Advertisements
Home

“Concealed Carry Is Great!” Manager Thrilled After Employee Shoots Armed Robbers

Leave a comment

This is from Bearing Arms. 

Here is a store manager that understands the benefits of concealed carry.

The manager of a Chicago T-Mobile store is singing the praises of one of his employees who pulled his concealed handgun and took the fight to two armed robbers yesterday,putting both of the bad guys in the hospital.

Two robbery suspects were shot by an employee at a cell phone store in the Jeffrey Manor neighborhood on Chicago’s South Side.

The T-Mobile store in the 2000-block of East 95th St. was left riddled with bullet holes. If not for the employee carrying a weapon with a concealed carry license, the manager of the store says he might be telling a different story.

“I think concealed carry is a great opportunity for managers, workers, employees to protect themselves in these cases. And our employee did a great job to protect themselves and the other employee,” said Neil Tadros, store manager.

He says two men entered the store and acted like they were shopping for phones for a few minutes, then pulled out guns.

One employee ran to the back to call for help while the other pulled out his own gun and fired at the two suspects. He hit one of them in the groin and the arm, and the other in the abdomen and the arm.

The men ran from the store with the employee chasing them, on the phone giving a description to police.

The suspects then drove to a nearby hospital where police took them into custody.

Both of the bad guys ran instead of engaging the concealed carrier, and managed to escape even after taking two bullets each. Don’t expect bad guys to fall just because they’ve taken hits. They likely have friends who have been shot and survived, and may have been shot themselves committing prior crimes. Don’t plan on firing one or two shots. Plan on engaging until the threat presented no longer exists.

By that, we mean that you should engage a threatening person until they stop being a threat. If they run, drop their weapon, or otherwise stop being a lethal force threat after your first controlled pair or hammer, that’s great. If they continue to present themselves as a threat after you’ve made good hits to the upper chest, you need to work your failure drill, moving shots to the head and pelvis and perhaps back again to the chest if the threat continues. People who are on drugs or who are simply very determined can absorb a lot of handgun bullets and continue to function for 30 seconds to a minute even after taking fatal hits. Keep working the problem until it is resolved.

The concealed carrier in this instance made a major tactical mistake, but survived to tell his tale.

What was it?

Advertisements

Federal Judge Says DC Gun Carry Law is Unconstitutional

Leave a comment

This is from The Washington Free Beacon.

The powers that be in D. C. will keep fighting this ruling and will end up being  charged with contempt of court.

This fight is sadly a long way from being over.

 

Injunction issued against ‘good reason’ requirement for concealed carry permit.

A federal judge has issued a preliminary injunction saying the District of Columbia’s new concealed carry law is unconstitutional.

The order, issued Monday by Judge Frederick J. Scullin, was the second decision in less than a year declaring the Washington, D.C., gun carry laws to be unconstitutional. In October of 2014, the same judge ruled that the district’s complete ban on gun carry was also in violation of the Constitution.

Scullin barred DC Metropolitan Police Chief Cathy Lanier from enforcing the city’s requirement that a person applying for a concealed carry permit must prove they have a “good reason” to need one. This requirement created a system where only those with police reports detailing violent threats against them could obtain a permit.

Critics said the requirement was the reason few permits had been issued thus far, and argued that it violates the Second Amendment.

The “good reason” clause was used to deny three men who wished to carry weapons in the District permits. The men—Joshua Akery, Tyler Whidby, and Brian Wrenn—joined with the Second Amendment Foundation to file suit against the city.

In Monday’s order, the court sided with the plaintiffs.

“This conclusion should not be read to suggest that it would be inappropriate for the District of Columbia to enact a licensing mechanism that includes appropriate time, place and manner restrictions on the carrying of handguns in public,” Judge Scullin said in his ruling. “The District of Columbia’s arbitrary ‘good reason’/’proper reason’ requirement, however, goes far beyond establishing such reasonable restrictions.”

“Rather, for all intents and purposes, this requirement makes it impossible for the overwhelming majority of law-abiding citizens to obtain licenses to carry handguns in public for self-defense, thereby depriving them of their Second Amendment right to bear arms.”

The plaintiffs say they are pleased with the ruling. “This is a devastating loss for the District and its anti-gun-rights policy,” Second Amendment Foundation executive vice president Alan Gottlieb said in a statement.

