A little over a month ago, a Denver area man had his car stolen at the Northfield shopping center. He tracked his car down using an app and when he located it, he approached the car to confront the thieves. At least one person in the car shot at him and he immediately returned fire. The car took off and was found a few blocks away, the driver was dead. The driver was 12 year old Elias Armstrong.
Two weeks later, a Pueblo resident was leaving her house to walk to her car when she was ambushed by 4 armed juveniles. When she turned to go back into the house in an attempt to get to safety, she was shot twice in the back by a 12 year old boy. The assailants have been caught and charging decisions are being made.
When the story about Elias Armstrong’s death hit the news, there was a general outcry from some about the killing of a 12 year old boy by a grown man who was trying to get his stolen car back. The story reached national news. The boy’s pictures were used to show the public that this child did not need to be killed.
The story about Chanise Sena being shot twice in the back by a 12 year old boy has received very little attention, even in the city where the incident happened.
The lesson that we should be taking from these two incidents are important. The first lesson is that you are risking a great deal when you voluntarily enter a potential life and death situation. In the case of the car theft, the victim risked his life, his criminal future and his future financial stability. The family of Armstrong has indicated that they intend to file a lawsuit against the defender when they can identify him. This civil suit is likely to go on for a very long time once it starts. And because it was a 12 year old boy who was killed, he will have an uphill battle. He will also be living with the fact that he killed a 12 year old boy for the rest of his life. In the moment where this man was being shot at, it is reasonable that he defend himself and return fire provided that he is prepared to do so. But the question he’ll probably be asking himself for a long time will be, “was it all worth it to try to get my car back?”.
The other lesson we should be taking from these two incidents is that threats can come from anywhere. We have a moral responsibility to be as prepared as is reasonable in our daily lives. Chanise Sena stated that she didn’t take the boys seriously when they first ambushed her, she didn’t believe that a group of young boys was serious about the threats they were presenting her with. I’m not encouraging you to treat everyone as a threat, but rather to not take the world around you for granted and assume that the world reflects your expectations and values.
Chanise was not armed and had very few options to respond to this extremely dangerous threat, but if she had been armed it would have been reasonable for her to respond with lethal force. Chanise did not create this situation, she was in a place where it was normal for her to be, doing things she normally does when the threat literally came to her doorstep.
We carry guns in case we are forced into a position where we have to defend our lives or the lives of others. We should be prepared to do that against anyone who presents that kind of threat, whether it be a group of hardened criminals or a 12 year old boy with a gun who is shooting at you. We only shoot when we have to, because the risks of using a gun in self defense are extreme.
Get trained, educate yourself, build your skills, think and act defensively. Make yourself harder to attack. You have a moral responsibility to be as prepared as is reasonable to defend yourself.
Police said a Walgreens employee was notified by another employee that two women were stealing items from the store. The employee told police he saw the women putting items into a store cart and into a large over-the-shoulder bag. The employee said he began recording the women with his cell phone and followed them as they left the store without paying for the items.
According to investigators, the employee said as the women began putting items into the trunk of their car, he made his way to the back of the car. That’s when one of the women reportedly pulled a can of mace and began spraying at him.
The employee then pulled his semi-automatic pistol and began shooting, saying he was afraid and did not know if either of the women were armed. The women then fled in their car while the employee went back into the store and called 911, according to police.
It’s very likely that this employee had no intention of shooting either of these women who were stealing from his employer. But when you are carrying a gun around, every conflict includes the risk that the gun will become involved. This requires that you think ahead about your actions and seriously consider what you’re willing to risk and why.
This man’s self defense case is now going to include that he shot a pregnant woman who was forced to deliver the baby prematurely through emergency surgery, putting both the mother and child at risk. Many people are frustrated with issues like shoplifting, but this man now has a very long and very difficult criminal battle ahead of him, not to mention the likely civil action he will face. He is not only facing the legal consequences, but this man is almost definitely no longer going to be employed by Walgreens.
Carrying a firearm carries certain risks, and these risks are potentially life changing. The benefits of carrying and using the firearm should always clearly outweigh the risks. In this case, they certainly did not.
Get trained, educate yourself, build your skills, and think before you act. Remember what is at risk when a gun is involved.
