The video
discusses the importance of less lethal self-defense options, advocating
for tools like pepper spray over solely relying on firearms.
Learn more @ https://bit.ly/ConcealedCarry0723
The Coolest Sports, The Hottest Talk, Music, and Fun
US Sports Radio
https://bit.ly/USSportsRadioToday
To learn more about Guardian Nation and how you can receive the quarterly gear box please visit https://tinyurl.com/CCGuardianGear
Please note, for Guardian Nation members in New York and Massachusetts it is illegal for us to ship Pepper Spray to you. We will substitute the pepper spray with a store credit to https://tinyurl.com/CCGuardianGear. Sorry for any inconvenience.
The Concealed Carry Show
Now streaming on US Sports Radio
https://tinyurl.com/USSportsRadioToday0824
Besides this being an election year in the U.S., the recent amendment to the Czech Republic's charter has me thinking about the debate over gun control and ownership here in America. This move comes with an extreme tightening of restrictions, raising the question: are European-style gun control laws a blueprint for America?
Back in 2021, I wrote about how the Czech Republic became an anomaly in Europe. See, they amended their charter to allow for the right to own a firearm for self-defense. This is an extreme view within the progressive nations of Europe. But the Czech laws were a far cry from those we take for granted in America.
As mentioned, the Czech Republic, like many European countries, has strict gun control laws. For example, to own a firearm for self-defense, individuals must:
Stringer/Anadolu via Getty Images
Despite these stringent measures, a tragic incident on December 21, 2023, at Charles University, where a legal gun owner opened fire and killed 14 people and injured 25, highlighted the limitations of these laws.
This month, in response to the incident, the Czech legislature passed additional laws, shortening the gun license renewal period from ten years to five, and giving doctors access to databases to determine if their patients are gun owners. These new measures aim to further restrict access to firearms, raising questions about the balance between individual rights and public safety, which are laced with privacy and authoritarian issues.
The Czech Republic has an adult population of approximately 8,720,000, with roughly 314,000 individuals (3.6%) holding gun licenses and owning approximately 1 million firearms.
In comparison, data estimates (nobody can really know) the adult population of the US at around 259,000,000. While it's challenging to determine the exact number of gun owners and firearms in the US because of the lack of universal gun registration (although that is the gun-control advocates goal), estimates suggest that about 45% of Americans own guns, totaling around 82,880,000 individuals owning an estimated 494,000,000 firearms.
The Gun Rights Rally in Columbus, Ohio on March 10, 2018 drew around 1000 well armed, law-abiding citizens.
Implementing European-style gun control laws in the US would be challenging both practically and legislatively. The sheer number of gun owners and firearms in the US would make it difficult to enforce similar restrictions. Besides a scheme like this requiring universal background checks, confiscation and privacy concerns are obvious.
Additionally, the monetary costs from an enforcement standpoint would blow up many state budgets. The US Constitution's Second Amendment protects the right to bear arms for self-defense, which the Supreme Court upheld in landmark decisions such as the District of Columbia v. Heller.
While the Czech Republic's approach to gun control may seem appealing to some, it raises a simple and fundamental question about the nature of rights and privileges.
Is a right overlaid with such extensive restrictions truly a right, or does it become a privilege granted by the government?
In the US, efforts to implement stricter gun control laws have faced challenges, particularly in light of the Supreme Court's decisions affirming the Second Amendment. While states have attempted to work around or disregard federal constitutional protections, the legal landscape has shifted following key rulings like Bruen v. City of New York. However, this doesn't mean that proponents of gun control have given up. The debate over gun control in the US remains contentious, with ongoing efforts to find a balance between individual rights and public safety.
The short answer is, not yet. While the Czech Republic's recent amendment to its charter highlights the country's approach to gun control, it may not find its way into American law today, it absolutely serves as a blueprint for American lawmakers bent on taking away the individual's right to own firearms, through tighter and tighter restrictions. The differences in population size, cultural attitudes towards firearms, and constitutional protections make it challenging to replicate European-style gun control laws in the US, but it won't deter the “only the government and my personal private security should own firearms” crowd. The debate over gun control will continue, with both sides advocating for their respective positions in the interest of public safety and individual rights, and I believe Americans will slowly march towards the inevitability of turning over their right's to the government.
What say ye? Do you think Americans will retain their gun rights or, where gun rights are concerned, will we look like Europe in the future? Leave a comment below.