The Judge also ordered that lawyers from both sides meet on July 7 to “discuss an expedited schedule for the resolution of this case.”

“To quote the renowned American folk trio, Peter, Paul, and Mary, ‘when will they ever learn, when will they ever learn?’” Gottlieb asked.

The city’s attorney general is looking at Judge Scullin’s ruling but still believes the District’s concealed carry law is constitutional. “We are reviewing the ruling; however, we believe that the law passed by the Council is constitutionally valid,” OAG spokesperson Robert Marus told the Washington Free Beacon.

If D.C. decides to fight the court’s ruling, the plaintiffs will continue with their case. “If they do not comply with the court order we will move to hold them in contempt,” Gottlieb said.

“We will take this case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.”

Two great road signs

1 Comment

This is from my email box.

Indiana sign

West VA

Masked Man Robs Bank in Kroger, Moms Demand Action Says an Open Carry Ban Would Have Prevented Robbery

Leave a comment

This is from Guns Save Lives.

I doubt if the armed robber would have paid any attention to a ban by Kroger on open carry.

Criminals do not pay attention to the laws or rules that is why they are criminals.

 

Moms Demand Action rarely makes sense with their ridiculous demands and corporate bullying tactics. However, they are REALLY not making sense today.

According to Cincinnati.com, this is how the robbery went down,

The incident occurred around 10:30 a.m. Wednesday at the branch location at 2310 Ferguson Road.

Police say a man wearing a grey skeleton mask carrying an open umbrella brandished a semi-automatic handgun at the teller and demanded cash.

After receiving an undetermined amount of cash, the suspect placed the money in a black nylon bag with white letters and fled the bank.

Of course, Moms Demand Action had to jump on the event and even used it to push their agenda of banning LEGAL open carry in Kroger stores. This is the post they made on Facebook following the incident:

ANOTHER ARMED ROBBERY AT KROGER: This man robbed a bank inside a Cincinnati-area Kroger yesterday. Police say he wore a grey skeleton mask and demanded cash while brandishing a semi-automatic handgun at a teller. The robbery comes only two days after a man at another Cincinnati Kroger was robbed at gunpoint in the restroom: http://cin.ci/1w8GXnq

These crimes at two Kroger stores in one week should serve as a wake up call to Kroger’s leadership to prohibit the open carry of firearms in its stores. Kroger customers should not be responsible for determining if someone in the store holding a gun is a criminal or making a political statement.

Really? Can someone please tell these moms that armed robbery is not only already illegal, I’m pretty sure Kroger doesn’t allow it as a policy. These “Moms” aren’t even living in reality anymore. I wonder how long before this unsuccessful group is disbanded and replaced in the Bloomberg merry-go-round of anti-gun groups.

If anything, the fact that armed criminals sometimes target Kroger stores is even more reason to allow law abiding citizens to carry there.

Poll: Chicago Residents Feel Less Safe with Concealed Carry Legal

1 Comment

This is from The Truth About Guns.

This is the place that elected men for Mayor as “Big Bill Thompson,

Richard J. Daley,Richard M. Daley and Rahm “The Ballrenia” Emanuel.

Chicago also supported Barack Obama. Enough Said.

 

I’ve written before about the difference between feeling safe and actually being safe, but it’s a concept around which most in the anti-gun population will never be able to wrap their heads. Their entire argument is based on emotion, so asking them to think rationally about the issue is like asking a cat to recite a Shakespeare sonnet. A new poll was released on Monday reinforcing this disconnect between logic and emotion in the Windy City, as apparently 55% of Chicago residents feel “less safe” now that concealed carry is legal.

According to the Chicago Tribune, 55 percent of poll-takers said they felt “less safe” with the law permitting licensed gun owners to bear hidden weapons in public. Meanwhile, 15 percent said they felt “more safe” and 30 percent said they were indifferent.

The numbers coincide with a rise in Chicago shootings this summer — headline-making cases include the tragic death of 11-year-old Shamiya Adams — and a decline in Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s job approval rating. The Trib reported last week that his rating slipped from 50 percent around this time last year to a current low of 35 percent, revealing significant dissatisfaction with how the incumbent Democrat — up for re-election this February — is handling the city’s myriad problems, crime being one of them. The mayor blames “economic stress” for his poor reviews.

There are two problems here.

