Previous Post
Next Post

open carry courtesy

Your Lockdown of the Day™ comes to you from Millington, Michigan and is for about the most ridiculous reason you’ve heard yet (and keep in mind you’ve heard some doozies). It seems that a female volunteer went to Kirk Early Elementary and asked if she could open carry a handgun in the school. Despite having her carry permit and it being completely legal for her to do so, she was told no, and then the Millington Schools were put on “modified lockdown” as a security precaution…

until Superintendent Males and Tuscola County Prosecutor Mark Reene had determined that the woman was off school property. The schools were placed on lockdown until they could make sure she’d left because she asked a question. Added note: The original source of the story,, who helpfully provided a photo of “A person open carrying a handgun” (above), has a poll on their site: “Do you think law-abiding citizens should be allowed to openly carry handguns in schools?” At the time of this writing, the results were 80/20 in favor.

An unidentifed man in East Allen Twp, Pennsylvania is apparently familiar with the scene in “The Untouchables” where Jim Malone (Sean Connery) explains “the Chicago Way” to Eliot Ness (Kevin Costner): “He pulls a knife, you pull a gun.” The man was working at a Trader Joe’s warehouse last Monday afternoon when he got into an altercation with a coworker. That coworker pulled a knife and advanced on our man, who pulled out his legally-carried GLOCK-brand GLOCK 27 and told blade-boy to back off, which he did, most ricky tick. The attacker was charged with terroristic threats, prohibited offensive weapons, simple assault and disorderly conduct. The defender was not charged.

A Colleton County, South Carolina man is in the hospital after not knowing that he’d taken stupid too far, and will be facing several charges when he gets out. A sheriff’s deputy attempted to pull over a vehicle for an improper turn, but the driver didn’t stop. Instead, he led the deputy on a merry chase, attempting to ram another patrol car in the process. Eventually he ditched the car and took off on foot, and was seen to be holding a handgun. While running, he turned and pointed the gun at the pursuing deputy, who promptly shot him three times “in the buttocks area.” There’s no mention of any outstanding warrants, so there’s no telling why he ran, but I’m sure he’ll be questioning that decision for the next several years.

Carnik Con torture tests an AR-15 from Palmetto State Defense (not to be confused with Palmetto State Armory). I don’t think I’d ever heard of PSD before this video, and I can’t honestly say that I’d definitely buy from them because of it, but hey, it’s funny.

Poor Barry.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. Those grips look painful, from several standpoints. I wonder how many times that guy’s actually fired his pistol with those installed.

    • open carry in a prohibited zone is perfectly legal in MI if you have a CCW. Odd result, but the legislature tried to eliminate open carry in return for CCW and the governor shot it down.

      • I looked into this some more. It looks like several schools are pissed about open carry so more and more are instituting a policy of automatic lock-down (and call the cops) if they see any parent openly carrying a handgun on their hip.

        Their strategy is to say, “You all (armed parents) are totally disrupting the learning environment and causing unnecessary lock-downs. You must stop disrupting our children!” Of course it is the schools are who disrupting the learning environment but they are not concerned with the facts.

        It is obvious that the particular case in this post is ridiculous. What spree killer is going to check with the school office and “ask” if they can bring their handgun into the school with them? More importantly, if the school staff are so “concerned” that they have to lock down the schools, why are the staff members not running away and screaming before the armed parents even reach the doors? In every single case, school staff talks to the armed parents before instituting the lock down. That doesn’t sound like the actions of people who see a credible threat.

        And, as if that isn’t enough, all the enterprising spree killer has to do is rent a police costume if they want to walk in to a school openly armed, no questions asked. The school response to this stuff is asinine.

        • “That doesn’t sound like the actions of people who see a credible threat.”
          That doesn’t sound to me like the actions of a sane person. Which is the root of the problem.

    • Just when you think the gungrabbers have reached the limit of stupidity; they reach way down deep, and outdo themselves.

    • The author of the article did not bother to mention if the woman who asked the question was carrying at the time. I’m sure that was intentional, because to not mention it makes it easy for the clueless masses to assume that she was carrying at the time.

      Anyway, a blatant omission.

      • Yeah. It’s not completely clear exactly what happened, and you’re right, it’s completely left out of the text of the news story.

        In the video at the link above the anchor said “after a volunteer carried a loaded gun into the building.” (Emphasis, of course, was the reporter’s.) Later in the video the on-scene reporter said “after a woman entered Kirk Elementary with a gun.”

        The implication or assumption is that she had it holstered on her hip. Since it’s legal to do so, that seems like a reasonable assumption. But that’s all it is. An assumption.

    • If I’d had the disposable income, I’d have been all over that. Unfortunately, Christmas tapped the cash reserves, and I don’t want it bad enough to buy on credit.

      • I could tighten my belt a little, but i have no idea when i’d be able to build the gun and i really doubt it would ever increase in value over a normal lower. BTW, did you get that email from the other day about the quote?

