With all the craziness going on in the world, I think it might be a good idea to cool down, calm down and relax by enjoying the voyeuristic pleasures of Girls with Guns. I firmly believe that Islamists could enjoy a little booze, weed and women, they might see the world for the beautiful place that it is and not go around blowing things up and killing innocents. What do you think?
There have been a number of these anti-gun rights versus pro-gun rights debates being hashed out online as of late. Here are screen shots of the one I got into this morning. I won the debate. What do you think?
Orlando, Florida... what a tragedy. What a sad world we live in when certain people take their radical religious beliefs to an insane level. Radicalized, extreme religion IS insanity. Already, in the United States, a mentally unstable person is not supposed to be able to buy a firearm. So let's enforce the laws already on the books. But how?
When I think about the practical, logical reasons I accept the responsibility of legally carrying a firearm, I think about the possible scenarios that I might NEED to do so. Well, there's personal defense, in case I am ever attacked by someone attempting to rob me, car jacking etc. There's home defense (for which I don't need a carry permit but this scenario still enters my thoughts) and there are unforeseen contingencies, like domestic terror. Any of these scenarios are ENTIRELY within the realm of possibility.
I'm not paranoid, I still believe the likelihood of being caught up in an event in which I might need to use my firearm is slim. But, it's possible, and so, I carry.
I also carry for the simple fact that it is MY RIGHT to do so. I am a law-abiding citizen and an active duty soldier in the US Army. The Second Amendment is just one of the tenants that our founding fathers saw fit to enshrine in the Constitution a document which I am sworn to defend. But I digress...
I have had my mind made up to carry my Ruger SP101 .357 Magnum revolver as my everyday carry, mostly because I feel more comfortable carrying a revolver than having to carry with a chambered round in a semi-auto, but the events of Orlando reminded me that as a responsible gun owner and law-abiding citizen, I might also have to shoulder the responsibility of defending someone else's life, if the situation ever arose.
I don't usually care for attending events that draw large crowds. And other than the occasional live sporting event, or concert, I tend to shy away from them, if for no other reason than I simply don't like large crowds. But with Orlando, I'm reminded of another perfectly good reason to stay away from gatherings of large crowds. Events that draw large crowds are usually events at which legally carried firearms are not allowed. Why would I want to be someplace at which my main source of personal protection is taken away, given this place is a likely target for a terrorist attack?
My carry permit should arrive in the mail soon, and when it does, I'll carry nothing less than a .45 caliber 1911 with at least 2 extra magazines, some days I might even carry my .40 caliber Springfield XDM with at least 2 extra magazines. And while my Ruger SP101 is a fine revolver, it's 5 round capacity simply won't do if a life-threatening situation ever arises. It's a back up piece. I might carry it if I am out on a date and want to carry a pistol that definitely won't be noticed, but short of that, I probably won't carry it very often. A real emergency, such as Orlando, requires the maximum level of defense possible.
I'm truly sad at the news of what happened yesterday in Orlando. I see "most" Americans as my brothers and sisters. I say "most" because anyone who spews hate, who espouses radicalized, religious extremism to the point of killing over an ideology, is NOT my brother or sister. I am a law-abiding American citizen and I will see it as a call-to-action if politicians move to take away my right to defend myself. I will get politically involved, and use whatever means at my disposal (like my blog) to promote support for the Second Amendment.
MyGunDiary.com Presents, this Exclusive Interview with gun rights activist and founder of Open Carry Texas retired US Army First Sergeant C.J. Grisham.
For those of you who don't know who C.J. Grisham is, he gained notoriety from a You Tube video which recorded his controversial arrest several years ago, while he was out walking/hiking with his 15 year old son. Mr. Grisham was legally carrying an AR15 rifle, front strapped, when he was approached by Temple PD Officer Steve Ermis. Here is the video in question...
A follow up video features the original phone call to the Temple police non-emergency line made by a citizen who happened to drive by Mr. Grisham and his son as they were walking, and decided to call the police as a result of seeing a man with a rifle. What I found striking about this phone call is that at no time did the officer who took the call, in form the caller that carrying a rifle in the State of Texas is LEGAL nor did he ask any follow up questions. Someone is seen with a rifle, they dispatch an officer, end of story. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2etnNGFYBxc
The saga of his arrest as it has progressed through the courts, as I see it, is a complete miscarriage of justice. Charges were changed (from Resisting Arrest, to walking on the wrong side of the street) until they found a charge that would stick. That, combined with a biased judged and two trials, resulted in a guilty conviction for interfering with police duties, a class B misdemeanor. Now, if you have any doubts that this case was nothing more than personal and that Mr. Grisham was being bullied by the police and the prosecutor, think about this. The prosecutor decides to retry the case, for a class B misdemeanor, not a felony, but a misdemeanor. In the end Mr. Grisham had to pay a $2000 fine which he paid in nickels. Good for you! However, he is appealing the case and I would be quite alarmed if it wasn't overturned.
