Cocked and locked: The decision to carry a loaded pistol.

If you have made the decision to carry a weapon concealed then you will eventually have to decide whether or not you want to carry with a round in the chamber. Besides having the advantage of an extra round (full mag + 1 in the chamber), many people decide to chamber a round for speed and surprisingly, safety.

Unlike Hollywood, nobody runs away when they hear a round chambered. We’ve all been conditioned, thanks to movies and TV, to think that some bad guys would run or stop whatever they’re doing merely at the sound of a 12 gauge being brought into action, but it’s just not the case.

Police officers carry their handguns with a round in the chamber. Why? Because when their gun clears the holster its out for a reason; life has to be defended and someone who is trying to take a life must be stopped. But isn’t that why you’re carrying a weapon? Hopefully you’re not carrying a legally concealed weapon because you think it’s cool- it’s there to save a life if need be. If your gun ever clears leather you don’t need something else to think about.

Opponents of loaded carry often cite the safety concerns with carrying a loaded weapon. With all the safety devices that modern firearms have, you’re brain should be all the safety you need. But just in case that isn’t enough remember: (1)The gun is always loaded; and (2)Never point a gun at anything you don’t want to destroy.

Some people persist and decide to carry everyday and just work on their Israeli draw. The origin of the Israeli draw is mired in legend, but is essentially a weapon carried with a loaded magazine with an empty chamber. Upon drawing, the slide is racked and a round is chambered. This is a draw that must be practiced for speed as it is NOT intuitive. Some people do pretty well with it but again, practice and a lot of it will only help with this.

As for the Lone Ranger and his house? We carry loaded. If I ever have to draw that weapon it will be nothing like I practiced on a static gun range. There will be noise, distractions, fear, sweat, and enough adrenaline to move a train. The last thing I need is something else to think about and slow me down.

Open Carry: Something Different

For those of you who have ever read my blog, you’ll know that I’m a huge advocate of concealed carry. The ability to protect and defend your life is priceless and sometimes the ability to have that insurance hidden pays dividends.

I currently reside in a state where open carry, e.g. on the hip, unconcealed, etc. is legal. I have tried to open carry a time or two but have never really enjoyed the experience. All of that changed for me last night when I attended a local meeting where local “open carriers” met and talked about their experiences, legal rights, etc.

It was a new experience to put on a holster I typically only use to practice at the range with (as it’s a demon to conceal) and walk into a large restaurant with 30-40 other people all wearing their gun in plain sight. To my surprise, not one law enforcement agency was summoned by someone eating there, management had given us permission to come, and it was a lot of fun to exercise a 2nd amendment right out in the open! With all of us in one place, I have to say it was the safest building in the state!

So now for a little background. In conversing with people the conversation usually goes like this:

“Open carry? Like cowboys in the old west?”

“Yes, except now with modern equipment, training, responsibility, etc.”

Modern open carry got its start in the pioneer and old west days of America. Firearms were a part of daily life, a tool like a hammer for building or repairing except better suited for fending off would-be outlaws, wild animals, and Indians. While the crime rate in 19th century America was lower in general, Dr. Roger McGrath of UCLA asserts that the murder, robbery, rape, and other violent crimes of today were kept at bay due to the prevalence of firearms1.

Today, open carry continues to be a hotly debated topic amongst gun owners as some feel that concealed permits only entitle a carrier to do just that-carry concealed. A common phrase found on gun forums is, “concealed is concealed. No one needs to know about it.” People on the other side of the debate contend that open carry is not only a right, its a crime deterrent and not something to be feared.

As for the Loneranger, I’m more apt to carry open in some instances. I haven’t completely gone over to open carry as there are still plenty of institutions that can ask me to leave if they know I have a gun and it can result in a hassle with law enforcement officials who are not familiar with state laws. Open carry is coming around. People are becoming more accustomed to seeing firearms and learning to recognize the good guy from the bad but we still have a long way to go.

1. McGrath, Roger D. (1987). Guns, Highwaymen and Vigilantes: Violence in the Old West. ISBN 0-5200-6026-1.

When lightning strikes: Carrying a concealed weapon 24/7

I recently viewed a training DVD for employees and students entitled, “Shots Fired: When lightning strikes.” The 20 minute video helps trainees learn to recognize an active shooter situation and take action. The DVD explains that while no one wants to think about a shooting where they work or attend school it is an unfortunate possibility. The DVD goes on to explain that the odds of an active shooter scenario occurring in your work place are equivalent to your odds of getting struck by lightning, hence the title.