First, despite Chicago residents having been conditioned over decades to fear “concealed carry killers” thanks to the civilian disarmament extremist crowd, people with a concealed carry permit are FAR less likely to commit a murder than even the police. In reality, Chicago citizens would be more justified in their lack of perceived safety if Rahm Emanuel put more cops on the streets as opposed to legalized concealed carry, but the population has been so well conditioned to think that all guns are evil and all gun owners are criminals that their perception of the situation in no way matches up with reality.

The second issue is that the NBC article conveniently correlates the availability of concealed carry permits with a “rise in Chicago shootings this summer.” I’ll give you a hint: no one involved in those incidents had a concealed carry permit. If someone with a legal concealed handgun permit went on a shooting spree in Chicago we’d hear about it non-stop from the Moms Demand Action crowd, but they have been oddly radio silent on this issue. NBC, just like the gun control establishment, believes that guns cause crime, and if we could just remove all firearms from the world then we would have finally achieved that utopian ideal where everyone is naturally good and kind to each other.

There’s just one problem: life is indeed nasty, brutish, and short. There really is true evil in the world, and the availability of firearms (on balance) does vastly more to allow individuals to protect themselves than contributes to the commission of crimes. But, of course, NBC doesn’t see it that way. To NBC and their ilk, firearms are a talisman of evil — a magical item that forces the holder to commit crimes. Without that firearm, those same criminals would have been perfect law-abiding angels helping old ladies across the street. I think not.

Perception is reality. It doesn’t matter if the crime rate plummets and murders become few and far between — we still have our rights on the chopping block so long as the public perceives our ability to defend ourselves as a threat to their safety. There is one silver lining to this story, namely that the percentage of people in Chicago scared of concealed carry is only 55%. While it’s a solid majority, it’s not everyone. With some luck, hopefully they too will start to realize that law abiding citizens are not the issue and come around on the gun rights issue. A man can dream, anyway…

Love Freedom Enough to Fight the Machine Yet?

1 Comment

This is from AmmoLand.

No more Gun Free Zones.

I am adding a sign that would be useful.

 

Carjacking

More cameras! More lights! More signs! More ” Gun-Free Zones” And, they are even suggesting that automakers stop making vehicles that are so difficult to steal…

www.etsy.com This sign will help

 

 

 

 

Ft Collins, CO –-(Ammoland.com)- “When they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about answers.” ~ Thomas Pynchon

Bankrupt and crumbling Detroit, MI, where all who are able are getting out as fast as they can, has unhappily become the sister-city of Johannesburg, South Africa!

For years, Johannesburg has claimed, among other unflattering titles, the ” carjacking capitol of the world,” but now Detroit is providing Johannesburg with stiff competition!

Brazen, armed carjackers ply their trade in broad daylight in MI’s biggest (but shrinking) city. It is so bad that savvy motorists no longer pay any attention to stop sights and stop lights, and they never stop for gas, nor for any other reason. They remain in constant motion while in the City!

To combat this dubious distinction, Detroit’s powers-that-be are predictably doing more of all the things that have consistently failed, the way liberals/leftists always do.

More cameras! More lights! More signs!  More ” Gun-Free Zones” And, they are even suggesting that automakers stop making vehicles that are so difficult to steal!

I wish I were surprised at such pathetic drivel coming from the mouths of those with a public trust.

The one thing that does serve as a genuine deterrent, independent, productive, and armed citizens (and an occasional carjacker full of righteous bullet-holes) is, of course never mentioned, as only “naughty” citizens have guns, according to most mayors and other leftist politicians.

As if to confirm the trend, a NC restaurant that posted a conspicuous “Concealed Guns Not Allowed” sign has just suffered a successful armed robbery! Robbers apparently didn’t see the sign! And, we all know what “solution” the restaurant’s idiot owners will come up with, don’t we?

Bigger signs!

Or, we can take the advice of Juan Williams of Fox News and “… make the whole nation a gun-free zone” ( read: Juan Williams Wife Robbed & Now Wishes She Had A Gun )

These people don’t love freedom the way our Founders did, and the way some of us still do!

It is going to get worse. And, leftists will predictably continue to punish good citizens who are not committing crimes, because we don’t vote for them.

A few of us are not drinking the Koolade, but we’re a minority. This is the way once-proud civilizations decline and fall!

“And how we later burned with regret in the gulags, thinking: ‘What would it have been like if every state security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive, and had to say a nervous good-bye to his family?’

Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but instead understood they had nothing left to lose anyway and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?

