Retired Marine Defends Himself in Florida

Retired Marine is top gun at sub shop
BY ERIKA BERAS AND JENNIFER LEBOVICH

The night started like many for John Lovell, a 71-year-old ex-Marine and helicopter pilot who served two presidents. Late dinner alone at a Plantation Subway shop — veggie sub, soda, oatmeal cookie.

Wednesday night, though, Lovell’s meal was interrupted by an armed robbery. Two gunmen stormed into the sandwich shop at about 11 p.m., robbed the cashier and tried to shove Lovell — the lone customer — into the bathroom. Two bullets later, one gunman was dead, another was wounded and Lovell was being hailed as a hero.

”There’s no such thing as an ex-Marine, and he typifies this,” said longtime friend Wesley White.

”What he did last night was unbelievable Samaritan spirit,” said shop owner Khalid Malik.

Lovell already was a great customer at the Jacaranda Square Subway, Malik said: He comes by almost every night, slides into a back booth and orders the six-inch veggie sub, cookie and soft drink. But now, said Malik, “I love him a lot more.”

No one could find Lovell on Thursday. But when he shows up again, Malik said, the hero will have free heroes at the shop for life.

The Subway video surveillance cameras, which the owner had installed only a week ago — ”just to be on the safe side” — caught the whole drama.

The robbers got Lovell’s money. But Lovell, who neighbors and friends say is in tiptop shape and looks years younger than he really is, pulled out his handgun and shot both in the head.

Donicio Arrindell, 22, of North Lauderdale died. Fredrick Gadson, 21, of Fort Lauderdale, was critically wounded.

The front window was blown out and cash strewn around the shop.

”There were fives and rolls of coins everywhere,” said Detective Robert Rettig of the Plantation Police Department.

Rettig said Lovell, who has a permit to carry a concealed weapon, is not expected to be charged. ”He was in fear for his life,” Rettig said.

Reporters and television crews clustered Thursday outside Lovell’s two-story town house in Plantation, hoping for an interview. He didn’t show.

CLEAN-LIVING

Friends said Lovell is amicable and soft-spoken, doesn’t drink or smoke, and is a no-nonsense kind of guy.

”There’s no BS with him,” said White, of Yulee. ‘You could compare him to Clint Eastwood in Dirty Harry. But because of his lifestyle, he’s like `Clean Harry.’ ”

Neighbors and friends said he is unmarried, drives a Corvette and sometimes is away for long periods of time. A neighbor collected his mail Thursday.

At one point during his Marine career, the Kentucky native served as a pilot for presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson. After retiring from the Corps, he became a pilot for Delta and Pan Am.

Bryan Sklar, who serves on the Townhouses at Jacaranda board with Lovell, said he is a straight-up guy.

”I’ve seen pictures of him with John F. Kennedy,” Sklar said.

After the holdup Wednesday night, the suspects were transported to Broward General Medical Center, where Arrindell was later pronounced dead. Gadson, listed Thursday night in serious condition, faces armed robbery charges. And because someone was killed during the crime, he also will be charged with murder, authorities said.

BEST FRIENDS

The two young men were longtime best friends and roommates in North Lauderdale, Arrindell’s grandfather, Meanwell Prince, said Thursday.

”My grandson was a good child,” he said.

The last time he spoke to his grandson was shortly before the robbery. At 10:50 p.m. Prince called his grandson, who told him to leave the door unlocked because he would be home soon.

The next morning, Prince awoke to find police at his door.

Prince was shocked to learn what had happened.

”What could possess them to do this?” Prince said.

Miami Herald staff writers Jennifer Mooney Piedra and Trenton Daniel contributed to this report.

…clicky…

Share/Save

"Lucky" .50 shot…

June 29, 2007 on 11:53 pm | In .50 BMG, headshot, lucky, ricochet | 1 Comment

OUCH!

Share/Save

Men Who Own Guns Are Psychopaths

June 29, 2007 on 2:53 am | In cnn, criminal, media bias, pat brown, profiler | 2 Comments

UPDATE:

After reviewing what Pat Brown actually said, I have decided to remove this post. It is my policy to be honest and admit when I am wrong, and I was wrong in this case.

Thank you to Robb Allen for the heads up on this.

For clarification on this, please follow the link provided to me by Robb Allen:

http://www.saysuncle.com/archives/2007/06/28/pat_brown_responds/

Thanks!

Share/Save

Mack vs. Brady - 10 years after a defeat of the Brady Bill,… then the NRA Turns on us…again.

