Senior Couple Saved by Gun
Cape Coral, Florida
From the Bonita Daily News of May 29, 2007
Cape Coral couple tries to cope after attack at their homeJacob Seckler keeps a gun in his pocket when he mows the lawn. He keeps a gun in his pillowcase when he tries to sleep, but the shadows dancing across the bedroom walls keep him awake.
“I’m strictly against guns. I never wanted them in the house,” said Seckler. “Now I wouldn’t be in the house without a gun.”
Seckler’s stance on guns changed the morning of May 16. He was mowing his lawn when he turned around and saw two 20-year-old men standing behind him. Seckler said one of the men was pointing a gun at his head.
After Seckler, 50, raised his hands to the sky, the two men pushed him past the garage toward the front door of his home in northeast Cape Coral. They held him at gunpoint and said they were getting into his house no matter what.
A struggle ensued at the front door. Seckler refused to let the men inside and they beat him over the head with the pistol and their elbows and fists. One of the men bit Seckler’s back. Seckler’s fiancée, Elizabeth Kachnic, 37, said she heard screaming and the door slam repeatedly.
“I don’t know what happened to me,” said Seckler. “I was so scared. I’m not crazy like that, but I knew I had to do something.”
The gun was pressed against Seckler’s temple. He said he pushed the assailant’s hand down and the gun fell to the ground. Seckler said he screamed for Kachnic to call 911 as he and the two men scrambled for the weapon.
“I got the gun. I just turned around and shot,” said Seckler. “If they did not come here with a gun, they would be alive. It’s their fault.”
He fired every bullet in the clip. One of the men, John Patrick Moore Jr., was hit as he sprinted across Seckler’s driveway. He stumbled to the edge of the street and died.
Police say Moore’s accomplice, Damion Jordan Shearod, fled when they lost control of the gun. Seckler said Shearod was hiding in the garage or the side of his home and appeared after the gunfire ceased and ran to a car parked in the street outside Seckler’s residence.
Police say Moore’s 19-year-old girlfriend, Jazzmyne Carrol-Love, was waiting behind the wheel and the two sped away.
Seckler had just killed a man. He hadn’t held or fired a gun since he was 18 years old and serving in the German Army. Even then, he was only aiming at practice targets.
“I was crying, screaming and hurting,” said Seckler, a large man who became tearful while recounting the shooting. “If they would have gotten in they would have killed us both. Everybody says I did the right thing, but it feels so bad. I killed another person.”
Found at Civilian Gun Self Defense Blog
Anti-Gunner Advocates Murder
ISRA Press Release:
Chicago Priest Calls for Murder of Gun Shop OwnerSPRINGFIELD, Ill., May 29 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — The following was released today by the Illinois State Rifle Association (ISRA):
Nobody expected Saturday’s Operation PUSH protest at Chuck’s Gun Shop & Range to be anything other than a circus of the bizarre. However, nobody anticipated that an address by a Chicago priest would include a call for the murder of a suburban gun shop owner and legislators who oppose gun control.
During an address at an anti-gun rally in front of Chuck’s, Rev. Michael Pfleger, pastor of St. Sabina’s Church, exhorted the crowd to “drag” shop owner, John Riggio, from his shop “like a rat” and “snuff” him. Rev. Pfleger went on to tell the crowd that legislators that vote against gun control legislation should be “snuffed” as well. As many know, “snuff” is slang for especially violent murder.The ISRA has a recording of Pfleger’s remarks in MP3 format.
“Certainly Fr. Pfleger has offered Absolution to a murderer or two during his tenure as a priest,” commented ISRA Executive Director, Richard Pearson. “That’s why it’s shocking to hear him actually advocate the murder of a gun shop owner who has never committed a crime in his life. He then compounds the problem by calling for the murder of legislators who disagree with his personal political views — something I suspect is a felony in this state. Pfleger’s comments were disgusting and dangerous. And, I seem to remember that the Fifth Commandment frowns on murdering one’s neighbor.” (Actually, it’s the sixth, -Yuri)
“This week, I’ll be penning a letter to the Archbishop, expressing my concerns over Rev. Pfleger’s comments,” continued Pearson. “I would hope that the Archbishop would reply with words of comfort for Mr. Riggio, his family, state legislators, and all others who were injured by Rev. Pfleger’s thoughtless, inflammatory remarks.”
The ISRA is the state’s leading advocate of safe, lawful, and responsible firearms ownership. Since 1903, the ISRA has represented the interests of over 1.5 million law-abiding firearm Illinois firearm owners.
This press release is posted at PRnewswire.
