Texas CHL 2005 numbers released

Buckeye Firearms Association has the info. As usual, it shows that holders of a Texas CHL are much more law-abiding than the average (cough) citizen.

Texas' first concealed handgun self defense of 2008

I can't find any cite for this today, but I heard it on the news this morning, thanks to the local public radio station.

Texas has already recorded its first self-defensive handgun use of 2008. A case of road rage, apparently. When the vehicles stopped, one man attacked the other man with a baseball bat. The man being attacked shot and killed the bat-guy.

The man with the gun has a CHL, if that makes a big difference to you.

Final word: "Police determined it was self defense. No charges will be filed."

UPDATE: JR found the link.

Students for Concealed Carry on Campus got some airtime

On NPR this morning. Only a couple of minutes, but they were focused on the movement going on at nearby Texas State University in San Marcos (previously known as Southwest Texas State University). Just thought I'd mention it.

Check out their website, if you haven't yet, at ConcealedCampus.com.

UPDATE: Here's a news report about it, via NRA-ILA.

The presumption of guilt

A Dallas D.A. doesn't like having to prove you're guilty:

In other words, if you're caught carrying a concealed pistol on the street and don't have a permit, tell the cop you're walking between your car and your home, either getting ready to travel somewhere or coming home. The burden now falls on the police officer to prove you are not really "traveling," which Dallas District Attorney Craig Watkins says is virtually impossible.

"If you read the new statute, it essentially does away with the concealed handgun law," Watkins says. As of September 1, his office no longer accepted most UCW (unlawfully carrying a weapon) charges that involved the "traveling" issue and dismissed pending cases.

"Actually we didn't really have a choice," Watkins says. "The law had changed, and some of the individuals could have fallen under the old statute, but it would be an unfair standard if we prosecuted them. And it's impossible now for us to prove those charges when we get them. Now it makes it the responsibility of the state to disprove that a person is on their way to or from their car, and that's pretty difficult to prove. It does a disservice to law enforcement. They have to prove this person was not on their way to somewhere. Why should they even bother [to arrest them]? I see it as a possibility for a lot of individuals with criminal intent to be carrying weapons."

The change has some police officers grumbling.

"It's insane," says one Dallas officer, who asked not to be named. "They basically destroyed the concealed gun law. We're letting drug dealers with Glocks under the seat go and say have a nice day. In the past we could have charged them at least with a weapons violation and confiscated the gun. Texas is wide open now. It's a huge story. This has just gone under everyone's radar."

First of all, no it doesn't. The Motorist Protection Law clearly states that one must be "inside of or directly en route to a motor vehicle that is owned by the person or under the person's control." I think most police officers can tell if you are "directly en route" to your car or not. If you're busted with a gun halfway across town from your car, it's going to be pretty obvious. It also means that you can't leave your car with the gun for any reason other than to go to "the person's own premises or premises under the person's control." That means you can't take your gun into Wal-Mart under the Motorist Protection Law. You can only have your gun in your car as you drive there.

Not that there would be anything wrong with that.

It boils down to yet another vigilante D.A. being inconvenienced because he can't bust people for not committing a crime while peaceably carrying a gun. "Now it makes it the responsibility of the state." Yeah, how dare we common folk insist upon presumption of innocence until proven guilty?

The ramifications will take a while to percolate through the system. But the bottom line is: "If you've got a car," says a Dallas officer, "you can carry a gun."

And what's wrong with that? As far as I care, if you're not conspiring to commit a crime, you can carry a gun. Whether you have a car or not.

Dan McKown in the news again

Since I haven't seen anyone else mention this. I'm sure everyone who reads this blog knows his name, but in case you don't, he was carrying a concealed pistol the day an evil maniac shot up a mall in Washington (state). He hesitated before shooting and was badly wounded because the shooter did not hesitate. He's still a hero in my book.

McKown recently testified in the Tacoma Mall shooting trial:

"I prayed a very unappropriate prayer – 'God let me shoot this guy before he shoots somebody else'. I thought I was dead," said McKown.

Not so inappropriate. Praying for strength to stop a force of evil is never inappropriate.

The shooter survived. Many of his victims did not. Dan McKown will likely be partially paralyzed for the rest of his life.

Interview with Michael DeBose in USCCA Magazine

If you're not a subscriber to Concealed Carry Magazine, beg or borrow a copy because there's an interview in it that should be read by everyone. Even better that it be read by those who think self-defense is wrong.