The most
comprehensive educational and preparatory legal program for American Gun
Owners. Gun owners have reason to be concerned with changing and
confusing laws that ensnare and trap them. This course is anchored by
over 40 High Def video interviews with one of the nation's top attorneys
and several downloadable resources, workbooks, and guides to help the
gun owner prepare their legal defense while also better understanding
the laws that affect them.
https://bit.ly/AmericanGunLaw
We dive into a
harrowing incident in Ponka City where a homeowner was forced to defend
his residence against an armed intruder. At around 7 PM on a quiet
Sunday evening, a 29-year-old suspect attempted to forcibly enter a
home, leading to an exchange of gunfire. Learn the critical lessons from
this encounter about the importance of readiness and home security,
especially in domestic situations. Watch now for insights and tips on
protecting your home and loved ones.
https://bit.ly/AmericanGunLaw
The Concealed Carry Show. Now Streaming On US Sports Radio
https://bit.ly/USSportsRadioToday
In August, a Columbus, Ohio gas station, a man had his handgun stolen while he was paying the cashier. The criminal took the gun from the unsuspecting customer, fled the scene and the police have not apprehended the now armed suspect. This incident begs a conversation about open carry vs concealed carry.
Photo [Google Maps]
Columbus Police say that on August 24th, around 10:00 PM, at a gas station in the 600 block of East Hudson Street, a criminal stole a handgun from the victim while he payed the cashier. Local ABC News 6 reported that the police state:
The victim was standing at the counter when the suspect reached into the victim’s pocket and stole a handgun. The suspect then fled on foot.
Have you seen the man in the red shirt? Police say he stole another person's gun while in line at a gas station. (Columbus police)
Based on the police statement, the victim was carrying the gun “in his pocket.” It isn't clear if he carried the gun in a pocket holster, or his pocket was the holster. The victim may not have been ‘technically' open carrying his handgun, but it was visible. I'm not sure the victim's intent to conceal the gun or not matters much, Other than an opportunity to mention two things.
First, that you should always carry a gun in a proper holster. Here is one example of what can happen when you don't.
View this post on Instagram
Second, that if you intend to carry concealed, you need to ensure the gun is…concealed.
This isn't the only incident where a criminal took a gun from an unsuspecting victim. For example, in this video we see a criminal take a gun from a victim by force. Here are just a couple more incidents similar to this recent one in Ohio.
Stolen Off Carrier’s Hip, And Prevention Tips
Suspect who stole gun from man open carrying at Detroit gas station arrested for unrelated crime
I know some will say that millions of people open carry every day, and I am just cherry picking a few stories to confirm my bias against open carry. It may be true to say the number of guns taken from open carriers is low. However, the number of guns taken from concealed carriers is even lower. What I mean is that although I've searched, I haven't found an incident where a criminal disarmed a person who carried their gun concealed.
Improper concealed carry is practically not much different from open carry.
Here is a separate incident caught on video. Don't blink, it happens quick folks. Once your gun is gone, what is your response?
We don't want to provide any criminal with a free gun, but there is even more to worry about. Someone willing to steal a gun from your hip may also be willing to use it against you or anyone else. Here is one incident where that is exactly what happened.
It's important to consider your physical condition as well. In this video, we see an older man carrying his handgun openly. If you were a violent predator, would you consider this man your prey?
Check out the video of this incident.
I am not a fan of open carry. It's not a “rights” issue, it is a tactical and practical decision. But, supposing it is legal to do so, you may still choose to open carry. If you do, at least consider comparing the answers to the following questions to any benefits of open carry.
Oh, and this one just happened recently in Memphis, TN: Man’s gun stolen from holster while waiting in gas station line
If you're interested in a couple more, here is another one where the criminal stole the gun and used it against him. Man Disarmed And Shot With Own Handgun in Parking Lot. Getting shot is horrible. Getting shot with your own gun, even more so.
If you choose to open carry for comfort or ease of draw, consider this course called Holsters Concealment and Carry Positions. This is the most thorough course that breaks down the pros and cons of different carry methods, as well as the attributes of a holster that provide for adjustment and ultimate comfort and concealment.
Anyone with information about the suspect’s identity is asked to contact Det. Miles at either (614) 645-2090 or jmiles@columbuspolice.org. Another option is to call Central Ohio Crime Stoppers at 614-461-TIPS.
ConcealedCarry.com is a network of firearm instructors across the country, an online store of firearm accessories, and a media outlet for the firearm industry. We have a team of instructors that teach in person and online firearm training classes across the United States.
I think anyone who carries a firearm as a defensive tool has thought sometime about what they would do if this or that scenario took place. I think these “what if” scenarios are valuable mental exercises, provided we keep some things in mind.
