......Get a firearm
By Edward Morrissey

The Week –
Law enforcement simply cannot ensure that all the people are alright all of the time. The solution? Buy yourself a gun

Two stories in the past few days have highlighted the need for self-defense preparation, one in South Carolina and the other in the Twin Cities, where I live. In the latter case, a man with a carry permit followed a robber who had allegedly beaten a woman in her 50s outside of a grocery store. The Samaritan demanded the return of the woman's purse. The alleged perpetrator, an ex-convict named Darren Evanovich, reportedly responded by pulling his gun, which prompted the permit holder to draw his own weapon and fire, fatally wounding Evanovich.

Minnesota has had a "shall-issue" permit law for several years. What exactly does that mean? There are "may issue" and "shall issue" laws. Under a "may issue" system, the local county sheriff has unlimited discretion to deny carry-permit applications. "Shall issue" laws mandate that sheriffs must issue permits to anyone who meets the requirements (including education and weapons certification from licensed instructors). Prior to the passage of the shall-issue law, Minnesotans received widely disparate treatment based on the county in which they lived — and the political outlook of each county sheriff. Some sheriffs issued permits readily to those who qualified, while a few refused to issue permits in almost any case.

A properly prepared citizen presents no special danger to his community, and an argument can be made that each law-abiding permit holder enhances security.

In 2003, at the time of the current law's passage, opponents predicted dire consequences, including a rapid increase in murders, duels in the street, and more fights that ended in shootings than in fisticuffs. Critics warned about vigilantes roaming the streets to deal rough justice to anyone who looked out of place.

None of this materialized. Crime rates did not rise; in fact, they fell over an eight-year period, as the index of violent crime in 2002 went from 267.2 per 100,000 people to 236.0 in 2010. Murders dropped from 2.5 to 1.8, forcible rapes from 45.2 to 33.9, robberies from 78.4 to 63.9, and aggravated assaults from 141.4 to 136.4. Carry permits may or may not have impacted these declines, but they certainly did not push the crime rate upward.

But to critics of Minnesota's gun law, the Evanovich case provided the example of an out-of-control citizenry that they had long predicted — and the local media leaped to exploit it. Television news stations interviewed family members who attested to Evanovich's commitment to the community, while the local Star Tribune newspaper twice provided this misleading description of the events: "A man nearby saw the attack. He had a state permit to carry a pistol, and he had one with him. He chased the robber behind a restaurant and shot him dead." The man did not "chase" Evanovich, and the newspaper failed to acknowledge that Evanovich drew his own weapon first. The Star Tribune's reporter went on to relate how Evanovich's sister Octavia Marberry was "with Evanovich the night he died," and "held him in her arms as he took his last breath."

The prose strains toward poetry, but it also fails to inform readers that Marberry was with Evanovich because she had been his accomplice in the alleged robbery and beating that had just taken place. In fact, police arrested her a few days later as a suspect in a string of armed robberies and assaults allegedly committed by Evanovich in the nine days before his demise. Marberry herself allegedly told one victim that she would "cut" her if the victim screamed and said, "We know where you live" to another. That was no idle threat, apparently, as Marberry faces fraud charges, likely linked to the use of credit cards that allegedly stolen in the robberies.

It's safe to assume that Evanovich and his sister weren't going to stop victimizing middle-aged women shopping alone in south Minneapolis, at least as long as they could presume that their intended victims couldn't defend themselves. One might imagine the media's surprise when the Hennepin County Attorney — a Democrat (DFL in Minnesota) — not only cleared the shooting as justifiable self-defense, but also commended the permit holder for trying to come to the aid of the real victim in this case. The decision reaffirmed the legal right to self-defense, and managed to undercut the notion that the man who allegedly pistol-whipped a defenseless woman and pulled a gun on another man was somehow the victim that needed lamenting.


