The heroic Johnny Hurley interdicted an active killer, shooting and killing him, and was then killed by a responding police officer. At the time the officer shot this courageous good guy, Hurley had the killer’s rifle in hand, no doubt in an effort to remove it from the downed threat. Picking up that rifle is, likely, the act that lead to this tragedy.
Kyle Rittenhouse, the 17 year old who was in Kenosha, Wisconsin, during riots ended up shooting three assailants who, according to video footage, were clearly assaulting him. While it appears his actions were justified (a jury will decide, eventually) Rittenhouse was running around the streets, during a mob scene, with a rifle in hand. Drawing attention from bad actors? You bet.
In Austin, Texas, a BLM protester named Garrett Foster allegedly pointed an AK47 at a driver. The driver, in what appears to be justified self-defense, used his handgun to kill Foster. If Garrett did, indeed, threaten the driver with the rifle then the outcome is justified. However, in the mayhem of the protest, Foster may have made himself a likely bullet magnet because he was walking around in a tense situation with a rifle in hand.
Guys, I know this might hurt some feelings, but I will say it as clearly as possible: If you keep a rifle in your vehicle for self-defense in the event of an active shooter, a riot, or some other extreme incident, you are not learning from reality. A long gun is of exceedingly limited use in civilian self-defense outside of the home. When in public, the handgun is your weapon.
Think about it: in many active killer situations, what are the responding police officers looking for? Namely, they are seeking a guy with a rifle in civilian clothing. That sounds a lot like you, when you charge into the mall with your AR15 to stop an active killer, does it not? What do you suppose other concealed carriers on the scene will do when they see you, rifle in hand, right after gunfire and screaming erupts around them? Carrying a rifle is a good way to get burned down by responding police or other armed citizens. Ask yourself, in the middle of a riot, when things are tense, and gunfire is just one rash decision away, who is going to get shot first? My guess is the guy holding the rifle.
Now, a dedicated long gun for home defense? Absolutely. I would even submit that a dedicated rifle, at home, for neighborhood defense is worthwhile, as we have witnessed several incidents where armed citizens stopped mass shootings in their own community. Also, if you live in a rural area and keep a rifle in the vehicle to deal with trouble out on the barren country roads, totally legit. But, a long gun in the vehicle, kept for deployment against active killers or aggressive mobs in urban environments? Nope. Rather than adding a rifle to your trunk, add a backup handgun to your body. In the event of an active killer, if you use force, put the gun away as soon as the threat is neutralized. In the event of mob violence, get out of the area, and if you must flee on foot your concealed handgun will not draw any unwanted attention.
We all love rifles, but the handgun remains the primary weapon of the armed citizen against criminal enterprise. The rifle belongs at home for house or neighborhood defense, or for the defense of your liberty.
I keep handguns, rifles and shotguns in various vehicles. I have actually used the shotguns numerous times each while out and about. ‘Nuff said.
Did you use them to interdict an active killer or to protect yourself from a mob? In the article I state that having a truck gun for certain reasons and environments, such as rural area uses, is totally legit. However, for active killers or mobs, the history speaks for itself.
The 4th gun safety rule is to know your target and what is in front and behind. This was in force even in the 1960’s military. The police have been less that forthcoming about why officer Barney shot the gentleman with the rifle. I have watched cops shoot at my local range and my first reaction to the incident was that Mr Hurley was damned unlucky, He ran in to the one cop in a boatload who maybe could shoot or just got “lucky”.
If the point of your article is that the cops are buffoons and that having a long gun means officer Barney is likely to unload on you, then I accept that as a reasonable conclusion, and something I am willing to factor into my risk calculations. However, if you are defending the police in this situation with the knowledge that is currently publicly available, I am inclined to refer back to the first paragraph. I do agree that in this modern American world with Soros’ elected DA’s using any gun to try to stop a mass-shooter unless he/she is directly threatening you or your loved ones is a bad idea. They are likely to award the shooter with a mural and try to put you in jail. That is a societal failure not anything wrong with a truck gun. You basically are arguing that the gun is the problem, not officer Barney.
While your argument that cops need to identify their target has no objection from me, I urge you to consider what holding a rifle in the midst of an active shooter situation looks like to any responder, LEO or another armed citizen. The events I reference in the article speak for themselves. If you want to carry a rifle into a violent mob or in reaction to an active killer, go for it. Maybe your experience will yield a different outcome for our discussion….or not.