In December of last year, I was in Reno for the IDS Instructor Development course. Edgar and I rented an AirBnB for the instructor candidates, one of which was from Jalisco, Mexico. His name was Angel, and when we arrived at the AirBnB he was very surprised that the house we were staying in did not have a wall around it. He couldn’t believe that the front door of this house led straight into the living room.
American’s live in a peaceful society. You can argue if you want, but I’ve been to plenty of other parts of the world where having a wall around your dwelling is not only a good idea, it’s practically a requirement. Angel illustrated that with his disbelief that anyone would live in a house without more layers of security. In the US, finding a house with a wall around it is unusual in most areas. This is a reflection of the threat level that we live in. If walls were necessary, we would build them.
Yet even though we live in a peaceful society that doesn’t mean that plenty of bad things don’t happen. Our normal experiences can lead us into a false sense of security and lead to behaviors that are welcoming to a bad guy who wants to victimize us. In addition to making it easy for a bad guy to select us for an attack, we also in many ways lack the mindset to respond to a threat once it’s been presented.
In the following video, we are going to see all of these points illustrated. This video comes to us from Houston, Texas where a 72 year old woman and her 75 year old husband are robbed at gunpoint. The woman in this video is horrified and panicked at the sight of a gun in her face, and when her husband responds to her screams, he has no plan for self defense. They both left in a position to only try to negotiate with the criminal who holds the power of life and death over them.
We can see from the video the woman has little time to react. Even if she had seen him coming from further away, the bad guy is faster than she is. But once she does recognize the threat, she is essentially paralyzed into inaction. This kind of reaction is due in part to not mentally preparing yourself for this kind of situation. I wrote an article in our newspaper, the Guns For Everyone Gazette, last month about mental repetitions and why they are important.
The husband responds to the screaming and comes out to check on what is going on. He has a counter ambush opportunity as he comes outside as we can see the bad guy is not aware of his presence until he speaks. But instead of having the tools and skills needed to deal with the threat to his wife, all he is left with is his voice. Communication is a powerful skill in self defense but in this scenario, a gun would have been better.
What we see in this video is two people who don’t seem to have anything resembling a defensive mindset. This is the “it wouldn’t happen here” mindset, and it leaves them wholly unprepared.
Get trained, educate yourself, build your skills, think and act defensively. Make yourself harder to attack. You have a moral responsibility to be as prepared as is reasonable to defend yourself.
Multiple news outlets and organizations in Colorado are now reporting that the Assault Weapons Ban that was intended to be introduced in the Legislature is not going forward. Until the legislative season is over, I’m still leaving the possibility open that it could be resurrected but it seems for now, the immediate threat of this bill is over.
While I wholeheartedly cheer the grassroots work done in this state the likely led the legislature to change course, the fact remains that gun control is expanding in this state. The fight is not even close to over and we are still ‘on the ropes’. Every gun control bill that does pass in this state makes it easier to pass more. The momentum is going firmly in the wrong direction.
The Colorado legislature passed multiple bills in the last few weeks, including expanding red flag laws, raising the age of purchasing a rifle or shotgun to 21, and allowing firearm dealers to be sued by the victims of violent crimes in which a gun they sold was used. That last one has the potential to effectively shut down firearm dealers across the state. A plaintiff doesn’t even need to win a lawsuit in order to put a gun store out of business. Lawsuits are expensive to fight and time consuming. It’s very possible that even one lawsuit could be enough to put a gun dealer out of business, a point I made in an interview on Fox21 this week.
These new laws will go into effect in this state soon, and if we want to fight against them, we will be left with the courts. I encourage you to support Rocky Mountain Gun Owners to fight these suits in court. But Colorado will gain national attention for passing more “gun reform” and will give Colorado the reputation as being a gun control state. That will embolden the lobbyists sending money into this state to pass more gun control in the future.
We have another problem as well, gun violence will continue to rise in this state, perhaps even sharply. We are already seeing headlines in this state that look like they came from Chicago, “12 people shot in Denver area this weekend” is becoming more normal. The rise in gun violence in the state will continue to give the media and the legislators the momentum they want in order to push gun laws, including an assault weapons ban. And I hate to say it, but I have no doubt that Colorado will see more mass shootings in the future. These high profile tragedies will apply the same pressure.