Another Only One…
The one, the only, the classic…
Police Officer Accidentally Fires A Gun In A Classroom - The best bloopers are a click away
Update: Apparently he’s suing the DEA. What a joke!
Only Cops Should Have Guns…
…because only they are properly trained in their use.
For the record, I didn’t name this video. I have nothing against women being cops, if they so choose to be. And for the cop in this video, it’s called trigger control. Keep your finger off the trigger until you’re ready to shoot.
Anyway, here’s the video.
Only Cops Should Have Guns… - More amazing videos are a click away
The Unanimous Declaration of the Thirteen United States of America
When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. –Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has refused his assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of representation in the legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the legislative powers, incapable of annihilation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise; the state remaining in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavored to prevent the population of these states; for that purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither, and raising the conditions of new appropriations of lands.
He has obstructed the administration of justice, by refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers.
He has made judges dependent on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies without the consent of our legislature.
He has affected to render the military independent of and superior to civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation:
For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states:
For cutting off our trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing taxes on us without our consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of trial by jury:
For transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offenses:
For abolishing the free system of English laws in a neighboring province, establishing therein an arbitrary government, and enlarging its boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule in these colonies:
For taking away our charters, abolishing our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our governments:
For suspending our own legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated government here, by declaring us out of his protection and waging war against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burned our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow citizens taken captive on the high seas to bear arms against their country, to become the executioners of their friends and brethren, or to fall themselves by their hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare, is undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace friends.
We, therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name, and by the authority of the good people of these colonies, solemnly publish and declare, that these united colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent states; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the state of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do. And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.
Man with Gun Saves Womans Life
“Woman claims double murder suspects broke into her home
May 23, 2007
By ERICA ESTEP 6 News Reporter
KNOXVILLE (WATE) — There is a new twist in the January murders of Christopher Newsom and Channon Christian. An East Knoxville woman says the suspects in the case broke into her home just a day before the couple was carjacked.
The single mother is afraid for her safety, so 6 News is protecting her identity. She lives less than a mile from the crime scene of the gruesome double murder on Chipman Street.
Her home was invaded by armed men a day before Newsom and Christian were carjacked. She says they are connected.
“I heard a big boom…they kicked…they kicked the door in.”
The scuff marks are still visible where her front door was kicked in. She couldn’t believe what happened next.
“I ran back into the room and they start shooting my door down,” the woman says.
She says the suspects tried to get inside her bedroom. The door to the room is now ripped at the bottom.
The young mother’s 13-year-old son and two friends were just a couple rooms away.
“I was screaming… ya’ll stay down,” she says.
But there was someone else in the house. A male friend who had a gun of his own. He shot back and the suspects took off.
Knoxville police responded and took pictures of the damage. Two weeks passed and then she says police returned.
“They brushed it off. Until these people get killed, then they take stuff serious,” the woman says.
According to the woman, the police asked to come back and remove the bullets. She says they wanted to look for fingerprints and determine if the suspects were connected to the double murder.
She says police cut a panel from her wall and showed her photos of the double murder suspects. The victim says she recognized at least one of them as the man she saw that night.
“Actually at the door, I knew that big face. I knew one of the faces, the one that kicked the door in,” she says.
While the victim says a detective told her the crimes were connected, Knoxville police will not confirm or deny that. They only say the investigation is still open.
When asked about national speculation that the double murders were racially motivated, the woman says, “I don’t think it’s a hate crime because I am a young, single black person, an African-American and they came after me.”
No Living Person Left Behind
I haven’t had time to Fisk their new 54 page treatise on “Guns Bad, Victims Good!” called “No Gun Left Behind”, but I do have some comments on the website that accompanies it.
Some salient quotes:
“Armed students? Armed teachers? That is the response of the gun lobby to the horrible massacre at Virginia Tech. Let’s give everyone a gun and start the crossfire. The gun lobby is pushing legislation modeled after a law in Utah that prohibits colleges and universities from barring possession or use of firearms on campus. As a result of the law, 18-year-old kids could carry handguns to class, and kids even younger than 18 could possess AK-47 assault rifles with high-capacity magazines on campus. The gun lobby also wants to arm K-12 teachers.”
Okay, let’s tone down the rhetoric here. As it stands currently, there is no crossfire. Teachers and students cannot defend themselves. They’re DYING instead!
Yes, let’s talk about Utah. How many mass shootings have taken place in a Utah school? Come on, I’m waiting… Times up!