Mark Walters, who writes the regular "The Ordinary Guy" column for the magazine, interviewed Representative Michael DeBose of Ohio. DeBose had a solid record of being against individuals carrying a handgun for self defense, and voted against Ohio's concealed carry bill twice, before it became law.

He was recently the intended victim of an attempted mugging, and it changed his mind.

Well to be honest with you, I'm not promoting guns quite honestly. I voted against concealed carry twice but when this happened--someone points a gun at you and you feel hopeless and helpless and you want some way to defend yourself and your family--then your perspective changes. Any person who has a gun pulled on them has walked in my shoes. Quite frankly, I don't want to experience that again. I don't want them to either. It changed my views in that I'm only dealing with me. I can't tell other people what to do and I'm not encouraging other people to do something that I'm doing. I'm only dealing with myself. It's in my best interest to get a gun.

[...]

I would like people to understand one thing. Don't judge people by what they do or what they don't do. Until you've walked in that person's shoes, you don't understand what brought them to that decision. This decision has been a personal one. I'm not after anyone to be a copycat and I'm not going around starting trouble with a gun. I'm not going around asking people to get out of my way and like I'm some type of bully. The only thing I'm saying is that you have to have an equalizer on the street. These streets are dangerous. There are killers and they're equal opportnity murderers. These people are mean-spirited and they're evil. You have to have a way to get their attention to let them know that you're not playing with them. Bottom line is, personally I'm not taking it anymore. We have to take our streets back. We have to take our neighborhoods back. I'm not moving. I'm not going to leave the area. I'm not going to run and I'm not going to stop taking my walks because I need the exercise. So I'm going to continue to do what I was doing and nobody's going to stop me from doing it.

Also worth pointing out is that he says "I got hammered in the papers." But on a personal level, he has "got more support than negative publicity." That is, person to person he's had a lot of support on his decision, but the media was against him. His local paper wouldn't even print any letters to the editor that supported him--even though he knew such letters were being sent in.

There are also a couple of things worth mentioning in the epilogue to this interview. Jim Irvine of The Buckeye Firearms Association organized a concealed carry training class for DeBose which also included "a group of his associates, friends and neighbors."

Also, Cor-Bon donated "several thousand high quality rounds of various calibers used during the training class."

The final word:

Rep. DeBose and his wife have since applied for and received their Ohio CCW licenses.

HELPS

The Firearms Coalition is going on the offensive:

The Firearms Coalition has drafted legislation which would restrict any federal funds from going to any college or university which prohibits employees and students who may lawfully possess and carry defensive weapons off campus from possessing and carrying those weapons on campus. We call it HELPS, the Higher Education Lawful Personal Security Act and we believe it could be passed in the 110^th Congress.

There is absolutely no way to keep armed and dangerous criminals and lunatics from bringing weapons onto a college campus. The forced disarmament of employees and adult students does nothing but reduce the likelihood that there might be someone with a gun in the right place at the right time to stop criminal violence and save lives. Disarming law-abiding adults, who happen to be employed by, or attend a college and who lawfully and safely carry defensive firearms when not on campus, is not just irrational - it’s downright criminal.

It’s past time for the gun rights movement to stop pussy-footing around and take a strong, public, and principled stand. We know what’s right and sensible and we need to act on that knowledge.We must stop playing political games, by the politician’s rules, at the cost of our children’s lives. The United States Congress has the power to stop federal funds – including research grants and student loans – from going to schools with disarmament policies – whether those policies come from the school itself or from state government. The people have the power to force Congress to take such actions.

I'm sure there will be plenty of nay-sayers who will declaim it as a waste of time. But if you get enough people hammering at a brick wall long enough, eventually something's gotta crack.

A Schott in the Dark

From The Gazette-Enterprise of nearby Seguin:

La Vernia Mayor Pro Tem Harold Schott retired from the San Antonio Police Department after a 33-year career.

One would be wise not to charge at him with a weapon, because he is a deadly-accurate shooter. Not one of his bullets hit outside the “bread basket” area on his target, and a couple of holes were on dead center in the bullseye.

But Schott was renewing his concealed handgun license by taking Cope’s class, and he explained the reason for it:

“If you go to buy a new shotgun, even if you’re in a policeman’s uniform, you have a five-day wait for an FBI background check. If you have a concealed handgun license, you could have the gun today. If you want to purchase a gun, a license makes it easier,” Schott said.

Wrong! Texas has no state waiting period. Period.

I would have assumed an ex-Only One would know that.

And yes, I noticed that his statement also reeks of elitism. But then I suppose that's par for the course.

Via Front Sight, Press.