The Screaming Viking

I mean to post about this when I first heard about it (last week?).

The Indiana Supreme Court ruled that you have no right to resist entry in to your house by law enforcement officers even if the entry is unlawful.  I understand the spirit of this law, people should not put themselves into situations that might be confrontational with police.  The people also have no way to know if the entry is really unlawful or not.  I don’t expect that it is common place for the police to enter homes illegally in this area.  It’s kind of unsettling to know the courts have ruled that you are to let them in, then have to spend money later on lawyers to reject the search.  Isn’t there something in the constitution about illegal search and seizure?  Did the supreme court of Indiana just rule against that?  I don’t get it.

After you change your address you have a short amount of time till you have to submit the request to change the address on your concealed weapons permit.  The process is ridiculously archaic.  I changed the address for my vehicle registration online via the ND DOT system.  I get that there are quite a few more people that drive cars than have the CWP…so it’s more beneficial to have an automated system for that.  I thought maybe I’d be able to submit the information via email or something…but no.  I have to write down my name, old address and new address.  Stick that sheet of paper in an envelope with my old permit and mail it to an address.  It can take around 2 weeks for me to get the new permit, but if it takes more than 45 days I am suppose to contact them and see what the hold up is.

Now I’m against the idea of a CWP from the beginning.  I think my american citizenship is the “permit” necessary for this right.  Never the less, after I moved to town I saw a lot more value in having the actual permit.  I’m not a guy that carries a side arm with me all the time…or anytime really.  I wanted the permit because of the distance between fargo and the area where I hunt.  I wanted to avoid any hassles that might arise from me having a gun next to me in the vehicle.  If I wanted to go out to the gun range, about 15miles or so out of fargo, again I wanted to avoid hassle.

I waited till this point to change my address for a couple of reasons.  First, I wanted to make sure I had moved guns up to the farm from fargo…again to avoid some hassle.  Second I wanted to have the address on my driver’s license changed just so I can avoid any potential questions or delay in “checking out” my new address.

It sucks, but in the end it doesn’t cost me anything except time.  As I mentioned earlier I don’t

An employee at a walgreens pulled his gun to defend himself and co-workers from robbers.  I would bet he’ll get fired, I would expect walgreens (as well as many other stores) has a policy in place that prevents workers from carrying dangerous weapons while on the clock.  Some of us might not like those rules, but they are in place for the business to protect itself.  From the business perspective, an employee having to put up with a little bit of “fear” or trauma from being a victim of a robbing is far less expensive than the potential payout from bystanders, or even the ones committing the crime, being shot.  Reading the story, it sounds like the guy retreated as far as he could and decided to defend himself in what was described as a bad situation.  It’s too bad for him, but living and losing your job is far better than the alternative.

link

BENTON TOWNSHIP — They wore masks.

They wore gloves.

They brandished handguns.

But there was one thing two robbers didn’t anticipate when they barged into a Benton Township Walgreens drugstore early Sunday and tried to march workers into the back room: A worker already in back carried a handgun and knew how to use it.

Township police Lt. Delmar Lange said the worker fired multiple shots at one of the bandits, forcing the men to flee.

“He could see the hostage situation developing,” Lange said. “He could not retreat any farther. He was in the back room. If it was me, I would have done the same thing.”

Lange said the worker, whose name was not released, saw one of the robbers force another worker from the front of the building toward the rear. That robber then saw the worker in back and started to pursue him.

The worker then fired multiple shots.

The robber tried to fire back, but his gun malfunctioned. The robber and his partner ran out.

Lange said none of the four workers was hurt in the 4:30 a.m. incident in the store at Napier Avenue and M-139.

It’s unclear whether the robber was struck, he said. Police are asking hospitals across the area to report if someone comes in with gunshot wounds.

Lange said security camera videos indicate the worker acted appropriately. He said the videos show that the robbers were “very aggressive and very dangerous in what they did and how they did it.”

He said the worker was licensed to carry the concealed handgun.

There is a bill making it’s way through the MN legislature that says, essentially, that if someone enters your house via force or “stealthily” you have the right to use deadly force.  It is/was my understanding of MN law that if you are able to retreat, even in your home…you must.  I think this is a self defense law that should be on the books in every state.  At the very least, a man should have the right to protect his home against someone entering unwanted.  Now we need MN and ND to validate each other’s concealed weapons permits and we’d be getting somewhere.

link

ST. PAUL — A bill that would change the state’s laws on gun permits and the right to use deadly force in cases of self-defense is getting a hearing before a House public safety committee.

The committee plans to hear testimony on the bill Thursday.

Among other things, the bill expands the state’s laws on use of deadly force in self-defense situations. It creates a presumption that anyone who forcefully or stealthily enters a home intends to cause harm, so deadly force is allowed.

Proponents say it allows law-abiding citizens to stand their ground. Those against the bill say it would allow deadly force even if the person is making a peaceable entry and is unarmed.

The bill also would require that Minnesota recognize gun permits issued by other states.