First, it's important that when we run our “what if” scenarios, we have an accurate understanding of our level of skill in a specific area. A simple example would be knowing your draw to first shot time. Knowing this number gives you a rough idea of the time it would take to draw and get a shot on a threat, under ideal conditions.
Then you can accurately “what if” a scenario with your skills instead of what you think you could do. And no, you're not just going to rise to the occasion when the time comes. Don't get me wrong, I hope you do. It's just not a good idea to rest on possibly performing at a high level under stress if you've never done it before.
Secondly, we need to have an idea of what real violence looks like. I'm not talking about staying safe by looking at crime trends in your neighborhood and pattering your behavior accordingly. One example is to think no one could ever get the drop on you because you're “always aware of your surroundings”. Or as soon as the criminal sees you have a firearm, they will comply with your commands.
Reality is that situation awareness is critically important, can buy time and may keep you from being involved in a deadly force incident, but it doesn't ensure that. Furthermore, as much as we think we “have our head on a swivel” if you spend enough time in public places, you'll be vulnerable at some time even if it's brief.
A well executed plan by a couple of criminals catches these two completely off guard.
Additionally, you may respond appropriately, but will your loved one? Each person involved adds another variable that you can't control. The point is, real life violence and self-defense is far more complicated than it appears on the surface.
Which brings me to this video.
The video is brief, lasting only about 8 seconds. But in these 8 seconds a lot goes down. There are many things we can take from this short video, but here are just a couple things I think we would be wise to note.
First, while we train to defend our lives, criminals who've been around the block a few times know what they are doing, and they can become quite proficient in their profession. A smart criminal picks the right moment and minimizes their risk. They want the upper hand, which is usually the element of surprise. And since we typically must respond to a threat, the criminal can gain a position of advantage before we have time to react.
Now someone may say the victims had poor situational awareness. They never should have let anyone ride up on them like that. But in reality, if you're walking down a busy street, do you assess every single vehicle and person in your vicinity? Do you do it 90% of the time, 75%? Anything less than 100%, and that's unlikely, leaves the door cracked for a criminal with a plan.
We see how fast this goes down. The motorcycle is on them in seconds, and the rider in the back has a gun drawn and on them before they know what happened. At this point, even the fastest draw is a high-risk play. The couple goes with compliance, which in this case seemed like a good call. Sometimes compliance works. Other times, you may have to take the high-risk route because the criminal shows a high level of violence.
These criminals have the position of advantage.
Then we see the man take off and leave the girl to fend for herself. I don't want to get wrapped up too much on the chivalry or lack thereof. Or the post incident conversation between these two victims. I just want to mention again that we may have a plan or ability to escape. But if our loved one doesn't or can't, what's your Plan B?
I think sometimes men nobly fill that protector role. But we can't always be there, and even if we are, there is strength in numbers when they've trained, have the means, a plan, and are on the same page. This is just one of the several reasons I love to see couples attending training together.
Adios amiga.
For example, last year we had several husband and wife, and father and daughter combinations attend the Annual Guardian Conference. We purposely designed this training conference to be family friendly, capture people of every skill-level and provide a diversity of training from live-fire to legal, to trauma medicine and so much more. If you've thought of attending a training course, consider going as a couple. And then consider checking out the line-up of instructors teaching at this Annual Guardian Conference.
|
In February, a criminal murdered a DeKalb County, Georgia man with his own firearm, after the criminal disarmed him in a Dunkin’ Donuts parking lot. Then a similar incident occurred on March 30th in Clayton County, Georgia. Again, a criminal disarmed a man, but this time, an accomplice of the suspect shot the victim. Recognizing the similarities between these two incidents, and the big difference, is important to our defensive strategy.
Screen grab from WSBTV 2 News.
I wrote about the DeKalb County incident in this post called Man Disarmed And Shot With Own Handgun in Parking Lot. A quick summary of that incident is that the criminal observed the victim carrying a handgun on his waistline. The suspect grabbed the gun and ran, with the owner chasing to retrieve the gun. The two men got into a physical fight over the gun, and the criminal used the gun to shoot and kill the owner.
In that story, there was no information as to if the victim purposefully carried the gun openly or just did a poor job of carrying the gun concealed.
Suspect in DeKalb County Georgia Shooting. Photo: WSBTV 2 News.
