From the Eureka Police Department:

Published on Mar 15, 2016

Sent by Michael… yes the same one.

I guess in Virginia there is no mental health background check before you run for office… Holy crap!

Not only the Penile Polling Squad came out in full force, but we now discover that CSGV fans own guns in contradiction to their own Higher Morality stance. Priceless!

Again, priceless!

However, Mesa police noted that their investigation of the shooting turned up a vulgar inscription on the rifle that doesn’t meet department policy.“Inscripted on the officer’s gun, and I hate to use profanity, but it said, “you’re f*****,”’ Laney Sweet, Daniel Shaver’s wife said.
According to several sources, the rifle’s vulgar inscription is on the inside of the rifle’s dust cover.  The inscription is only visible if the dust cover is open, which happens automatically in order to eject spent rounds while the weapon is fired.
“That statement tells me this is a person who’s enthusiastic about killing people,” Marc Victor, lawyer for Sweet and her late husband, argued. “That’s what that inscription means.”

Source: Questions over assault weapon used by Mesa officer facing murder – CBS 5 – KPHO

Real Trials are not like they show in TV or the movies: there is not one key piece of evidence that is the equivalent of a stake through the vampire’s heart. There is no skillful cross-examining of a witness by the prosecution or the defense that will make him/her blurt out a confession in court in front of God and carefully placed cameras recording it for posterity. Real trials are decided by the preponderance of evidence or better explained, by  the prosecution or the defense piling up enough stuff to make the case go their way. That being the case, every little thing adds up and you should not help the people on the other side by doing stupid stuff.

The engraving “You are fucked” by itself is not hurtful, but in combination with other pieces of evidence are gong to hurt the defendant in this case. Diatomaceous earth is just inert dirt from fossilized algae. Glycerin is a sugar alcohol that can me used as humectant in lotions and Nitrogen is the what plants use to create their nutrition. Each of these individually are not dangerous, but if you properly combine them, you are suddenly playing with a stock of dynamite.

A trial is death by a thousand paper cuts, it does not make sense to give the other side a free ream of paper to be used against you.

Hat Tip to Rob R. again…

Tonney McCants, a 22-year-old convicted burglar with nearly a dozen arrests on his record, has now been cleared in a Sanford manslaughter case because of Florida’s “stand your ground” law.On Jan. 20, Marquis Grooms, the one-time sweetheart of McCants’ girlfriend, broke into her Sanford apartment and began beating her, according to a police report.She was bleeding from the head.McCants grabbed his 9mm handgun and shot the man 13 times, according to the report. Grooms died at the scene, killed by a bullet that tore open his aorta…

…They booked him into the Seminole County Jail on a charge of manslaughter.Five weeks later, after evaluating evidence, the State Attorney’s Office formally dropped the charge and closed the case, declaring that McCants had a valid “stand your ground” defense.

“This is a case of justifiable use of force,” wrote Assistant State Attorney Dan Faggard. “Grooms had unlawfully entered the home … and McCants had the right … to stand his ground.”

Source: State cites ‘stand your ground’ law, drops manslaughter charge in Sanford case – Orlando Sentinel

We have seen similar cases pop up now and then. What still mystifies me is that some people take affront at the fact that a felon confronted with a deadly force situation by no fault of his own, would had the nerve to defend himself as if serving prison time automatically nullifies that right.

McCants spent two nights. Seminole County Judge John Woodard reviewed the evidence and ordered his release on Jan. 23, saying he could find no probable cause that McCants had committed a crime.

In a prepared statement, Sanford police Chief Cecil Smith said it was unfortunate that the case is now closed. He said his agency had provided sufficient probable cause.

“But he is a felon! He broke the law by using a gun! He cannot have a gun! He should be charged!”  And in the strict sense of the law, that one part of not legally allowed to even touch the gun is right, but this is a case where not doing so would have allowed a bigger crime to happen.

Defense of Necessity:
A defense that permits a person to act in a criminal manner when an emergency situation, not of the person’s own creation compels the person to act in a criminal manner to avoid greater harm from occurring.

Robert the K from Suburban Sheepdog was kind enough to explain it in Crayola terms:

De duobus malis, minus est semper eligendum.

Of two evils, one should always choose the lesser.

In criminal law it is the defense of “necessity.”

Necessity induces a privilege.

My wife is in labor and if I cross your land I can get her to the hospital an hour faster than if I go around. Yes, I trespassed, but necessitas inducit privilegium, so my trespass will be forgiven. It is an “affirmative defense” — I have the burden of demonstrating it.

IANAL: From what little I have read (A little knowledge is a dangerous thing) there cannot be or shouldn’t be (for lack of a better word) premeditation: I am a felon, I hang with bad people so I am gonna get me a gun to defend myself if they attack me and I am covered by Defense of Necessity. Nope, does not work that way apparently and if you want an example on how that can backfire, I will remind you of Bernard Goetz who wasn’t even a felon. For the Defense of Necessity to be valid, the element of imminence must be present; the crap is about to hit the fan and you have to do something or die or let some other innocent person be gravely injured die.

