Authorities believe Lopez attacked the family at their ranch near Centerville, about 115 miles south of Dallas, then stole their truck and drove it more than 200 miles before he was shot to death by police.
A medical examiner’s report released Thursday by a Leon County justice of the peace said Collins and his 18-year-old grandson, Waylon Collins, died from gunshot wounds and sharp force injuries.
The three younger grandsons — 16-year-old Carson Collins, 11-year-old Hudson Collins, and 11-year-old Bryson Collins — died from gunshots and stab wounds.
Police in Uvalde, Texas, face a barrage of criticism for delays in confronting the shooter who slaughtered children and teachers last week. Officials admit law enforcers screwed up; worse, they impeded parents who wanted to intervene, leaving the crime to be ended by agents who ignored police orders. As politicians rush to leverage tragedy to advance legislative agendas, we’re reminded again that it’s foolish to place our trust in authority or to surrender our ability to protect ourselves and our loved ones.
“From the benefit of hindsight, where I’m sitting now, of course it was not the right decision,” Steven McCraw, director of the Texas Department of Public Safety, admitted of police choosing to wait for backup and equipment before intervening in a massacre that took the lives of 19 schoolchildren and two teachers. “It was the wrong decision, period. There’s no excuse for that.”
That decision delayed the response for over an hour. Finally, a Border Patrol team that drove 40 miles to the scene defied orders and stopped the shooter’s rampage.
“Federal agents who went to Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, on Tuesday to confront a gunman who killed 19 children were told by local police to wait and not enter the school — and then decided after about half an hour to ignore that initial guidance and find the shooter,” noted NBC News.
The feds weren’t the only ones willing to intervene. Instead of taking on Ramos, local police tackled, pepper-sprayed, and handcuffed parents rather than allow them to take action at which officers balked.
“The police were doing nothing,” said Angeli Rose Gomez who was briefly arrested for challenging official indecision.
“Once freed from her cuffs, Ms. Gomez made her distance from the crowd, jumped the school fence, and ran inside to grab her two children,” reported The Wall Street Journal. “She sprinted out of the school with them.”
This isn’t the first time police faced criticism for dithering in response to danger. By the time officers entered Colorado’s Columbine High School in in 1999, 47 minutes had passed allowing the shooters to do their worst before killing themselves. Columbine was supposed to spur changes in police policy, but that wasn’t apparent during a 2018 incident at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Florida.
“Information reported over 10 months by the South Florida Sun Sentinel reveals 58 minutes of chaos on campus marked by no one taking charge, deputies dawdling, false information spreading, communications paralyzed and children stranded with nowhere to hide,” that newspaper concluded.
Our discourse over law enforcement in recent years can be characterized as a debate between people who vilify cops and those who sanctify them. They’re either racist thugs or a thin blue line standing against barbarism. The crimes of Derek Chauvin and his buddies as well as the heroism of the federal agents who raced to Uvalde shows that both breeds exist. But the majority of officers are regular people working a unionized public-sector job. Like most of us, they go through their days and collect their pay.
“Cops are civilians with guns who have had minimal training,” Eugene O’Donnell, a law professor with John Jay College of Criminal Justice and former police officer told the South Florida Sun-Sentinel. “Some of them are heroic. But not all. You’re asking for Zeus-like cops to speed to these scenes and be ready to put down mass killers. And cops are being told to stay out of trouble by the courts, the media, the culture. That’s their alpha and their omega.”
Angeli Rose Gomez’s children gave her a personal stake, which is why she was willing to run into Robb Elementary School; other parents scuffled with police for the opportunity to do the same. An unidentified woman in Charleston, West Virginia, also had skin in the game (her own) when she drew a concealed pistol and put down a man who opened fire on a crowd a day after the Uvalde massacre, preventing the death of anybody other than the attacker. Most officers don’t have personal stakes in the incidents to which they respond, and it’s asking a lot to expect them to put their lives on the line for strangers. They don’t even have a legal obligation to protect us.
“Nothing in the language of the Due Process Clause itself requires the State to protect the life, liberty, and property of its citizens against invasion by private actors,” then-Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote for the majority in DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services (1989).
So, we’d be foolish to surrender our right to defend ourselves and our loved ones, as many politicians demand, in hope that public employees with no stake in the situation and families waiting at home will take up the slack. No law or hollow promise relying on the limitations of human beings in public sector jobs can replace the attachments we have to our children, spouses, friends, and our own lives.
Politicians also vow to fortify schools against attack with fencing, metal detectors, and armed guards. The approach hardens targets, but it confines children in something like prison camps. It also leaves those within the perimeter at risk if it’s breached. Then-Interpol Secretary General Ronald Noble wrestled with that dilemma after a 2013 terrorist attack at the Westgate mall in Nairobi, Kenya.