The latest incident from Clayton County has a familiar beginning. According to LawOfficer.com, the victim called Watkins was waiting in line at a Shell gas station. The suspect was behind him in line and:
“quickly disarmed Watkins by grabbing the holstered weapon from his hip and then ran from the store. Watkins gave chase and caught the suspect in an attempt to retrieve his firearm”
While Watkins fought the suspect for control of the stolen firearm,
“a second suspect exited a car, pulled out a gun and opened fire on Watkins, hitting him multiple times”
Again, the reports didn’t provide the detail on whether Watkins carried the gun openly, or just concealed it poorly.
Murder Suspect in Clayton County, Georgia Shooting. Photo WSBTV News.
In most contexts, open carry puts you at a tactical disadvantage. The downsides far outweigh the benefits. Not all criminals are afraid of an armed citizen, or law enforcement officer, for that matter. And often, it makes you a target of criminals, anti-gun activists who call the police or people who just freak out at the site of guns.
If the few links to stories above don’t convince you, check out this article from Greg Ellifritz where he provides links to 103 news stories where criminals disarmed someone of a firearm.
We don’t know how either of these men carried their firearms, openly or poorly concealed. But it really doesn’t matter because, in a practical sense, a poorly concealed gun isn’t much different from a gun carried openly. If you’re pro open carry argument is that these guys might have been carrying concealed—like several comments on the post of the first story—you’re missing the point.
Columbus, OH man disarmed.
If the criminal took the gun because the victims improperly concealed it, they would certainly have done the same thing if it the victim’s carried it openly. And while a retention holster is a must if you open carry, in and of itself, doesn’t ensure a criminal can’t disarm you. I’ve seen holsters torn off belts, and criminals defeat active retention systems on holsters. Firearm retention involves gear, but it’s there is technique as well.
At the same time, advocates of concealed carry need also to recognize that the gun needs to remain concealed. There is a balance between fixating on a little bump and thinking everyone knows it’s a gun printing, and not caring about the obvious gun-shaped bulge under our shirt. This is yet another reason I don’t recommend small of back (SOB) carry. It’s just too easy for your shirt to ride up and expose the gun without you being aware.
In both of these incidents, after the suspect disarmed the men, they chased after the person who took their gun. I’m not sure why saying this is an extremely unwise thing to do is controversial. Certainly, everyone may do what they think is best, but it doesn’t make it wise in practice.
NY City woman disarmed.
When I made this point in a prior article, people argued that the criminal now had a gun and could use it to harm innocent people. That is absolutely true. What is also true is that once they shoot you, they will still have the gun to use it in a crime against innocent people. How about instead of getting shot trying to get your gun back, you do everything in your power to make sure you’re not disarmed to begin with? This includes using proper gear concealing well, and learning some basic gun retention techniques.
Situational awareness is important, but it doesn’t insulate you from unavoidable confrontations. Readiness is necessary when avoidance is not an option. Are you training so you’re ready to respond?
I’m not making excuses for the criminal. If you’re going to carry a gun—and I am all in favor of you doing so—you need to understand the reality of the violence. Both of these incidents happened in Georgia, but this type of violence isn’t confined to a geographical area.
I highly recommend checking out this post called 4 Deal Breaking Criteria for Holsters, And Why the Majority of Holster Fail. The rules will help you if you’re looking for a new holster and provide guidance on how you can test your current holster.
We encourage you to leave your opinion in the comments below.
In an incident that happened last week, a man shot at two roommates inside his Cape Coral, Florida home. That man faces 3 felony charges. Here is what happened.
Cape Coral Police: Dayne Miller
According to Cape Coral Police, around 12:30 AM, they responded to a call from the homeowner at 1041 SW 1st Street. When they arrived, they safely removed the two roommates from the home without incident. They found shell casings on the floor outside a bedroom, and bullet holes in the door.
Police then spoke with the homeowner called Dayne Miller.
Miller admitted he shot at the two roommates through a closed bedroom door, after his teenage daughter told him she woke up to one of them laying next to her in bed, naked. The teenage daughter did not accuse the roommate of any criminal act.
According to police, all parties stated that Miller and the two roommates, a husband and wife who rent a room from Miller, were drinking alcohol “in excess”.
One roommate told police that while intoxicated, and after using the bathroom, he mistakenly went into Miller’s teenage daughter’s room and laid down in the bed, and fell asleep.
Police say that the spouse of the confused and inebriated roommate heard Miller’s daughter telling him about the naked man in her bed. The wife woke her husband and brought him into the couple’s room. That is when Miller demanded they open the door and let him in.
Police say that when the couple wouldn’t open the door, Miller threatened to kill them, and shot 3 or 4 times through the bedroom door.
Police arrested Miller and charged him with two counts of F.S.S. 784.021(1)(a) Aggravated Assault With a Deadly Weapon, and one count of F.S.S. 790.19 Shooting into an Occupied Dwelling.
