8 L.A. officers won’t be punished for firing 103 times on two unarmed women | The Libertarian Republic

Chief Charlie Beck insisted that this shooting was simply the result of “a tragic cascade of circumstances that led to an inaccurate conclusion by the officers.”

via The Libertarian Republic.

 

The Los Angeles police department and local prosecutors are living down to a reputation as corrupt organizations with poor ethics. Depending on your perspective, this is nothing new. I certainly grew up with a healthy fear of black and white patrol cars and dreaded every trip I ever made to LA. It can be argued that was just bad press but, incidents like this make that concern seem well founded.

If the officers had at least shot up a vehicle of the same make and model as that of the suspect vehicle, I’d be a little more understanding of what happened. If they’d actually made an attempt to identify the occupants and saw movement suggesting they were going to take fire, I’d get it. If they’d actually come across Chris Dorner and lit him up as he stepped out of the truck, I likely wouldn’t care. But, that’s not what happened here. Two different sets of officers on the lookout for Dorner basically shot at anything in a pickup truck or resembling a pickup.

Race doesn’t even factor in to how wrong this is. Basically, the local government and police department are saying that their officers can do no wrong because there was no “intent.” It doesn’t matter who they shoot at, it can be chalked up to the officers were scared. If John Q. Citizen had taken the same actions with similar results, he’d be prosecuted and thrown under the jail with good reason.  We’re known to be pro cop at GOTR but, this is just plain wrong. No charges, no impact on their job, just remedial training that will likely be forgotten shortly after they get back on the street.

GM

Subjective issuance by an objective standard…SF Police Chief

Want a concealed gun in California? Head north - SFGate“I think concealed carry permits should be handed out subjectively with an objective standard,” the chief said. “We’re a crowded place. … The last thing I need is people that aren’t trained on firearms who may not be in the right frame of mind from being so scared or having a cocktail or two. I would much rather they rely on us.”

via Want a concealed gun in California? Head north – SFGate.

Handed out subjectively using an objective standard?!?! WTF? That’s classic political double speak for, “you aren’t getting one unless the mayor says I have to give you one or we play poker on a regular basis together.”  The good news is, the chief may not have a choice on that much longer now that the “good cause” clause commonly applied to Californa concealed carry permits has been struck down by the 9th Circuit.

GM

16 February 2014 Podcast

16 February 2014 Podcast is up!

You can download the mp3 directly here or from http://gunsovertexasradio.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/20140216GOTR.mp3

His last four rounds may have led to Dunn’s conviction in Florida

THE FINAL THREE BULLETS

Earlier on Saturday, the judge said questions posed by the 12-member jury indicated they thought Dunn was initially justified in firing the first seven bullets to defend himself from Davis, but then went too far by continuing to pull the trigger as the fleeing teens drove off.

The judge speculated that jurors felt Dunn overstepped the limits of self-defense law by shooting a final volley of three bullets after he got out of his car, when the teens no longer represented any kind of threat.

via Florida man faces 60 years in prison for shooting teens over loud music | Reuters.

Long time Harris County District Attorney, John B. “Johnny” Holmes, was once quoted saying “…if it is OK to kill a guy dead, it is OK to kill him dead, dead, dead.”  Many people have borrowed that quote in the years since he uttered them, relating to an officer involved shooting in the late 1990s. It could be argued that it’s a standard that has been applied not just in Harris County but across the country in many other cases. Well, MIchael Dunn, may have just proven that standard wrong, wrong, wrong.

The original incident was overshadowed by the Zimmerman case in which Trayvon Martin was shot to death in February of 2012.  It was in November of 2012 that Michael Dunn pulled into a gas station and parked next to a SUV in which Jordan Davis and three of his friends were sitting. Davis and friends were playing loud music and Dunn confronted them about it, It turned into a heated argument and each party alleges the other threatened them. What is known for sure is that Dunn reached into his glovebox, retrieved a pistol and fired a total of ten rounds into the SUV, ultimately killing Davis.

What may have ultimately “hung” Dunn in this case is clear audio of him firing, pausing, and then firing four more rounds from his Taurus PT-92 as the vehicle departed. Rounds that apparently entered the rear of the vehicle as the driver sped away from the scene.  Other potentially significant factors are Dunn’s own video statements and the fact police had to track him down via his license plate. Now, we can make plenty of statements about talking to the police without an attorney but, that really goes without saying.

Among the most incriminating things Dunn did here is not that he left but, that he didn’t call the police. They had to come find him. He’d gone home. Ordered a pizza. And it could be argued that he was dealing with a traumatic incident in which he was quite literally in denial, one of the phases of dealing with a traumatic incident.  Either way, if the jury watched the video of his interview (seen here), his own statements and actions are largely responsible for his convictions.

GM

Rumor has it, Obama Seeks to Mandate Background Checks for the Purchase of Ammunition according to NationalReport.net

Memos obtained by the National Report purport that Obama, Harry Reed and Nancy Pelosi have been meeting ‘off the record’, to craft a way of subverting and ignoring the will of the American people by using a Presidential order that would no longer seek to register guns but register ammunition instead.

via Obama To Mandate Background Checks for the Purchase of Ammunition! | National Report.

Some thing about this sounds wrong. Not that I don’t think the President would look for a way around Congress. He has very plainly said he would do just that at every opportunity in his most recent State of the Union address. Even with that, until more information is available, I’m filling this away with Alex Jones conspiracy theories. This is not a site with which I am familiar and I cannot call it a credible source.

GM