“Stay with me…We got pulled over for a busted tail-light in the back..,” said the woman as she calmly begins to Facebook live-stream. Her video pans to a black male in a blood-soaked white shirt slumped over in the driver’s seat, and then an officer–his face is out of frame–standing outside the car window pointing a gun at him. She tells her viewers, “the police just…he, he’s covered–they killed my boyfriend. He’s licensed, he’s licensed to carry.”

The woman in the car is Lavish Reynolds, and her boyfriend, Philando Castile, had just been shot multiple times by a police officer in Falcon Heights, Minnesota during a traffic stop. Her four-year-old daughter was present during the shooting, sitting silently in the back seat.

Castile later died at the Hennepin County Medical Center in Minneapolis at 9:37 pm, a few minutes after he arrived.

The fatal officer-involved shooting comes just one day after multiple videos captured Alton Sterling being shot and killed by Baton Rouge police sparked outrage over police brutality across the country.

*Warning: This Video Contains Graphic Material

#AltonSterling been dead what? A day? Now they killed her boyfriend right in front of her. I’m sick…https://t.co/7Ghdf3502h

— Several (@SeveralChains) July 7, 2016

Reynolds, who maintained a calm composure during the ordeal, explained the incident to her viewers during the live-stream. “He was trying to get out his ID in his wallet out of his pocket, and he let the officer know that he was… that he had a firearm and that he was reaching for his wallet. And the officer just shot him in his arm.”

The officer is later heard yelling in the video, “I told him not to reach for it!  I told him to get his head up!” to which Reynold’s replies: “He had…you told him to get his ID, Sir. His driver’s license. Oh my God, please don’t tell me he’s dead…”

No one besides Castile was injured during the shooting. When police backup arrived, Reynolds, better known as Diamond, was detained. Her video has been shared hundreds of thousands of times on Facebook.

In a lengthy CNN interview Thursday, Valerie Castile, the mother of Philando Castile, said that both her son and her daughter have conceal-carry gun permits, and that she discussed the topic with them at her house yesterday–mere hours before Philando was shot.

Valerie Castile stated that her daughter said during that ominous conversation that she might stop carrying her gun, out of a fear that “they’ll shoot me first and then ask questions later.”

She was joined in the interview by Philando’s uncle, Clarence Castile, who called the video “the most horrific thing I’ve ever seen in my life.” Both he and Valerie Castile expressed outrage toward the unnamed police officer’s actions.

“He’s not an officer,” Clarence Castille said. “He’s just a man. An officer is supposed to protect and serve. That was a man who did that. That man is a destroyer and he came into our lives and done something and took something from us.”

Girlfriend behind the #PhilandoCastile video speaks out. pic.twitter.com/Nn5HW83VCV

— Melissa Colorado (@melissacolorado) July 7, 2016

According to NBC, Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton said in a statement Thursday morning that he asked the White House to compel the U.S. Department of Justice to begin an independent federal investigation into the death of Castile, who would have turned 33 on Friday.

Dayton added that the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension has already begun “collecting all necessary evidence, and interviewing witnesses, to determine what happened, and to assure that justice in this case is served.”

Unfortunately the American public will not be able to see the actual shooting from the officer’s perspective, because the St. Anthony’s Police Department, which serves the city of Falcon Heights, does not have body cameras, according to the department’s office manager, Kim Brazil.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Woman Live-Streams After Police Shoot Boyfriend, Philando Castile appeared first on Law Street.

On the internet, everyone can have an opinion. The idea behind Change.org is that if enough people share an opinion, the powers that be will listen and accommodate their requests. Some petitions are superficial, like this one demanding that Instagram present photos chronologically. Some are touching, such as this one by the mother of a murder victim asking that the killer not receive a death sentence. One petition that has been getting attention recently is a petition for the Republican convention in Cleveland—an event with the potential to incite riots—to be an open carry zone for firearms.

Ohio is already an open carry state, but Quicken Loans Arena, the venue for the RNC convention, forbids firearms inside the premises. The petition explains in no uncertain terms how dire the need for firearms at the convention truly is. The author, a man named Len Davies refers to Quicken Loans Arena’s policy as “a direct affront to the Second Amendment,” arguing that it puts “all attendees at risk.” Davies even quotes the NRA as saying, “gun free zones… tell every insane killer in America… [the] safest place to inflict maximum mayhem with minimum risk.”

If the petition comes to pass, the GOP candidates (as well as the managers of Quicken Loans Arena) will have a tricky decision on their hands. From one point of view, open carry is a no-brainer because all three republican candidates have voiced their disapproval of gun-free zones. The petition cites several quotes from each candidate: Donald Trump has called multiple times for the expansion of open carry areas, saying “you know what a gun-free zone is to a sicko? That’s bait.” Ted Cruz has said “look, if you’re a lunatic ain’t nothing better then having a bunch of targets you know that are going to be unarmed.” John Kasich worked to end “gun-free zones” at National Guard facilities in Ohio.

While the decision would ultimately come down to the venue’s management, candidates and figureheads of the RNC will be encouraged to respond to this petition. Supporting open carry at an event like this one could be a very dangerous move, but denying open carry could be seen as a violation of second amendment rights. If a candidate supports open carry in their state, that should mean they see it as a safe choice and would have no issue following the same rules at an RNC event. The petition decries the “hypocritical act of selecting a ‘gun-free zone’ for the convention.”

Some of the petition’s supporters may have ulterior motives, however. Many tweets and Facebook posts seem to indicate that the petition’s proponents aren’t quite friends of the RNC and are sending a tongue-in-cheek request for mayhem and chaos at the Cleveland convention. It’s also likely the petition’s author isn’t a ‘true conservative,’ as some elements of his petition read so strongly that they may be a parody. Davies capitalizes “HUSSEIN” in Barack Obama’s full name, and refers to ISIS using Dubya’s favorite phrase—”evil-doers.”

These petitions do occasionally enact real change but are often just digital wishful thinking. Don’t hold your breath for Cleveland to become the ‘wild wild (Mid)West’ just yet. Expect this petition to make some buzz, especially if it reaches its goal for petitioners. If you believe in the cause, add your name, and if you don’t, add your name just to add fuel to the fire. In all likelihood, nothing will change. Today, the Secret Service announced unequivocally that there will be no guns at the RNC convention, but it never hurts to try.

Sean Simon

Sean Simon is an Editorial News Senior Fellow at Law Street, and a senior at The George Washington University, studying Communications and Psychology. In his spare time, he loves exploring D.C. restaurants, solving crossword puzzles, and watching sad foreign films. Contact Sean at SSimon@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Open Carry Petition A Double-Edged Gun for GOP appeared first on Law Street.

Students at the University of Texas-Austin are taking public protest to a whole new, innovative level. In an attempt to protest a new law signed by Governor Gregg Abbott that allows “campus carry”–essentially people with conceal carry licenses may now carry their handguns on public university property. However, these enterprising students noticed that UT-Austin still has some obscenity rules on the books, meaning that someone could feasibly get cited for carrying around an “obscene” sex toy, such as a dildo. So, hundreds of UT-Austin students are planning on doing exactly that next August, when the law will go into effect. They’ll be walking around for the day and attending a rally, all with sex toys strapped to their backpacks.

The Facebook page for the event, started by recent UT-Austin alum Jessica Jin, explains the motivation for the event, stating:

The State of Texas has decided that it is not at all obnoxious to allow deadly concealed weapons in classrooms, however it DOES have strict rules about free sexual expression, to protect your innocence. You would receive a citation for taking a DILDO to class before you would get in trouble for taking a gun to class. Heaven forbid the penis.

The page goes on to explain the details of the forthcoming protest:

Starting on the first day of Long Session classes on August 24, 2016, we are strapping gigantic swinging dildos to our backpacks in protest of campus carry.

ANYBODY can participate in solidarity: alum, non-UT students, people outside of Texas. Come one dildo, come all dildos.

“You’re carrying a gun to class? Yeah well I’m carrying a HUGE DILDO.”

Just about as effective at protecting us from sociopathic shooters, but much safer for recreational play.

As one would assume, the entire tongue-in-cheek protest offers plenty of room for innuendo. The entire thing is being called a “strap-in” as opposed to a sit-in, and protestors are getting the word out with the accompanying hashtag #cocksnotglocks.

#CocksNotGlocks America. Sex is good. Shooting each other is not. http://t.co/ferzga2siQ

— Rachel Delmar (@RachelDelmar) October 11, 2015

‘We glorify violence in our media but vilify sex.’ #Cocksnotglocks http://t.co/mfzMQXqd3H — K Merie (@lezcakes) October 11, 2015

While the event is making waves, it’s not all in the form of good feedback. The Facebook page is also receiving a lot of negative comments from those who support the conceal carry law, and Jin has left it up to highlight the violent and upsetting rhetoric being used by those who oppose the protest. In fact, Jin has already received multiple death threats for the event. Yet, supporters keep joining the Facebook group, and Jin is being applauded by many for her creative and catchy activism.

Overall, this protest has a little bit of everything–humor, shock value, and a really good point: many UT Austin students don’t want conceal carry on their campus, especially in today’s environment of consistent mass shootings on college campuses. News of the protest has gone viral, and rightly so. Come August 24 of next year, expect to see a lot of dildos around UT-Austin’s campus.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post UT-Austin Students to Protest New Conceal Carry Law by Carrying Sex Toys appeared first on Law Street.

The Texas legislature recently passed a bill that will allow licensed residents to carry concealed hand guns on public colleges and universities. With the bill currently on its way to Governor Greg Abbott, who is expected to sign it, it will soon permit the presence of concealed weapons on college campuses. But this raises some serious questions about the levels of danger the schools could potentially face as a result of the new law.

The final version of this bill allows private institutions to opt out, while public universities would be able to create gun-free zones in areas of campus. This new bill allows licensed gun owners to carry their handguns in classrooms, libraries, and other campus buildings. The law would be in effect in September for four year colleges and universities and by fall 2017 for community colleges.

Some key components of the law include a requirement for university presidents to adopt rules and policies regarding carrying a concealed handgun on campus. The university may also create rules on policies regarding carrying guns into dorms and the storage of guns. The bill does not change who can obtain a concealed handgun license. Any locations that have their own rules off campus, such as bars and hospitals, can keep those rules. Open carry on campuses remains prohibited.

As a student, and someone looking at law schools in Texas, I am not sure how I would personally respond to a bill like this being passed on my college campus. In addition to attending classes, campus is a place where students eat, sleep, and live. It doesn’t really seem fair to invade one’s home with a weapon without really asking. That sentiment is consistent with some of the reactions coming out of Texas and the country right now in response to this legislation.

Julie Gavran, the western director of the Campaign to Keep Guns off Campus, said she worries accidents involving guns, gun thefts, and suicides will increase. She also fears that if the bill is passed, colleges will have to invest more money into hiring security officers and buying metal detectors, which will be taken away from education spending. Gavran stated:

The legislators were more concerned with (concealed handgun license) rights rather than the quality of research and education that the state provides. This total disregard of the voice and concerns of the campus community is an insult to the State of Texas.

Despite these fears, Bill McRaven, chancellor of the University of Texas System does not seem to agree, stating:

It is helpful that the bill was amended to allow our campus presidents to consult with students, faculty and staff to develop rules and regulations that will govern the carrying of concealed handguns on campuses. I pledge to our students, faculty, staff, patients and their families and to all those who may visit a UT institution that, as UT System leaders, we will do everything in our power to maintain safe and secure campuses.

The bill’s House sponsor, State Representative Allen Fletcher explained his motivation for filing it, stating:

Currently, a student, faculty member, or other adult with a concealed handgun license may carry their concealed handgun throughout a campus as long as they remain outside, but the moment they step foot into a building on campus they become criminals.

Despite that point, the safety factor is still a large issue. Fletcher believes that the media, parents, students, and higher education officials exaggerate the bill’s consequences. He argues that the measure will just broaden current laws that already allows concealed handguns on campus outside of buildings. Those in favor of passing the bill also believe permitting gun owners to carry weapons on college campuses can help students and faculty members defend themselves.

The arguments in favor of this bill are extremely valid, but I feel like there could be a different solution that accommodates the needs of all people. An increased presence of weapons on campus still makes me and many others very wary.

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Texas Bill Will Allow These Weapons on College Campuses appeared first on Law Street.

On Tuesday, a new Georgia gun law went into effect, despite 70 percent of Georgians disagreeing with the law. The law is officially called the Safe Carry Protection Act, but is better known as the “Guns Everywhere” law. Sadly, its nickname is only a slight exaggeration.

So what exactly is this new law, and what’s in it that’s so controversial? Well here are the highlights:

1)   Those who have a license to carry a concealed weapon can take guns into places of business including, restaurants and bars, although these businesses can technically opt out.

2)   School officials and appointed staff members can carry guns in schools and religious leaders can allow guns in their places’ of worship.

3)   Guns can be carried up until the security checkpoint in the airport.

4)   Guns can be carried into government buildings that do not have metal detectors, with the exception of the Georgia Capitol Building.

5)   No individual, including a police officer, can ask to see a person’s permit to carry unless they have cause.

Let’s walk through this incredibly far-reaching law’s many problems. First of all, restaurant and bar owners are very concerned about how this law will affect business. Many bar owners have come to the very logical conclusion that providing alcohol to someone who is carrying a gun is not a bright idea. But in order to opt out of this law, bar owners must place an official sign outside the restaurant saying guns are not allowed. This makes owners concerned that gun rights groups may protest their business if they ban guns. Alice Johnson, the director of Georgians for Gun Safety, says, “bar owners will be targeted for boycotts and all kinds of public relations problems.” She also believes that bars will face lawsuits for not allowing guns. Georgia’s bars are stuck between a rock and a hard place. They can either serve people with guns alcohol, or risk losing business.