Almost without exception, anytime someone uses deadly force, the person must have a reasonable belief that the threat presents an eminent threat of death or serious bodily injury. Here, even if Miller knew the roommate assaulted his daughter—something the daughter never claimed—he could no longer use deadly force against the roommate once he was away from the daughter, in his room behind a locked door.
I think it would horrify and anger any parent to learn a naked man was in bed with their teenage daughter. But this doesn’t mean the parent can legally attempt to or actually kill the person at a later time.
Alcohol certainly played a role in this incident. We don’t know if either man would have done what they did, had they not been drinking alcohol? The roommate is not without blame. No one would likely blame Miller had he pummeled the roommate. But shooting through a bedroom door at two people is crossing a line. Miller would have done far better in protecting his daughter if he would have remained sober, and vetted the people he rents to a little better.
Just because Police arrested Miller, doesn’t mean a prosecutor will file charges against him. Do you think the prosecutor should file charges? Will Miller plead out to lesser charges? What do you think? Leave your comment below.
Prosecutors initially charged Crimo Jr. with 7 counts of ‘reckless conduct', one for each person killed by his son. If convicted, each charge comes with a possibility of 3 years in prison. A grand jury just formally indicted Crimo Jr. and it seems like this case is proceeding.
So let's look at the case based on what we know so far.
Wikipedia
The charges against Crimo Jr. stem from his endorsement of his son's 2019 FOID permit application. Illinois requires a person to obtain a Firearms Owners Identification (FOID) to possess firearms or ammunition legally. Because the killer was under a8 years old in 2019, Illinois law requires a parent to endorse the application. Authorities say:
Illinois State Police reviewed the son’s gun license application and found no reason to deny it because he had no arrests, no criminal record, no serious mental health problems, no orders of protection and no other behavior that would disqualify him.
Prosecutors claim Crimo Jr. knew his son was potentially violent, and yet he still endorsed the young man's FOID application. Prosecutors argue this because of two incidents which occurred months before the killer applied for his FOID card. In April 2019, police responded to the family home because the killer threatened to kill himself using a machete. Then is September 2019, a family member reported to the police that the future killer threatened to “kill everyone.”
Police didn't arrest Crimo Jr.'s son for the criminal threats, nor was he committed against his will to a mental institution. Police can temporarily detain a person for 72 hours, so a licensed doctor can evaluate the person and determine if they pose a risk to themselves or others. It appears that the evaluation determined the future killer was not a risk to himself or others, and did not need to be detained any further.
It is easy to second guess the doctors, knowing what we do now. However, we have to understand the troubled history of governments holding against their will, people who they deemed “crazy.” Many people incorrectly believe that people with mental disorders are likely to commit to violence. This isn't the case, even though that some mental illnesses cause people to act bizarrely and it can be quite scary. This issue of stripping Second Amendment rights, or confinement to an institution and forced medication, of those with ‘”mental health issues” is difficult to solve. Especially in a society where we value individual liberty and restrained governmental authority.
It's important to know that Illinois already has robust laws that police can use to seize the firearms of someone who is a danger to themselves or others. They could have temporarily seized the young man's firearms if they took custody of him based on valid suicidal threats. It appears as though they didn't.
Illinois also has red flag laws, that police could have used to disarm the killer years before the shooting, had a family member or police petitioned a Judge and presented compelling evidence he was a threat to himself or others. It seems like nobody close to him, or the police who responded to the calls, thought the threats reached that level.
I tried my best to present what I know of the case in an impartial way. I purposefully didn't want to include my opinions on the charges against Crimo Junior. It is still early, and as the case progresses, we will understand more of what happened before the shooting.
It is very hard to predict criminal behavior, even if someone makes statements to harm themselves or others. In hindsight, we often can't imagine how red flags went unnoticed. But it's hard because we don't know how many similar incidents occur, where nobody acts on their statements. I'm not saying this to advocate for Crimo Junior, not in the least. I think that the young man who decided to kill innocent strangers is extremely disturbed. Shame on the parents if they didn't help their son, or through neglect made the issues worse. I'm not saying this is the case, but I presume we will learn a lot as the case progresses.
I just think cases like this are a good opportunity to reflect on our relationships.
Consider checking out the non-profit organization “Hold My Guns.” Since the time we interviewed the founders on our Concealed Carry Podcast, I have become a strong advocate for their mission to give gun owners safe firearm storage options and help overcome the stigma of mental health. Check out the interview by clicking here.
" "
