Tuesday, February 14, 2006

The Goleta Postal Shooting: A Case Study For Non-Gun Owners.

John Longenecker in Men's News Daily
The reportage of the mass shooting in Goleta, California, Monday, January 30th is still coming out, but it’s clear there’s a few lessons to be learned, especially by the non-gun owner community.

This is not an incident requiring more gun laws – obviously, laws did not stop Jennifer San Marco from getting a gun and ammunition. They never do.

And high technology didn’t work either; so much for federal registration databases. The key is not to maintain them; they key is to understand that they don't work. Criminals and the unstable will always be able to get weapons. Hasn’t that always been true?

[San Marco, with a history of being unstable, acquired the 9mm Smith & Wesson model 915 and ammunition in New Mexico. She reportedly completed an application for a background check, which didn't turn up any problems, and picked up the gun after a waiting period. She circumvented California law by shopping elsewhere, then returning to her target area in Goleta.]

Let’s look at it from the victim’s side instead of the coroner’s side.

Why do we summon police?

We summon them for their training, their authority and their force. They act on behalf of the community and they document things. They do a lot more.

They derive their training from experience of others who then pass it down. Whole generations of mistakes, new ideas and tactical judgment. They derive their authority from we the People, who authorize them.

If we direct them to break off Code Three high speed chases, they’re dropped; if we direct them to modify policy to drop choke holds, no more choke holds; the People authorize and direct the police, not the other way around. With me so far?

And then there’s force. Guns.

Let’s look a little deeper.

The People authorize not only Police, but the Postal Service, also, in fact all agencies and all public buildings. What Congress does is on the direction of the People, is it not? The present situation of believing that we the People cannot effect change from here is a combination of over-ambitious officials exceeding the scope of their authority and of a sleepy, uninvolved electorate.

How such a situation as Goleta could happen is a direct result of nonsense policies in connection with our sovereignty, that is, our training, our authority and our willingness to act.

This could be solved if you get involved.

Looking deeper now, we see that weapons are banned [by Congress and by others] in certain locations, such as churches, schools, public buildings and other areas. Notice how San Marco-type shootings don’t occur in gun shops, shooting ranges and other places where people are armed? One bumper sticker says it all: fight crime: shoot back.

[Ah, Congress: Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American... The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state government, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people. — Tench Coxe, Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788]

First, on the subject of why we call Police, we see that not only Police are trained, but private individuals are often trained, also. Any private citizen can take training from Department of Justice or NRA Certified Instructors on subjects such as close-quarter defense, in-home defense tactics, streetside encounters, well it’s a whole candy shop of instruction, live-fire and evaluation.
A lot of people don’t know that many gun owners are not only trained in how to discharge their weapon, but the when’s, the why’s, the precisely-just-how’s and what-if’s of using their weapon in self-defense in a public place or in defense of another. It's another of the best kept secrets in the anti-gun, anti-liberty movement.

It’s kind of stupid to make it illegal for an honest and trained citizen of self-restraint and good judgment to carry in a public place when criminals of no restraint and of bad judgment don’t obey the law, isn’t it? Goleta is exactly what happens when the perp knows their quarry is unarmed. Or, it could be very smart if you're a politician.

On the subject of authority: Now that’s one of the most misunderstood aspects of the entire scenario. Individuals already have all the authority they need to stop a crime in progress. How many non-gun owners knew this?

And finally, the weapon itself: Often – very often – the victim is the first line of defense in such matters. The targets can instantly become the very force that makes them the first line of defense for the entire community, not to mention those people in line or behind the counter in offices, workplace, school, church, public buildings. . . .

Don’t forget: we give police the authority to act without losing any authority ourselves. We still retain all legal authority to stop a crime in progress, especially acting in self-defense in the face of grave danger.

Finally, there is the practicality of the matter, that all-important response time.

In the Jennifer San Marco shooting, it only took her a minute or so. For all mass shootings, it only takes a minute of your time. That’s less time than it takes to realize the gravity of the situation, to get to the phone, to complete the call for aid, to prioritize the call to dispatch assets, the travel time for assets Code Three, time to go 10-97 (on scene in California) time to size up the situation and perhaps even stop her before she can shoot again.

Ah, but she took care of that: she committed suicide. She was dead before arrival of assets, her act completed. That's illegal: it's shooting yourself for the purpose of evading justice.

Goleta is yet another case study for the disaster that is gun control. Goleta is a case study of just how officials side not with their electorate, but with the thugs and the insane. Keeping crises alive is part of the job of keeping your job in politics.

On the other hand, the American way of life says that an individual is sovereign, and that means being free to protect himself and others should the occasion arise – with the will, the training available and with all the authority one already possesses by law.

Meanwhile, there will be more successful Goletas to come because the Jennifer San Marco’s of the future will strike where they know no one will shoot back to stop them.

It’s at this point that the usual question appears: you’re not the police. No, we’re the People who give the police their training, their authority and their weapons. We still retain our authority to stop a crime in progress, especially in self-defense in the face of grave danger.

As far as we’re concerned, the law is already on scene. Never forget this.

"But that means there might be (gasp) shooting!!"

Then why summon armed officers?

Look at the alternative when no one stops them, not police, not citizens, not anybody, and the criminal and the unstable are permitted to complete everything they set out to do.

Right-to-carry states -- two-thirds of the states of the nation now -- not only permit people to carry concealed weapons, but are expanding the latitude of how their people can carry. Many states are inaugurating their own Castle Doctrine and the extended Castle Doctrine, the idea that a person is sovereign in their home and, now, away from home.

It's amazing: the right-to-carry states don't have more shootings, they have fewer. Armed citizens don't escalate violence; we stop a crime from escalating. Think of it: what do you summon police for when you can have the law already on scene? Disarming citizens is to delay the law, often with fatal results. This is the value of studying all mass shootings.

Decriminalize concealed carry of weapons where it’s needed most; Kalifornia, New York, and Washington. D.C.

Fighting crime is not done by surrendering more rights to ineffectual anti-crime policies and waiting for assets while the criminal kills – fighting crime is done instance by instance, sometimes by individuals who refuse to be a victim.

And this is good for the country.
Right on the money. We delegate our protection to our law enforcement agencies, and we have the right to reserve self-defense as our own.


Post a Comment

<< Home