It seems to me, after watching the infamous video of your
arrest while legally exercising your right to open carry, that one of the most
pressing issues would be educating police officers about the law. How do you
propose to improve the education of law enforcement officers as to the law? For
example: in your specific case, you were doing nothing illegal, yet you were
detained, disarmed and arrested.
The video itself, as
well as several more from around the state, served as a major educational
effort. We began open carrying rifles everywhere around the state and basically
forcing it down their throats until they got it. At the same time, I was
personally working with many departments around the state and providing free
training seminars which were very successful. When I founded Open Carry Texas,
I ensured that our mission statement reflected the need to work with law
enforcement to minimize negative encounters. As part of our policies, our
members had to call law enforcement ahead of an event just to inform them in
case they got calls. Within six months, that was no longer necessary as TCLEOS
also began sending training and awareness information to Texas police
departments.
Do you believe that in your particular case, had the officer
in question been better educated about the law, your confrontation with him
might have unfolded differently? How?
I'm not sure if the
encounter would have been different. The particular officers involved in my
arrest have a history of bullying people. They just always got away with it
prior to meeting me. I don't like bullies at all. Additionally, the officer
lied to his supervisor and on his reports about what happened. This was a case
of a bad cop that encountered resistance to his illegal actions and he did what
all bad cops do: he lied to cover up his ignorance. I'm honestly not sure if
anything would have changed that encounter for those reasons. Now, if he had
been many other cops in TPD, I think it would have ended much differently and
you would never even know who I am.
Why do you think law enforcement agencies have an apparent
bias against law-abiding citizens who are open carrying legally?
In my opinion, it's
because it threatens their perceived power. When the citizens are visibly
armed, I think many cops realize that they are no better than everyone else.
For many, it's an ego thing where they enjoy getting to do things most people
can't. Not all cops, mind you, but a good number. They've also been lied to about
who the enemy is. They look at every citizen as a threat instead as just
citizens. As such, when they see the enemy - us - they feel threatened. We need
to reverse that mindset. Not only does it put the public safety at risk, but it
creates paranoia in our nation's police force. This is drilled into their heads
in police academies across the country, so we need to address this first. This
mentality of "You job is to go home at night" creates an "us vs
them" atmosphere. When I was in the military, I put myself in danger to
ensure innocent people got to home at night. My safety was the last thing on my
mind. If cops are in it for self-protection, they're in it for the wrong
reasons.
How many interactions do you have with LEOs that are
positive interactions and what are the root differences between positive and
negative interactions?
I would say 80% of my
interactions with cops are very positive. Another 10% starts off apprehensively
then calm down. The remaining 10% are extremely contentious. Those are
generally the bullies and holier-than-thou cops. Like with Ermis, I take them
down a notch or two. I have learned to record EVERY encounter with police, good
or bad, for my protection. While a few still want to play the fool, most will
correct themselves when the camera comes out. Since my initial arrest, I've had
about 100 encounters with cops and nearly all of them were positive. One
resulted in another false arrest in Austin in which the charges were dismissed
and we are suing the department and officers (https://youtu.be/my79AFSBjJI).
One resulted in having actual assault rifles pointed at me
(https://youtu.be/xfK1fJhZX7g). Others I simply told the cops I'm done talking
to them and walked off. Our Open Carry Texas YouTube channel has examples of
good and bad cops.
Do you believe that 911 operators have a responsibility to
also know the law and to inform someone who calls 911 of the law? For example:
Person A looks out their front window and sees person B walking down the street
with a rifle slung over their back. They are alarmed and call 911 to report it.
Another part of our
education effort has been focused on 911 call centers. We have successfully
gotten every call center trained in asking follow up questions to protect law-abiding
gun owners. TCLEOS was a major factor in that once they recognized that was
center of gravity for how encounters would play out. Yes, they bear a HUGE
responsibility in asking following up questions to protect both the officers
and public. The more cops know, the less aggressive stance they will take.
Concerning your case... Are you pursuing civil litigation
against the officer(s) or the department for violating your civil rights? If
so, how is that progressing?
