It's All Fun For Them, Until One of Their Little Unionized Terrorists Get Shot
I was offline most of the weekend, spending the bulk of Saturday and Sunday in an NRA Personal Protection Outside the Home course with a class filled with NRA instructors. All of us were concealed carry permit holders, and all had previously taken the Personal Protection in the Home course (more on the courses at another time, perhaps).
As a result, I didn't get a chance until today to read about Nina Easton's account of a SEIU/NPA mob action that terrified the teen-aged son of a Bank of America lawyer, who was alone when the mob poured out of 14 buses and stormed their home. I was not there and cannot provide details, context, or the perceptions of the young man trapped inside the home, but I would not begrudge anyone the right to arm themselves if their home is suddenly surrounded, swarmed by a crazed and shouting mob. Grasping the size of the angry horde massing outside, trapped family members have every reason to go into a state of high alarm, as any reasonable person would under these completely unreasonable circumstances. If a homeowner in such a situation felt that a chanting mob banging forcefully on door and windows was attempting to break into the home, they would be fully justified under the laws of many states if the decided to start firing a gun through the door into the tightly packed mob behind it in order to stop what they felt was a felony home invasion in progress. This is not an extreme nor unusual statute, but a simple acknowledgment of castle doctrine and stand your ground laws applied to a bizarre situation. The simple fact of the matter is that the union mob need not intend harm upon the family they've besieged, they merely need to act in such a way as to make those poor trapped souls feel in fear for their lives from the mob actions. At such a point, angrily thrown rocks, kicked doors and punched-out windows could unleash a volley of gunfire, causing casualties among those attempting to terrorize a family at home. No jury on earth would convict a family trapped by 500 thugs screaming through bullhorns and causing them to reasonably suspect that their lives were in danger from a mob they thought was breaking down his door, and it's doubtful there would even be a prosecution in many jurisdictions. Barack Obama's comfort with thug politics and love of strong-arm behavior may get some of his supporters killed one day, and he'll have no one to blame but his own tactics and allies.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 03:19 PM
Comments
1
CY ... I endorse what you say 100%. I know that if some depraved organization like SEIU sent in 14 busloads of rowdy thugs to come on my property and terrorize me, I'd be standing in my doorway with my trusty Taurus The Judge revolver and daring them to come one step closer if they wanted a butt full of buckshot. Texas is 'my home is my castle' territory, and I'm 82 years old and not as strong and nimble as I used to be. But one thing I've learned -- you don't back down and hide from bullies. You face them down. And in Texas if they get shot on my land, I get no-billed by the Grand Jury. And you get, well, maybe dead.
Marianne Matthews
Marianne Matthews
Posted by: Marianne Matthews at May 24, 2010 03:31 PM (Aaj8s)
2
As Glenn Beck put it, this guy was coming home from his younger son's baseball game. His older son, 14, was in the house alone and scared out of his wits. That man had a decision to make.
According to Glenn's account, the cops refused to do anything out of fear of the mob. At that point, I say the guns come out. But, this guy more than likely does not believe in guns and these thugs and hoodlums were terrorizing the wrong people. Again. Start harassing the politicians who corrupted his nation through their greedy and anti-america laws.
According to Glenn's account, the cops refused to do anything out of fear of the mob. At that point, I say the guns come out. But, this guy more than likely does not believe in guns and these thugs and hoodlums were terrorizing the wrong people. Again. Start harassing the politicians who corrupted his nation through their greedy and anti-america laws.
Posted by: captainfish at May 24, 2010 03:46 PM (+2+jA)
3
Apparently, the cops in question not only would not do anything about this home invasion, they had escorted these purple gang criminals to the house!
In the states that have castle doctrine in effect, it would be proper to open fire on those organized crime members.
SEIU: 21st century organized crime; our new "Purple Gang".
In the states that have castle doctrine in effect, it would be proper to open fire on those organized crime members.
SEIU: 21st century organized crime; our new "Purple Gang".
Posted by: John Thomas at May 24, 2010 06:40 PM (er7+p)
4
DC FOP:
"The FOP is unaware of any MPD officers being involved in this activity. MPD has denied that any vehicles or officers were sent into Maryland. In addition, the details were provided without any confirmation or citation to the source of the allegations. Finally, the details that were provided do not match or conform to MPD protocols for protests or other actions by MPD.
"I would also note that if there were in fact non-Maryland law enforcement or security at the event, there are over 30 police departments and dozens of "special police" (security guards) business and agencies in the District of Columbia. Many of those organizations wear uniforms and drive vehicles that include the name "District of Columbia."
"The FOP is unaware of any MPD officers being involved in this activity. MPD has denied that any vehicles or officers were sent into Maryland. In addition, the details were provided without any confirmation or citation to the source of the allegations. Finally, the details that were provided do not match or conform to MPD protocols for protests or other actions by MPD.