“Noble said there are really only two choices for protecting open societies from attacks like the one on Westgate mall where so-called ‘soft targets’ are hit: either create secure perimeters around the locations or allow civilians to carry their own guns to protect themselves,” ABC News reported at the time. Noble seemed to favor armed civilians since that allows for dynamic responses to unpredictable situations—assuming police don’t tackle enraged parents trying to protect their children.
Based on the seemingly inevitable trail of threats, manifestos, and bad behavior left behind by Ramos and his ilk, some pundits advocate intensified scrutiny of potentially troubling messages. “The answer is obvious,” insists Holman W. Jenkins, Jr. at The Wall Street Journal. “Surveillance powered by big data, whose advancing role in our world seems unstoppable in any case.”
But, as economist Arnold Kling points out, a lot of people say troubling, violent, and extremist things, but very few actually do anything to endanger others.
“For surveillance to work, you have to be willing to see thousands of people tracked for every one who actually attempts murder,” Kling cautions. “And you will have to intervene every time the surveillance algorithm reveals a potential for the person to become violent.”
We would end up with a Big-Brother state staffed by risk-averse bureaucrats. They would live in dread of missing a dangerous person, and the threshold would drop whenever somebody slipped through.
The truth is that proposals for a prison society of disarmed and surveilled subjects shepherded by public employees are unworkable. The state can’t defend us from danger, and nothing obligates us to pretend otherwise.
If you want to protect yourself and your loved ones, you have to do it yourself.
Firing a warning shot cost man over $10,000 in attorney fees.
Noted criminal defense attorney Tom Grieve in a recent interview with Kevin Michalowski, the executive editor of Concealed Carry Magazine . . .
“Every single time — not sometimes, not usually, not maybe, or most, or nearly all — every time I’ve had a client fire a warning shot, they have been arrested, they have gone to jail, and they have been criminally charged. Not 99% of the time — 100% of the time.”
If you carry a gun or keep one at home, that’s important to know.
In fact, in the case Tom and Kevin were discussing, the man who fired a warning shot spent $10,000+ on attorneys and still had to take a plea deal.
But why does it work that way?
It’s pretty simple.
When you fire a warning shot, that’s typically considered using deadly force.
Here’s the catch:
You’re only allowed to use deadly force when you’re in fear of death or great bodily harm.
So the question becomes…
“If you were in fear of death or great bodily harm, why did you fire a warning shot instead of shooting at the threat?”
Now, you’re trapped.
This is why it’s so important that you get training on the justified use of deadly force.
Either you can pay an attorney $10,000+ to tell you what you should have done…
How A Warning Shot Cost This Man Over $10,000 . . . .
The woman’s quick reaction saved lives and may have prevented a mass shooting.
May 30, 2022 – Chaleston, West Virginia
The woman then pulled her legally-owned gun out of her purse and shot and killed him. At a press conference on Thursday, Charleston Chief of Detectives Tony Hazelett praised the woman as a hero. ‘Instead of running from the threat, she engaged with the threat and saved several lives last night,’ he said.
It comes amid a national debate over guns after a school shooting in Texas.
Butler had driven by the area earlier on Wednesday evening when he was warned to slow down because children were playing.
He returned armed with an AR-15-type rifle and opened fire from his vehicle on the birthday-graduation party outside the apartment complex in the city.
The gunman Dennis Butler, a 37-year-old criminal who had already been cautioned for speeding near children when he drove to the graduation party that was being held outside at the Vista View Apartment Complex in Charleston, West Virginia.
Mr Hazelett told a news conference that the woman who fired back did not have any law enforcement background. She has not been identified.
“She’s just a member of the community who was carrying her weapon lawfully,” he said. “And instead of running from the threat she engaged with the threat and saved several lives.”
The woman remained at the scene after the shooting, and is co-operating with investigators.
Charges will not be filed against her, police added.
Butler was found dead at the scene from multiple gunshot wounds, police said.
Mr Hazelett said it is not yet clear how Butler obtained the weapon – which he was not legally allowed to carry as a convicted felon.
EDITORIAL COMMENT: This story has made international news, but has received little attention by the US news media and has not been mentioned by the New York Times, CNN or MSNBC.
07-21-2021 During his Wednesday night CNN town hall, President Joe Biden talked about a “push to eliminate” 9mm pistols that have an ammunition capacity beyond that of which the left approves.
Biden said, “The idea you need a weapon that can have the ability to fire 20, 30, 40, 50, 120 shots from that weapon, whether it’s a 9mm pistol or whether it’s a rifle, is ridiculous. I’m continuing to push to eliminate the sale of those things.”