June 27, 2007; Sheriff Mack Ten Year Anniversary

On March 30, 1981, John Hinckley shot President Reagan and severely wounded his press secretary, James Brady. Richard Mack was watching the news about all this from his office in the Provo, Utah Police Station where he had just started his career in law enforcement. This was the first time he had really heard of James Brady, and 15 years later he would find himself on opposite sides of a lawsuit sitting next to James Brady in the United States Supreme Court.

Richard Mack was raised in Safford, Arizona. He graduated from BYU and stayed in Provo as a policeman for about 11 years. He left a promising career to move back to Arizona and run for Graham County sheriff. He was elected in 1988 and again in 1992. In 1993 Bill Clinton signed the Brady Bill (named for James Brady) into law and the wheels of Sheriff Mack’s lawsuit opposing the Brady Bill began to turn.

The Brady Bill was a federal law which required the local Sheriff to conduct background checks on all of Sheriff Mack’s constituents who wished to purchase a handgun. The sheriff was responsible for all costs associated with the checks, keeping files on each purchase and notifying the gun shops and customers of his findings. Sheriff Mack told me that the most offensive portion of this legislation was that the bill contained a provision that threatened to arrest “anyone who knowingly failed to comply.” Well, sheriff Mack intended to do just that; he would not comply and instead filed a lawsuit in Federal District Court in Tucson to have the Brady Bill ruled unconstitutional.

At the time, he was the only sheriff in the entire country taking such action. He made the decision alone, except for consulting with his wife. He told her that this would probably be very unpopular and that this type of thing could cost them dearly; including everything they owned. She gave him her full support, but it did as Mack had feared, he lost his home, his job and his career in law enforcement.

Mack’s lawsuit was filed the very day the Brady Bill took effect, February 28, 1994. Approximately five weeks later another sheriff from Montana filed the same suit there. Ultimately, six other sheriffs joined the lawsuit that Sheriff Mack started, which made a total of seven; seven out of 3020.

The suit contended that the federal government had no authority or jurisdiction to compel or force any sheriff in the United States to comply with any mandate, funded or not. Sheriff Mack also objected to being forced to participate in a federal gun control scheme, but the suit had no standing on Second Amendment grounds. All the District Court cases were successful, with each sheriff prevailing except the case filed by a Texas sheriff. Losing a court case in Texas about guns and state sovereignty is of interest.

The government of course, appealed and Sheriff Mack and Sheriff Printz (Montana) headed to the Ninth Circuit court in San Francisco. They had just met for the first time a few weeks earlier as guests on the Phil Donahue Show. The case in San Francisco did not go well and this court, the most overturned court in the United States, dealt the sheriffs a crushing defeat. However, the Texas sheriff prevailed in the Fifth Circuit and this is exactly what Mack had hoped for; conflicting rulings from the Circuit courts. This all but guaranteed that the U S Supreme Court would have to take the case to settle the opposite rulings from the Circuit courts.

A few months later the miracle was finally announced; Mack v. USA would be heard by the Supreme Court on December 4, 1996. Mack had just lost his bid for re-election a couple of months prior. He was extremely disappointed, but not surprised. Appearing before the U S Supreme Court was an amazing and awesome experience. He spoke briefly with James Brady. He was very friendly and told Sheriff Mack that he admired him for fighting for what he believed in. After the hearing Sarah Brady called Mack and Printz “rogue sheriffs.”

Upon leaving the sheriff’s office Mack took a job teaching high school government. He enjoyed it and it kept him busy while he waited for the Supreme Court’s decision. On weekends he still made some appearances around the country speaking at freedom rallies. Then after six and a half months of waiting, CBS news called Mack at home on June 25th and informed him that the decision would probably be announced on the 26th or the 27th. They asked him to go to a hotel in Tucson so they could interview him as soon as the decision was published. He did as they requested. Then on Friday morning at about 7:30 a.m., June 27, 1997, CBS News called Sheriff Mack and congratulated him on his victory. The United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of the sheriffs and told the federal government, i.e., the Clinton administration, that it could not compel the states or the states’ officers to administer a federal regulatory program. Justice Scalia delivered the decision for the majority, which was a tenuous 5-4 split.

