Category: Guns

Ammo Land describes the event and trials (yes, trials) of one Michael Dunn, who, during an altercation with a group of youths over their music, shot and killed seventeen-year-old Jordan Davis. Dunn then fled the scene, and was arrested at his home the next day.

I know I for one look forward to the daily “Feel Good Stories” posted here, and I’m sure I’m not alone. But there is a flip side, too, where a situation occurred that could have been avoided if some common sense was applied, and tempers checked. This is one of those.

USA – -(AmmoLand.com)- Michael Dunn is one of the relatively rare criminal defendants who endured two trials and faced two juries for the same incident.

Dunn fatally shot seventeen-year-old Jordan Davis at a convenience store parking lot after an argument over the loud music Davis and his friends were listening to in their red Dodge Durango. While Dunn claimed Davis made death threats, displayed a shotgun, and attempted to get out of his car to attack him, no evidence or witness testimony corroborated his account. Dunn fled the scene and failed to contact law enforcement. A witness memorized Dunn’s license plate number, and detectives apprehended Dunn at his home the next day. He was eventually charged with one count of first-degree murder for the shooting of Jordan Davis, and three counts of first degree attempted murder for firing at a car full of teenagers as they sped away. The state threw in a charge of throwing or firing “deadly missiles” for good measure.

During the first trial, scrappy criminal defense attorney Cory Strolla, operating on a shoestring budget, made an impassioned argument that the state failed to disprove, beyond a reasonable doubt, Dunn’s claim that he shot Jordan Davis in self-defense. According to a juror who spoke to reporters after the trial, Strolla convinced two members of the jury that the state had not met their burden. They refused to convict Dunn on the murder charge and forced a mistrial on the central count. The jury was unanimous, however, on the three counts of attempted murder, although he opted for the lesser charge of second degree, telling the state they believed the act was done in the heat of the moment, not as a premeditated plot to kill. They found him guilty for the “deadly missile” charge as well.

The mandatory minimum sentence for second-degree murder in Florida is 20 years — each. Dunn would get 60 years in prison for the shots he fired that hurt no one, and he’d have to stand trial a second time to resolve the question surrounding the shot that took Jordan Davis’ life.

During the second trial, experienced public defender Waffa Hanania represented Dunn and worked methodically to convince the jury that “Jordan Davis escalated this situation until he ended up dead.” The jury didn’t buy it. After a short deliberation, they gave the state exactly what they asked for: a guilty verdict for first-degree murder. The verdict meant that the jury didn’t just reject Dunn’s self-defense claim — they felt that at some point in the argument, Dunn made a deliberate decision that he was going to kill Jordan Davis, and then he did.

Don West, veteran criminal defense lawyer and National Trial Counsel for CCW Safe said that the Dunn trial provides a “list of how not to act” as a concealed carrier.

Here’s a list of some of Dunn’s biggest mistakes:

When Dunn pulled into the convenience store, he heard the loud music. He could tell it was coming from the red Dodge Durango, and he chose to park right next to it anyway. Had he chosen any other parking spot, Davis would be alive, and Dunn would be free.

Dunn chose to confront the teenagers in the SUV about their loud music. While it was within his rights to do so, a grown man shouldn’t be surprised that cocksure teens out with their friends might take umbrage at a request to turn down the radio. Dunn invited the argument that ensued.

Once Jordan Davis got angry and started shouting obscenities, Dunn could have disengaged. He could have looked away or moved to a different parking spot. Instead, he rolled down his window and, stealing a line from Robert De Niro in the film Taxi Driver, he said, “Are you talking to me?”

Dunn told investigators, “I went over this a million times, and what I should have done is put the car in reverse . . . it was fight or flight. I don’t think there was any time for flight at that moment.” Dunn did have enough time, however, to reach across the passenger seat, open the glove box, grab his holstered pistol, draw the weapon, and rack the gun before firing.

Dunn fired too many times. The fact that the first jury failed to convict on murder says that the first round of bullets Dunn fired could have been considered justified. But everyone agreed that the final burst of gunfire was without justification.

Dunn fled the scene and failed to report the shooting to investigators, Don West says there was no plausible scenario to explain why Dunn left the scene without reporting the shooting to authorities — unless he had done something wrong.

Dunn spoke to police investigators without the advice of an attorney. His voluntary testimony was used against him in court.

Clearly, there are many lessons here for the concealed carrier, but perhaps this is the most important: don’t confuse anger for fear. No one could present any solid evidence or witness testimony to bolster Michael Dunn’s claims that Jordan Davis produced a shotgun and was starting to get out of the SUV to attack him. Without such evidence, combined with that fact that Dunn fled without calling the police, it must have appeared to most jurors that Dunn was inventing facts to justify the shooting.

The second jury, with their first-degree conviction, said that Dunn’s actions amounted to pre-meditated murder. Perhaps that’s true. The jurors with dissenting votes on the first jury must have felt that Dunn’s fear could have been reasonable. Perhaps that’s the truth.

Or perhaps the truth is somewhere in between, in a murky gray area where fear and anger mix. Self-defense is a matter of life and death, but it’s not often black and white. Should you ever find yourself suffering the tragedy of having to defend yourself with deadly force, people are going to look into your heart to determine whether its filled with fear or anger. Before you ever pull the trigger and take a life, you’d better be sure about what those people will find.

A lot to think about, but the real lesson is don’t look for trouble.

Ghost guns?

I’ve seen this term tossed about here and there, and frankly, had no idea what it referred to. I thought that perhaps it was a reference to people with 3-D printers who can concoct just about any solid object from plans, using resins that are easily obtained at most hobby shops.