Up until now, Biden has pushed “assault weapons” ban legislation and moved executively to have the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) take regulatory action against AR-pistols with stabilizer braces.
On June 7, 2021, Breitbart News reported the DOJ moved to place certain AR-pistols under the purview of the National Firearms Act. But those AR-pistols are chambered in 5.56 or .223, not 9mm. Biden’s mention of going after 9mm pistols opens the door to regulating wildly popular Glock, Heckler & Koch, Smith & Wesson, Sig Sauer, Kahr, Taurus, and Springfield Armory pistols, among many others.
Biden: ‘I’m Continuing To Push To Eliminate The Sale Of’ Things Like ‘9mm Pistol,’ ‘Rifle’
President Joe Biden suggested during a CNN town hall on Wednesday night that he is pushing to eliminate the sale of high-capacity pistols and rifles.
“I’m the only guy that ever got — passed legislation when I was a senator to make sure we eliminated assault weapons,” Biden said. “The idea you need a weapon that can have the ability to fire 20, 30, 40, 50, 120 shots from that weapon, whether it’s a, whether it’s a 9mm pistol or whether it’s a rifle, is ridiculous.”
“I’m continuing to push to eliminate the sale of those things, but I’m not likely to get that done in the near term,” Biden added.
QUESTION: So how will you address gun violence from a federal point of view to actually bring about change and make our local cities safer?
BIDEN: Now, I’m not being a wise guy, there’s no reason you [inaudible], have you seen my gun violence legislation I’ve introduced? As you know, because you’re so involved, actually, crime is down. Gun violence and murder rates are up. Guns. I’m the only guy that ever got passed, legislation when I was a senator, to make sure we eliminated assault weapons. The idea you need a weapon that can have the ability to fire 20, 30, 40, 50, 120 shots from that weapon, whether it’s a, whether it’s a 9mm pistol, or whether it’s a rifle, is ridiculous. I’m continuing to push to eliminate the sale of those things. But I’m not likely to get that done in the near term. So, here’s what I’ve done. The people who, in fact, are using those weapons are acquiring them illegally, illegally. And so what happens is, I’ve gotten ATF, Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, I have them increase their budget and increase their capacity along with the Justice Department to go after the gun shops that are not abiding by the law of doing background checks. For real, that’s number one. Number two, number two, we are in a position where you, most of the cities, and I don’t know enough, I think you’ve had a lot of gun violence here in Cincinnati, I think it was up to what, how many, how many dead? 500 over a period? Don’t hold me to the number, whatever it was. But my point is all across the country. And it’s not because the gun shops in the cities are selling these guns. They are either shadow gun dealers and or gun shops that are not abiding by the law. So we’re going to do major investigations and shut those guys down and put some of them in jail and for what they’re doing, selling these weapons. There’s also a thing called ghost guns that are being sold now and being used. And so but in addition to that, what we have to do is we have to deal with a larger problem of the whole issue of law enforcement generally, we’re in a situation where as much as we need to pass the Floyd Act and all that, but here’s the deal. Cops are having real trouble. They’re not all bad guys, there are a lot of good guys. We need more policemen, not fewer policemen. But we need them involved in community policing, community policing. And when we did that, violent crime went down, all the criticism about the original crime, but guess what, crime went down until we stopped doing community policing. So it’s about getting, we have availability now, of over, billion, lots of money, for cops to be able to hire psychologists, psychiatrists, as well as social workers to be engaged in the process.
When the man advanced on her, Virginia fired one warning shot into the air.
Sunday afternoon, May 22nd Virginia Morrison, 70 was confronted in her living room by an unknown, middle-aged male intruder.
Virginia immediately demanded to know who he was, what he wanted and what he was doing there. Standing there mute, the intruder did not reply. At that point, Virginia attempted to scare him off, striking the man in the face with the bristle end of a broom.
When her attempts failed, she shouted to her live-in companion, Charlie, 80, who was in an adjacent room, to get his gun.
Failing to dissuade the intruder with her broom, Virginia threw her cell phone at the man.
Upon Charlie entering the room and assessing the situation, he fired one round from is .45 caliber semi-automatic into the living room floor to frighten off the intruder. Again, the intruder was undeterred.
At that point Virginia retreated to get her own gun. Virginia then exited the home by the backdoor and circled the house to the front yard where she again encountered the intruder.
Standing in the front yard facing her assailant, Virginia again shouted to the man demanding to know who he was, what he wanted and what he was doing there. Again, her assailant did not answer. Virginia then warned him that she had a gun and was prepared to use it.
