Illinois Gubernatorial Candidates: The Associated Press recently asked candidates for Illinois governor questions about gun-control legislation. Here are highlights of their answers: QUESTION: "Would you sign or veto legislation banning the sale and possession of semiautomatic assault-style weapons in Illinois?" ... QUESTION: "Would you sign or veto legislation allowing concealed-carry for handguns?" ... http://www.wandtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=11666917 --- A New Breed of Criminal: Violent gangs are popping up in the last place you would ever expect: Upper-middle-class Valley neighborhoods. The parents are doctors and lawyers. Some live in gated communities but police say these educated, privileged high school and college students are just as willing as your average street thug to steal, cheat and even kill. Twenty-two suspected gang members have been arrested so far and investigators say more arrests are coming. They range in age from 19 to 24 years old. Investigators say they committed crimes in all corners of the Valley and those crimes were becoming increasingly violent. Investigators say their crimes started by organizing so-called party crew events and selling booze to 14 to 20-year-olds. Roger Vanderpool, a Department of Public Safety director, says, "It's not a safe environment. Bad things happen there." A group of Valley law enforcement agencies spent the last year investigating the suspected gang members. They are all young men along with one young woman... (This is a phenomenon I first saw two decades ago, with Vietnamese and Chinese youth in California. I credit, in part, the entertainment industry for glorifying the "gangsta" scene.) http://www.azfamily.com/news/local/Violent-gangs-in-well-to-do-neighborhoods-across-N-Phoenix-79109182.html --- Oops, Wrong House: Police are investigating a possible home invasion in the 2100 block of east 35th on Spokane's south hill. Police say they received a call from a homeowner around 7 p.m. Friday. He told police someone tried to break into his house and he shot at them. The homeowner, 85-year-old Andy Anderson, said he had just gone to bed when he heard someone enter his home through a side door. Mr. Anderson said the suspect then went to his home office and began rummaging around. At that point Mr. Anderson grabbed his handgun and confronted the suspect in the hallway. Mr. Anderson said he came face to face with the suspect and shouted at him, "Who are You?" when the suspect did not respond Mr. Anderson said he fired at him twice and the suspect fled through the front door... http://www.khq.com/Global/story.asp?S=11665636 --- Staying Vigilant without Being Paranoid: ...Being aware of your surroundings is a necessary survival skill but it's not an "on-off" switch - in the best cases this is almost always a gradation, a continuum. You can learn to control your attention, to make it flexible, effective, and responsive to the moment-to-moment needs of your patrol situation. That way, you don't have to maintain white-knuckled concentration to keep safe. Instead, your well-trained attention control system will act like a mental firewall, automatically scanning the environment so that it will be hard to catch you off guard. Here's how it works... http://www.policeone.com/patrol-issues/articles/1973293-Keys-to-staying-vigilant-without-being-paranoid/ --- Defending a Self-Defense Case: ...Many assumptions about trial tactics are inverted in a self-defense case. If the defendant presents some evidence on each of the elements of self-defense, then he or she is entitled to a jury instruction on the issue, which places the burden of proof squarely on the prosecutor to disprove self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt. If the prosecution fails to disprove self-defense, the client is acquitted. In practice, however, the defense attorney has a great deal of work to do in order to convince the jurors that the client's conduct fell within the common law of self-defense or within applicable state statutes. This article is a starting point for attorneys representing clients in a self-defense case. It is focused on the common law of self-defense, using Massachusetts as its primary example, but the general principles are applicable in any state. It also introduces attorneys to some of the research regarding use of force conducted by police and self-defense instructors... http://www.criminaljustice.org/public.nsf/01c1e7698280d20385256d0b00789923/f587d7d10c34fff2852572b90069bc3c?OpenDocument --- From John Farnam: 7 Dec 09 MDL, "Minimum for Daily Living" from an Instructor: "We all have different jobs, different social settings, wear different attire, live in different climates, and, in the case of our female colleagues, possess a unique superstructure. So, when we discuss what a person 'should carry,' we have to be flexible, as it all has to be concealed. In any event, here is my MDL (Minimum for Daily Living) list: Primary pistol, and at least one reload (spare magazine or speed-loader) Back-up pistol Tactical flashlight Blade OC spray Cell phone IBD Small light When I mention this List to people who don't carry on a regular basis, I am usually greeted with a good deal of eye-rolling, particularly from women Then, I suggest an 'Airplane List.' Delete everything you are not able to carry on commercial flights, and what is left? I strongly suggest all of us carry those items, all the time, a flashlight being first on that List, then IBD, cell phone, and small light. TSA has no issue with any of the foregoing, and they are all literally lifesavers!" Comment: It comes down to personal readiness/preparedness. How prepared you reasonably need to be, as noted above, is a relative question, varying with person and circumstance, and with world history, which may critically change that question for all of us- tomorrow morning! Part of "being prepared" is looking into the future and anticipating what items, though not required now, may be acutely necessary when our personal situation changes radically. /John ("IBD" is "Israeli Battle Dressing." I am fortunate to live in an area where a "tactical" vest is viewed as a fishing vest, not a "shoot me first" vest. In some areas fanny packs do not attract undue attention, in others they seem to scream "gun!" Other belt-mounted pouches may look more "normal." Regardless, some of these garments or accoutrements may facilitate carrying the stuff you may want to have in the various emergencies that may intrude in your life, whether a criminal attack or the effects of inclement weather.) 8 Dec 09 Comments, brief and to the point, on your personal MDL List, from an experienced Operator: "When you don't have it with you, you don't own it! How many times I have heard, 'If only I had my...' 