Defensive Gun Use of the Day: Conflicted Edition

News flash: DGU’s happen here in California, too. In the rural area of Salinas, a good Samaritan shot two armed robbers. “Police said a 36-year-old man outside retrieved a handgun from his car, entered, and shot the two youths. His identity has not been disclosed, but police said he is associated with someone who was inside the deli.” And “they do not plan to ask that charges be filed against him when the case is referred to the District Attorney’s Office.” Apparently, though, locals are a bit uneasy about this whole defending yourself and your loved ones thing . . .

“It raises uncomfortable questions,” said Brian Contreras, director of 2nd Chance Family and Youth Services in Salinas. “But you don’t want to be an armchair quarterback.”

“I understand the frustration of the community,” Contreras said. “We’re tired of all the violence. Tired of hearing about people shot while riding their bicycles. But that’s not the call for people to take up guns. I also understand some of those people who are like, ‘Those were 17-year-old kids.’”

Yes, they were 17. And they were illegally carrying firearms to commit a crime. Just by pulling the guns in the store, they committed a felony. The bystander-turned-crime-stopper went to his car, got his gun and defended the store, along with the people in it. He didn’t break the law, and no one but those who were committing a felony anyway were hurt or killed.

Mayor Dennis Donohue said the good Samaritan description of the shooter is “technically accurate — somebody chose to get involved. I think everybody agrees that this individual did something very understandable. Who wouldn’t protect their son or daughter?

“Somebody who chooses to risk their life on behalf of others, I think we all can appreciate anybody who does that, because they are potentially putting themselves in harm’s way.”

He cautioned, however, that not enough is known yet about the events of that night.

“This incident has some very specific elements and it should not be used as an example. The basic message remains the same: violence begets violence.”

Thanks for the leadership Yeronner. While staking out a position solidly on the top of the fence regarding the shooting, Mayor Donohue didn’t let the crisis pass without using it as a plea for more police funding.

But we need to have the necessary law enforcement assets to support that. This police department is really being taxed but continues to go above and beyond, stretching themselves and working hard to protect this community. But from a resource standpoint they’re getting pushed to the brink. And it matters. Folks may be frustrated, but in my view, there’s a clear answer.

Because there’s no problem that more tax dollars won’t solve. He fails to understand that unless you have a police officer on every corner and in every home, in most cases the police are arriving after the fact. It’s great when they can get there in time, but in reality it just isn’t possible. I carry a gun because carrying a cop is hard on my back.

67 Responses to Defensive Gun Use of the Day: Conflicted Edition

  1. avatarAharon says:

    “Tired of hearing about people shot while riding their bicycles. But that’s not the call for people to take up guns.”

    Sure it is a call to arms. When I get my CC permit and snubbie this month I might carry it while riding. In my situation I’m a bit more concerned with a deranged homeless meth-head charging me on the bike path or a mountain lion jumping out of the woods.

    • avatarRalph says:

      Aharon, I always carry a snubby while cycling. Here are two cautions:

      First, if you pocket carry, you can’t pull the gun rapidly — if at all — when you’re sitting. Cargo pants or shorts, with a big lower cargo pocket, are a must. Pack your snubby in the cargo pocket, not the regular pocket, and you’ll be able to deploy more rapidly from the sitting position than from the standing position, which can be a benefit or a detriment depending on circumstances. You also may need to keep one button on the cargo pocket closed, which is a hindrance but will also prevent the gun from being jettisoned while riding. If you keep both bottons closed for maximum security, accessibility will be gravely compromised.

      Second, carrying at 4:00 (if you’re a righty, 8:00 for a lefty) makes deployment easy whether sitting or standing, but printing is an issue when you’re bent over the handlebars. You may need a cover garment of some kind. You’ll have to practice drawing with the cover garment while on the bike or off it.

      • avatarAharon says:

        Ralph, Thank you. I appreciate reading your insights as always.

        I do ride with cargo shorts since I don’t look quite as hot in spandex bike shorts as I did in my twenties. One option might be to sew a Velcro-type enclosure on the cargo pockets and skip the buttons. The type of enclosure that does not make noise when peeling it open. I can also use a rain parka of some nature that might have good cc pockets or just provide good coverage as the weather cools and gets wetter here in the PNW.

        I’m not sure what the laws are here about riding with a can concealed or open of pepper or bear spray. I might carry that too as an option depending on the situation. If possible I would prefer to defend myself with spray against an aggressive drunk hanging out near the bike paths rather than a bullet.

        • avatarEric says:

          I have had good luck riding the road bike with a belly band, keeping the PM9 at about a 4:00 position. A typical cycling jersey does not print at all.

          If I wear a back pack, I use a Safepacker on the strap.

        • avatarNot Too Eloquent says:

          Hey guys: I use a lumbar pack on my “mountain” bike to carry an extra bottle of water which has a pocket big enough for my P3AT. Zips open quickly. Too much humidity here in Florida to keep within a pocket of my mountain bike shorts.

        • avatarRalph says:

          When I tested the M&P Shield for TTAG, I carried it in a Remora at 4:00 when I cycled to the range. The gun was invisible. It didn’t print at all. The same strategy is less successful when I tote my snubby, because the gun is wider (1 3/8″ across at the cylinder vs. .95″ for the Shield).

          When I was t-boned on my bike last winter while carrying the snubby in one pocket and two loaded speedloaders on the other side, I had no issues such as an AD. The passive safties worked as advertised despite a powerful impact with concrete. I emerged bruised and battered with a hematoma the size of a coconut on my leg, but that’s all.

    • avatarPavePusher says:

      Or move to an open carry state. It works here in Arizona.

  2. avatarMoonshine7102 says:

    No gun? Know fear, no peace.
    Know gun? No fear, know peace.

  3. avatarjwm says:

    It’s California, if the good guy has no permit and still get’s away with no criminal charges we will have seen something close to a miracle.. Or maybe even a slight, mind you slight, change in attitude about self defense in this state.

    Of course in a couple of days we could see Brown signing a law making it illegal to transport a gun in a car for any reason. This is still California after all.

    • avatarliquidflorian says:

      You can always count on the Sacramento political machine to do the wrong thing.

    • avatarDonS says:

      He had to go to his car to retrieve his firearm. It’s conceivable (even likely) that he was transporting it according to CA law (unloaded, in a locked container).

      • avatarjwm says:

        Transporting legally without a permit in a car in California means too or from the range or hunting area. Anything else is considered storing in a car which wasn’t legal last time I looked. Ain’t it grand living in California.

        • avatarDonS says:

          Wrong.

          It is perfectly legal to transport a firearm in your vehicle in California as long as:
          * the firearm is legal to possess in CA
          * the firearm is not loaded
          * the firearm is in a locked container (not glove box, console, etc.)
          No other requirements or conditions.

          Contrary information supported by the CA Penal Code certainly welcome.

        • avatarWill says:

          You’re right DonS.

          CPC Section 12025 basically says you can’t conceal carry (on person or in your car), and lists the bad things that happen to you if you do.

          Section 12026.2 says “If you’re doing any of these things, (going to a gun store, a gun range, gun show, other things, etc.) you’re not carrying concealed” (Noting that it must be locked and unloaded).

          This is the key part of 12026.2: (c)This section does not prohibit or limit the otherwise lawful carrying or transportation of any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person in accordance with this chapter.

          That’s where Section 12026.1 complements .2:
          (a)Section 12025 shall not … prohibit any citizen … who is not prohibited by state or federal law from possessing, … a firearm, from transporting … provided that the following applies to the firearm:

          (1)The firearm is within a motor vehicle and it is locked in the vehicle’s trunk or in a locked container in the vehicle other than the utility or glove compartment….

          So, the lists of conditions in 12026.1 and .2 are a cumulative set of allowed exemptions to 12025.

          If you just read .2, then it implies you can only transport in your car if you’re doing the listed activities, but .1 is a generic “can carry in your vehicle locked and unloaded” for any purpose, and any duration.

          Which makes you wonder why there is still a need for the 12026.2 section. Several entries I’ve seen reference .2 as a limitation of .1, but that’s not the way I read it. Nor does DonS, not does CalGuns.

          http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/Transporting#In_a_vehicle

          Also, I guess the CPC numbers are different now, they’ve all been renumbered.

          IANAL

      • avatarGS650G says:

        Some serious STFU and careful conversation through an attorney is required in this situation.

  4. avatarliquidflorian says:

    I expect this guy to be charged. This is California, and as Adam Corolla points out, they go after the people with assets to loose.

    Victor David Hanson outlines how far the state is falling in his essays on PJmedia. California, from a to z, has huge systemic problems that stem from wishy-washy fence sitting in the face of political correctness.

    …as an aside I’ve read Salinas is statistically more dangerous then Baghdad.

    • avatarAharon says:

      Well, it can be seen as a transplanted Mexico in many places. I’ve studied identity theft and that general area in Northern California is one of the top three locations for ID Theft in America. One of the hottest categories of ID Theft is health care fraud. Victims often have their identity re-sold nine times. If you ever go there use cash and avoid giving out any of your identity to anyone for any reason.

  5. avatarJoshinGA says:

    Two less thugs and no injured by-standers? How can they possibly spin this one into being bad? Well, its Kalifornia, Im sure they’ll find a way.

  6. avatarKA-BAR-A-RANG says:

    It’s absolutely nauseating that someone would question this. If it were their child it would have been a different story. Those weren’t 17 year olds that were just hungry (even if they were no excuse). Those were dangerous individuals ready to murder for personal gain. I say this man deserves a day named after him an annual parade and the key to the city.

    It’s time people decide to stop being the victims (especially in CA) and start putting their foot down. I live in CA and my home was violently broken into 2 times in one month while I wasn’t home (if I was there would have been a DGU). While neighbors watched as a man drove a truck across my front lawn and ram my front door just to steal electronics. The neighbors called the police it took over 3 hours for police to respond. Myself or anyone of my family members could have been murdered.

  7. avatarAccur81 says:

    Nice work, Good Samritan! I’d call that a call to take up arms, also, which is exactly what the Good Samaritan did. Seems to have worked. I find the violence begets violence pants – wetting mantra disturbing. There are plenty of times when violence is a natural and justifiable response to external stimuli. It happens in nature all of the time, which is an incredibly violent atmosphere for those organisms who aren’t at the top of the food chain.

  8. avatarWill says:

    Boy, the stars sure aligned for this one.

    The person with the pistol had the time to open his trunk, unlock the gun from the gun case, unlock and retrieve the ammo from its case (could have been a loaded magazine or a speed loader), load the gun, and head back inside in time. Not only that, by no doubt pure coincidence, again more galactic providence, he was on his way to or from the gun range, gun store, or gun smith since random pistol carry in a car is illegal in California (unless you have a CC).

    • avatarDonS says:

      In CA, he could’ve legally had a single, locked container on his passenger seat, with:
      * unloaded pistol
      * loaded magazines (not in pistol)
      No concealed carry permit required.

    • avatarGS650G says:

      And innocent people are alive today thanks to stellar alignment.

  9. avatarBill F says:

    “I understand the frustration of the community,” Contreras said. “We’re tired of all the violence. Tired of hearing about people shot while riding their bicycles. But that’s not the call for people to take up guns. I also understand some of those people who are like, ‘Those were 17-year-old kids.’”

    Yes they were 17 year-old kids. But were they any less of a threat? Did the age of the yoots somehow put the folks in the store in any less danger? Given their spare time activities, I’d sooner think their age placed them close to the peak of their own lifetime poor judgement and, consequently, less predictable and more dangerous.

  10. avatarIdahoPete says:

    Oooooh, the badmouthing of the wonderful People’s Republic of California! I am shocked! I escaped the PRCa and moved to Idaho many years ago, but it was only because I am a stingy, right-wing racist gun-nut hater of baby harp seals, and could no longer endure the atmosphere of harmony, peace, loving kindness and fruitcake liberalism in the [very tarnished] 10kt-plated Golden-ish State.

    And the PRCa’s soon-to-be passed initiative to increase income tax on “the rich” will solve all of California’s budget problems, because billionaires from all over the world will want to move their businesses and their fortunes to the PRCa – so they can be part of the great Sharing of Someone Else’s Wealth!

    Jerry Brown and the PRCa legislature have to be praying to any gods they used to believe in that Obama is re-elected. If the Bamster doesn’t bail the state out, the PRCa is bankrupt.

    • avatarRalph says:

      If the Bamster doesn’t bail the state out, the PRCa is bankrupt.

      It’s already morally, intellectually and politically bankrupt, so it might as well be financially backrupt, too.

    • avatarSanchanim says:

      Funny you are a CA transplant. We are thinking the same thing.
      Not sure when but somewhere around Boise is in the running at this point. I, like Nick are in IT, so not sure what the jobs are like in the great spud state.
      We are both fed up with the fact that this whole state has become a Nanny, we will take care of you, don’t worry about your liberties kind of place.
      Forget the fact that they want more taxes, or that Urban areas are becoming war zones. I admit Salinas is not an Urban areas, but it is a hot bed for Mexican based gangs, just like the central valley is.
      The funny thing is when the cops put their foots down to stop crime, or the cops aren’t fast enough which happens a lot, people riot and cry out.

      • avatarIdahoPete says:

        From some of the stories I have read in the Idaho Statesman newspaper’s Business Review section (they have a web site), the IT and manufacturing firms here are having a hard time finding grads with computer/software engineering expertise. Boise State Univ only graduated 22 in that field. Look beyond Micron and HP in Boise – there are a LOT of newer small firms that are apparently having to hire employees on temp visas from India to fill out their staff. Check out http://www.boisehelpwanted.com – may be some info there.

        Good luck escaping from the PRCa – if you need help getting out without the state confiscating everything you own, I have some friends still in Lassen and Modoc counties who could guide you out using gravel and dirt roads through the backcountry. (Travel not advised in winter and early spring.)

        The other key advice I would give you is to NEVER say “well, in California we used to do it like this ….” And get Idaho plates on your vehicles ASAP.

    • avatarDonS says:

      Also a CA transplant. After ~46 years, I took my family and my tax dollars to CO. It took a little effort to assure my new neighbors that I was escaping CA in favor of CO, not trying to bring the PRK with me.

      Within a few months of arriving in CO, I had a) acquired a modern sporting rifle with standard features and magazines and b) received my CHP 15 days after visiting the Sheriff’s office.

      • avatarAvid Reader says:

        I’m impressed that you got your permit in 15 days.

        Now, if only we could convince the rest of the Californicators that have moved here that they shouldn’t vote in such a way as to create the same problems here. . .

        • avatarDonS says:

          My Dad, who moved (also from CA) to an adjacent CO county 4 months after I did, had his in 14 days. Maybe the counties (Douglas and Elbert) have something to do with it?

          So far, 4 members of my immediate family have emigrated from CA to CO. We came from a relatively conservative area of CA (Ventura County), and are all refugees. None of us will be voting in ways that bring CA’s problems here.

      • avatarIdahoPete says:

        +1 I always tell people here that I “escaped” California, not that I moved from that state. Sets the right tone to the conversation.

    • avatarGuardian says:

      Very good point!

    • avatarGS650G says:

      CA is truly hoping for a bailout one day. I can see the line on my pay stub called CA bailout tax.
      They have bills that exceed the GNP of several countries.

  11. avatarCameron S. says:

    “Buy dey was just babbys. Dey was yung kids, and dint deserve to be GUNNED DOWN LIEK A BUNCHA DOGS!!”

    Those “kids” were 17. I was as big, strong, etc. at 17 as I am now at 21. 17 Can often look like 20+ as well… I’ve seen a 17 year old with a full beard. Give a 17 year old a gun in the commission of a crime, and I’m going to not think twice about shooting. Those weren’t “kids” – they were hardened criminals.

    • avatarRalph says:

      Those weren’t “kids” – they were hardened criminals.

      One is a hardened criminal. The other is just kinda stiffened. Rigor mortis will do that.

      • avatarPavePusher says:

        I’m going to Hell for LMAO at that, aren’t I?

        (Not that there was any chance of escaping that fate due to previous actions…)

  12. avatarElliotte says:

    “This incident has some very specific elements and it should not be used as an example. The basic message remains the same: violence begets violence.”

    This should absolutely be used as an example. It should be an example to all who seek to commit crimes, as the mayor says, “violence begets violence.” So criminals and would-be criminals, pay attention, if you attempt violence, you are inviting violence, and potentially death, to be brought down upon you.

    And this should be an example to all those who as the mayor also says are, “tired of all the violence. Tired of hearing about people shot while riding their bicycles.” The way you stop these violent people is not with more laws that go unenforced, or by increasing the size of a police force who can’t be everywhere at all times. The way you stop violent people is to counter their violence, meet force with your own force. Criminals want to take the easy route, the path of least resistance. If they didn’t, they wouldn’t be out breaking laws, they would be working hard like the law-abiding portion of the population. Don’t simply be an easy victim, arm yourselves with the tools to legally defend yourself. Arm yourselves with the knowledge of when, where, and how to defend yourself within the laws where you live.

  13. avatarflyboy says:

    He says that “violence begets violence”. Why is he preaching this to the guy who STOPPED the violence? Typical political gun grabber.

  14. avatarSean from Montana says:

    You have an IGOTW here too! “A cousin of Ceja [dead perp] is in custody after he went on an apparent rampage shortly after his younger relative was killed. Officers said that a few minutes after the shooting, 18-year-old Eduardo Ceja opened fire, striking random vehicles and a residence a few blocks north of the scene. He has been booked into Monterey County Jail on suspicion of shooting into an inhabited vehicle or dwelling, violation of probation, gang charges and resisting an officer.” Nice kids. Wish they lived in my neighborhood.

  15. avatarLongPurple says:

    “The basic message remains the same: violence begets violence.”

    Mr. Mayor, the message should clearly be this: “If you initiate violence, the result will be overwhelming violence in return for your aggression”.

  16. avatarWill says:

    Violence begets violence. Yup, most of the time… The “kids” initiated the violence and begot a death and jail-time (plus added charges for the remaining.)

    We smart (and sane) ones don’t initiate violence, although we may be willing to end it if necessary.

  17. avatarBHirsh says:

    Excuse me? Not possible to have a cop “on every corner and in every home”?

    Why, oh why do ostensible pro-gun advocates resort to this inanity? The very idea of a cop in every home (who doesn’t actually LIVE there) is as mad as a hatter. Would the author really accept, as he allows in his rationale, a cop in every home presumably to protect its inhabitants, but actually watching them 24/7 instead?

    Is he NUTS?

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.