OK, bad explanation aside, we must remember that self-defense is a human right and people should not have to have it curtailed because of past actions. However those actions do carry consequences and one of it is that a felon is not allowed to own and carry the best tool for that job: You paid your monies, you took your chances and you lost. Deal with it.

And yes, I still support the restoration of Second Amendment Rights for non-violent felons who have paid in full their debt with society. That an 18-year-old got convicted as felon just because he wanted to buy a keg of beer with a fake ID and he may never be able to own a gun? Stupid.

A 17 year old black youth, named Trevon, was shot under dubious circumstances in Miami.

It seems that young Trevon had broken into the wrong home.  The home owner was alerted to the break in by her security camera, rushed over to the home, and shot the youth after a confrontation as we was climbing out of the back window.

Not all of the details are in yet.  The home owner has not been charged and is cooperating with police.

I’m not going to rush to judgement on this case.  Could she have been attacked during the confrontation, making the shooting justified?  Maybe.  Could she have shot an unarmed teenager snaking out of her home?  Equally likely.  What I do know is, as a citizen with a gun, it’s best to avoid this type of situation all together.  It’s one thing if you are home when the break in occurs.  If your alarm goes off and you have security camera footage of the burglar, let the cops deal with it.  Not just as a mater of law, but you don’t know if the intruder is armed.  Don’t go looking for a fight.

That said, sometimes the loved ones of the victims make it very, very hard for me to sympathize with them at all.  Trevon’s aunt is one of these people.

“It’s no reason she should have waited until I think he walked out the yard to try to shoot him.  If she called the police already why would she shoot him? You have to look at it from every child’s point of view that was raised in the hood.  You have to understand… how he gonna get his money to have clothes to go to school? You have to look at it from his point-of-view.”

Hold on a minute.  Let me see if I got this right?  Because your nephew was raised in the hood (Liberty City, FL), it is OK for him to break into home and rob them in order to obtain the legal tender necessary to purchase necessities?  Burglary is an acceptable form of occupation?

I’m trying to remain objective here, waiting to for all the facts to come in, and if need be call a bad shoot a bad shoot.  Now I have to try an ignore the crap that came out of your mouth.  Auntie, please, STFU.

The right to self-defense is not basic. One’s protection can be delegated to others such as parents in the case of young children and the military in the event of foreign invasion. Moreover, if we enjoyed perfect physical security, there would be no need for protection. The right to self-defense is grounded in the fundamental moral right to physical security.
(David DeGrazia (ddd@gwu.edu) is a professor of philosophy at George Washington University.)

Source: Gun rights include the right not to be shot – Baltimore Sun

This guy has to be tenured. No other way he could put out an editorial without a basic research and get away with it. A bit of Google-Fu would have taken him to read about No Duty to Protect and avoided him this embarrassment. If anything, in Warren versus District of Columbia you will find the following:  “[t]he duty to provide public services is owed to the public at large, and, absent a special relationship between the police and an individual, no specific legal duty exists.”

Do we need to explain this in crayola or what?

So the ultimate foundation of the right to private gun ownership — physical security — is also the basis of the right not to be shot. Rights are extremely important, but they also require support. Supporting the right not to be shot requires some limits on the right to gun ownership.

I see where he is coming from: If you own a gun, you are a criminal, period. You are a bloodthirsty animal who goes out every morning seeking for targets of opportunity to increase your collection of minority heads mounted in your wall. Your Gun Club and the local chapter of the Bloods or MS-13 are one and the same legally and morally wise not to say intellectually. I am still baffled by this attitude but they need to feed out of their own Narrative which sees us as a bunch of brain-dead rednecks with a second grade education and a felony record for dealing moonshine.  That we are probably more law-abiding than 99% of his friends in the faculty does not compute in his pre-programmed little mind.

Pro-gun scholars often assert that the right to bear arms trumps considerations of social utility — including the possible fact (suggestive evidence abounds) that widespread gun ownership increases homicide, suicide and lethal-accident rates.

Again, a total lack of five minutes of Google research which may have led him to the FBI data proving this statement so wrong, his jacket’s elbow patches would have fallen off.

We need to do more to prevent violations of the right not to be shot.

Shoot first at those who come after you?

It is time to say No to those who tolerate the killing of thousands of innocent Americans each year in the name of gun rights.

The blame for the murder of innocent people lays 100% on your feet dear professor.  Your kind has been playing some sick game of Social Engineering and collecting bodies on the way. Your ilk kept telling us that family is bad, drug abuse is good, honor and religion are dead, charity is outdated, being a leach to the taxpayers is OK, humility is shameful and disrespect for others is fundamental.

You are so stupid, you think you can juggle six jars of nitroglycerin forever without a problem.

Boom.