Similarly, the sheriff in Spartanburg County, S.C., warned citizens that they have to defend themselves after a man with a long criminal record allegedly attacked a woman in a public park. After arresting Walter Lance on charges of aggravated assault and attempted rape in Milliken Park, Sheriff Chuck Wright vented his frustration with having to deal with Lance again, saying that Lance had been in the county jail more often than the sheriff. Wright told a press conference that although law enforcement officials regularly patrol the park because of rising complaints of crime, police cannot guarantee anyone's safety.

The solution? "I want you to get a concealed weapons permit," Wright said repeatedly. "Don't get Mace. Get a firearm. ... I'm tired of looking at victims saying, 'There's life after this' … I'm tired of saying, 'We're sorry, we can't keep them in jail.'"

This gets to the heart of the right to self-defense and the wisdom of the Second Amendment. The role of law enforcement is to keep the peace where possible, and to investigate crimes when they occur. The police could not possibly keep all citizens safe at all times. Law-abiding citizens need to prepare for self-defense, not because the police can't enforce the law in general, but because the police can't prevent crime from occurring in every situation and keep each individual safe in every situation.

Over a year ago, I received training and certification to carry a handgun. The training teaches citizens a few very memorable truths. First, a carry permit does not equate to a Junior G-man badge; it provides for your personal safety but does not commission you to wreak personal justice on the community. Second, the permit in no way changes the law regarding the use of lethal force in self-defense, although for most citizens, it might be the first time they actually learn just how restrictive that law is. In order to use lethal force, the citizen has to reasonably fear for his life, or worry about grave bodily harm. In the Evanovich case, the permit holder could not use lethal force until Evanovich drew his pistol.

The final truth, and the one that really stays with permit holders? Shooting anyone is the second-worst possible outcome, short only of getting killed yourself. The better outcome is getting an assailant to flee. The best outcome is to not be put in a position where drawing the gun is necessary at all. Training includes review of de-escalation techniques and situational self-awareness, subjects designed to reduce conflicts and confrontation, not turn communities into Wild West shootout zones.

As we have seen in Minnesota, a properly prepared citizen presents no special danger to his community, and an argument can be made that each law-abiding permit holder enhances security. The same cannot be said for the properly prepared violent offender in the midst of a disarmed populace. When a sheriff tells citizens that the solution to violent crime is self-defense, perhaps people should pay attention. Perhaps the media should take note as well.

View this article on TheWeek.com Get 4 Free Issues of The Week

Its posted in the PF as well

Good Read!

I live in Spartanburg County, SC and having met Sheriff Wright on several occasions I can say he is a hell of a good guy. He definately gets my vote. As a whole, his officers are very CC friendly as well.

I was pulled over once (had a taillight out that I didn't know about) and as required I immediately notified the officer that I had a CWP and I was armed. He was very polite and even friendly. So when he asked me why I carried I replied that I want to be able to protect my family because I know LEOs can't be everywhere all the time. Then, just to add a little humor, I told him that he was just too big and heavy to carry around on my belt. He really got a laugh from that. You gotta love a gun friendly police department like we have here.

Most police agree with you. It's only a few politically-appointed chiefs who don't.

Add two more counties in SC kershaw and chester. Recently a young woman was followed, kiddnapped. raped and beaten to death with a ball bat. No reason has been found. Sheriff for both counties said for people to get a ccp. We have had ours for sometime. If she had a gun she would be alive and we would have one less persom head for a lengthy stay on death row. I feel for her family as they play the what if game.

Just a few days ago two men wearing masks rushed into a Waffle House here in Spartanburg county. One of them was armed with a handgun. There were about a dozen people in the restraunt at the time. The 2 men ordered everybody on the ground and herded the employees to the back. A man holding a ccp drew his gun and ordered the men to drop their weapons and wait for police, which had already been called. The bad guy turned and pointed his weapon at the permit holder and was promptly shot and died at the scene. Sheriff Chuck Wright appeared on a local radio show the next morning and stated that the permit holder was well within his rights to shoot the man. He then went on to say "you just can't fix stupid".

