Like the NFA petition on SBRs before it, there is now one for suppressors (silencers).

Posted on by
Reply

You can see the petition here. Or at whitehouse.gov. The petition reads as follows:

WE PETITION THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO:

Remove suppressors as an NFA regulated item.

Removal of suppressors as an NFA regulated item would eliminate the $200 tax stamp, eliminate legality and travel issues between states, reduce hearing safety concerns related to discharging firearms, and would help people be courteous neighbors when discharging firearms.

As of this writing, the petition has 17,943 signatures. We need 82,057 more by August 5, 2014. Please consider signing it. As I’ve mentioned with the SBR petition, I do not expect a repeal of the NFA all together. But, there is a chance to at least make our voices heard on repealing parts of it. Specifically, short barrelled rifles and shotguns as well as suppressors.

-GM

Sonoma County Deputy Erick Gelhaus cleared in shooting of Andy Lopez

Posted on by
3
So, the California criminal case of Sonoma County Deputy Erick Gelhaus’ shooting Andy Lopez has been resolved, as the DA has declined charges against Gelhaus.

“Prosecutors said Monday they will not file criminal charges against a Northern California sheriff’s deputy who shot and killed a 13-year-old boy carrying a pellet gun he mistook for an assault rifle. The parents of Andy Lopez decried the decision, saying “it is impossible” to accept and they felt as though their son “had been killed again.”

Erick Gelhaus shot Lopez on Oct. 22 as the teen walked in a Santa Rosa neighborhood with the pellet gun. The deputy told investigators he believed the gun was real and opened fire out of fear for his life.

 

Gelhaus fired eight times, striking the eighth-grader seven times with his department-issued 9 mm handgun. The district attorney said Gelhaus had 18 rounds in his gun and stopped shooting when he felt the threat had ended. Lopez was declared dead at the scene.” – via http://www.policeone.com/officer-shootings/articles/7355600-No-charges-for-deputy-who-killed-teen-carrying-replica/

The FBI is still looking into possible Civil Rights violations, and the family will sue. So this is far from over. But let’s look at why Deputy Gelhaus was not charged, even though there was tremendous political pressure.

Graham V Connor (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=490&invol=386) states that police use of force must be reasonable given the circumstances available to the officer at the time the trigger is pulled. The Fourth Amendment “reasonableness” inquiry is whether the officers’ actions are “objectively reasonable” in light of the facts and circumstances confronting them, without regard to their underlying intent or motivation. The “reasonableness” of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, and its calculus must embody an allowance for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split-second decisions about the amount of force necessary in a particular situation. Pp. 490 U. S. 396-397.

Monday morning quarterbacking may show different circumstance, but THE OFFICER IS JUDGED ONLY ON THE FACTS AVAILABLE TO THE OFFICER AT THE TIME. When the trigger was pulled, Deputy Gelhaus had an “armed individual refusing multiple lawful orders to comply”. That is what Gelhaus saw, and that is what Gelhaus had a split second to react to. The facts uncovered during the subsequent months long investigation are real vent to the case, but not to the issue of the reasonableness of the use of force.

So was this tragic? Yes. Do police want to kill people? No. Was the suspect in control of the amount of force used? Yes. Did the suspects actions (whether or not he intended) cause the officer to feel threatened? Yes.

The family wants answers. I would too. I would want answers to questions like “why did my son purposefully remove the mandated orange tip on the replica rifle and the replica pistol he was carrying?” “Why was my 13 year old son high on marijuana, and in possession of marijuana at the time of his death?” “Why was my son not in school at 3:12pm when the school let out at 3:30?”

Perhaps the parents don’t want to ask those types of questions. 13 year olds are just kids. They make poor decisions sometimes. It is up to the parents to teach right from wrong. This is tragic for all parties involved.

-Jason

HIlton Yam offers sober commentary on polymer pistol mods

Posted on by
Reply

“…remember that you bought a Glock or M&P because you wanted simple and reliable.” Hilton Yam via Chasing Our Tails?: Polymer Service Pistol Mods | Modern Service Weapons.

In light of all the talk of $2,500 (Salient) Glocks lately, this is a well timed post over at Modern Service Weapons. Hilton Yam is a man about guns, having used them professionally for years. If you don’t know his name from the 1911 world, you should. The few examples of his hand built master pieces that exist in the world command high prices and most will go to the grave with their owners. But in recent years, he has moved away from the venerable old war horse in favor of the Smith&Wesson M&P as well as the Glock. To that end, his comments are well worth reading.

-GM

Man who shot at cops acquitted – Houston Chronicle

Posted on by
Reply

An interesting outcome to say the least. On one hand, the accused claims he was just defending his home.  And that certainly can be a reasonable statement.  While I am pro cop in general, I am not so naive as to believe there aren’t occasions where shortcuts are taken or mistakes made with deadly consequences.

“He was protecting his house, he was protecting Ms. Flores and he was protecting Savannah,” he said, referencing the 3-year-old granddaughter of Flores who also was at the home the night of the October 2010 raid.

 

via Man who shot at cops acquitted – Houston Chronicle.

But there are always at least two sides to every story. It is, quite honestly, rare for police to kick in the wrong door. Let alone do it for no reason. But juries and the general public don’t always get to hear the whole story.

Though jurors never heard about the reasons for or results of the search warrant, police at the time reported finding methamphetamine, drug paraphernalia and firearms in the home.

 

via Man who shot at cops acquitted – Houston Chronicle.

 

I am all for a man defending his home. And there’s no nice way to say that I’m OK with a the fact that might potentially lead to deadly force being lawfully used against cops if they’ve busted into the wrong house. But in this case, it seems the police clearly had the right house.

I don’t know that the jury would have come to the same conclusion if they’d heard the police had conducted a buy at that same house 24 hours prior to serving the warrant.  Or that the lawfully obtained warrant did in fact produce evidence supporting charges of criminal possession and distribution of drugs. Of course, one could argue that some times, even that, isn’t always the best use of police resources. This just seems like one of those times there is no “good” outcome no matter how it shakes out.

-GM