"I would also note that if there were in fact non-Maryland law enforcement or security at the event, there are over 30 police departments and dozens of "special police" (security guards) business and agencies in the District of Columbia. Many of those organizations wear uniforms and drive vehicles that include the name "District of Columbia."
Posted by: Neo at May 24, 2010 06:52 PM (tE8FB)
5
Metro PD:
"The reporting that the Metropolitan Police Department led members into Montgomery County and to the home of a bank executive is wholly false. The MPD shadowed the unpermitted march, while in the District of Columbia, to ensure that no one in the march was injured. At NO time did the MPD enter Montgomery County, Maryland. Upon arriving at the Maryland line the MPD notified the Montgomery County Police of the approaching march and then stayed in the District of Columbia."
"The reporting that the Metropolitan Police Department led members into Montgomery County and to the home of a bank executive is wholly false. The MPD shadowed the unpermitted march, while in the District of Columbia, to ensure that no one in the march was injured. At NO time did the MPD enter Montgomery County, Maryland. Upon arriving at the Maryland line the MPD notified the Montgomery County Police of the approaching march and then stayed in the District of Columbia."
Posted by: Neo at May 24, 2010 06:55 PM (tE8FB)
6
Just tweaked one of my lefty friends with this.
Me: Man, I wish I could afford a machine gun.
Him: What possible event could require you having a machine gun handy?
Me: A 500 strong mob, with the cops doing nothing about it, assaulting my house.
Him: Like that could ever happen.
Me: *hands him the article*
Seriously though, this is scary. It's like the damn Red Guards beating people up and destroying property in the name of socialist progress. No good can come of this.
Me: Man, I wish I could afford a machine gun.
Him: What possible event could require you having a machine gun handy?
Me: A 500 strong mob, with the cops doing nothing about it, assaulting my house.
Him: Like that could ever happen.
Me: *hands him the article*
Seriously though, this is scary. It's like the damn Red Guards beating people up and destroying property in the name of socialist progress. No good can come of this.
Posted by: Britt at May 24, 2010 07:37 PM (VN7Wi)
7
In Connecticut, I have a concealed carry permit for my .44 spl.
In Connecticut you can shoot and kill a rapist in the act in his back (legally). You can shoot and kill the driver of a car bearing down on you with intent to it you.
You CANNOT pull and shoot a mob of 30 people, all armed with aluminum baseball bats (sporting equipment) who are beating you to death.
Weird, huh?
You also cannot shoot and kill anyone OUTSIDE your house. The trick is to get the thugs to break down your door and ENTER your home...then, well, get out the body bags.
ALSO! Connecticut is one of the few states you can LEGALLY own full automatic sub-machine guns. In the history of the state, NO CRIME has ever been perpetrated with a LEGALLY owned machine gun.
A friend of mine owns about 20 and 2 or 3 suppressors (silencers). Don't break into his home by accident.
In Connecticut you can shoot and kill a rapist in the act in his back (legally). You can shoot and kill the driver of a car bearing down on you with intent to it you.
You CANNOT pull and shoot a mob of 30 people, all armed with aluminum baseball bats (sporting equipment) who are beating you to death.
Weird, huh?
You also cannot shoot and kill anyone OUTSIDE your house. The trick is to get the thugs to break down your door and ENTER your home...then, well, get out the body bags.
ALSO! Connecticut is one of the few states you can LEGALLY own full automatic sub-machine guns. In the history of the state, NO CRIME has ever been perpetrated with a LEGALLY owned machine gun.
A friend of mine owns about 20 and 2 or 3 suppressors (silencers). Don't break into his home by accident.
Posted by: Connecticut Yankee at May 24, 2010 08:00 PM (Ws1to)
8
Connecticut Yankee said
ALSO! Connecticut is one of the few states you can LEGALLY own full automatic sub-machine guns. In the history of the state, NO CRIME has ever been perpetrated with a LEGALLY owned machine gun.
________________
No, what's funny is that select fire weapons are illegal in CT, but full auto ones are legal. So you can't own an M16, but you can own an M249. After, of course, paying the 200 tax and registering your light machine gun with the feds.
Quite a few states allow their citizens to own full auto weapons. Yet you still see weird things like I mentioned. Know your states laws, and the laws of any state you're going to be in.
ALSO! Connecticut is one of the few states you can LEGALLY own full automatic sub-machine guns. In the history of the state, NO CRIME has ever been perpetrated with a LEGALLY owned machine gun.
________________
No, what's funny is that select fire weapons are illegal in CT, but full auto ones are legal. So you can't own an M16, but you can own an M249. After, of course, paying the 200 tax and registering your light machine gun with the feds.