I took something else away from the comparison: if you have made the decision to obtain a concealed weapon permit then you need to carry the weapon 24/7. Unlike weather forecasters who can track and predict weather patterns with some degree of success, you and I can’t know when we will need to defend ourselves or our loved ones. No one can predict the day lightning will strike them, the day they will get in a car accident, or the day they may actually need their concealed weapon and so we live right, buckle up, and strap up every day.

I hope that none of us ever has to shoot someone, but if someone does something to threaten my life or the life of my loved ones I will meet that threat with all of the force necessary to eliminate it. I saw a video clip of a commercial airline pilot talking about training in the post-9/11 world. He recounted how someone asked him when things in airports and airplanes are going to return to “normal”. His answer? “There’s a new normal.”

You and I can’t pick the date on the calendar when bad things will happen so train hard, stay safe, and pack everyday.

New Ruger SP101 - Courtesy of Uncle Sam

Like many of you, we received our stimulus check and promptly put it back into the economy. My wife and I had been wanting a gun that she could enjoy shooting but something also worth defending the home with while I’m at work.

Enter the Ruger SP101 chambered in .357 magnum: Strong enough for him, balanced just right for her. We looked at many revolvers and had initially settled in the S&W 642 in .38. After doing some homework on the internet, I didn’t want her to have to deal with trying to tame such a light gun. So after several trips to local gun shops we found the Ruger to be just right. Many of you are aware that you can fire .38’s from a .357 which makes it great for her and if I choose, I can throw in some .357 and knock down a bear or two.

Last night we took the gun out to the lake with some friends and set up a series of targets using 9″ styrofoam plates and colored 3″ x 5″ cards. I hadn’t fired a .38 in years but was happy to find it has very mild recoil and is actually a lot of fun to shoot. My wife loved shooting it (which is the most important part) and was a pretty good shot! The best part about this gun is that it just disappeared with an IWB holster under a light button-up shirt!

I changed out the stock grips for a nice set of Hogue grips which dampen the recoil even further and allow the shooter a full hand of control. The gun felt every bit as strudy as I had read about while not being too much. The gun still fits it a pocket but carries enough weight with it’s short barrel to be more accurate than a snubbie might otherwise be. All in all it’s a great gun that knows how to work but also likes to play.

Weapon Retention and Disarming

I recently took a course on weapon retention and disarming. Not only was the class an eye opener, but I spent the better part of four hours taking a beating. I highly recommend that anyone who carries a firearm for work or for personal self defense enroll in one of these classes.

People may ask, why do I need to take a class like this? If you carry a firearm and you are in a confrontation, the suspect will have access to at least one gun, YOURS! Professional criminals and terrorists TRAIN HARD and long to be able to disarm armed personnel like us. You must be able to defeat them.

Many people will say “I would just shoot him!” Since most confrontations occur at arms reach, there will not be time to draw and present your weapon. You will have to be able to defend your weapon, retain control, disengage and shoot as needed.

I have attached some pictures from a recent event in California which illustrates the point. The subject was acting suspiciously on a state highway. A Highway patrolman approached him to ask what he was doing. He immediately ATTACKED the officer. A violent struggle ensued with the trooper, a deputy, and an EMT trying to prevent the officer from being DISARMED. Note the magazine on the ground from the troopers Smith & Wesson 4006. His weapon is now non-functional with the magazine out. The trooper employs classic retention techniques and is able to maintain control of his weapon.

Cops get shot all the time with their own guns. They wear retention type holsters. Most of us who carry concealed do NOT. Our retention skills must be excellent since we are out in public and anyone who can spot our gun, can try and take it.

The class I took was comprehensive and as mentioned before-very physical. I learned how to defend my weapon in the holster from the front, back, sides, and on the ground as well as how to defend my gun when it is grabbed from the front, back, and sides. Probably the funnest part of the course was learning how to disarm someone who has a gun-or worse yet-your gun but is within reach. I came home with bruises that I wore for a week but also lessons I’ll not soon forget.

Oh, and that guy who tried to get the California Highway Patrolman’s gun?

Busted.