'Normally, I carry a...' ' I have a ... at home, and it would really work for this,' ... ad nauseam! They are all pitiable and boring laments of the unprepared, the 'That could never happen!' 'Weren't you supposed to bring that?' 'Oh no! What do we do now?' heard, as opposed to whatever, whenever, wherever, however, whoever, 'I'm ready now,' meat-eaters! If sheep have sufficient psychic powers so as to divine, in advance, when is the right time to carry important tools, then they also know winning lottery numbers, and will thus win enough so that they can pay lots of skilled Operators to look after them, eh? Who are that physic, need carry nothing! For us mere mortals, we all better understand: 'When you don't have it with you, you don't own it' Get over it" Comment: That pretty well sums it up! /John 9 Dec 09 Politicalization of our Justice System? These comments from a seasoned, and disappointed, investigator: "Detectives and prosecutors alike are regularly seduced by groups of organized political ideologues into pursuing 'violations of the spirit of legislation,' instead of sticking with facts. These non-professionals, who have cynically attached themselves to our Criminal Justice System, thus regularly pollute investigations, compromising their integrity in the process. Prosecutors are then cajoled into pursuing nonsensical, agenda-driven crime-incident theory, and then are expected to come up with witnesses, and other evidence, to support the fantasy. Real investigators and prosecutors ignore these mendacious demands and simply follow the evidence wherever it goes. Others, with the identical job description, prostitute themselves and do the bidding of licentious political partisans and lobbyists who are anxious to hijack our Criminal Justice System in an effort to promote themselves and punish political opponents. Curiously, juries unfailingly identify these manufactured fantasies, correctly, as an attempt to use them as profane stooges in the promotion of someone's political career. Jurors take the job of deciding the fate of fellow citizens seriously, and they have scant patience with others in the System, who don't. Accordingly, they are just as put off by agenda-driven absurdity on the part of prosecutors, as they are with the same thing on the part of defense lawyers, even more so, because the prosecutor's salary is paid from the public treasury. Transparently pursuing political agendas in the courtroom, so that lobbyists in the background can file higher grant requests the next fiscal year, regularly generates internal struggles within juries that, without fail, lead to compromised verdicts. My advice to investigators and prosecutors alike: Throw the lobbyists, and politicians, out of your office! Forget clever tricks and cute posturing. Stick with the facts! Juries are not comprised of fools, and they visibly resent the entire Process being cheapened by shameless charlatans sucking-up to political hacks, at the expense of the pursuit of real Justice." Comment: As respect for our entire Criminal Justice System erodes, everyone in it will come under increasing pressure to compromise principles, in exchange for political favors. And, as they knuckle under, this nation will continue its slide toward becoming a third-world joke! It is incumbent upon all of us, who still know right from wrong, to magnificently hold our ground, and, as my friend suggests, throw these political hacks out of our office! /John (I have sat in a few jury pools, in three different venues, and served on one jury. I do not share John's view of the infallibility of juries. Additionally, while this comment focuses on the application of existing law, it ignores the endless proliferation of criminal statutes, with the exponential growth of non-violent offenses classified as RKBA-destroying felonies. "Did you really think we want those laws to be observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them broken...There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted - and you create a nation of law breakers - and then you cash in on guilt..." - Ayn Rand (1905-1982), spoken by Dr. Floyd Ferris in Atlas Shrugged, 1957) 10 Dec 09 Comments on our Jury System, from a Chief of Police, and student: "With sincere and logical intentions, our Founders believed they created a Justice System that would shield citizens from the abuses of government by positioning the jury between those citizens and the arbitrary power to incarcerate. It is an interesting theory, but today the System plea-bargains the vast majority of criminal cases. That fact, combined with the crippling financial impact of hiring competent attorney(s) to take one's case through the trial process, has eroded this so-called protection to the point of it being a rare privilege, rather than a 'right' accessible to everyone. When government brings a politically-inspired case against you, you will doubtless be offered a 'plea-deal.' Usually, this deal will include a guilty plea to a technical 'felony,' and a significantly reduced sentence, compared to that which is possible when the case goes to trial, and a conviction results. Thus, many innocent people face this dilemma: Do I plead guilty to a 'felony' that I did not commit and get probation, forever forfeiting basic rights in the process and essentially becoming a permanent, second-class citizen? Or, do I ever-impoverish my family in an attempt to win at trial, knowing that, when I lose, I will be incarcerated for an extended period, and will probably die in prison? Penalties are now so severe, for even insignificant, highly-technical violations of incomprehensible, generally-unknown, and arbitrarily-enforced codes and regulations, and litigation costs so high, that, unless you are willing to gamble your future with a public defender, most normal people are easily bullied into accepting the first 'deal' that is offered. Adding a vast array of brand-new federal felonies, that most of us will never even hear about (until federal agents come knocking on your door), is now the accepted approach in Congress." Comment: Our System, that was set up to protect the innocent from criminals, in both the private and public sectors, is corrupted by power-lusting politicians, eager to confiscate it for the purpose of promoting themselves. This, of course, has always been the case. But, the recent, enormous surge in the growth of government has imperiled everyone. The innocent are casually swept up into sinister, political agendas, high-sounding though they may be, and there is little protection. "Innocent until proven guilty" has become "Innocent until proven indigent!" /John -- Stephen P. Wenger, KE7QBY Firearm safety - It's a matter for education, not legislation. The tactics and skills to use a firearm in self-defense don't come naturally with the right to keep and bear arms. http://www.spw-duf.info .