Sitting Duck Policy

In yet another example of how Gun Control Gun Rights Infringement policies don’t work. Ironically, instances of late have proven that they may have the opposite affect: places that are under rules, laws, or policies which imply “no guns allowed” disarm the law-abiding citizen and ensure that only those who disregard the law carry guns (or knives, or bombs, or axe, or whatever other tool).

Let’s play a little logic game

Let’s say for whatever reason you’re an angry person and want to carry out some violent act against another person.

• There is a law that says you cannot assault another person, but you disregard that.
• There is another law that says you cannot kill another person, but you disregard that.
• There is another law that says you cannot carry a gun into a school, but you disregard that.
• There is another law that says you cannot buy a gun without jumping through a whole bunch of hoops (to keep guns out the hands of people like you), but you disregard that.
• There is another law that says you cannot carry your gun into a particular state or city without getting a permit, but permits are hard to get, so you disregard that.

Why do we need all the additional laws? Shouldn’t the first law suffice? The one that says it’s illegal to assault another person? Why do we need all the others? Aren’t they covered under the first law?

Well sure, but criminals don’t obey that law, so we need to pass another law. The criminals will obey that law, surely! But they don’t, that’s why they’re criminals!

What about this scenario

You’re a bad guy in the middle of assaulting someone. You’ve got a knife in one hand and a baseball bat in the other.

Your target has a weapon as well. In order to realize your goal you must first disarm your target, otherwise you risk being injured yourself, and being unable to carry out your crime.

Disarming your target isn’t something you want to do, you might get hurt or killed in the process. But there you are, faced with a target that refuses to be a “victim” and now you have to deal with it.

It would be a much safer place for you to carry out your crimes of violence if your targets couldn’t effectively fight back. Wouldn’t it be nice if you had an accomplice? Someone that would disarm your target before you got there?

But who could this accomplice be? In cases like this it could be the school board or the school administration. Maybe it’s the city/county/state that have passed a law that disarms the law-abiding.

Wait a minute… don’t we have laws that make it a crime for helping a bad guy commit his crimes? Does that mean the school board or legislature should be charged as accomplices? Oh? Why not? They created the policy that disarmed the targets, turning them into defenseless targets. Sounds like they helped the bad guy out to me.

Here’s another thought experiment

Let’s say you’re a bad guy, and you want to hurt people, for whatever reason, it’s not important.

You were really mad at some school principal. Two schools sit right next to each other. You aren’t sure in which school the principal works, but you’re so angry/frustrated at principals in general, you don’t really care.

The two schools are identical, same layout, same number of students, same number of faculty.

The only difference: on one school there are signs on every door that say “No Weapons Allows” and has a picture of a gun with a “no” sign through it; the other school has a sign that says “all faculty members are armed”.

Which of the two schools do you go into to carry out your violence?

You’d pick the place where you were less likely to have someone stop you from carrying out your plans, right? So do criminals.

Someplace with a “no guns” policy tells would-be criminals that beyond that sign they’ll find a “defenseless victim zone”.

If we truly want to reduce massacres wouldn’t we want to train and arm as many law-abiding people as we can, then incentivize them to carry their self-defense weapons with them in as many places as possible?

Unless Gun Control Gun Rights Infringement Laws aren’t really concerned about reducing crime at all.

Related Articles:

• http://www.freep.com/article/20091110/NEWS07/91110026/1398/CNN–Gunman-puts-N.Y.-school-on-lockdown

Reportedly, two students at Tarrant County College in Fort Worth, Texas have filed a lawsuit against the college after being forbidden from wearing empty holsters on campus as part of a national protest.

Students for Concealed Carry on Campus was formed by a University of North Texas student in reaction to the 2007 shootings on the unarmed Virginia Tech campus.

To illustrate the feeling of vulnerability to campus crime, members and supporters wear their “holster-sans-weapon”.

Angela Robinson, the attorney for the college made the following statement:

“Of course [the college] will be opposing the request to allow empty holsters on campus. The college believes it has policies to protect the constitutional rights of students on campus, but also has to worry about the safety of students.” [emphasis added]

What’s that? An empty holster somehow poses a “safety issue” for the students?

“I can’t really get into what potentially might be evidence, but you can use your imagination as to the danger of empty holsters on campus, with the partial covering of it, or who knows if it’s empty.” [emphasis added]

Yes, we can see the dangers of empty holsters on campus. We feel there are more dangers with felons, rapists, and violent criminals on campus.