The NKVD would very quickly have suffered a shortage of enthusiastic officers, and notwithstanding all of Stalin’s malevolent thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt!

Ifif…

But, we didn’t love freedom enough!” ~ Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

Read more: http://www.ammoland.com/2014/05/love-freedom-enough-to-fight-the-machine-yet/#ixzz332HIGwI6
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook

 

 

GUN CONTROL PROPONENT: ADDRESSING SEXUAL ASSAULT SHOULDN’T BE TIED TO ARMING WOMEN

1 Comment

This is from Breitbarts Big Government.

These gun control loons would sooner see a woman raped and murdered than to see her defend herself with a gun.

 

 

As Safe Campus Colorado pushes for a November ballot initiative to ban concealed carry on college campuses in that state, its founder, Ken Toltz, says suggestions of arming more women to fight the growing epidemic of sexual assaults on campus is not the way to go.

According to Toltz, “The statistics are really worrisome about how prevalent sexual assault is on college campuses. We’re not doing enough, and handing out guns is not the solution.”

According to Boulder’s The Daily Camera, Toltz also said those who defend concealed carry as a way for women to fight sexual assault “politicize” and conflate two issues – sexual assault and concealed carry – which ought to be dealt with separately.

He used these comments to try to undercut the effectiveness Amanda Collins’s testimony before the Colorado legislature. Collins testified about “how a concealed [carry] gun may have allowed her to stop her sexual assault as it was happening on a college campus in Nevada.”

Katherine Whitney just graduated from Colorado University’s law school. She has a concealed carry permit and said, “There are women in this state who have been raped on campus but have concealed carry permits and are still completing their degrees. It’s very important that they are able to attend a university where they’re permitted to carry on campus.”

Toltz did not explain why his group is pushing a ban that will disarm law-abiding female gun owners who go through an extensive personal background check before being issued a concealed carry permit for self-defense.

 

“Knock That White Boy Out!” Juvi-Thugs Film Assault On Veteran

Leave a comment

This is from The Black Sphere.

More sons of Obama attack a white veteran.

They know that people in Cleveland has very limited rights to self defense by being  able to conceal carry.

One day while riding Cleveland, Ohio’s “Healthline” bus, Matthew Robinson, a disabled Army veteran, realized that his health was actually on the line after being surrounded by approximately eight Juvi-Thugs.

When he exited the bus, which was near Cleveland’s Public Square, they followed and eventually attacked him. During the unprovoked assault, he was taunted with racial slurs, and robbed of his items.

Adding insult to injury (but beneficial for law enforcement), one of the miscreants filmed the attack on a cellphone for their sadistic enjoyment.

A visibly shaken Matthews recalled to 19 Action News:

“The whole time I’m just thinking, pretty much protect myself and don’t let anybody in behind you.”

“What they were saying was, ‘Knock that boy out!’ ‘White boy.’ ‘Cracker’. They were saying, ‘Knock that white boy out’.”

The Juvi-Thugs scattered once police arrived, but luckily, three of them were apprehended, including a 16-year-old girl who recorded the incident.

Police acknowledge that violent “teens” have plagued the Public Square, which is a four-block plaza in downtown Cleveland. However, the police won’t acknowledge that these violent “teens” are overwhelmingly Black.

(Read here to learn the non-PC truth about of these “teens.”)

Knowing the detrimental effects of crime, Cleveland has increased the police presence at Public Square. Of course, this short-term solution doesn’t address the real problem (culture), but like most cash-strapped cities, Cleveland simply cannot afford to have taxpayers assaulted, and the commerce districts hijacked by Juvi-Thugs.

I wonder how Cleveland’s NAACP chapter feels about this story. Just kidding, I already know… it’s the victim’s fault.

Read more at http://theblacksphere.net/2014/02/knock-white-boy-juvi-thugs-film-assault-veteran/#XutWxli2OIGruR6w.99

Proposed medical marijuana rules: Your pot or your gun

Leave a comment

This is from the Chicago Tribune.

If your smoking marijuana medical or not I do not want you with a concealed carry handgun.

If your drinking heavily and are falling down drunk I do not want you with a concealed carry handgun.

 

Long list of planned regulations up for public comment.

 

Patients who want to qualify for medical marijuana in Illinois would have to be fingerprinted for a background check and pay $150 a year — and give up their right to own a gun, state officials proposed Tuesday.