Quite a few states allow their citizens to own full auto weapons. Yet you still see weird things like I mentioned. Know your states laws, and the laws of any state you're going to be in.
Posted by: Britt at May 24, 2010 08:56 PM (VN7Wi)
9
Actually, if the mob of 500 was intent of turning you into a greasy spot, one gun-wielding person would be unlikely to provide more than an honor guard to Valhalla, all fantasies to the contrary. Even with automatic weapons, it would just make the splatter a bit larger.
I daresay, the kid did the right thing, locking himself someplace safe and the dad staying away. The police are just as culpable here. Trespassing is a crime, loitering is a crime, failure to disperse is a crime, protesting without a permit is a crime...all of which would have and should have resulted in a rather full county jail.
And as for the person talking about waving a gun around in public...even in Texas, they would arrest you, for the absolute stupidity of waving a loaded gun around if nothing else.
Easiest way to get the SEIU off the lawn: Turn on the spriklers. I heard they hate bathing.
I daresay, the kid did the right thing, locking himself someplace safe and the dad staying away. The police are just as culpable here. Trespassing is a crime, loitering is a crime, failure to disperse is a crime, protesting without a permit is a crime...all of which would have and should have resulted in a rather full county jail.
And as for the person talking about waving a gun around in public...even in Texas, they would arrest you, for the absolute stupidity of waving a loaded gun around if nothing else.
Easiest way to get the SEIU off the lawn: Turn on the spriklers. I heard they hate bathing.
Posted by: MunDane at May 24, 2010 09:36 PM (dlS06)
Posted by: Bohemond at May 24, 2010 09:40 PM (GznpF)
11
MunDane ... Evidently you are unfamiliar with the laws of Texas regarding firearms. I, however, am not, since I am a resident of this wonderful state. Texans are allowed to have reasonable numbers of guns at home, both long guns and side arms, without having to register them. And they are allowed to defend their homes and surrounding property from home invaders, with the guns they own. As long as the invading criminals are on my property, I can shoot them if they refuse to leave. And, as I said, I would be no billed by a Grand Jury, if the case ever came to court. Texans don't like strangers who threaten little old ladies in tennis shoes.
Concealed carry permits are fairly easy to get in Texas, although there are so many applications right now that there is a delay of a few months. We take our constitutional rights seriously here, MunDane, and we are the border state with the longest border with Mexico -- even longer than the border Arizona shares with Mexico.
I don't know what part of the country you're from, MunDane, but I suggest that you could, with a little exploration on the Internet, find out the gun possession regulations and carry permit regulations for all the states, if you would investigate before popping off.
Somehow, I don't think you'll do that. You seem to prefer ignorance to enlightenment.
Marianne Matthews
Concealed carry permits are fairly easy to get in Texas, although there are so many applications right now that there is a delay of a few months. We take our constitutional rights seriously here, MunDane, and we are the border state with the longest border with Mexico -- even longer than the border Arizona shares with Mexico.
I don't know what part of the country you're from, MunDane, but I suggest that you could, with a little exploration on the Internet, find out the gun possession regulations and carry permit regulations for all the states, if you would investigate before popping off.
Somehow, I don't think you'll do that. You seem to prefer ignorance to enlightenment.
Marianne Matthews
Posted by: Marianne Matthews at May 24, 2010 10:37 PM (Aaj8s)
Posted by: MunDane at May 25, 2010 06:46 AM (dlS06)
13
It would have been a great time to water the lawn...
Posted by: Scott Wiggins at May 25, 2010 08:07 AM (sE08M)
14
Appearing in the your front doorway (an open upstairs window would actually be ideal) with a shotgun at port arms would have been an affective crowd dispersant. Bet you wouldn't even have to speak, much less raise your voice.
If nothing else it would let the local LEOs know that they need to end the situation pronto. If the cops try to approach you simply close the door and tell them you are willing to discuss the matter once they disperse the crowd. Otherwise they are gonna need a warrant to come inside.
If nothing else it would let the local LEOs know that they need to end the situation pronto. If the cops try to approach you simply close the door and tell them you are willing to discuss the matter once they disperse the crowd. Otherwise they are gonna need a warrant to come inside.
Posted by: ThomasD at May 25, 2010 08:46 AM (21H5U)
15
If the cops did indeed "escort" the protesters then they are liable for criminal prosecution. They've overstepped the bounds of their sovereign immunity.
Posted by: Jerry in Detroit at May 25, 2010 08:52 AM (OQ4ml)
16
MunDane ... Why would I shoot at a cop? Cops are my friends, not my enemies. If an SEIU mob in 14 buses drove down my street and started to make trouble for my neighbors and me, I would already have called the Constable Patrol and the cops. And they would already be on their way. When they got here, they wouldn't try to protect the thugs in their purple shirts. They would be protecting me. That's the way it works here in Texas.
