To Keep and Bear Arms
The US 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, San Francisco, ruled today that there is no individual right to keep and bear arms. Their ruling will affect cases in nine western states and is in near-direct opposition to a ruling out of the US circuit court in New Orleans that says yes there is such a right. No doubt the fight will rise to the US Supreme Court, forcing that group to confront the 2nd Amendment.
For myself, I think it's a silly decision. Backed by lots of argument in support of the ruling, but not a lot of substance from the opposition. Such is the nature of things. Eugene Volokh got quoted in a news piece about it. No doubt he'll have something more to say on his own Blog.
Guns, especially handguns, are a lousy way to actually kill someone, but they're wonderful for self-defense. Not so very long ago, the statistics were that only 11% of the bullets fired by "the bad guys" actually hit a target. Police were better; they hit 20% of the time. Those numbers are around six years old, I don't know what the updated stats would be.
Think about that. A cop fires five times at a bad guy. Statistics say that only one bullet will hit. No too good. Applying general statistics to a single case is a bad idea, though, and I can think of three shootings that illustrate the effectiveness of guns, handguns in particular.
Two San Joaquin county deputies confront a wacko in a parking lot. Literally. He's 5150, which is California-speak for mentally unhinged. He starts whacking on one deputy with a hammer. The other pulls out his 9mm pistol and opens fire. Shoots until he's empty. 16 rounds. Point blank. Every single bullet hits the guy and he keeps nailing. Second deputy reloads, fires three more times, 5150 finally gets tired, lays down, and dies. Victim deputy survives the assault and, as far as I know, is back on the job.
Same week, Sacramento county deputy goes out into a park to talk to a young man sitting on the lawn. It's after dark, early morning, park is closed, kid's not supposed to be there, kid jumps up and turns around, bringing a chopped down rifle to bear on the deputy. Kid's first shot misses, allowing the deputy to draw his .40-caliber and fire. Once. Dumps the kid to the ground but the kid neither a) dies or 2) drops the rifle. He's still trying to shoot. As I recall when the deputy keys his radio to scream for help you can hear him screaming at the kid to drop the rifle. Second shot from the deputy. No result. Third deliberate shot from the deputy. This one is low, in the leg, blows a knee, almost literally cutting the lower leg off. Kid still in the fight. Fourth and final shot and the fight is over, kid dead.
Politics and legitimacy of the shooting aside, there are reasons why those four NYPD cops fired so many times. In California the police can carry hollowpoint ammunition. In New York, at the time, they were firing 9mm full metal jacket, "ball" ammo, notorious for drilling straight through a target.
Third shooting was in Lodi and in this instance bad guy exits van with his "girlfriend." He's holding her in the classic hostage pose, back to him, holding a shotgun to her head. Squares off against a flock of cops. He's clearly trying to get away (and I say clearly because all of this was caught real-time by an overhead news helicopter). But his shotgun just drifts away from her head and a cop takes the shot. He goes straight down because that shot is from a .223-caliber rifle. It has cut his spine and he is Right Now a parapalegic for life. He's down but not out because he raises the shotgun and fires back at the officers. More shots. Bullets pinging into him, including at least one more .223 round and a host of .40-caliber pistol shots, including one to the face.
Result: He's alive and well and a long-term member of the California penal system. He is a cripple for life, is minus one testicle, poops into a sack, has one mostly useless arm, and has had reconstructive surgery on his face. But he's alive. (Oh, he was charged with assault on a peace officer [stole a cop's gun], kidnapping, auto theft, felony evasion [this was at the end of a pursuit], attempted murder of a peace officer [during the pursuit he shot a police officer once in the leg; officer has recovered and is back on duty], etc. Long list. Sorry, but I don't know what his plea-bargain was for, only that he's only for a looooong time.)
Why all this gruesome stuff? Because those are shootings I have some immediate knowledge of, and in each case shooting The Bad Guy was only marginally effective. There are legendary stories of people taking upwards of 40 hits and still fighting. The notorious FBI shootout in Miami resulted in dead Feds, both killed after their killer had already been hit in the chest, severing his aorta. He was dead, just didn't care, and killed some agents before he croaked off.
On the other hand, guns are terrific when you don't have to fire 'em. Every day people use a gun to defend themselves, and never pull the trigger. Anti-gun people constantly rage about the number of people killed by guns of all kinds (especially Evil and Dreadful Handguns, of course), but refuse to acknowledge that the staggering and overwhelming percentage of guns are never fired in self-defense. Merely brandishing the weapon is sufficient to deter the attacker. He runs, gets caught, goes to jail. Cops use their guns daily, yet seldom actually have to make them go "bang" at anyone. Guns are amazingly effective for self-defense because you don't have to actually fire them.
This fact keeps getting lost on those who say individuals don't have a right to keep and bear arms.
If the logic of the 9th Circuit prevails, I can't help but wonder the outcome will be. A universal banning of personal possession of firearms? And when they're collected, it's not just that only criminals will have guns, it will mean that all those hundreds of thousands of people who annually use a gun to protect themselves -- all without firing a shot -- won't have that means of defense.
I can't begin to imagine what this will mean to the crime rate.
Comments