Articles by Herschel Smith

Dean Weingarten.

On the evening of 22 September 2005, a hunting guide and his hunter, who was from Ohio, were attacked without provocation, by a grizzly bear in the Shoshone National Forest in the northwest corner of Wyoming. The details of the attack were found in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) response to AmmoLand. This correspondent has not found any other published account of this attack.

[ … ]

The guide attempted to draw his .44 magnum revolver, but the pistol hung up on the trigger guard. The bear was very close, so the guide dodged behind an eight-inch birch tree, to avoid the bear. The guide estimated he spent 40 seconds dodging the bear around the tree, until the bear grabbed him by the right side, and threw him to the ground.

With the guide on the ground, the bear worried him for a short period, then left him and ran at the hunter, who was armed with a crossbow. At ten yards, the hunter shot the bear in the chest with his bow. At the impact of the bolt, the bear stood up, and started back toward the guide, then lay down.

The hunter shouted to the guide, “She’s dead, I’m all right!” The guide got up and asked where the bear went. The hunter said “She is right next to you, about 6-8 feet away.” The guide determined the bear was still breathing, so he shot her in the back of he head with the .44 magnum.

This is impressive skills at composure under pressure.  Still, I’d rather have successfully deployed the .44 magnum handgun.

ZeroHedge.

Remington and the families of nine victims from the Sandy Hook school massacre, the second-deadliest school shooting in US history, have reached a settlement that was years in the making: the gun-maker and manufacturer of the Bushmaster AR-15 used by shooter Adam Lanza will pay a total of $33MM. Divided up among the families, that comes to $3.66MM each (before the lawyer’s cut). The families insist the money is no substitute for the brutal killing of their loved one.

According to Reuters, the settlement must still be approved by the Alabama judge overseeing the Remington bankruptcy case. The plaintiffs allege that Remington’s marketing contributed to the shooting. In a February court filing, the plaintiff’s legal team  argued that the value of their claims could exceed $1 billion, including punitive damage – a pretty obvious negotiating tactic.

Sickening.  Why didn’t Remington fight this all the way?  There is a federal law in place to prevent this sort of thing.  Why did they cave?

And tell me why I should ever buy a Remington product again?

Via WiscoDave.

BBC.

The man told them he had been attacked by a bear and hadn’t slept for days after it kept coming back to his camp.

He was found with chest bruising and an injured leg he had taped up.

The helicopter crew had been on their way to fly a team of scientists on a wildlife research mission when they were diverted off-course by weather and spotted the distress message.

According to the New York Times, the man had almost run out of ammunition for his gun and the door of the shack where he was staying had been ripped off.

“At some point, a bear had dragged him down to the river,” Lieutenant Commander Jared Carbajal told the newspaper. “He had a pistol. He said that the bear kept coming back every night and he hadn’t slept in a few days.”

The pilots found the man stumbling out the shack waving a white flag.

The man has not been named but officials said he is in his late 50s or early 60s and had been reported overdue home from the trip by friends.

The US Coast Guard flew him to hospital in order to get medical attention, but say his injuries are not life-threatening.

From Colorado.

“How does any dog survive in the White River National Forest for a month, much less an eight-pound, ten-month-old, little Cockapoo?” the Chaffins wrote.

“There was plenty of water between the creek and the rains. Was she eating grasses, cow pies, an occasional varmint? This is a drainage populated by coyotes, fox, mountain lion and bear — how did she manage to hide? What stories Bella could tell but will never be told.”

To a dog guy like me, this is heartwarming.

But the owners were irresponsible.  Get your dog chipped.

The Regulatory Review.

It is doubtful that state courts outside of New York would enforce New York State court judgments, especially in the 34 states with laws shielding gun sellers from lawsuits arising out of criminal misuse of weapons—many of which are precisely where the out-of-state sales that concern New York take place.

There are good things that could come out of New York’s attempt to hold firearms manufacturers liable for misuse of gun (like, say, holding Ford liable for someone using a truck to run over people).

The more difficult and less incentivized it becomes for firearms manufacturers to do business in New York, the better.

The end goal wouldn’t just be the complete end of firearms manufacturing in New York.  It would be for the atmospherics of firearms liability to be so bad in New York that manufacturers refuse to sell even to law enforcement in New York.

But where there is $$$ involved, there will always be some manufacturer who’s willing to sell to LEOs even if it means confiscation of firearms from peaceable men.

Still, the option is out there – a splintering of states and laws such that states once again become the laboratories of democracy as envisioned by the founders.

Detroit.

Video shows a man pull out a gun and start firing right before Detroit police officers appear to flee.

The department has launched an investigation into what was captured on the police dashcam. The officers could face consequences from the incident that happened on June 30 if wrongdoing is found.

The gunman hung out of the back of a car and fired shots at a man, striking him. Video appears to show officers speeding away instead of jumping into action.

“Troubling, not consistent to training,” Interim police Chief James White said.

White said the officers did return to help the man who was shot. He said the department is investigating if the officers called the shooting in.

“Shocking is an understatement. I think we all have the understanding the police are to run towards danger as we are running away from it,” Local 4 Legal Analyst Neil Rockind said.

And where did you get that false understanding?  Who taught that to you?  You’re a legal analyst – you’re supposed to know better.

Y’all recall the coverage of Mr. Walker who was stopped by the crude, vulgar, loud-mouthed jerk cop because he was carrying an AR-15 to Coyote hunt in the middle of nowhere in West Virginia?  I wasn’t aware of the fact that the first decision at the Fourth Circuit was a panel.  The Attorney representing him, John Bryan, has filed a petition for rehearing in the case.

If the Panel Opinion remains, Black is meaningless, because there will always be “more” available to any police officer. Even if an individual has violated no law, they will be subject to detainment based on any speculative crime which generally could be committed by any anonymous person. A man walking in the direction of any woman might be a rapist, given that he would appear to have the physical ability to carry out a rape. Any driver of a car heading in the direction of any other human being might be a potential murderer, because they appear to have the physical ability to run-over people, should they so choose. The analogies could go on and on because, like the Michael Walker case, these scenarios are all generalized, rather than based on individualized reasonable suspicion.

Deputy Donahoe did, and claims to have done numerous other times, exactly that which Black forbade: to assume that being a felon in possession of a firearm was the default status; that, without more, he could detain and ID anyone he saw with a firearm. He admitted that he had no information that Walker may have been a prohibited person. (J.A. 162:5-8). Donahoe admitted under oath that had no indications that Mr. Walker was a threat to anyone, nor appeared to have any ill intentions (J.A. 167:1-4). Donahoe told Mr. Walker at the beginning of the stop, “At this point, I have the absolute right to see whether you’re legal to carry that gun or not.” (See J.A. 209 – Video of Incident).

I like the cut of his jib.  Either the Fourth Circuit mans up and does the right thing, or else their decision in the Black case is meaningless (we’ve covered this case too having to do with Mr. Black and the Charlotte Mecklenburg Police Department).

I discussed this case with a Charlotte cop I know at length – I’ll reiterate what we discussed at some point again in the future.  Needless to say, I was disappointed at the cop’s lack of concern over what the Fourth Circuit had decided, and equally disappointed in the rights he felt he had to detain people.