Self-Defense on Trial

The radicals want to defund or abolish the police, or, as their forked-tongued talking heads in D.C. and the media like to say, “reimagine” policing. At the same time, they want to release convicted felons from prison while taking away your guns and rights to self-defense.

The Second Amendment is vital to the concept of self-defense.
The Second Amendment is vital to the concept of self-defense.

They have wanted to take our guns away for several generations now, but thankfully, they have mostly fallen short of their goals. Sure, they’ve gotten their capacity restrictions and waiting periods in blue states, but they cannot seem to penetrate the wall that is the Second Amendment to the Constitution—our guaranteed right to bear arms. Because every single American with a room temperature IQ can see what happens to countries where the citizens are stripped of their firearms and left with no recourse against a tyrannical government.

Right to Self-defense

What reasonable person would imagine that it is up to Nancy Pelosi to decide if you have the right to defend yourself against an attacker? There is no more primitive human instinct than to do so. It is as fundamental as seeking food and shelter, and these things are not “granted” to us by a collection of idiots who won or stole more votes than their opponents. Nor is the right to keep and bear arms. It’s right there in the Constitution.

Ted Nugent once said if he were to fall from space and land in the middle of Detroit without any concept of where he was, who we were, or what laws existed, his first instinct would be to arm himself with some type of weapon. He wouldn’t bother asking anyone if it was okay to do so.

Because self-defense is instinctual and a God-given inalienable right.

So with the pushback too great, and the concept of completely disarming Americans more ridiculous than thinking Joe Biden is running the country, the left has chosen the tactic of trying to make it illegal for one to defend him or herself. Sure, have your guns, you gun- and bible-clinging simpletons. But try using them in your defense, and we will hang you in public for all to see.

Kyle Rittenhouse

And that is what the malicious prosecution of Rittenhouse was all about.

Every honest trial lawyer, prosecutor, and investigator in the country will tell you that Rittenhouse would have never been charged if there hadn’t been a political component and strategy. Simply put, there is no clearer case of self-defense so vividly captured on video in recent times. Yet they charged him with murder.

Just to be clear, contrary to so-called news reports, Rittenhouse did NOT illegally possess the rifle he used to defend himself. And even if he had, that wouldn’t change the fact that he acted in self-defense.

Every American should celebrate the failure of those incompetent, lying, and cheating prosecutors who knowingly tried to persecute an innocent man. They should be disbarred, at the least.

My Experience vs. The Left’s Emotions

I have investigated thousands of criminal cases and presented the facts of many of those cases to prosecutors so that they could determine what, if any, charges should be filed against the perpetrators. You might be surprised by how many of those cases were determined to be acts of self-defense and didn’t warrant criminal charges.

There was a gangster who illegally possessed a firearm and returned fire when a drive-by shooting was committed upon him and his brother. The brother was killed by our gangster, as it turned out, an unfortunate mishap in the heat of battle. But said gangster was not charged. Not for illegally possessing a firearm, nor for his brother’s death.

At the time, the felony murder rule existed in California for just these types of cases, allowing the state to charge the instigator of a felony for any death that occurs as a result of their actions. And that is what we did. The occupants of the car who initiated the drive-by were charged with murder. You can read that story here, Murder in the Alps or in my memoir, Nothing Left to Prove.

Another case was that of an 18-year-old who shot his father in the back of his head. The father was beating the boy’s sister, something that happened frequently along with other abuses to her that nobody would quite admit but we (and you) might imagine. The father also regularly beat the boy and his mother. He (the father) had always boasted of his military service in El Salvador, claiming to have been part of the Death Squads, and all members of the family feared him mightily. This boy knew he had to put a stop to the beatings, and there was only one way he was able to do so, and he did.

No, the boy did not (could not) legally possess a firearm in California. But he knew where his older brother secured a gun he used in his employment as a security officer, and the boy helped himself to it when the time came to end the violence.

Knowing this was a complex issue, my partner and I spent many hours and days interviewing family members, neighbors, friends, and school officials, and we were able to clearly substantiate a case for “in defense of others” due to ongoing abuse and a reasonable fear for his and his mother’s and sister’s lives.

Self-defense and a Civil Society

There are many other cases of people killing in the name of self-defense. Most police shootings are matters of self-defense or in defense of others. Battered women have resorted to killing abusive partners to save themselves and their children. The right to self-defense is critical in a civil society!

So when you see Kyle Rittenhouse dragged through a kangaroo court, and when you see the McCloskeys criminally charged for arming themselves and standing up against a violent mob as the rioting that swept through the nation came to their doorstep, you need to understand why these things are happening, and what the end goal of the left really is.