When the man advanced on her, Virginia fired one warning shot into the air. Again unfazed, the man continued to walk toward her. Virginia then pointed her .38 Special revolver at her assailant’s chest and fired a single shot, striking her assailant in the chest.
Clutching his chest and seeing blood on his hands, the assailant turned, took several steps toward the driveway and fell to the ground, where he died.
What Virginia Morrison did right:
Called for assistance from her companion.
Retreated from the room to obtain her gun.
Exited the home.
Fired one well-placed shot in her assailant’s center of mass, neutralizing the threat.
Had a sufficient caliber gun to neutralize the threat.
What Virginia and Charlie did wrong: Oh my!
Initially, tried to speak with and rationalize with the intruder.
Initially, attempted to scare off the intruder with a broom, when her help was only feet away.
Threw her only means of communication (cell phone) at the intruder.
Charlie fired warning shot into the floor.
Virginia ran from the home rather than aiding Charlie and firing on the intruder inside the home.
When encountering her assailant again outside the home, Virginia attempted to rationalize and have a conversation with him.
Virginia fired a warning shot into the air. Where did that bullet end up?
Virginia fired only one shot. Rarely is one shot sufficient to neutralize a threat.
Cooperative fully with law enforcement officers investigating the incident, without consulting an attorney.
Gave a live interview with the news media, without consulting an attorney.
At no time, during her recorded TV interview, did Virginia ever state that she was in fear for her life.
Virginia only stated that she was sorry for what she did. She did what she had to do and she would do it again. She stated that she hoped God would forgive her for killing a man.
The bigger picture and time proven recommendations:
In Florida, your home is your castle. Under Florida’s ‘Castle Doctrine’, your home is your castle. Anyone entering your home univited, armed or unarmed, is deemed to be there to do you harm and you are justified in the use of lethal force.
You only fire your gun in defense of your life.
There is no such thing as a “warning shot”, either inside or outside the home. Firing a “warning shot” can send you to prison for 20 years.
You do not attempt to carry on a conversation with your assailant. He or she is not your friend.
In most instances, you are dealing with someone who is:
Stung out on drugs or under the influence of alcohol
In the home, retreat to a ‘safe room’ and make a stand. Do not exit the home. Your assailant may have accomplices outside.
When firing on your assailant, fire until your threat is neutralized. Resign yourself to firing a minimum of 3 rounds and re-assess. Rarely is one round sufficient to neutralize a threat.
When law enforcement arrives, the only state you should make is: “I was in fear for my life.” “I want to speak to my attorney.” PERIOD and you say NO more!
In such a situation, your only friend is your attorney. Your attorney is the only one who can keep you from spending the rest of your life in the state penitentiary.
You absolutely, positively give NO statements to the media. Your only friend is your attorney. Your attorney is the only one who can keep you from spending the rest of your life in the state penitentiary.
DISCLAIMER: Nothing contained herein is to be considered to be legal advice. If you have questions regarding your legal rights, consult an attorney licensed in the state of Florida.
Commissioner Nikki Fried Calls on Legislature to Add Gun Violence Prevention Reform to Special Session Agenda
It should be kept in mind that this woman is running to be governor of the state of Florida.
May 24, 2022
Tallahassee, Fla. — Today, Florida Commissioner of Agriculture and Consumer Services Nikki Fried released the following statement on the news of another mass shooting in Texas today:
“I am completely heartbroken and sickened by the news of another horrific mass shooting today in Texas. While our country is still reeling from the racially motivated murders in Buffalo just ten days ago, this is yet another devastating tragedy that took the lives of innocent elementary school students. In Florida, we know all too well the pain and trauma that senseless mass shootings cause in our lives and our communities, and our hearts go out to the victims and everyone who has been hurt by gun violence.
“I want to be completely clear: offering ‘thoughts and prayers’ is not enough. It’s past time for us to take serious and meaningful action to prevent gun violence. The Legislature must add gun violence prevention reform to the current Special Session agenda. There cannot be any more children massacred or lives destroyed by mass shootings while our government sits idly by.”
DEKALB COUNTY, Indiana – A group of four armed intruders broke into an Indiana home recently, but only two left alive, state police told news outlets.
It happened early Sunday, May 15, at a home in DeKalb County, officials told WXIN.
The suspects forced their way inside but were soon confronted by the homeowner, who was also armed, the TV station reported.
The resident fired at the burglars, killing two of them, police told WTHR. The homeowner held the remaining two at gunpoint until officers arrived and arrested them.
No charges have been brought against the homeowner, WPTA reported.
The surviving suspects were taken into custody on charges of burglary and murder, according to the outlet. Murder charges can be brought against the suspects because they reportedly were committing a felony that led to two deaths, the station said.