The plan outlines how adults who have any of 41 specified medical conditions, such as cancer, AIDS or complex regional pain syndrome, may apply to get a patient registry identification card to purchase medical pot.

The proposed rules are the first in a series of parameters expected to be outlined over the course of the year to govern how medical marijuana can be legally grown, sold and purchased. The Illinois Department of Public Health will take public comment on this set of rules until Feb. 7 and then submit them to a legislative panel for approval by the end of April.

Most of the rules address how a patient can qualify for an ID card to buy up to 2.5 ounces of marijuana every two weeks — or more if a doctor certifies that it’s necessary.

One new proposal states that a qualifying patient or caregiver may not possess a firearm, even if they have a state firearm owner’s identification card or concealed carry permit, and violators may be subject to sanctions by state police.

Todd Vandermyde, lobbyist for the National Rifle Association, said the NRA takes no position on the issue but that the rule seems to be an attempt to interpret federal law. A U.S. Department of Justice firearm application form asks if the buyer is “an unlawful user” of marijuana or other controlled substances.

Illinois regulations make clear that pot possession is still prohibited by federal law, and the state denies liability for damages arising from the program, including federal prosecution.

“It presents a novel legal conundrum,” Vandermyde said. “The courts are going to have to reconcile it.”

The rules would allow patients to designate a caregiver who could legally purchase and carry marijuana for them. Patients and caregivers would undergo a background check by Illinois State Police and would be rejected for any felony conviction for a violent crime or for possession of a controlled substance, including marijuana or methamphetamine.

A proposed exception would be if the patient proves that a drug conviction involved “a reasonable amount (of) cannabis intended for medical use,” and that the patient had a debilitating medical condition at the time.

Also, each patient must be at least 18 and have a “bona fide” relationship with a doctor who would certify the patient’s medical condition.

The state would have 180 days to act on an application. A patient would need to reapply annually to maintain the certification.

The possession or use of marijuana would be banned on school grounds or school buses, in any other vehicle and at child care businesses and correctional facilities. An exception is made to transport marijuana in a vehicle if it is in an inaccessible sealed container. Smoking marijuana also would be prohibited in health care facilities, anywhere that tobacco smoking is prohibited or in “any public place where an individual could reasonably be expected to be observed by others.”

The law also would prohibit use of medical marijuana by police officers, firefighters, school bus and commercial drivers, and anyone who is not a qualified patient.

On the production side, cultivation centers would need to track inventory and have 24-hour surveillance systems. They could not operate within 2,500 feet of a school, child care center or residential area and could not sell directly to the public, only to registered dispensaries.

The state Department of Agriculture still must develop rules for cultivation centers, and the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation still must draw up rules for dispensaries.

The proposed patient registry rules were developed by Bob Morgan, medical marijuana coordinator and legal counsel for the Department of Health, in consultation with staff members and officials from other states that have medical marijuana, agency spokeswoman Melaney Arnold said.

She expects tens of thousands of applicants, and many comments from the public.

Patient applications will be accepted for those whose last names start with A through L in September and October; the remainder may apply in November and December. After that, all applications will be accepted year-round.

A nine-member advisory board of health professionals and one patient advocate, all appointed by the governor, will review proposals for adding ailments to the list of qualifying conditions. The Department of Public Health director will make the final decision.

Illinois is the 20th state to allow medical marijuana. The proposed rules may be seen at mcpp.illinois.gov.

The Big Question: To Conceal or Not to Conceal

1 Comment

This is from Clash Daily.

This debate will keep going as long as we are still able to carry a firearm.

I have said this before I am grateful I live in Indiana as both open and concealed carry is legal.

I do both forms of carry that being said I concealed carry because I like to keep the bad guys guessing.

 

Every day it seems there are more stories of some of the 2A brethren pushing the envelope by open-carrying. The story usually grabs a headline. The picture tends to show a confrontation between a police officer and an openly carrying individual. Many online stories come complete with video and audio as friends record the event on their phones. The open carry faction of the gun rights movement demand what they believe to be a God given human right documented and guaranteed through our Second Amendment. They see it literally. Black and white. No need for a permit. No need for permission. No need for concealment. No off limits places. No restrictions. A right is a right is a right, right?