Mack’s case has appeared in history and government text books and it was covered by every major news agency in this country. The lamentable issue here is the real impact this victory should have had never happened. The Clinton White House said the decision was meaningless and Janet Reno quickly downplayed it stating that it would change nothing. The truth of the matter is Mack’s case changed history. There were actually five Brady bills scheduled for Congress’ promulgation, each one to be passed one year after the other. Brady bill two was introduced just two months after Sheriff Mack filed his lawsuit by Senator Moynihan. It failed in committee and Brady bills 3, 4, and 5 were never even mentioned. Sarah Brady said at the signing of the first Brady bill that this “was only the beginning.” If the rest of her Brady bills had been passed the Second Amendment would have been completely gutted and gun shows would have been a thing of the past. Mack’s case had a great deal to do with stopping this. He fought the Clintons, the Bradys, Handgun Control Inc. and countless others. He received hate mail and threats and ironically had a window shot out of his mini-van. On the other hand, he is the only person in history to have received the top law awards from the National Rifle Association, Gun Owners of America, the Second Amendment Foundation, the Firearms Industry of America, and the Local Sovereignty Coalition. This battle was a real roller coaster ride for this small town sheriff. It cost him a lot and it brought him a great deal of satisfaction.

“What frustrates me to this day is the fact that state legislatures ignore the door that this case opened for them to keep the feds in DC. My other concern is that Congress violates his ruling from the Supremes on pretty much a daily basis. Why would we expect anything else from them? They violate the rest of the Constitution as a matter of routine also.” Mack said.

Richard Mack was a sheriff who walked tall. He stood against political correctness and made a difference for all of us. He gave us something to believe in. His case was extremely powerful. It re-established the lines between DC and local autonomy.

His favorite quote from the ruling made this entire battle and ordeal completely worthwhile: “But the Constitution protects us from our own best intentions. It divides power among sovereigns and among branches of government precisely so that we may resist the temptation to concentrate power in one location, as an expedient solution to the crisis of the day.” Now if our senators and representatives would follow this ruling? Thank you Sheriff Mack and happy anniversary!

It is now 10 years later and Mack has sent a letter to Wisconsin Gunowners that were upset about increased background checks of the federal mandate that required access to mental records (unfunded mandates) first step to submitting to mental evaluation to purchase a firearm. “State legislatures are not subject to federal direction” NRA supported the Mack V. Brady litigation to the tune of almost half a million dollars and now is supporting federal legislation (HR 2640) that rips at the heart of this court victory.

Is the NRA just trying to fit in to political correctness or is there another agenda they are supporting? Sarah Brady put out a statement saying that this bill was a victory for gun control and was shocked that the NRA was supporting this.
The NRA’s cooperation with Congresswoman McCarthy and Senator Shumer isn’t a surprise to those of us that have been witness to the NRA’s authoring hand of gun control legislation, A+ endorsements of legislators that vote for legislation like the Assault Weapons Ban, provide cover for the passage of the Brady Bill in the first place and abuse the gun owner and their vote over and over.

“The Gun Control crowd is very happy that this is a step towards requiring a mental health screening before obtaining a firearm.” (Reporter Comment: …and the government gets to determine what is and is not proper mental health?) “I’m praying for the day that the NRA and Congress respect and follow the United States Constitution.” Richard Mack.
To celebrate the 10th anniversary of his Supreme Court victory Fmr. Sheriff Richard Mack will be honored at the Tucson Breakfast Club June 30th (Sat.) 520-419-4364 Mark Spear for details.

The Mack v Brady suit was directed at the Clinton Administration (The only non-sexually oriented lawsuit that I know of) but with the Bush admin in office now, the NRA has become the Gun Control darling of a Fascist Regime bent on total domination of an increasingly resistant population. And I was paying very close attention during those years in the mid 90’s when I met Sheriff Richard Mack while he was still Sheriff of Graham County. It was Sheriff Mack that confirmed for us the existence of “Project Lead” we had heard about through Maricopa County Sheriff Department Investigators. Sheriff Mack provided us the forms for this Clinton Administration effort to register every unregistered firearm in the nation that they could during any contact an individual had with law enforcement. This is when individuals were beginning to be asked if they had a firearm while being pulled over for traffic stops or any other contact with an officer. The form was adapted from the form used to track firearms involved in a crime and were traced by investigators of a crime. The forms now include providing the information of all of the people traveling with the person detained and even the license plates of other cars that might be associated with the person in contact with the law enforcement officer. This came to our attention because an officer under Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio was very concerned about what they saw happening.

Many in Arizona may remember when Sheriff Joe Arpaio announced that no Sheriff employee was to ever speak to the media again and that his office would be the sole media contact. This was a direct result of our published investigation into “Project Lead” conducted by the BATF in Washington that was originally to be test marketed in other large cities that did not include any in Arizona. It was Sheriff Arpaio that invited the Federal Government here and Sheriff Richard Mack’s opposition to such gun control caused a rift between the two Sheriffs that was more about who stealing Arpaio’s spotlight than the discussion of abuses of Federal Power and a Sheriff’s duty to use their powers as the _highest_ ranking law enforcement in their jurisdictions to protect the people from such abuses. This is what Sheriff Richard Mack did while Sheriff Arpaio has pursued an entirely different path.