I seriously doubt anyone at the NRA is suggesting that kids younger than 18 carry AK-47’s to school. But even if they were, there was a time in this country when school kids did take their guns to school, put them in a locker, and then took them home with them after school was done. Tell me how many school shootings happened back then. I’ll give you the answer, none.
I can think of a lot worse things than arming K-12 teachers. Like my kids dying because their teacher wasn’t able to protect them.
Take a lesson from the Israeli’s. After terrorists began targeting their schools, they armed their teachers and armed guards patrolled the perimeter. The terrorists soon learned that schools were no longer an easy target. And that is all a “Gun-Free Zone” is anyway, a target rich environment.
Sarah Brady, Paul Helmke, et, al. Pull your collective heads out of your butts and smell the coffee!
“Obviously, arming students and teachers is a bad idea.
Here are a few reasons why it would be insane to introduce guns into colleges and schools. The college age years — 18-24 — are the peak years for engaging in gun crimes, abusing drugs and alcohol, attempting suicide, and having other mental health problems. A binge-drinking, drug-using student is dangerous enough; let’s not give him or her a gun.”
Obvious to whom? But yet at the same time Sarah, you’re perfectly fine with heavily arming the same age group to go fight, kill and die for this country. Given your logic, a large portion of the armed forces should be disarmed and given pepper spray and keys to defend themselves with against the terrorists.
Positioned right next to this argument is a disgusting cartoon which includes, Lee Harvey Oswald, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold and Seung-Hui Cho taking turns reciting parts of the second amendment. I will not post it on my blog on principal, but you can view it here. Any respect I may have had for these idiots evaporated on the spot. Sarah, which of the other rights should we make fun of and denigrate? How about free speech? How about freedom of the press? To peacefully assemble? How about the right against illegal search and seizure? You people disgust me!
“Do We Really Want Guns in K-12 Classrooms?
Even trained police officers, on average, hit their intended targets less than 20% of the time.
Arming teachers would likely make them the first targets in an attack, and could encourage attackers to increase their firepower or wear body armor.
More than 2,000 K-12 students are expelled each year for carrying guns to school. Do we really want armed teachers confronting them? What if a teacher shoots a student?”
Now they trot out the “Police officers are the only ones trained enough to handle a firearm safely and accurately” myth. Police officers are less likely to hit what they aim at simply because most of them only have to qualify once a year, with a limited number of rounds. The gun for them is just a part of the job and they take no interest in honing their skills further. Therefore, it is no surprise they can’t hit what they aim at. I personally asked an officer in my town what kind of gun he had and all he knew was that it was a Glock (stamped on the side of the gun) and that the bullets were the kind that expanded and wouldn’t pass through, hitting other people. From the small clues he awkwardly gave me, I deduced that it was a Glock in .45 ACP with hollowpoint bullets. I’m not trying to run down cops, merely demonstrating that holding them up as the paragon for weapons handling is goofy at best. I belong to a shooting range, and among the people I see there, 95% of them are very good with a handgun. The simple reason is, they practice. They practice many more times a year than most cops do.
Seriously, aren’t teachers usually the first targets of an attack anyway? They’re bigger and older and more able to resist than their children. This is a strawman and that’s all I’m going to comment.
Well, what if a teacher shoots a student? What if a wack-job storms into the school with a 9mm and a .22lr pistol and kills 32 people? Is one better than the other? Are the victims more righteous if they can’t or won’t fight back? Would a teacher be better off confronting the attacker or cowering in fear beneath their desk?
As soon as I have the time and a large supply of antiacid, I’ll peruse their little booklet and post the results.
Anyway, I’ve got some kids to feed…
Which is it Wayne?
Mr. LaPierre. Do you, or do you not support a CCW permit holder’s right to carry a concealed weapon at their school; for theirs, and others protection?
Reference this quote from May 1st, 1999:
“First, we believe in absolutely gun-free, zero-tolerance, totally safe schools. That means no guns in America’s schools, period … with the rare exception of law enforcement officers or trained security personnel.
We believe America’s schools should be as safe as America’s airports. You can’t talk about, much less take, bombs and guns onto airplanes.Such behavior in our schools should be prosecuted just as certainly as such behavior in our airports is prosecuted.”
This quote, btw, is quoted verbatim on page 11 of the Brady Campaign’s new propaganda “No Gun Left Behind.”
Contrast that to this quote from May 11th, 2007:
“I agree that we need to look at steps the government can take to protect our kids, but let’s be honest here. I mean, my gosh, Mr. Gonzales agrees there’s no guarantee of complete security.