Obama should apologize!

Obama Should Apologize For Insulting Millions Of Armed Citizens

——————————————————————————–

NEWS RELEASE
OBAMA SHOULD APOLOGIZE FOR INSULTING MILLIONS OF ARMED CITIZENS, SAYS CCRKBA

BELLEVUE, WA - Democrat Barack Obama on Tuesday insulted millions of legally-armed American citizens when he told a Pennsylvania newspaper that concealed carry poses a threat to innocent people, and he should immediately apologize for that remark, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms said today.

Senator Obama, quoted by the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, admitted, “I am not in favor of concealed weapons. I think that creates a potential atmosphere where more innocent people could (get shot during) altercations.”

“American citizens have been responsibly carrying concealed handguns for years in 48 states,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb, co-author of America Fights Back: Armed Self-Defense in a Violent Age, published by Merril Press. “These citizens go through background checks, and in some states complete required training courses. Statistically, these armed citizens are far less likely to ever be involved in a crime than average citizens. They have stopped crimes. They have sometimes aided police officers.

“Senator Obama,” he continued, “should not confuse legally-armed, law-abiding Americans with inner-city thugs, gang-bangers and other criminals who carry guns illegally. Thanks to a revealing 1996 questionnaire bearing Mr. Obama’s handwriting from his days as a candidate for the Illinois Senate, it’s clear he has the good guys confused with the bad guys.”

That controversial questionnaire, which Obama originally claimed he never saw, contained answers to questions that indicates he opposes capital punishment and criminal prosecution of juveniles as adults, is against mandatory sentencing and supports “alternative sentencing.” He supported a ban on handguns and semiautomatic sport-utility rifles, and mandatory waiting periods before Americans could exercise their constitutional right to own a firearm.

“Barack Obama ignorantly believes that legally-armed Americans are as reckless and irresponsible as the criminals with whom his political sympathies evidently lay,” Gottlieb said. “He has been insisting for months that he supports the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, but here he is now campaigning in Pennsylvania, stating essentially that he would prefer Americans not exercise that right.

“Legally-armed citizens are also voters, Mr. Obama,” Gottlieb stated, “and you have outrageously insulted every one of them. You owe these good citizens an apology.”

-END-

The original article appeared here.

The Sheep Parable

Author unknown.

Not so long ago and in a pasture too uncomfortably close to here, a flock of
sheep lived and grazed. They were protected by a dog, who answered to the
master, but despite his best efforts from time to time a nearby pack of
wolves would prey upon the flock.

One day a group of sheep, bolder than the rest, met to discuss their
dilemma. ‘Our dog is good, and vigilant, but he is one and the wolves are
many. The wolves he catches are not always killed, and the master judges and
releases many to prey again upon us, for no reason we can understand.
What can we do? We are sheep, but we do not wish to be food, too!’

One sheep spoke up, saying ‘It is his teeth and claws that make the wolf so
terrible to us. It is his nature to prey, and he would find any way to do it,
but it is the tools he wields that make it possible. If we had such teeth, we
could fight back, and stop this savagery.’ The other sheep clamored in
agreement, and they went together to the old bones of the dead wolves heaped
in the corner of the pasture, and gathered fang and claw and made them
into weapons.

That night, when the wolves came, the newly armed sheep sprang up with their
weapons and struck at them, crying, “Be Gone!” We are not food!’ and drove
off the wolves, who were astonished. When did sheep become so bold and so
dangerous to wolves? When did sheep grow teeth?

It was unthinkable!

The next day, flush with victory and waving their weapons, they approached
the flock to pronounce their discovery. But as they drew nigh, the flock
huddled together and cried out, ‘Baaaaaaaadddd! Baaaaaddd things!

You have bad things! We are afraid! You are not sheep!’

The brave sheep stopped, amazed. ‘But we are your brethren!’ they cried. ‘We
are still sheep, but we do not wish to be food. See, our new teeth and claws
protect us and have saved us from slaughter. They do not make us into wolves,
they make us equal to the wolves, and safe from their viciousness!’

‘Baaaaaaad!’ cried the flock, ‘the things are bad and will pervert you, and
we fear them. You cannot bring them into the flock!’ So the armed sheep
resolved to conceal their weapons, for although they had no desire to panic
the flock, they wished to remain in the fold. But they would not return to
those nights of terror, waiting for the wolves to come.