In the Temple case, I
did sue the officers. However, because the prosecutors chose to keep changing
the charges until they could secure a conviction and I was convicted, the judge
tossed it out. He said since I was convicted the officer obviously did nothing
wrong. The problem is that the law only gives you two years to sue, regardless
of whether your appeal has been ruled on or not. When the appellate court overturns
my conviction, I will again file a civil suit. In my Austin arrest, I overcame
the claim of qualified immunity that cops always use. Since I was carrying a
toy gun and the officers KNEW it was a toy gun, they had no basis for the
arrest and willingly arrested me. We are in the deposition process now for that
case.
How would you advise people to act if they found themselves
in a situation similar to yours? (i.e. they are legally carrying a rifle or now
open carry of a handgun with a license).
I would advise people
to be as calm as possible. That's a difficult thing to ask because when you're
faced with someone with a gun a badge, there is a high level of anxiety.
Everyone responds to stress and anxiety differently. It's the fight or flight mentality.
My response is to fight which is why I tend to get mouthy. I don't mean to,
it's just how I manage stress. I don't bottle it up. Some people are able to be
very calm during an encounter. So, my advice is to be as calm as possible and
record everything. If you're going to open carry you MUST be well versed in the
law. If you don't know the law, you can't defend yourself in the streets. If
you give the impression the cop knows more than you do, he will use it to his
advantage. I have memorized Texas law and can literally write chapter and
verse. I put every cop on notice that if he continues, he is willingly and
knowingly violating my rights. When you tell him that, he realizes he's setting
himself up for failure if he continues. I'm about to put up a video of this I
action when I was pulled over on a traffic infraction and the cop wanted to
disarm me during the stop. I refused and I prevailed even though she called in
five cops as backup.
What can the average person do to support gun rights and
promote education about the law as it stands today?
EXERCISE YOUR RIGHTS!
When you don't exercise your rights it's easier to lose them. One of the things
about open carry is that by itself it is educational. For too long, the
American people have been conditioned to fear the sight of a gun. By exposing
the public to seeing guns in public, it directly confronts that mentality and
forces people to get used to it. That's what we did with rifles. Within six
months, the 911 call rate virtually disappeared because people got used to
seeing them and knew it was legal. We have to directly confront the narrative
that guns shouldn't be seen in public because all that does is perpetuate the
ignorant fear of them. We also need to stop spreading these baseless myths
about open carry being confrontational, making you a target, or somehow
surrendering the tactical advantage. These are all tactics the anti-gunners
jump on and as gun owners spread they will seek every avenue of exploitation
and we can't give them any. Gun owners should stop attacking those that open
carry because it furthers a wedge issue the liberals can focus on.
*****
I am tempted to join in on a future Open Carry Texas rally, it's a big decision, however, because it takes a tremendous amount of courage to stand up for your rights the way C.J. Grisham does. You put yourself at risk of getting arrested, perhaps even putting your life in danger. I appreciate what citizens like Mr. Grisham are doing to defend our rights.
Smith and Wesson is a legendary name in firearms manufacturing, and as it so happen, the very first pistol I ever purchased was a Smith and Wesson M&P 9mm, way back in 2005. I have since purchased two more M&P's, a .40 Viking Tactical Special Edition and a 9mm Talo Nickel Boron Special Edition, both are super reliable, comfortable in the hand and are far better than similar Glocks.
It makes sense for me to add a .22LR M&P to my arsenal because it gives me to option/luxury of putting rounds down range with rounds that are far less expensive, yet still be able to train with a handgun body which is nearly identical to the other Smith and Wesson M&P's that I carry from time to time.
The Smith and Wesson M&P 22 looks so good. It's light weight, yet full-size. My only complaint is that only one magazine is included (is it really that much of a stretch to throw in one extra mag?).
I love the brand, have had nothing but good experiences with this model in the past and will more than likely add a Smith and Wesson M&P Sport II AR15 to my rifle line-up next weekend when they go on sale for Memorial Day!
This guy, Keith Morgan, is the President of West Virginia Citizens Defense League, and is apparently, a masterful debater when it comes to the subject of gun rights. As a matter of fact, I enjoyed his defense (not that it should need defending any more than what the Constitution lays out) of the Second Amendment and gun rights.
Keith tears apart the host of the show, some dumb fuck named Bray Cary, who has no clue about what the intent of the Second Amendment is and who would rather put his life and the life of his family in the hands of the police when it comes to self-defense. It seems he would also rather that the only entities that should be armed with AK47's and/or AR15's are the government and police.
I rarely watch debates of this type because they usually end up being nothing more than shouting matches, however, in this case, Keith Morgan does indeed have an opportunity not only to get his points across but to shred the points of the opposition.
This video, for me, sums up the irrational debate points that are constantly put forth by the anti-gun politicians and activists. Enjoy...