Some of the Supreme Court’s decision is included to inform you of what should have been embraced by our government officials in what is suppose to be a Constitutional Republic. But what I fear Richard Mack’s greatest contribution to freedom has been, is that he has demonstrated just how overdue we are for a full blown revolution between the ears. It’s time we all recognize just how bad thing really are.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/95-1478.ZO.html

This separation of the two spheres is one of the Constitution’s structural protections of liberty. “Just as the separation and independence of the coordinate branches of the Federal Government serve to prevent the accumulation of excessive power in any one branch, a healthy balance of power between the States and the Federal Government will reduce the risk of tyranny and abuse from either front.” Gregory, supra, at 458.
To quote Madison once again:

“In the compound republic of America, the power surrendered by the people is first divided between two distinct governments, and then the portion allotted to each subdivided among distinct and separate departments. Hence a double security arises to the rights of the people. The different governments will control each other, at the same time that each will be controlled by itself.” The Federalist No. 51, at 323.
“Much of the Constitution is concerned with setting forth the form of our government, and the courts have traditionally invalidated measures deviating from that form. The result may appear `formalistic’ in a given case to partisans of the measure at issue, because such measures are typically the product of the era’s perceived necessity. But the Constitution protects us from our own best intentions: It divides power among sovereigns and among branches of government precisely so that we may resist the temptation to concentrate power in one location as an expedient solution to the crisis of the day.” Id., at 187.

We held in New York that Congress cannot compel the States to enact or enforce a federal regulatory program. Today we hold that Congress cannot circumvent that prohibition by conscripting the State’s officers directly. The Federal Government may neither issue directives requiring the States to address particular problems, nor command the States’ officers, or those of their political subdivisions, to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program. It matters not whether policymaking is involved, and no case by case weighing of the burdens or benefits is necessary; such commands are fundamentally incompatible with our constitutional system of dual sovereignty. Accordingly, the judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is reversed.

Richard Mack was inducted into the NRA Hall of Fame 1994 and was the NRA’s Law Enforcement officer of the year 1994. His books: “From my Cold Dead Fingers – Why America Needs Guns” 1995 republished and updated after SCOTUS Victory in 2000 – “Vicki, Sam and America – How the Government killed all Three” - 2003.


Share/Save

Gun Talk & Chat Today!

June 24, 2007 on 10:56 am | In Gun Talk, gun chat | No Comments


Gun Chat

I’d like to invite everyone who reads this blog to join me for chat during Gun Talk every Sunday from 11AM - 2PM PST.

There’s a good bunch of folks that chat there during the show, so come on in!

-Yuri

Share/Save

Jesse & "Snuffy" go to the Slam!

Jesse Jackson Arrested at Demonstration

AP
CHICAGO (June 23) - The Rev. Jesse Jackson was arrested Saturday at a demonstration outside a south suburban gun shop and charged with one count of criminal trespass to property.

Rev. Jesse Jackson.
By Adam Rountree, AP

Jesse Jackson has been protesting for stricter gun laws since a 16-year-old honor student was gunned down on a Chicago city bus.

Jackson was arrested when he refused to move away from the entrance to Chuck’s Gun Shop in Riverdale, police said. He has protested with other community activists outside the shop in recent weeks after a 16-year-old honor student was gunned down on a city bus.

Police said the shooting was gang-related but the teen was not the intended target.

Jackson, who says the gun shop’s proximity to Chicago provides gang members and criminals easy access to firearms, has used the protests to call for stricter gun laws.

The Rev. Michael Pfleger, a Catholic priest who oversees a South Side congregation, also was arrested and charged with Jackson.

A message seeking comment from the gun shop was not immediately returned Saturday afternoon.

Two teens have been charged as adults with taking part in the May shooting of Blair Holt, an honor student at Julian High School.

…clicky…

Share/Save

"Snuffy" at it yet again!

Action Alert for Saturday, June 23, 2007: Counter-Protest at Chuck’s Gun Shop, the 3rd Time in 4 Weeks

ISRA has found out that Fr. Michael Pfleger is going to march yet again atChuck’s Gun Shop, 14310 S. Indiana, Riverdale, IL on Saturday, June 23rd. This is four weeks after the highly publicized protest at the same location where he called for the “snuffing out” of Chuck’s owner, John Riggio. He will probably bring Reverend Jesse Jackson with him.