In time, the wolves attacked less often and sought easier prey, for they had
no stomach for fighting sheep who possessed tooth and claw even as they did.
Not knowing which sheep had fangs and which did not, they came to leave sheep
out of their diet almost completely except for the occasional raid, from
which more than one wolf did not return.

Then came the day when, as the flock grazed beside the stream, one sheep’s
weapon slipped from the folds of her fleece, and the flock cried out in
terror again, ‘Baaaaaad! You still possess these evil things! We must ban you
from our presence!’

And so they did. The great chief sheep and his council, encouraged by the
words of their advisors, placed signs and totems at the edges of the pasture
forbidding the presence of hidden weapons there. The armed sheep protested
before the council, saying, ‘It is our pasture, too, and we have never harmed
you! When can you say we have caused you hurt? It is the wolves, not we, who
prey upon you. We are still sheep, but we are not food!’

But the flock drowned them out with cries of ‘Baaaaaaddd! We will not hear
your clever words! You and your things are evil and will harm us!’

Saddened by this rejection, the armed sheep moved off and spent their days
on the edges of the flock, trying from time to time to speak with their
brethren to convince them of the wisdom of having such teeth, but meeting
with little success. They found it hard to talk to those who, upon hearing
their words, would roll back their eyes and flee, crying ‘Baaaaddd! Bad
things!’

That night, the wolves happened upon the sheep’s totems and signs, and
said, ‘Truly, these sheep are fools! They have told us they have no teeth!
Brothers, let us feed!’ And they set upon the flock, and horrible was the
carnage in the midst of the fold. The dog fought like a demon, and often
seemed to be in two places at once, but even he could not halt the
slaughter.

It was only when the other sheep arrived with their weapons that the wolves
fled, only to remain on the edge of the pasture and wait for the next time
they could prey, for if the sheep were so foolish once, they would be so
again. This they did, and do still.

In the morning, the armed sheep spoke to the flock, and said, ‘See? If the
wolves know you have no teeth, they will fall upon you. Why be prey? To be a
sheep does not mean to be food for wolves!’ But the flock cried out, more
feebly for their voices were fewer, though with no less terror, ‘Baaaaaaaad!
These things are bad! If they were banished, the wolves would not harm us!
Baaaaaaad!’

So they resolved to retain their weapons, but to conceal them from the
flock; to endure their fear and loathing, and even to protect their brethren
if the need arose, until the day the flock learned to understand that as long
as there were wolves in the night, sheep would need teeth to repel them.

They would still be sheep, but they would not be food!

Students for Concealed Carry on Campus

W. Scott Lewis
Media Coordinator
Students for Concealed Carry on Campus
media@concealedcampus.org
Students for Concealed Carry on Campus - ConcealedCampus.com

STUDENTS FOR CONCEALED CARRY ON CAMPUS (CONCEALEDCAMPUS.COM) ANNOUNCES SECOND NATIONAL COLLEGIATE EMPTY HOLSTER PROTEST

During the week of April 21-25, 2008, thousands of college students throughout the United States, organized under the banner of Students for Concealed Carry on Campus (SCCC), will attend classes wearing empty holsters, in protest of state laws and school policies that stack the odds in favor of dangerous criminals and armed killers by disarming law abiding citizens licensed to carry concealed handguns virtually everywhere else.

SCCC hosted its first national collegiate Empty Holster Protest during the week of October 22-26, 2007, on the campuses of approximately 125 U.S. colleges and universities. This second Empty Holster Protest will expand upon the concept of the first protest by placing greater emphasis on educating the uninformed. Protesters will focus on sharing the facts of “concealed carry” with students and faculty who may not be aware that concealed carry laws exist or that those laws differ on college campuses from most other locations.

In 39 U.S. states, thousands of collegiate students and faculty—age 21 and above—are licensed to carry concealed handguns throughout their day-to-day lives. And they do so without incident. Numerous studies* by independent researchers and state agencies show that concealed handgun license holders are five times less likely than non-license holders to be arrested for violent crimes. However, despite the absence of any compelling evidence that these licensed individuals would pose any more threat to college campuses than they currently do to office buildings, shopping malls, movie theaters, grocery stores, banks, etc., they are prohibited, either by state law or school policy, from carrying their firearms onto most college campuses.