The armed customer fixed it just fine.....
Any poor soul who believes the police are going to be able to protect them is sadly misunderstanding the role of law enforcement.

you have to understand that liberal and mass media are one and the same in most of the country.
None of them believe that the 2nd Amendment protects the first and the rest of them.

They have no moral values, or interest in personal freedoms, except freedom of the press.

I have wrestled with the idea of concealed carry since 1976 and the use of deadly force since that time also. I obtained a concealed carry permit when I moved to the Pittsburgh area. I lived in the country with the nearest neighbors probably 1/2+ mile away. They were having some murders in the rural areas around Pittsburgh and had formed a task force to stop them. I don't think they ever solved them as long as I lived there. My wife worked in downtown Pittsburgh at the time and was taking some college classes that necessitated her staying late and missing her carpool. I would drive in and pick her up on those nights. I parked in the parking garage adjacent to her office building in the center of a very good area and was walking to escort her to the car when a group of 12/13 year olds ( about 8 or 10 ) started asking me for money. I told them I had none but they kept insisting that I give them a dollar. I ignored them and was walking on when something hit me in the back of the head and I was on my knees (later discovered it was a piece of concrete from some nearby construction and my head was bleeding). One of the kids said,and I will remember it for all my life - 'I said I wanted a dollar,honky'. I drew the 38spl Mdl 36 I was carrying legally and then had the realization that I could not shoot a 13 year old kid in downtown Pittsburgh and survive the results. Recently someone had shot a mugger in self defense and he was prosecuted and told he had to run before he could use force. This actually went thru my mind. Luckily when they saw the gun they just vanished. I went in to my wife's office building and cleaned up and took her home. While I continued to carry a gun and when we moved to Arizona and they finally got a CCW program I was one of the first qualified and have carried a gun mostly since. I say mostly because it was constantly until after my wifes death. I made up my mind nothing or rather no one was ever going to harm her if I could stop them. I THINK I was fully prepared to inflict bodily harm at that time. Since her death I am more unsure if I am prepared to take a life in defense of my own. As a result I find myself carrying less and less although the need has not diminished here in Southern Arizona in the least. Possibly others face the same dilemma. I would certainly be less than eager to use deadly force merely in the protection of property. Arizona has recently implemented the Castle Doctrine in law but my thoughts remain the same.

ZIM;

Interesting account. COndolences on the loss of your wife.

Consider this-even if you are willing to allow a criminal to end your life rather than stop him from harming yourself, what do we as moral thinking people owe to society? Should we allow a feral person to run us down and then maybe another and another until they finally are stopped?

Don't get me wrong, I certainly respect your position. I value your life more than that of a criminal bent on repeating what happended to you back in PA- who's skull gets crushed by a similar thug that may have been stopped? My wife? Your child?

Hang in there and God Bless.

I've never been reffered to as not being a Moral person before and don't really think that I am not moral. I feel great trepidation at the thought of taking another life. If you have no qualms about it then it is between you and your maker ,I'm not going to judge the right or wrong of it.

Zimbabwe... I've also wrestled with this. Our situations are just very different. My struggle stems from that I'm not a violent person. I don't like to fight. I almost always backdown and try to keep peace. But, I'm finally done with always backing down. And, I have a real threat. Who's not an unknown attacker. A few months ago my exhusband put a shotgun up to my head and cocked it while he screamed and cursed me when I was picking up my son from his apartment. It's a pretty scary thing. A scenario I'm not entirely unfamiliar with. But, I've decided I'm not going to let him or anyone else bully me anymore. I'm fighting for myself. It's not an easy decision. After years of absorbing, placating him and working hard at doing things to keep him from losing his temper, its hard to change. I know I really surprised him with the protective order. I'm sure he didn't see that coming. I'm not going to be so vulnerable anymore. I'm especially alert lately because I'm pushing for child support. And money matters can easily become a catalyst for violence. I don't have someone that loves me and wants to keep me safe. I only have me. And if it comes down to him or me, I'm choosing me. And that goes for anyone else that may try to harm me or my children. Anyway, that's what I've decided.