Many of you have followed the news about Pfleger’s threat and wished that you could have been at Chuck’s on May 26th to show your solidarity. Some of you took advantage of the short notice to come out to Chuck’s last weekend. ISRA 1st Vice President Mike Weisman was there to stand with John Riggio and the counter-protestors at both marches. He’s going to be there again, and he’s urging all gun owners who can do so, to come to Chuck’s this Saturday.

“Chuck’s Gun Shop is a part of my own personal history with firearms. I first went there over 25 years ago, when I lived in the city. The staff helped me get my first FOID card.” Mike Weisman said, “Chuck’s Gun Shop as been part of the community in the south suburbs for decades, it’s a vital, family-run business that should stay and serve the community in the decades to come.”

“So I’m going back there this Saturday, and I’m calling on my fellow ISRA members and Illinois Gun Owners from all across Chicagoland to join me. I’m also making a special appeal to those who have ties to this part of the metro area. It’s important to me personally that we have strong representation there.” Weisman concluded.

Background info: The owners of Chuck’s have been long-time defenders of the right to keep and bear arms. Unfortunately, they have paid dearly for supporting your rights. Chucks was the primary target of Mayor Daley’s $433 million lawsuit against the 2nd Amendment. Although the Daley suit failed, Chuck’s was forced to bear huge legal costs to defend their business - and to defend the 2nd Amendment. Chuck’s has also been harassed ceaselessly by anti-gun church groups and the gun-hating media - including “60 Minutes.” Rev. Jackson and Fr. Pfleger have marched twice on Chuck’s Gun Shop in the recent weeks, including May 26, when Fr. Pfleger called for John Riggio to be “snuffed out.” The ISRA has an audio copy of his turn at the microphone, which you can download and listen to. (550KB mp3 file)

ISRA is calling upon gun owners to make the return trip to Chuck’s Gun Shop to take a stand for the right to keep and bear arms. Please do the following:

1. Plan on gathering at Chuck’s Gun Shop & Range, 14310 South Indiana Avenue, Riverdale, IL, at 12:30 PM on June 23rd for a counter protest against Michael Pfleger and Jesse Jackson. Click here for a mapquest map.

2. While at Chuck’s, express your solidarity with the owners and, if you can, make a purchase. No matter how small, your loyalty to Chuck’s will be greatly appreciated.

3. Prepare to peacefully confront anti-gun protesters with the truth. Don’t be shy about defending what you know is rightfully yours.

4. If possible, take photographs of the anti-gun protesters and send copies to webmaster@isra.org.

5. Please post this alert to every Internet blog and bulletin board that you belong to. Encourage all your friends and fellow shooters to join in this counter-protest against the gun grabbers.

Only you can defend your rights from destruction by guys like Fr. Pfleger and Rev. Jackson. The gun grabbers must not attack our rights with impunity. You are the gun owner who will stand up and be counted. Make sure that you are there Saturday, June 23rd at Chuck’s Gun Shop.

This is beyond ridiculous!

-Yuri

Share/Save

I hope they found what they were looking for

June 20, 2007 on 9:26 pm | In Michael J. Sullivan, US senate, gun, trace | No Comments

Share/Save

Teen Saves Mother from Carjacker

Louisiana teenager grabs gun to foil carjacking
17-year-old shoots would-be attacker who threatened his mom, police say

METAIRIE, La. - A 17-year-old boy foiled an attempted carjacking, wrestling a gun from a would-be robber and shooting him after the man grabbed his mother, authorities said.

Carl Chestnut, wounded in the head and torso, will face armed robbery charges once he is released from East Jefferson General Hospital, Col. John Fortunato, a Jefferson Parish Sheriff’s Office spokesman, said Monday.

The 53-year-old woman, whose name wasn’t released, and her son were in the drive-through line at an Arby’s Roast Beef Restaurant early Monday when Chestnut, 44, walked up and pointed a gun at her, demanding their money and the car, Fortunato said.

When he leaned inside, trying to yank the mother out of the car, the 17-year-old grabbed the gun, Fortunato said. He said it went off once as they struggled, but did not hit anyone. Once the youth got the gun, he shot Chestnut several times, Fortunato said.

Sylena Rhodes, a corporate officer for Arby’s, said, “He saved his mother’s life. He’s a hero. He’s an absolute hero.”

While acknowledging the gamble succeeded, authorities stressed that it’s safer to cooperate in such a case.

“Give them the money and give them the keys,” Sheriff Harry Lee said. “You make an insurance payment on your car, and nobody gets shot.”

Share/Save

Teach Your Children Well

June 20, 2007 on 6:54 pm | In AR15, eleven year old, field, girl, strips | No Comments

An 11 year old field strips an AR-15

Share/Save

Next Page »