Colorado State University, Blue Ridge Community College (Weyers Cave, VA), and all nine public colleges in the state of Utah currently allow concealed carry on campus. After a combined total of more than sixty semesters of allowing concealed carry on campus, none of these schools have seen any resulting incidents of gun violence, gun accidents, or gun theft.

From assault to rape to mass shootings, college campuses are touched by every type of type of violent crime imaginable. Labeling an area “gun free” may make some people feel safer, but as the shootings at Virginia Tech taught us, feeling safe is not the same as being safe. There is a wide discrepancy between the intent of campus gun bans and the actual consequences of such bans. It is this discrepancy to which the student members of SCCC hope their Empty Holster Protest will draw attention. While opponents may argue that guns have no place in institutions of higher learning, SCCC contends that it is the rapes, the assaults, and the uncontested, execution-style massacres that have no place in America’s colleges. The students of the Empty Holster Protest respectfully ask that steps be taken to take the advantage away from those who seek to harm the innocent.

For more information contact Scott Lewis at media@concealedcampus.org or visit Students for Concealed Carry on Campus - ConcealedCampus.com.

*“Crime, Deterrence, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns,” John Lott and David Mustard, Journal of Legal Studies (v.26, no.1, pages 1-68, January 1997); “An Analysis of The Arrest Rate Of Texas Concealed Handgun License Holders as Compared to the Arrest Rate of the Entire Texas Population,” William E. Sturdevant, September 1, 2000; Florida Department of Justice statistics, 1998; Florida Department of State, “Concealed Weapons/Firearms License Statistical Report,” 1998; Texas Department of Public Safety and the U.S. Census Bureau, reported in San Antonio Express-News, September, 2000; Texas Department of Corrections data, 1996-2000, compiled by the Texas State Rifle Association

ABOUT STUDENTS FOR CONCEALED CARRY ON CAMPUS - Students for Concealed Carry on Campus is a national, non-partisan, grassroots organization comprised of over 10,000 college students, college faculty members, parents of college students, and concerned citizens who believe that holders of concealed handgun licenses should enjoy the same rights on college campuses that current laws afford them virtually everywhere else. SCCC is dedicated to persuading state governments and school administrators to approve laws and campus policies that will grant all citizens with concealed handgun licenses the right to carry their concealed handguns on college campuses. We are not affiliated with the NRA, a political party, or any other organization.

http://www.concealedcampus.org/about_sccc.pdf

http://www.concealedcampus.org/washi…times_oped.pdf

http://www.concealedcampus.org/answers.pdf

http://www.concealedcampus.org/campus_handout.pdf

http://concealedcampus.org/sccc_flyer.pdf

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I shouldn’t need to add this, but the shooting at Louisiana Technical College today should say it all. God bless their families and friends.   -LR

Molon labe

I’ve never been much of a blogger. I like to write but honestly, I’m not consistent enough to make a decent showing. In spite of all this I’ve decided that I’ve had enough. Society as a whole is in a downward spiral that isn’t slowing anytime soon. This blog will primarily be a soapbox for my thoughts on the second amendment, right to keep and bear arms, concealed carry, and other gun-related issues. While other hot topics may surface now and again, it’s focus will be on guns.

Here’s a quote I really enjoy: “[T]he simple truth—born of experience—is that tyranny thrives best where government need not fear the wrath of an armed people. The prospect of tyranny may not grab the headlines the way vivid stories of gun crime routinely do. But few saw the Third Reich coming until it was too late. The Second Amendment is a doomsday provision, one designed for those exceptionally rare circumstances where all other rights have failed—where the government refuses to stand for reelection and silences those who protest; where courts have lost the courage to oppose, or can find no one to enforce their decrees. However improbable these contingencies may seem today, facing them unprepared is a mistake a free people get to make only once.” - US Federal Appeals Judge for the Ninth Circuit Alex Kozinski, in a dissent written over the court’s refusal to hear a challenge of the California Assault Weapons ban in 2003

While fear of the government is pretty far down on my list of reasons to carry I still think it’s nice that voices like this exist in America, especially voices of power.

So why guns? I like guns. I enjoy shooting guns for fun, I enjoy hunting, and I maintain a concealed carry permit which allows me to protect myself and my loved ones. I carry on a daily basis and do so because I believe that the responsibility to protect myself lies with me. As a society today we have a sense of entitlement. We’re entitled to this or that.