Marianne
Marianne
Posted by: Marianne Matthews at May 25, 2010 09:13 AM (Aaj8s)
17
Actually, I was thinking the same thing, namely that if a mob of chanting angry people came onto my lawn, the guns WOULD come out.
I wouldn't necessarily start shooting just because a mob was standing around chanting, but if anyone were breaking my windows or banging on the front door; or if I though they were heading in the direction to do that; or if any of them were carrying weapons or making overt physical threats, they'd get shot with no hesitation whatever.
I think in all 50 states an angry mob banging down your door would qualify as "reasonable belief of imminent grievous bodily injury or death".
Being on your own property (with or without children present), having absolutely no ability to retreat, facing numerous attackers simultaneously, and ALREADY having called the police would together literally make the strongest legal case possible for defensive use of deadly force. If you can't employ deadly force legally under those circumstances, you can't employ it period. I'll take my chances with a grand jury, even in liberal states.
Note that in practice, more likely than not, just a few shots fired (even into the air) would probably cause the mob to disperse.
In terms of actual hardware, a true machine gun would not only not be necessary, it would probably be suboptimal. A simple AR-15 or AK type gun would probably be ideal.
I wouldn't necessarily start shooting just because a mob was standing around chanting, but if anyone were breaking my windows or banging on the front door; or if I though they were heading in the direction to do that; or if any of them were carrying weapons or making overt physical threats, they'd get shot with no hesitation whatever.
I think in all 50 states an angry mob banging down your door would qualify as "reasonable belief of imminent grievous bodily injury or death".
Being on your own property (with or without children present), having absolutely no ability to retreat, facing numerous attackers simultaneously, and ALREADY having called the police would together literally make the strongest legal case possible for defensive use of deadly force. If you can't employ deadly force legally under those circumstances, you can't employ it period. I'll take my chances with a grand jury, even in liberal states.
Note that in practice, more likely than not, just a few shots fired (even into the air) would probably cause the mob to disperse.
In terms of actual hardware, a true machine gun would not only not be necessary, it would probably be suboptimal. A simple AR-15 or AK type gun would probably be ideal.
Posted by: looking closely at May 25, 2010 09:43 AM (YpVHs)
18
All the comments about needing a machine gun or heavy artillery to disperse this mob is a little overkill. It is the carry permits that make would be muggers think twice about robbing someone, or other violent crimes. If the SEIU and the rest of the "Intimidators" had known there were guns in the house would they have been as bold? I would not go looking for trouble, but I will give my troubles some trouble of there own.
Posted by: Picric at May 25, 2010 10:31 AM (xJEYd)
19
Shoot them. You have every right to.
Posted by: OdinsAcolyte at May 25, 2010 10:59 AM (brIiu)
20
Much as there is the visceral desire (and in most states the recognized right to defend your person with lethal force at your residence), to inflict bodily harm on these SEIU thugs, the instant result revealed several things: 1) the SEIU likes to terrorize anyone who is a perceived class opponent; 2) the SEIU are now being perceived more and more as thugs pursuing a socio-political ideology supported by the democrats and 3) SIEU will terrorize children to achive their aims. This will hurt them more than they realize.
The cloak that the SEIU wraps itself in, to protect the working class, is now torn free to reveal the purple shirted thug underneath.
While SEIU's terror campaign resulted in no physical injuries (though I think that teenager will be scarred for life by their tactics). The fact that no SEIU thugs were hurt reduces any sympathy that could be directed to the SEIU thugs. In adddition the SEIU now look like purple shirted jackbooted thugs terrorizing a teenager with no respect for other people's property or common decency or respect for fellow human beings. There is no talking point that excuses their behavior.
We can't buy that kind of publicity against these cretins.
The cloak that the SEIU wraps itself in, to protect the working class, is now torn free to reveal the purple shirted thug underneath.
While SEIU's terror campaign resulted in no physical injuries (though I think that teenager will be scarred for life by their tactics). The fact that no SEIU thugs were hurt reduces any sympathy that could be directed to the SEIU thugs. In adddition the SEIU now look like purple shirted jackbooted thugs terrorizing a teenager with no respect for other people's property or common decency or respect for fellow human beings. There is no talking point that excuses their behavior.
We can't buy that kind of publicity against these cretins.
Posted by: Penfold at May 25, 2010 11:01 AM (1PeEC)
21
I'd have fired for effect.
Posted by: cmblake6 at May 28, 2010 01:35 AM (04buQ)
Processing 0.0, elapsed 0.0133 seconds.
18 queries taking 0.0092 seconds, 29 records returned.
Page size 21 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.