They root this belief in the Second Amendment itself and I will just say I don’t disagree, but. Let’s review for fun the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” There is nothing in there about permission, background checks, concealing, permitting, limiting magazine capacity, calibers, gun free zones, or much of anything restrictive that we are dealing with every day in America. It reads like patriot poetry, beautiful words of freedom. Oh, if it was just that easy, but we all know it’s not. Let’s start with why would you want to open carry? I think there are three main reasons to do it.

1- Function. You feel that open and easy access to your weapon is necessary to achieve victory in an armed altercation. Also, hunting or working outside can make open carrying the most logical thing to do for safety sake.
2- Rights. Since it’s our right, some people want to do it just because they can. This falls under the whole freedom thing. Are we not free to do what is within our rights?
3- Shock Value. Some people like to be the center of attention. Whether it’s getting arrested on TV or just stirring the societal pot, some people enjoy being the fly-in-the-ointment.

I’m sure there are other reasons, but these listed would encompass most of them. Feel free to add more in the comments section. State by state this topic is being tossed around. Some states are staunchly against while others, mostly out west, say carry away. I like personal choice within our right to carry, the ultimate freedom. The less the government micromanages our affairs the better as far as I’m concerned. With that said, I personally only open carry for reason #1. If I’m hunting or in bear country and wearing a winter coat, I like that heavy handgun accessible as Momma Bear comes around the bend. Otherwise, I would never open carry. Just my opinion.

Here’s why. I don’t like attention. I would never do it for reason #3. I’ve always been that way. It might just be me, but I don’t like public attention. (My wife is snickering right now as I try to book another speaking event!) I’d rather know a secret and keep it than tell the whole world.

I don’t like freaking people out either. I believe our cause may be hurt by scaring the sheep of our world. The gun control sheeple of America have been conditioned to fear the mere site of blued steel. Guns of all kinds really, but pistols especially scare the begeezus out of them.

My goal is to advance our gun rights within my lifetime or at the very least hand to my sons and daughters the ones we were given. Fear of weapons is the most powerful tool our anti-gun opposition has. I personally don’t want to give them any more power by walking around Wal-Mart open carrying.

I know it’s my right to do it. Calm down open carriers. I’m still on your side. I didn’t say you couldn’t do it. I just told you why I don’t. My last reason to choose to conceal is the aspect of surprise. I prefer my enemy not to see it coming. I like the idea that Joe Psycho may walk into a locale and open fire thinking all of us are unarmed. Then he will get to know the dirty little secret. We aren’t all unarmed. BAM! Dead psycho. I feel carrying concealed gives me an advantage against a would-be adversary. I know open carry folks are typing furiously right now. Blasphemy! Open carrying makes you safer as a deterrent.

They feel that when Joe Psycho sees you are carrying he will leave you alone! Right? Wrong. If that was true, we would never have a cop smacked in the head, disrespected, or shot and killed. They open carry all the time. Are they exempted from being a target? No. Sometimes, they are a bigger target because of who they are and what they openly carry.

As you ponder the age old question, to conceal or not to conceal, check why you’re doing it and what you hope to accomplish. I choose to conceal. My home state of Iowa has a Permit to Carry. It doesn’t require concealment. I choose concealment, but that’s just me. However you do it…Keep Calm and Carry On!

mercy shotAuthor, S.C. Sherman latest novel titled Mercy Shot is available for purchase at www.scsherman.com and Kindle version is available on Amazon.com. S.C. Sherman is available for speaking events and members of the media feel free to contact him for interviews. If you are interested in bulk purchasing or resale of Mercy Shot, please contact S.C. Sherman via email steve@scsherman.com. Also, go LIKE www.facebook.com/mercyshot to stay up to date on all things Mercy Shot. All new LIKES are entered into a drawing to win a Safari Cigar Sampler Pack.

Doug ‘The Big Dawg’ Giles reviews Mercy Shot:
Mercy Shot is a riveting, modern tale of the twisted and insidious war that’s being waged against our Second Amendment rights. S.C. Sherman does a great job of forecasting in this timely tome of how things could possibly go down. My advice is to a.)Read this book and b.) Buy a stack of guns and ammo, pretty damn quick. Molon Labe.”– Doug Giles, CEO of ClashDaily.com

Image: Courtesy of: http://gigabiting.com/you-can-bring-a-gun-into-a-restaurant-in-49-states/

Read more at http://clashdaily.com/2014/01/big-question-conceal-conceal/#prlRvGR28etVHsvw.99

Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: