Month: April 2024

Threat Assessment

Saturday was my monthly outing to interact with people. Always a stressful thing for me.

Part of that stress was aggravated because I couldn’t find the holster for my preferred firearm for “polite company that isn’t Gun People.” Which meant that I was carrying a 1911 instead of a Sig. That Sig is so small it doesn’t print at all.

So I’m speaking with some friends, but move on to introduce myself to the man my wife is talking to. He introduces himself and I do a threat assessment.

Not enough information.

He appears to be from the Middle East and talks with an accent that matches. threat += 1

We banter about not having met before. He claims to have been going to these events for multiple years. This is the first time I’ve seen him. threat += 2.

When I ask about his accent, he tells me he is Egyptian. threat += 0

I say something to like, “Oh, I thought you were from the Middle East.”

“No, I’m from Egypt. Egypt is not part of the Middle East.” threat += 1

He then explains to me that Egypt is part of Northern Africa, not the Middle East. Ok. This is a true statement. I’ll accept this on face value for now. He is attempting to distance his country from the Middle East. threat -= 2

He then tells me that the Middle East consists of the following countries: Palestine, Israel, Lebanon, Syria, Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, Yemen, and Oman. Basically, everything west of the Red Sea but nothing on the continent of Africa. threat += 5

There is no country of “Palestine”.

We are in polite company, I’m not interested in him anymore. The threat level has hit 7.

He had not done anything to suggest ill intent on his part. But the entire conversation left me feeling uncomfortable.

The numbers I’m using are made up. They are in this article for illustrative purposes only.

A different example of a threat assessment: Older adult male, white, heavy smoker, day labor/handy man. The threat assessment was so high that he was never and would never be invited into my home. The sort of person who if I were to sell him a firearm, I would do it through an FFL, regardless of what he said about his background.

A different example, a number of dark skin females wearing head coverings. No increase in threat level. An angry black man with a skull cap comes out and starts speaking in angry tones to the women. Threat assessment goes high enough that I reposition myself and make sure he is under observation at all times. Verified egress path.

We all do threat assessments. If you can’t do a good assessment rapidly and then trust yourself you need to practice more.

The thing to note that more people have been injured or killed trying to avoid offending people than have been from avoiding people and situations that raise that threat assessment.

This has been a difficult article. None of us want to be racists. We would rather not judge people by the color of their skin or the culture they come from. We would rather not appear to be the sort of people who do judge people by their outward appearance.

But we are judged by what we look like. We do judge people by what they look like. When people see me, they will make assumptions about my past. Typically, they are mistaken. Some of that is because of how I present. I have three favorite hats I wear. A woodland camo Boonie Hat. A military issue watch cap.

And a black and white knit cap made from the yarn I spun from raw wool. My wife dyed the wool before I spun it. I had a friend make the cap.

If I’m wearing any of them, people assume. That’s fine with me. The only issue is when somebody thanks me for my service and I have to say, “I didn’t serve.”

Are you part of that paranoid group, like I am? Do you walk into a place and immediately find all the exits? Even exits that are not assessable to the public? Do you look for the seat where you can watch the people and there are few or no people behind you? Do you give every person who enters the once over?

Do you blade yourself to keep your firearm that much further from “them?”

Or is that just my paranoia?

Another incident that is baffling.

Carjacking was stopped by the driver of the truck, Jonathan Adam Lecompte. Then the carjacker got in the truck and proceeded to use it as weapon. I have no idea if those are shot or what Lecompte was using for ammo if that was indeed a gun.

But the truck was a bigger caliber.

 

Several measures of Stupid in one video.

 

 

I agree with J. Kb when it comes to use of deadly force to defend property. But FFS, facing empty handed assholes is not the way to go.
You came out, the guy ran away, the problem was solved.
Ego got in the way, and he almost got to go to the ER plus now his truck has a nice dent in it.

PS: I am not sure, but I believe the homeowner left the truck unlocked.

Shooter in Marina Del Rey

Initial reports blame the AR15 for the guy going stupid and there is even a video of the event.

This is one that will be abused by the usual Gun Control Suspects as proof that we need to ban them nasty Black Rifles.

They will be oblivious to what took us all of two seconds to figure out: The fact that if somebody could get that close with a camera, something as simple as a .22LR revolver would have ended the situation quickly.

So today, while they pontificate about “We don’t need weapons of war in our streets! (Unless it is cops, military and security for the pols, rich and famous) I will be busy today with this baby.

 

Text, History, and Tradition. Really?

The other day I was reading Bruen, again. I was looking up that standard mantra, “When the plain text of the Second Amendment is implicated, the burden shifts to the state or prove a history and tradition of regulation.”

That is not what Bruen says.

Today, we decline to adopt that two-part approach. In keeping with Heller, we hold that when the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct. To justify its regulation, the government may not simply posit that the regulation promotes an important interest. Rather, the government must demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Only if a firearm regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition may a court conclude that the individual’s conduct falls outside the Second Amendment’s “unqualified command.” Konigsberg v. State Bar of Cal., 366 U. S. 36, 50, n. 10 (1961).
New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. V. Bruen, 142 S.Ct. 2111, 8 (U.S. 2022)

The state must prove the regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.

Not “this nation’s history and tradition,” but “this Nation’s historical tradition.”

Those are two different things. I might be able to prove a tradition of disarming people as they enter the church. But if there is no historical regulation, that tradition is meaningless in support of a modern infringement.

In the same way, I might be able to show that there was a historical regulation that banned guns in schools. If it is not also a tradition, then it doesn’t meet muster.

Notice that it also says this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. I don’t know how well it would work in court, but this seems to say that bans on other types of arms are not meaningful in a modern Second Amendment Challenge.

This appears to be a one-way ratchet. We can use the Second Amendment to protect all arms. The state can only use firearm regulations to justify their modern infringements.

So lock it in, When the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct. And, The state must prove that their modern infringement is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulations.

Nothing from before this Nation counts. Nothing from a different nation counts. It must be part of this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulations.

supported by the historical tradition of prohibitingDistrict of Columbia v. Heller, 467 U.S. 837, 627 (2008),

H/t to Mark Smith for pushing me to write about this.

WWIII May have started.

Tomorrow when/If you go out to your particular House of Prayer or may gather with others in family or group activity, stay alert, stay armed because we don’t know if “newcomers” will come out of the sewers to assist in the Iranian exercise of power in the Middle east.
What better way to keep the weak US out of the region than staging attacks within its borders?
You may want to add long guns to your Sunday tools.
Stay frosty.

Draw your phone before your gun

I was born in the 80s and grew up in the 90s.

The idea of pulling out my phone and recording every damn thing is anathema to me.

I hate seeing other people do it.

Unfortunately, I think we’re all going to have to adopt that mentality.

 

According to the news, the man who drew the gun is being charged with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.

The problem is, we only have the video of the guy who got the gun pointed at him, and he was the guy who approached the other driver.

We don’t know if he was threatening before he started recording.

We don’t know if the other driver was justified in pulling his gun.

Expect your enemy to use their phone against you.

You need to, I need to, be prepared to use your (and my) phone against them.

If you need to draw and fire, you should have video justification for why you did.