The groundwork for fighting against these laws needs to be done constantly, not just when there is an emergency. We need to show that gun laws are not popular here, and when they are passed they will be fought against fiercely. Colorado gun owners need to get their act together and join the fight. In the strongest possible words, I urge you to get engaged. Your state needs your time, energy, money, and effort. There are a lot of ways to do it, but the quickest and perhaps most efficient way to get started is to work with Rocky Mountain Gun Owners. They make it easy to contact lawmakers, join petitions, fight lawsuits, and other ways that are proven to work. But don’t let another day go by before you get involved. It’s time.
One question that we get all the time in our Free Concealed Carry Classes is “What is the definition of concealed under Colorado law.”
Its an important question asked by people who are conscious about following the law. But In Colorado, the answer is not as easy or intuitive to find as people would hope.
The starting place to look for clarification is C.R.S. 18-12-105: Unlawfully Carrying a Concealed Weapon
(1) A person commits a class 1 misdemeanor if such person knowingly and unlawfully:
(b) Carries a firearm concealed on or about his or her person.
The statute goes on to show that it shall be an affirmative device if the person has a valid concealed handgun permit or is in their home, vehicle or their own business.
This state does not provide a definition of “concealed” here. It just says it’s against the law. But if we move down to the relevant case law referenced below the statute, we are directed to two important cases that provide a definition.
The first part of the definition of concealed is based on a case involving a 15 year old juvenile who was approached and then chased by police officers (https://casetext.com/case/people-v-or-1). While he was running away, the arresting officer saw the silver handle of a handgun sticking out of his back pocket. The officer went on to testify that he could tell that this was a firearm and the juvenile was charged and convicted of unlawfully carrying a concealed handgun.
The state court of appeals eventually overturned this conviction based on the interpretation of concealed as a weapon “carried on or about the body in such a way as the weapon is not readily discernible” as a firearm. Essentially, how could the police officer say that he saw the gun while also making the argument that it was concealed? The court overturned the conviction based on this analysis.
“For these reasons, we conclude that the juvenile court erred in determining that a partially concealed but readily discernible firearm is “concealed” for purposes of section 18-12-105(1)(b). We further conclude that the evidence was insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that O.R. carried, or even attempted to carry, a concealed firearm on or about his person.”
In our classes a variation of the question of when the gun is concealed includes, “What if I’m walking from the gun store to my car and the gun is in a case.”
Case law provides the second important part of the definition of concealed . Pueblo vs Sanders, 1962, affirms that intent must be part of the criminal activity when the offense is carrying a firearm unlawfully concealed. The defendant here was charged with unlawfully carrying concealed when he was carrying the gun as an article of merchandise. The Colorado Appeals court found that:
“The offense of carrying a concealed weapon forms no exception to the general rule that to constitute a crime there must be a criminal intent. . . . In trials for the offense of carrying a concealed weapon, it should be borne in mind that guilty intent is the intent to carry the weapon concealed, and does not depend upon the intent to use it.” (Emphasis supplied.)”
What does this mean for you? Simply put, if there is an intent to conceal the gun, and the gun is not readily discernible as a firearm, it is concealed.
My personal advice here is to not try to ride a line between lawful and unlawful carrying. If you are going to carry open then do it in an obvious way. If you’re carrying concealed, keep that gun well concealed.
join us for a free concealed carry class by checking our class calendar at https://concealedcarryforfree.com.
Guns For Everyone has had nearly 100,000 students come through our Free Concealed Carry classes in the last 10 years. We have heard every kind of story, heard every kind of question, and seen every walk of life.
When we discuss the 911 call in our class, we always emphasize that the recording of the call will be used in the investigation after a self defense incident, and is very likely to be used in the prosecution against you.
You are almost guaranteed to say something on that 911 call that opens legal doors that are not easily closed. You must understand this risk.
Two months ago I had a County Criminal Court Judge in the class. She had 16 years experience as a Prosecutor, and had been on the bench for more than 2 years. In this class, when we reached the topic of the 911 call, our judge emphatically agreed, and made it a point to tell the entire class that in her experience, the prosecution will almost always use the 911 call in the court room.
A key point that I try to impress on our students is that there is a huge amount of risk involved in that call. You are likely to be in an altered and elevated state of mind. You are almost guaranteed to say something on that 911 call that opens legal doors that are not easily closed. You must understand this risk.
Most people have never experienced an investigation or a prosecution, and will be caught completely off guard as the investigation moves forward. Training and education is essential to prepare you for that risk. Take your responsibilities seriously, continue your education, and don’t take anything for granted in the aftermath.