        • I did, thanks, and I watched the quote part of the video, but not the rest yet.

          I don’t necessarily think it would ever increase in value, but I wouldn’t buy it for that anyway. I’d build it, eventually. The two lowers I have now (one an in-progress build) are both special edition State of Florida rollmarks and laser etchings, and it occurs to me that it’d be interesting if my entire collection was made up of nothing but “special” lowers, with not a single “stock” rollmark in the bunch. Just for fun.

        • Oh, and they didn’t have prices when I first watched that video. Didn’t even have it listed on their website yet, in fact. It’s cheaper than I expected. Maybe I’ll raid the couch cushions and the ashtray in the car.

  2. So the Glock wielding warehouse worker didn’t get charged (rightfully) but how does his employer feel about his carrying a firearm. From stories and articles I’ve read Trader Joe’s isn’t very hip to even customer’s carrying and here we are talking about an employee.

    • I spent about 30 seconds poking around to try to find any indication of the answer to that question, and was unsuccessful.

        • Haha. Some stories I’ll spend ten minutes trying to find that one last piece of information. Some I lose interest in quite quickly.

          In this case I was just late for tacos at Tijuana Flats with Bloomberg and Schumer. I’m a good spokesweasel; I know on which side my bread is buttered.

        • As an addendum, I have to do at least a first-layer dig on most of the stories I put in here, because the things that make them interesting/funny are often only interesting/funny because the stupid j-school numbskull reported them wrong. You’d be amazed how many stories I see that are “Wow, this’d be great for the Digest!” and then with the slightest little bit of scraping turn out to be completely wrong, and the true story is completely boring, and so they get circular-filed. I’d be embarrassed to write something up and then have one of you guys do the scraping and I end up with egg on my face.

    • I have been in several trader joes in at least 3 different states and I have yet to see a ‘no guns’ sign on any of their buildings.

      • I really think they take a pre-MDA Starbuck’s stance on the matter – their Corporate is not interested in exploring the lack of a posted policy in public.

    • Except it’s perfectly legal to do so. The mistake she made, in my opinion, was asking permission.

      It does occur to me that there may be some stupid rule for “employees” or whatever classification she’d fall into as a volunteer. You know the type of thing I’m talking about where it’s perfectly legal for the general public to do it, but the school system forbids its “employees” from doing the same thing. Maybe that’s why she asked, because she found herself in that “gray area.”

      • I’m not sure asking is a bad idea in an environment that could get you shot if you just show up OCing. Sure, your heirs might make a mint off the settlement, but is it worth it?

      • It’s also perfectly legal for her to paint her face white and outline her mouth and eyes in big circles. Like a clown. But doing so would make it clear to the rest of the world that she’s a clown. Kinda like OCing in an elementary school.

        It’s not about whether it’s legal or not. Because of the numerous high-profile shootings, people are understandably sensitive to guns in schools. So maybe it’s not a good idea to OC because it’ll *needlessly* freak a lot of the parents out. If you want to bring a gun, mabe do it in a way that won’t freak everyone out and just conceal it. No biggie. But if you just want to be an attention whore trying to show how the evil school is violating your 2nd Amendment rights, then paint your face and try to OC. Like this clown did.

        • “If you want to bring a gun, mabe do it in a way that won’t freak everyone out and just conceal it. No biggie.”

          Except, concealed carry in schools is specifically prohibited by Michigan statute. The same cannot be said for open carry. Therefore you’re advising against doing the legal thing and instead doing something that is thoroughly and completely illegal.

          Note that everyone involved, everyone, said that she did nothing legally wrong. They just didn’t like it. And they overreacted like fearful children.

    • nnjj, do you think it’s ok to OC anywhere, or are you just one of those folks who likes to bash OC anytime it’s done?

      Why isn’t it ok to OC in an elementary school? Is it somehow improper for a child or another parent to see a gun at all? Please explain.

  3. Carrying a gun is no walk of life in which ignorance is remotely inconsequential; lady should’ve never/had to have asked.

    I’m quite surprised the Trader Joe’s defendee didn’t get fired. They have now earned my respect.

  4. “The attacker was charged with terroristic threats, prohibited offensive weapons, simple assault and disorderly conduct.”

    The last three charges seem pretty par for the course when the prosecutor is trying to throw the book at you but the last one is just. Wow. Terroristic threats? Really?

    American’s need to wake up and watch world news. Run of the mill mugging, extorting, and fighting has nothing to do with terror.

    • “Terroristic threats” seems to be something that’s just come about in the last few years. I’m still trying to figure out how it differs from assault. I was always taught that (simplified) assault was making a threat with the apparent ability to carry it out, and battery was the “carrying it out” part. So what makes a “terroristic threat” different than assault? I dunno.