And you need to fight against it, as if your very life depends on our inalienable right to bear arms and to use these tools when needed in acts of self-defense. Because it does.

* * *

Thank you for reading my blog. I hope you will share it with your family and friends.



38 thoughts on “Self-Defense on Trial

  1. I just read where Jerry Nadler (D-NY) want the DOJ to charge Rittenhouse…He was not clear what the charges should be, just that he should be charged by the DOJ. Another attack by the liberals on our constitutional rights to bear arms and self defense. What an moron Nadler and the rest of his Democratic colleague are….

      1. The time is very near, Danny. We are very likely to see a revolution in our time and it will be ugly. That’s what the liberals don’t understand.

        1. There is definitely an element of society pushing hard for it. That’s what the two years of anarchy have been all about. it’s why they are not pursuing certain criminals and letting others out of prison, while locking up anyone on “the other side.” Very troubling times.

  2. With the rise in crime near us, in association with the rise in homelessness, my husband just bought another shotgun…

  3. Stagger’s the imagination to think how convoluted something can become. Case law and common sense was what I taught you.
    Peace Officers legal source book, penal Code, Title 18 Federal Code etc. we presented cases as a slam dunk or for rejection to protect people.
    And we were in our mid 20’s.
    These ass hats fight over things that scare them because they are incompetent.
    Know the law. Study and make intelligent decisions
    Really not that difficult

    Spot on my friend

  4. Thank you for being a constitutional Sheriff and person. I agree with every word you wrote, and all of us who do agree with you are the vast majority of this nation, indeed the world. We will peacefully take back our country from the paltry but now-powerful few who “run” it.
    I am not now nor have I ever been a peace officer, but I am a member of the posse of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association (CPOA) started by Richard Mack.
    I (and many others) thank all of you who serve “we the people” so selflessly and always appreciate your service. Defending ourselves is our right.

  5. Your take on this was spot on, Danny. Like you, I was a former homicide investigator. I had numerous self-defense cases during my career. I have even “849b1’ed” people arrested by patrol after I looked at the facts of the case and reviewed the evidence. I would then take the case to the filing DDA and get a formal reject. And it doesn’t matter what color you are. Race should never be a mitigating or aggravating factor in determining whether or not a criminal case should or should not be filed.
    I had a case once where a hardcore gang member on parole armed himself with a handgun and decided to walk to the local liquor store. Who knows why he took a gun? Maybe he was going to rob the store. Maybe he was going to kill a rival. Or perhaps, even, he had the gun to protect himself.
    On the way to the store, a rival gang member drove alongside him and started shooting. The parolee shot back and killed the rival gang member. This was supported by witnesses in the area. The result? A DA reject based on self-defense and he got his parole violated and a year in jail for having the gun.
    Investigators don’t get to pick and choose their victims and suspects, or who was right or wrong. The evidence does it for us.

  6. I agree with everything you said, Danny. The kid never should have been charged. It was a clear case of self defense and the videos proved it. Leave it to the Left to make a “hero” out of a maniac who raped little boys. This was a case of the prosecutors bowing to the demands of a mob. The scary thing is, how the media is handling it, and broadcasting false information. I never thought things would get this bad. I can only hope that things change.

  7. Thanks Danny! You nailed it. I can only hope those who pushed for the indictment are at a minimum disbarred and at best prosecuted for malicious prosecution. I doubt it’ll happen but I can hope.

  8. This post is definitely spot-on in terms of how the Left wants to use a Second-Amendment restriction/ban to impose their tyrannical ideology by force in the USA! Venezuela was a semi-wealthy country….until Chavez forcefully disarmed the law-abiding and the rest is history. I live in the Los Angeles area, and crime is out of control to say the least. People walk in and out of stores and steal to their heart’s content. Going for an errand now runs the risk of being followed home and viciously robbed upon arrival. The Left got mad at the Rittenhouse verdict because they know that sooner or later the average people are going to fight back hard against this anarchy. Have a wonderful Thanksgiving with your loved ones by the way! 🙂

  9. Having to defend yourself with deadly force is devastating. The emotional toll never goes away no matter how justified it was.The nightmares eventually fade, but the strangest things can bring it all back. I sincerely hope young Kyle is getting the counseling and support he needs.
    I’m very very happy that I retired before cameras, drones and cell phones were everywhere.

  10. Thank you for writing this article, I nodded my head through the entire thing. We are definitely in unprecedented times right now in America, I pray for us every day.

  11. Danny,
    I do not support defunding the police, am an active supporter, and before COVID was a volunteer at our local PD. I might agree that Rittenhouse was defending himself because I wasn’t there. But I don’t think the trial was uncalled for. I picture the defendant as a 17 year old video gamer blasting away on his video screen and wanting to do it in real life. Maybe that’s unfair, but he had no business injecting himself into the protesting going on. I wonder where his parents were in all this? We’ll have to disagree on why this all happened. BTW I am a gun owner also.

    1. It matters not why he was there, self-defense is self-defense and this was a textbook scenario from start to finish. You might have missed the point of this blog. Do you think the McCloskeys had a right to stand on their porch armed while rioters crashed through the gates of their private community? If so, then ask yourself why THEY were also prosecuted, and then connect those dots.

      1. I think the McCloskeys were well within their rights. IIRC, they were also aiming at people on the sidewalk. Isn’t good gun safety not to aim at anything you don’t plan to shoot? That’s the only problem I had with that incident.
        I do agree with some of the posts here about DAs prosecuting cases as a punishment of itself, and not having to defend their actions.

    2. Dean, I have no doubt you are a well meaning and civic duty type of guy (as suggested by your volunteer work at the local PD). However, I think you may fail to realize just how traumatizing going through a criminal trial (especially one with legal consequences as grave as that accompanying a murder conviction) really is for those who are not familiar with the justice system (read “they aren’t criminals”). Being dragged through a criminal trial-whether it ends in acquittaln or not–is puniishment in itself. Heavy punishment at that. As a career cop and LE supervisor, I have personally seen the severe devastation such an experience causes those who have led their lives as good citizens.
      Historically, most prosecutor’s offices in this country would not file criminal charges unless they were convinced the evidence showed BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that the party to be charged was guilty of the offense in question. Moreover, if memory serves, the bare minimum legal threshold for filing charges is PROBABLE CAUSE. Probable cause is actually the minimum legal threshold required for a peace officer to make an arrest, and, as stated above, has historically been insufficient to file charges, regardless if it meets the bare minimum threshold. In the Rittenhouse case the prosecution failed to even meet the probable cause threshold, let alone proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Unlike so many of the ethically lazy media persons and politicians, the Kenosha County DA viewed video footage that clearly exonerated Rittenhouse of any homicide related charges. The DA’s politically motivated decision to prosecute a demonstrably innocent young man was unconscionable and, I believe, constituted malicious prosecution. I wonder why it is that a peace officer in this nation is so readily charged with assault for any overstep re use of force, yet criminal prosecutors–who have the added luxury of extra time to make decisions–are virtually never held accountable when they abuse the authority they are entrusted with. Interesting, eh?

    3. Dean, you are an idiot. Kyle had as much right to be on the streets that night as the “protesters.” “PROTESTERS”!, are you F-ing kidding me? They were criminal rioters who were looting and burning everything they could get too. You sound like a talking head on MSNBC. Kyle was not “blasting away” as in a video game, he was watching over his friend’s business when he was attacked by the pedophile. He reacted by defending himself, as he has a right to do.
      So why do you own a gun? How do you plan to use it if you or your family are under a life threatening attack? Better sell it Dean before your liberal friends come after you.

      1. Thanks for the name calling Joe. Says a lot about you.
        The exonerating videos I saw of Kyle showed him running down the street, not defending people or property. If he was standing inside a friends business with a gun, I would not have issue with it at all. But bringing a semiautomatic to the streets is a provocation by itself.
        My gun is to protect myself and family. Anyone breaking in my house will not be leaving it under their own power.

        1. Annie Mouse, are you Dean? It was he I was talking to. So, what does calling Dean an idiot say about me? Danny called half the people in America idiots. Is your woke self going after him also?
          Ok, here is some fresh meat for you. You are an idiot. In any video you saw of Kyle running he was being chased by A-holes threatening to kill him. When he was protecting the business he was standing outside of their building on their property. Something illegal about that? There is video of that also.
          Do you have any issues with the A-holes bringing guns to a “peaceful protest”? How about the handgun clearly pointed at Kyle’s head just before he shot the A-hole with the gun? There I go again, calling people names!
          On the bright side, I totally agree with you regarding anyone breaking into my home not leaving on their own power.

      2. Joe, I don’t know you, but you are right. I wanted to address the videogame comment as well, but figured my comment was alread a bit lengthy. You covered it.

  12. You’re lucky to live in a country where the right to bear arms still exists and should indeed safeguard that right. I live in a country which removed that right after WW1, ironically to prevent us holding Govt. to account! Now I see tens of thousands of illegal immigrants entering my country, any number of whom could be members of ISIS, and long for a Glock or Sig. Stay safe.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.