Unfortunately, police have no duty to protect you.

Warren v. District of Columbia is one of the leading cases that reminds us of this. Two women were upstairs in a townhouse when they heard their roommate, a third woman, being attacked downstairs by intruders. They phoned the police several times and were assured that officers were on the way. After about 30 minutes, when their roommate’s screams had stopped, they assumed the police had finally arrived. When the two women went downstairs they saw that in fact the police never came, but the intruders were still there. As the Warren court graphically states in the opinion: “For the next fourteen hours the women were held captive, raped, robbed, beaten, forced to commit sexual acts upon each other, and made to submit to the sexual demands of their attackers.”

The three women sued the District of Columbia for failing to protect them, but D.C.’s highest court exonerated the District and its police, saying that it is a “fundamental principle of American law that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any individual citizen.” There are many similar cases with results to the same effect.

In the Warren case the injured parties sued the District of Columbia under its own laws for failing to protect them. Most often such cases are brought in state (or, in the case of Warren, D.C.) courts for violation of state statutes, because federal law pertaining to these matters is even more onerous. But when someone does sue under federal law, it is nearly always for violation of 42 U.S.C. 1983 (often inaccurately referred to as “the civil rights act”). Section 1983 claims are brought against government officials for allegedly violating the injured parties’ federal statutory or Constitutional rights.

The seminal case establishing the general rule that police have no duty under federal law to protect citizens is DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services. Frequently these cases are based on an alleged “special relationship” between the injured party and the police. In DeShaney the injured party was a boy who was beaten and permanently injured by his father. He claimed a special relationship existed because local officials knew he was being abused, indeed they had “specifically proclaimed by word and deed [their] intention to protect him against that danger,” but failed to remove him from his father’s custody.

The Court in DeShaney held that no duty arose because of a “special relationship,” concluding that Constitutional duties of care and protection only exist as to certain individuals, such as incarcerated prisoners, involuntarily committed mental patients and others restrained against their will and therefore unable to protect themselves. “The affirmative duty to protect arises not from the State’s knowledge of the individual’s predicament or from its expressions of intent to help him, but from the limitation which it has imposed on his freedom to act on his own behalf.”

About a year later, the United States Court of Appeals interpreted DeShaney in the California case of Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Department. Ms. Balistreri, beaten and harassed by her estranged husband, alleged a “special relationship” existed between her and the Pacifica Police Department, to wit, they were duty-bound to protect her because there was a restraining order against her husband. The Court of Appeals, however, concluded that DeShaney limited the circumstances that would give rise to a “special relationship” to instances of custody. Because no such custody existed in Balistreri, the Pacifica Police had no duty to protect her, so when they failed to do so and she was injured they were not liable. A citizen injured because the police failed to protect her can only sue the State or local government in federal court if one of their officials violated a federal statutory or Constitutional right, and can only win such a suit if a “special relationship” can be shown to have existed, which DeShaney and its progeny make it very difficult to do. Moreover, Zinermon v. Burch very likely precludes Section 1983 liability for police agencies in these types of cases if there is a potential remedy via a State tort action.

Many states, however, have specifically precluded such claims, barring lawsuits against State or local officials for failure to protect, by enacting statutes such as California’s Government Code, Sections 821, 845, and 846 which state, in part: “Neither a public entity or a public employee [may be sued] for failure to provide adequate police protection or service, failure to prevent the commission of crimes and failure to apprehend criminals.”

I don’t blame police though. Police officers are by and large great men and women who stick their necks out day and night to keep slime off the street and help us. They are grossly underpaid and in many locales somewhat underresourced. If every cop in America could patrol every “beat” 24/7 they would still be out numbered. Here’s where you and I come in. Pay attention to the news and you’ll see that everyday citizens are tired of being victims. They’re taking back their rights and taking back their piece of mind. I read story after story in papers across the nation of citizens shooting would be assailants or robbers. People are tired of it and they’re not going to take things laying down. I’m the same way. If someone wants to harm me or my family it will cost them. My home is my castle and when you enter that domain unlawfully and uninvited, consequences will ensue.

I don’t expect anyone to protect me and my family but me if trouble comes knocking, rest assured, I’ll be packing. Molon labe.