      • An assault is an attempted battery, i.e., throwing a punch without landing, aiming a weapon at someone. Assaults involve physical acts. Terroristic threats are, by contrast, verbal conduct–“I’m gonna kill/beat harm you.” Each can occur with or without the other.

        • OK, so since that was nearly opposite what I was taught (assault is the threat, battery is the act), I had to look it up. Florida defines assault as “an intentional, unlawful threat by word or act to do violence to the person of another, coupled with an apparent ability to do so, and doing some act which creates a well-founded fear in such other person that such violence is imminent.” Fl. Stat. 784.011 So basically, it can be a verbal OR physical thing, or both. I can say I’m gonna kill you, or I can swing a crowbar at your head. One threat is verbal, the other is nonverbal, but no less a threat.

          Florida doesn’t have a statute for “terroristic threat” but I found it defined elsewhere as: “A terroristic threat is when a person threatens to commit any crime of violence against another person with the intent to terrorize.” So, it’s a thought crime, because it’s not just about the act, but about the intent. Like a hate crime.

          Wikipedia quotes the Texas Penal Code which says:

          Sec. 22.07. TERRORISTIC THREAT. (a) A person commits an offense if he threatens to commit any offense involving violence to any person or property with intent to:
          (1) cause a reaction of any type to his threat by an official or volunteer agency organized to deal with emergencies;
          (2) place any person in fear of imminent serious bodily injury;
          (3) prevent or interrupt the occupation or use of a building, room, place of assembly, place to which the public has access, place of employment or occupation, aircraft, automobile, or other form of conveyance, or other public place;
          (4) cause impairment or interruption of public communications, public transportation, public water, gas, or power supply or other public service;
          (5) place the public or a substantial group of the public in fear of serious bodily injury; or
          (6) influence the conduct or activities of a branch or agency of the federal government, the state, or a political subdivision of the state.

          Sounds a little fuzzy to me. It can be applied to nearly anything, because of clauses 1 & 2. If someone makes even one person fearful via a threat or causes ANY KIND of police, fire, or EMS response, it’s a terroristic threat. Riiiight.

        • All crimes have an intent component in some form or other. For example, a man aims a gun at another man and pulls the trigger. Depending on the shooter’s intent and the exact circumstances, that act could range from no crime art all to first degree murder.

        • Since the “terroristic threat” was made in East Allen Twp, PA, I don’t think Texas law would apply. Maybe find a definition in PA law? Just sayin’…

          • Ug. Gimme a break here. I took the first two results that popped up, being lazy.

            Here’s Pennsylvania. It’s substantially the same:

            § 2706. Terroristic threats.
            (a) Offense defined.–A person commits the crime of terroristic threats if the person communicates, either directly or indirectly, a threat to:
            (1) commit any crime of violence with intent to terrorize another;
            (2) cause evacuation of a building, place of assembly or facility of public transportation; or
            (3) otherwise cause serious public inconvenience, or cause terror or serious public inconvenience with reckless disregard of the risk of causing such terror or inconvenience.

  5. The opening story makes me ashamed to be a Michigander. Well, that and living in a shotgun only zone.

    I honestly think some people think “Open Carry” means “Gun in hand”.

    • Hadn’t thought about that before … but it wouldn’t surprise me if that’s the case. OC is misunderstood by many.

  6. What holster is in the pic? It is unusual to see a high ride thumb break holster for a cocked & locked 1911. I like it.

  7. I don’t get the all the skulls, zombies, and punisher symbols everyone keeps putting on their carry guns.

    Let alone the fact that it’s just plain stupid… The real issue comes from not wanting to give an overzealous DA reason to make claims of trigger happy vigilantism.

    Find yourself in a DGU that’s not 100% righteous and all you’re doing is giving the prosecutor more ammo to come at you with, all because you want to look cool and feel like your guns is unique.

    If you want to wear superheroes and skulls, wear them on your underwear, not on your carry gun, which maybe used against you in a court of law.

    • I agree. MC riders who wear that crap are usually accountants and doctors who lead a fantasy life and play “dress up” on sunny Saturday afternoons, but can’t ride worth a sh1t..

  8. Three shots into the buttocks of a moving and turning person. That’s quite a group. Hat’s off to the deputy who managed that feat of marksmanship.

    • I think I gotta call B.S. on “he turned around and pointed his gun at me, so I shot him in the @$$, thrice”.

      Even the KJDubya would have a hard time pulling off that magic shot(s).

  9. On the Millington school lockdown:

    If this is the way they treat their volunteers, including calling the county persecutor, I guess it’s time for the lady to start making plans to move her little snowflake to another school when the semester ends in January. Hopefully a school that appreciates her volunteer efforts.

  10. “Lockdown” being a moronic meaningless construct of the antigun left, can we just ban the word from responsible discussions.

  11. She shouldn’t have bothered asking. Since she was within the law, there would have been nothing they could do besides having a cow, holding their breath ’til they turned blue, stamping their feet, and other manifestations of impotent tantrums.

Comments are closed.