If that’s the case (and we all know it is), then why shouldn’t we also be having a discussion about trained adults legally carrying concealed firearms for their own protection and the protection of others? Texas Governor Rick Perry’s willing to have that discussion. Why isn’t the nation’s attorney general?”
Recently I wrote a letter to the NRA voicing my concern with Wayne’s previously stated policy:
“I am disturbed by Wayne LaPierre’s support of “Gun-Free Zones” (http://www.nra.org/Speech.aspx?id=6043).
As recent events at Virginia Tech demonstrate, “Gun-Free Zones” are an oxymoron at best, and a killer at worst. Criminals don’t obey the law, period. Wayne should renounce his support of “Gun-Free Zones” and embrace the rights of students and teachers to be lawfully armed, or consider resigning his post. In addition, it is profoundly disturbing to me that he and the NRA are betraying their principals and the members by negotiating with the other side to further restrict our second amendment rights. I am speaking of the NICS enhancement bill.
Every time you compromise with evil, evil wins and you lose. Soon there will be nothing left of our rights and evil (Sarah Brady, et al.) will have won.”
What I got back from the NRA was political doublespeak and avoidance:
“Hello and thank you for contacting NRA-ILA in regards to the Gun-Free Zones issues.
Let’s always remember first and foremost that it is those deranged individuals who have committed horrific crimes with guns at schools that are themselves responsible for their acts. Clearly it is already illegal to bring a gun to school and use it to take the lives of others. In committing these criminal acts, numerous federal, state, and local existing laws are broken. You can’t make such heinous behavior any more illegal than it already is.
Of course, in the aftermath of such tragedies, Americans ask “why” and seek solutions to prevent future tragedies from occurring. If we are truly to find solutions to preventing school shootings, a wide range of remedies must be on the table for consideration, including whether or not there should be a lawful, armed presence on our nation’s campuses. However, at the top of the discussion list, should be trying to figure out what has gone so wrong in these instances that an individual(s) feels the need to take the lives of young students in what should be a safe environment. One thing that is certain, however, is that passing additional gun control laws should not be part of the discussion, as again, you can’t make what these criminals do with guns at schools any more illegal than it already is.
Suzanne N. Anglewicz
National Rifle Association
Institute for Legislative Action
703-267-11741-800-392-8683 (VOTE)
sanglewicz@nrahq.org“
Suzzane, I don’t really care why psychotic killers feel compelled to kill. I DO care about my ability to defend my life, and the lives of my loved ones. This includes malls, schools, churches…anywhere I might be, without fear of being labeled a criminal for exercising my 2nd amendment rights, and defending my right to life and liberty.
So now I am left with too very contradictory statements from Mr. LaPierre. Which is it sir, which one is your real position?
Wayne, you should take a hint from Tom Gresham who has come out very strongly in favor of abolishing (so called) Gun-Free Zones, which have done nothing to stop mass shootings, and only see the law abiding disarmed and defenseless.
I should point out that I am a member of The NRA, but on this topic (and some others) I don’t agree with them. It would be nice to get a consistent answer from them too.
I’d write them again, but I don’t have any faith that I’d get a real answer back this time either.
You Might Be A Terrorist…
…if:
You believe that Gun Control laws are unconstitutional.
You object to the governments behaviour at Waco/Ruby Ridge.
You fly a “Gadsden” flag and/or believe in the words “Don’t Tread On Me.”
You are or have been a member of an unorganized militia.
You believe Gun Control is a conspiracy to enslave us starting with the removal of our ability to either defend ourselves or forcefully change our government.
You believe the first ten amendments of The Constitution are God given and all others are temporary, invalid or outright fraudulent.
You believe all judicial authority resides with the people. The jury, not the Judge, directs trials and can nullify laws they do not approve of.
You believe that U.S. sovereignty is being surrendered to the U.N., World Court, and World Bank, with the U.S. becoming an economic region of this New World Order.
You believe that Federal and State governments do not have the legal authority to levy taxes or interfere with travel or private enterprise by requiring licenses or regulating activity or conduct.
This, according to http://www.pa-aware.org/who-are-terrorists/domestic-5.asp
Yep, it looks like I’m a terrorist, if being a terrorist is someone who loves their country to the death. If it is someone who believes in the principles that this country was founded on and believes that the government we have now is far from the government we should have. If it is someone who believes in the the whole bill of rights as written and owns several guns and knows how to use them.
Actually…doesn’t that pretty much describe a Patriot?
Well, might as well make it complete and embrace my “terroristness”. Here’s my Gadsden flag:
Thanks to Blognomicon for the tip.