I do have a laser tag gun that bears a remarkable resemblance to a handgun. It is currently buried in a box in a closet.

This article by Rick Kambric starts with his question: When is a gun really a gun?  http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/vernon-hills/news/ct-vhr-blotter-jakub-zak-80-percent-ghost-guns-tl-0816-story.html#

“Jakub Zak, 19, pleaded guilty Aug. 6 to a reduced gun possession charge after police said the teen was in possession of home-built firearms known as ghost guns. In total, he was in possession of five guns in various stages of completion including some that could be fired, police said.”

Here’s the problem: Zak is, under state law, required to have an FOID if he intends to own a weapon, period.  There is no leeway for this. Regardless of age and/or his intentions, not obtaining an FOID puts his possession of these firearms, incomplete or otherwise, into “illegal possession” status.

“The case highlights how the line between a gun part and an actual gun can come down to a few holes.

“A receiver — or the frame of a gun to which most of the parts eventually connect — is legally considered a gun, according to Kreis.

“Federal law allows purchasers to legally buy or transfer parts that are no more than “80 percent” of a gun, according to Kreis. He said a block of metal shaped like a receiver but not fully drilled to accommodate screws or a barrel is considered less than 80 percent of a gun, and can therefore be sold outside of the laws that regulate a completed firearm purchase.”

There are clear images in the lead photo in the article that show the various stages of incomplete and complete receivers, and it is the “complete” receiver with the groove in the metal that is considered to be a firearm by law enforcement. Adding places for bolts and screws increases the “completeness” of it.

Dismissing Zak’s personal bent towards partisan politics, and hanging out at the campus of the College of Lake County, the fact that he had any gun in a near-complete state and had no FOID is what nailed him. What he intended to do is speculation, and I will not do that here.

The article also includes the fact that hobbyists whose interest lies in reconstructing antique firearms such as flintlocks and black powder handguns and rifles can legally  buy the parts for them online and put them together in working order at home, but the fact is that the majority of these people are not disgruntled souls looking for a bone to pick.

I think those guns that Josey Wales carried in that movie are pretty cool. I’d wear those to the store, just for the sheer glamour of it.

There are plenty of people who will buy kits and receivers with serial numbers from gun shops, and build a custom gun for themselves with other parts.

As I said, I have no idea what Jakub Zak’s intentions were in buying these parts or bringing these firearms to completion. However, none of his weapons, complete or incomplete, had serial numbers which is common with the purchases of these online parts. The issue here is that these ghost guns with no serial numbers are frequently stolen from the people who built them, making them untraceable.

This makes it more difficult for licensed gun owners and potential gun owners like me to legally obtain weapons that we want for personal safety. The hysterics that follow this kind of thing, generated and fomented by the media, make it even worse.

What’s the conclusion? Well, requiring serial numbers on those “kit” guns, period would be a start, and I don’t care how much it inconveniences the buyer. There is a video in the article in which one shop owner says that most kit gun purchasers want the serial numbers and will jump through the hoops to get them, because the parts have been tested by the manufacturers.

Otherwise, let’s start with requiring that everyone have gun/weapons training, starting in 4^th grade (or 5^th if they are wienies), that they learn how to do things the right way, and apply for a gun owner’s education license by age 16, just like they required of us for driver’s ed  in high school.

Your learner’s permit meant your sister had to be in the car with you if you wanted to drive to the A&M Root Beer stand down the road, but it didn’t mean you could make the car jump the ditch and scare the crap out of half a dozen hogs while you ripped up 50 feet of hogwire fencing.

No, a gun learner’s permit means that you take the safety classes, watch the ‘don’t do this’ movies while you’re half asleep after gym class, go to the target range with your certified instructor (who has to be at least 48 and a grizzled Army or Marine vet, or no one will listen to her/him), shoot your bullets, get the marks or scores, pass the gun owner’s written test requirements to get your license, and when you go out on the street, you go with a responsible adult instead of your sister until you get sworn in at the recruiting office.

Unless, of course, you guys have better ideas, that’s my solution to it.

The estate of Bryan Galliher — through Columbus-based law firm Cooper & Elliott and the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence — filed the lawsuit Tuesday morning in the Wayne County Court of Common Pleas.

In the complaint, attorneys argued Cabela’s, and its parent company, Bass Pro Group LLC, violated state law by selling a “black powder gun” — a replica of an antique firearm made from modern materials — to Paul R. Claren, the Orrville man who killed Galliher using the gun in August 2016.

The lawsuit alleges that Cabela’s knew, or should have known, about Claren’s violent past, and therefore should not have sold him the black powder revolver.

“Cabela’s and its employees knew and/or should have known firearms law in Ohio, the state in which it was operating, including the law that prohibited Cabela’s from selling a black powder firearm to Claren,” the complaint states.

The lawsuit alleges that Claren purchased an 1858 Army .44-caliber black powder revolver from Cabela’s over the phone in December 2014. In July 2016, Cabela’s also sold Claren a black powder loading kit that he used to load the revolver, the lawsuit states.

Harry Campbell, a police officer and chief investigator for the Stark County Coroner’s Office, testified during the trial that under federal firearms regulations, anyone could purchase the type of pistol Claren used without going through an FBI background check. He added Ohio law is more restrictive when it comes to convicted felons.

I am unfamiliar with Ohio law specific to this idea that they must run some kind of a background check different than that which is required by Federal law.  Does Ohio have some mechanism by which you can see the criminal history of anyone wanting to purchase a firearm?    Many questions unasked in this article.  If he was not required to fill out a Form 4473, how does the gun shop know if he is not supposed to have a Black Powder Pistol?  Maybe the Buckeye state has a system that I just don’t know about.  You can read the whole thing HERE.