cops and waiting is a bad idea when an attack is imminent or already underway, because when cops do arrive, there is no guarantee that their response won’t end up in inaction, such in Uvalde or Parkland, or in shooting the wrong person, as was the case with John Hurley in Arvada, CO.

The article also addresses fear, command, the lack of intelligence (just one meaning of the word, unfortunately), and basic incompetence such as not checking if your radios are actually functioning.

Though this may be the standard now, instances have shown that fear may get the better of responding officers….

“It’s about the unifying of command. It’s about having an unseen coordinator. It’s about somebody dictating what has to go on inside and when somebody has to go on dealing with things outside,” he said. This was clearly a missing piece in Uvalde, Giacalone said….

More work needs to be done to address intelligence available to officers at these scenes, Giacalone said….

The shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School occurred just outside the Coral Springs Police Department’s jurisdiction, yet the 911 dispatch center didn’t make any officers aware of the shooting for over four minutes after receiving the first 911 call, according to the commission report analyzing the shooting…

Additionally, officers reported their radios not working at all, causing many not to respond urgently when they heard gunshots.

Although it is good to see NPR tell its listeners and readers that police responses can be slow and ineffective, and address a wide range of factors such as training, command, intelligence, fear, and incompetence, it is a letdown to see NPR not acknowledge the best solution that gun rights advocates have been demanding all along: armed self-defense.

That may take another decade or two, but better late than never, right?

States with higher rate of gun ownership do not correlate with more gun murders, data show

Calls have rung out across the nation demanding gun control laws in a bid to curb violent crimes such as the recent series of mass shootings. Data, however, show that in states with higher percentages of households with at least one gun, crimes are not higher than in states with strict gun laws.

“Gun ownership is higher in states with fewer restrictions, and homicide rates in these states are lower. People can protect themselves,” George Mason University Professor Emerita Joyce Lee Malcolm told Fox News Digital of what she’s found through her research. Malcolm pointed to a study on burglars from 1986 that found 34% of burglars interviewed reported “to having been scared off, shot at, wounded or captured by an armed victim.”

Fox News Digital compiled FBI data from 2019 detailing murders and gun murders per 100,000 population for most states, as well as assembled Rand Corporation data released in 2020 showing the percentage of households with at least one firearm in 2016. The data does not reflect the skyrocketing violent crimes of 2020 and likely undercounts the current percentages of homes with at least one firearm as it does not reflect the influx of Americans who rushed to arm themselves in 2020.

Continue reading “”

And how much of that sticks to the fingers of his cronies?

Secretary Buttigieg to Spend $1 Billion to Combat Racist Highways

Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg is on a mission. He’s looking for highways with a racist past and is aiming to “help reconnect cities and neighborhoods racially segregated or divided by road projects.” Buttigieg is examining interstate highways, built with federal dollars, “where a piece of infrastructure cuts off a neighborhood or a community because of how it was built,” said Buttigieg in a speech announcing the $1 billion “Reconnecting Communities” program.

“How it was built”? What does that mean? Does that statement refer to the racial makeup of businesses and residents? This is just more of the “disparate racial results” of government action, not because there was a racist intent behind it.

We’re told that these divisions deliberately targeted black neighborhoods because, well, racism, of course. States and communities will be able to “apply for the federal aid over five years to rectify harm caused by roadways that were built primarily through lower-income, Black communities after the 1950s creation of the interstate highway system.”

There are perhaps thousands of communities across the United States “harmed” by the building of the interstates. How many towns and cities that the Interstate Highway System bypassed withered and died on the vine because of an arbitrary decision by some soulless bureaucrat in Washington?

Associated Press:

“Transportation can connect us to jobs, services and loved ones, but we‘ve also seen countless cases around the country where a piece of infrastructure cuts off a neighborhood or a community because of how it was built,” said Buttigieg, who was announcing the pilot program later Thursday in Birmingham, Alabama. He described Reconnecting Communities as a broad department “principle” — not just a program — to address the issue with many efforts underway.

“This is a forward-looking vision,” Buttigieg said. “Our focus isn’t about assigning blame. It isn’t about getting caught up in guilt. It’s about fixing a problem. It’s about mending what has been broken, especially when the damage was done with taxpayer dollars.”

Does this sound like it’s going to “mend what’s broken”?

New projects could include rapid bus transit lines to link disadvantaged neighborhoods to jobs; caps built on top of highways featuring green spaces, bike lanes and pedestrian walkways to allow for safe crossings over the roadways; repurposing former rail lines; and partial removal of highways.

Is there a reason there are few “green spaces, bike lanes and pedestrian walkways” in these neighborhoods now? Just asking.

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis called the program the “woke-ification” of federal policy, which isn’t entirely accurate. This is good old-fashioned government goodies going to a favored constituency. There’s nothing remotely “woke” about it.

Justice Thomas referenced such shenanigans in the Bruen decision itself.
To be clear, even if a modern-day regulation is not a dead ringer for
historical precursors, it still may be analogous enough to pass constitutional muster. For example, courts can use analogies to “longstanding” “laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings” to determine whether modern regulations are constitutionally permissible. Id., at 626. That said, respondents’ attempt to characterize New York’s proper-cause requirement as a “sensitive-place” law lacks merit because there is no historical basis for New York to effectively declare the island of Manhattan a “sensitive place” simply because it is crowded and protected generally by the New York City Police Department.

and (at the end of footnote 9)
….because any permitting scheme can be put toward abusive ends, we do not rule out constitutional challenges to shall-issue regimes where, for example, lengthy wait times in processing license applications or exorbitant fees deny ordinary citizens their right to public carry.

May just be me, but I read that as Justice Thomas slyly daring New York, and other states, to enact crap-for-brains laws like this.

Shooter Development — the Eleanor Drill by Sage Dynamics

Making rapid transitions from precision to practical accuracy is what the Eleanor Drill from Sage Dynamics is all about, explains Aaron Cowan. He notes that there are thousands of shooting drills out there and that he uses those that suit his needs. If he can’t find a regular exercise that suits his needs, he will formulate a new one that does.

One of those needs that he sees is making the rapid transition from precision to practical accuracy, whether with a handgun or a rifle.

Continue reading “”

Actually, not very much

How will the new federal gun law affect Missouri? It’s complicated
In 2021, Gov Mike Parson signed the Second Amendment Preservation Act, which bars local law enforcement from enforcing federal gun laws.

The federal gun safety bill passed with bipartisan congressional support in June was heralded as the first notable piece of federal gun legislation in nearly 30 years. Yet Missouri won’t feel its full impact — yet.

Missouri will benefit from the millions of dollars in the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act set aside for mental health, crisis intervention and school safety programs. Retiring Sen. Roy Blunt co-sponsored the mental health component of the legislation.

But the provisions in the bill related to gun monitoring programs or red-flag laws cannot yet be implemented by state law enforcement because in 2021, Missouri passed the Second Amendment Preservation Act (SAPA), which bars local law officials from enforcing federal gun policy and could fine them for doing so.

The U.S. Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against the Missouri statute in February and the law is currently being challenged in Cole County court by St. Louis city and Jackson County. There isn’t a timeline on when the case could be settled, but until it is, SAPA is in effect in Missouri.

Continue reading “”