But my favorite logical fallacy of this law is the fact that you cannot ask to see a person’s permit to carry a concealed weapon without cause. This means a person must be doing something suspicious for even the police to demand to see a permit. I could go buy a gun and carry it around with me in Georgia and as long as I don’t do anything ridiculously stupid, like wave my gun in someone’s face, the police would not be able to ask for my permit to carry. This is effectively an “anyone can carry a concealed weapon if you aren’t a moron” law. Of course, if you are a moron or an actual dangerous person, by the time you commit said suspicious activity that will allow cause, the damage will most likely already be done. A man has already drawn his weapon in a shop after a fellow customer asked to see his permit.

There is so much more stupidity in this law that I could discuss, but I think you get the picture. So, I am going to move on the political aspects of this law. There is speculation that this bill was put to a vote to get Jason Carter, the Democratic challenger for governor, to vote against a gun rights bill. Carter did not take the bait, and voted with the overwhelming majority of the legislature to pass the bill. This meant that current Republican Governor Nathan Deal had to sign it, or appear to be less pro-gun than his Democratic challenger. The bill was voted down three times before it got passed, lending some credence to this theory. So there you have it, this new gun law may exist just because of a political game of chicken.

Seventy percent of Georgians being against a law that expands gun rights is almost unfathomable, unless of course, the law goes way too far. Let’s face it, that’s exactly what’s happening in Georgia right now.

—

Matt DeWilde (@matt_dewilde25) is a member of the American University class of 2016 majoring in politics and considering going to law school. He loves writing about politics, reading, watching Netflix, and long walks on the beach. Contact Matt at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Boris van Hoytema via Flickr]

Matt DeWilde

Matt DeWilde is a member of the American University class of 2016 majoring in politics and considering going to law school. He loves writing about politics, reading, watching Netflix, and long walks on the beach. Contact Matt at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Guns Everywhere: New Law Takes Effect in Georgia appeared first on Law Street.

Until last year, there was only one state without a conceal carry law, and that state was Illinois. A Federal Appeals Court stated last winter that the ban on carrying concealed weapons was unconstitutional. The court required the Illinois legislature to draft a conceal carry law by July 9th, 2013, for implementation by January of 2014.

The law has been written, and is ready to take effect, but it has led to a lot of confusion in Illinois. There are a lot of places where it is still forbidden to carry a concealed weapon, and there were many caveats inserted into the brand new law. For example, one of these complications is that it is illegal to take a concealed gun to a large fair or parade. But you can have a gun on the street normally. So, if you happened to be walking home with your legal concealed gun, and run into the parade, your gun suddenly becomes illegal. This makes things very complicated, because if someone was arrested for having a gun in a public gathering, they could just claim they were walking home.

You can have a concealed gun on a bike path that goes through a park, but not in the park itself. You can’t bring a concealed gun into a post office, alright, but you also can’t bring it into a post office parking lot.

Now I think the fact that restrictions are put on where concealed firearms can be taken is a good thing. I live in the one single, solitary place in the United States where it is still illegal to carry a concealed weapon–Washington DC–and I am completely okay with that. But I have to admit that these laws in Illinois do seem unnecessarily confusing.

Colleen Lawson, who owns a gun training facility stated, “it’s like a Byzantine maze. It’s possible to get through it without breaking any laws, but it’s tricky.”

The confusing law seems to be the result of the short period of time that the Illinois Legislature had to cobble it together, as well as the conflicting lobbies fighting for their say, leading to weird contradictions and Catch-22s.

Charles Lawson, Colleen’s husband, gave an interesting example. He described,

a scenario in which an armed person goes to a restaurant for a meal and decides to take a CTA train home. In that case, the permit holder would have to unload the gun and put it in a purse, backpack or other encasement. But the trick is removing it from the holster and unloading it. That can’t be done in public view. You can’t even go to a restroom inside the station and do it. To do it legally, the carrier would have to find a place nearby that allows firearms and go there to unload and put away the gun.

It seems clear that this juxtaposition arises out of the combination of pro-gun groups lobbying to allow that man to carry a gun into the restaurant, but anti-gun groups lobbying to disallow him from carrying it onto the train.

Like I said, it’s hard for me to say that conceal carry laws should be looser, because personally I’m not a fan of conceal carry on principle. But I really do believe that if you’re going to make a law, it shouldn’t be full of such gaping contradictions and complications the way this new Illinois conceal carry law is. It will make patsies out of innocent people who didn’t realize they were breaking the law, and that’s just not right.

—

Anneliese Mahoney (@AMahoney8672) is Lead Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Brent Danley via Flickr]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Conceal Carry Mess in Illinois appeared first on Law Street.