Any individual or organization that restricts how or when one can defend themself, we feel, is taking upon the responsibility for their individual protection and assumes full liability for any and all damages received by their failing to provide said protection.

Related articles

• http://www.texastribune.org/blogs/post/2009/nov/05/tarrant-county-college-sued-banning-empty-holster-protest/
• http://www.concealedcampus.org/
• http://www.texastribune.org/topics/campus-carry/
• http://www.thefire.org/public/pdfs/131692335995d92a7e4e1c931152bd59.pdf

If you’re anything like us here at Sitting Duck Policy, you feel a bit upset when you come across a location that has posted a “No Guns” sign.

You feel that this not only infringes upon your Right to self-defense, but also advertises to criminals that beyond that sign is a “safe working environment” free from “potentially hazardous conditions” which could end up getting them hurt (or killed) during the commission of their crime.

You don’t like this sort of “Defenseless Victim” zone the property-owner has created by posting their signage, but how do you go about telling them, in the hopes this policy will be removed (or preferably reversed)?

Tim Oliver over at Learn to Carry has created some free cards that help you do just that! Simply download to your computer, and print on any heavy-stock paper that you want (or take the .pdf to your local Kinko’s or UPS Store and have them print and cut a few sheets for you).

Recently we ran an article detailing our recommendations on how to conduct yourself during a traffic stop while armed. Ironically, one of our writers, Joe Levi, ran into just such a situation only days after the story was run. The following is his account in his words (used with permission).

It’s been years since I was last pulled over, but having a brother and a next-door-neighbor in law enforcement has kept me close to the their community. Although I respect the man behind the badge, I also respect the fact that “anything I say or do will be used against me”.

I left work shortly after dark and was “lit up” by a police officer. I pulled to the side of the road, put the car in “park” and cut the headlights.

I rolled down my window and place my hands on the top of the steering wheel while I waited for the LEO to come up to my window.

When he got to my window he did something I’ve never seen a LEO do before: he introduced himself by name and department: “Hi there. I’m Officer Smith from Clearfield Police Department.”

“Good evening, I’m Joe Levi, Syracuse, Utah.” Now, if I were on foot, that’s all the identifying information that I’d be provided to give, but since I was driving a vehicle at the time, I was prepared for the next question. It didn’t come, well, not right away.

“It looks like you’ve got a headlight out on the passenger side. Were you aware of that?”

“I didn’t know it was out, but it’s been acting up, so I’m not surprised,” I replied

“Yeah, it’s was out when you drove past me, that’s why I stopped you. Can I see your driver’s license?”

“Sure thing, it’s in my front pocket.” In my experience, LEO’s like to know what you’re doing so there are no surprises. Telling him that my wallet was in my front pocket, then digging my wallet out of my front pocket reassured him that I’m one of the good guys. I removed my driver’s license AND my Utah Concealed Firearm Permit (CFP), place the wallet on the dash in front of me, and handed him BOTH forms of ID, then returned my hands to the top of the steering wheel.

He looked at both (CFP was on top of the driver’s license) and said “Oh, okay. Are you carrying this evening?”

With my hands still on the top of the steering wheel I replied “Yessir. Right hip.”

“Thank you for letting me know. I’m also going to need your registration and proof of insurance.” He didn’t miss a beat, didn’t make a big deal over the fact that I had a loaded firearm on my hip.

“No problem, they’re in the glove box.” I paused before reaching for the glove box, then reached over with one hand, opened the glove box and removed the envelope that I keep that information, then handed him the requested papers.

“Great. I’m going to go back and run this, sit tight.”

“Yessir.”

A couple minutes later he came back, handed my my papers, permit, and license. “I’ve entered this stop into the computer as a warning with a note that I’ve advised you that your headlamp is out and that I requested that you have it serviced. I’m not going to cite you for anything and you won’t be getting any paperwork, just make sure you get that light looked at as soon as you can. Have a good evening.”

“Will do. Thank you.” He returned to his car. I re-filed my paperwork in the glove box, put my cards back in my wallet, turned the headlamps back on (both came on, ironically), signaled to my left, put the car in drive, waited for traffic, and drove the rest of the way home.

The total traffic stop was no more than 5-7 minutes and was the easiest, most hassle-free stop I’ve ever been involved with.

Mutual respect goes a long way, and I truly felt this officer respected me.

Disclaimer

Again, we remind you, we are not lawyers; we are not providing any type of legal and/or professional advice. As with anything you read/watch/hear, you should verify your facts and make sure the information applies to you. Consult legal council when and where appropriate.

When should you draw?

The question of when you should draw your sidearm should be something that you have already answered to your own satisfaction. It should be something that you have trained for. It should be something that you build into your Color Code responses so that it’s not a question of if, but when, and it’s not your decision, it’s the decision of the bad guy. His actions should dictate your pre-programmed response.

The answer to this question is both simple, and complex.

All of our laws are based on the presumption of what a “reasonable person” would do in that circumstance.

Simply put, draw your sidearm when a “reasonable person” would be in fear for their life or receiving serious bodily harm. (In many areas this extends to the life and well-being of another person.)

If you draw your firearm the bad guy has just crossed the Condition Orange line and you are now in Condition Red. At this point a “reasonable person” would feel fear for their life (fear receiving serious bodily harm), and would be justified in stopping that threat by the use of deadly force.

Put another way, as a civilian, you should not draw your sidearm unless you are justified in (and prepared to) kill the bad guy, if need be. Of course, killing someone is not your intent, but it may be the inevitable outcome of the encounter.

Put yet another way, as a civilian, if you’re not justified in pulling the trigger, you’re probably not justified in drawing your sidearm either.

Real-world scenarios

1. Your feel that your life is in danger:

1. someone is actively trying to kill you
2. someone is points a gun at you (even if it turns out it’s a BB gun or an air-soft gun, if a “reasonable person” would think it’s a “real” gun)
3. someone is enraged, has a weapon, is coming towards you, screaming he’s going to kill you

1. someone with a weapon (baseball bat, brick, bare hands) is actively beating you
2. someone is enraged, has a weapon, is coming towards you, screaming he’s going to hurt you or “teach you a lesson”

Real-world example

NCJones, a member of the USA Carry Forums recounts the following story.

I was at a friends pizza joint once about 11:30 PM waiting on my order and four thugs in baggy pants and gangster look walked in and just stood around (SW Houston).

The guy asked if he could help them and they said no.

At the time I was carrying a 1911 in a shoulder holster. I had my arms crossed with my hand inside the jacket. Hand on the grip and unsnapped just in case it turned ugly.

The pizza guy was a friend and noticed that I didn’t take my order and leave and that my hand was inside my coat. He thanked me for hanging around until they left.

In this example, NCJones elevated to Condition Orange when the four “suspicious individuals” came in. He prepared to enter Condition Red, setting his “mental triggers” (if one of the suspects did X, Y, or Z he’d draw and shoot). He prepared himself mentally and physically, and luckily, didn’t have to enter Condition Red.

Question

If I’m carrying a firearm in my vehicle and am pulled over for a routine traffic stop, should I inform the officer about the presence of a firearm?

Answer

First, we don’t offer legal advice on this site. You’ll want to contact your attorney or Department of Public Safety (or both) to make sure you’re abiding by the laws in your locality.

Second, we at Sitting Duck Policy have the utmost respect for those involved in law enforcement. 

When you are pulled over you are, by definition, being detained. You are not free to leave until the officer permits you to leave. The officer will ask you questions and is authorized to keep you detained until they have completed their investigation.

If the law requires you to notify the officer, abide by the law. Otherwise there are two schools of thought on what to do next.

• One says don’t tell the officer anything more than what you’re legally required to, and exercise your right to remain silent.
• The other says to be open and cooperative.

It’s up to you to decide how to proceed.

If you are in a locality that requires a permit to carry a firearm, when the officer asks you for your license and registration also pass him/her your carry permit. Don’t volunteer any information that you’re not specifically asked.

If they then ask you if you are carrying a firearm you can reply that you have a permit and are legally allowed to do so. It’s not answering their question per se, but it is notifying them that you are legally allowed to do so.

If they ask again, you can either respond by asking "am I legally required to answer that?" or answer specifically in a manner such as "my sidearm is on my right hip".

Remember, if you answer, you are required to answer truthfully; ironically, LEOs are under no such requirement to be truthful to you.

Furthermore, anything you say WILL be used against you. You are protected against self-incrimination in that you are not required to testify against yourself; however, you may ignorantly voluntarily testify against yourself. That is not illegal.

Know the law. Know your rights. Don’t let anyone, even a LEO, tread on those rights.

Question

Most of the time while at work my suit jacket is off so I just have suit pants, shirt, tie, etc.  The way I figure my pretty much ONLY option for carry is an ankle rig.  Pocket carry would seem just too difficult to conceal… even with a 642.  Anything I’m missing here?

Answer

Give some serious consideration to "tuckable" inside-the-waistband (IWB) holster, such as the Workman by Mitch Rosen.

With this sort of setup the holster lives between your body and the inside of your pants. Different types of IWBs have different "attachment" mechanisms. The Workman has a leather loop that wraps around your belt to secure it in place. A reinforced strap then drops down along-side the holster, and fastens to the bottom of the holster, allowing a shirt to be tucked in between the holster and the pants/strap. A little blousing of the shirt conceals the bulge and the top of the "loop".

Other IWBs may accomplish the same functionality in a different manner.

In this setup, as long as your shirt is sufficiently thick or dark, you can effectively conceal even a full-frame sidearm.

A reader of a forum posted this question (paraphrased):

This may be odd to some, I have been carrying my firearm for about a month and have yet to carry it fully loaded. I’m just now getting used to the Holster and weight.

When I’m carrying I think about what if something happens and I need to fire. If I draw my sidearm I would first have to rack the slide to chamber a round.

We don’t have kids so I’m not locking up my gun anymore. It stays close to me.

Here is a reply from one of our staffers:

I carried 10+0 in my Glock30 for the first 10 years (full magazine, no round in the chamber).

I sat through another CFP class recently and the instructor ran though some scenarios and statistics, and I came to realize, in most altercations where drawing my sidearm is necessary, I may not have enough time to draw and acquire my target before my target is "on me"… and carrying "unloaded" (no round in the chamber) means I’d still have to rack a round… which would take even more time. Add to the timing factor that I may have one of my hands occupied (fending off an assailant’s weapon, or distancing myself from him with an out-stretched arm), or may have an injured limb, and may not be able to use both hands to rack the slide, and it becomes even more important that all I have to do is "point and click".

After that class I’ve carried with a round in the chamber everywhere that I carry my sidearm.

It’s great they you’re getting used to the mechanics of carrying a sidearm! Take some time and get familiar with it. Get used to the holster, the added weight, and the fact that you have the added responsibility of that tool with you.

It took me a long time before I didn’t feel "uncomfortable" carrying concealed.

It took me a long time before I didn’t feel "uncomfortable" carrying fully loaded.

I’m still getting used to open-carrying.

You’re not "odd" by carrying "unloaded". Carry the way that you feel best suits you. Ask questions, do research (like you did by posting your question), and find out if you need to change "what suits you" in favor of a better practice, then decide if you’re willing to do so.

Background

We here at Sitting Duck are advocates of legally carrying a firearm to exercise your basic civil Right of self-defense. Whether you decide to do this in an open or a concealed fashion is up to you (and the laws that govern how, where, and when you can carry.

Statistics have shown that states that have adopted laws permitting concealed carry of firearms have had a notable decrease in violent crimes (rape, assault, homicide, etc.) as the number of concealed carry permits increase. An interesting corollary is that crimes against property tend to increase.

In other words, it looks like criminals, when faced with the increasing possibility of facing an armed victim, a criminal will favor property crimes over violent crimes. That’s a good thing. A stolen stereo, TV, or even a vehicle, is an insurance claim. A violent crime is something entirely different.

If ordinary “civilians” who might be carrying a firearm (concealed) are such a good crime deterrent, how much better would a civilian who actually is carrying a firearm (in the open)?

Open-Carry

Today we’d like to introduce you to Bad Ace.

Bad Ace is a regular guy who lives in the firearm-unfriendly state of California. He also openly carries his firearm every day, in compliance with California State Law. Unlike others who simply carry and deal with “concerned” citizens (those ignorant about the law) and uneducated Law Enforcement Officers (LEOs), Bad Ace carries an audio/video recorder with him. He knows the law, and he exercises his Rights. (Something more of us should do.)

Bad Ace then posts his experiences with LEOs on his website and makes them available via podcast.

• Website: http://www.opencarryradio.com/
• Twitter: http://twitter.com/bad_ace
• iTunes: http://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?id=325840010&uo=6
• RSS: http://www.opencarryradio.com/?feed=rss2

Midvale City, Utah will hold a City Council meeting to discuss what to do about the Midvale City gun laws which are in, if enforced, would be violation of Utah State Law.

I would request that you pass this on and be in attendance if at all possible.

UPDATE: Good news! Midvale City has repealed their city ordinances that were contrary to Utah Uniform Firearm Law. Good job Midvale!