187th Rakkasans – part (4)

Pacific Paratrooper

Rakkasans for life!

In March 2010, the 3rd Battalion, 172nd Infantry Regiment (Mountain), Vermont National Guard, joined Task Force Rakkasan units in Paktya province as a battle space owning unit in AO Rakkasan. Task Force Avalanche conducted 65 major named operations, over 4,300 combat patrols and 9 air assault operations, including Task Force Rakkasan’s largest combined air assault operation of the deployment in support of Operation Champion Stone.

During OEF X-XI, Soldiers earned or were nominated for 132 Army Commendation Medals (Valor). 44 Soldiers were decorated with the Bronze Star Medal (Valor). Additionally, two Soldiers were decorated with the Silver Star Medal. Nearly 1,600 individual Task Force Soldiers earned combat badges for participating in direct combat against the enemy for the first time. Almost 1,100 Combat Infantryman Badges (CIB), over 1,300 Combat Action Badges (CAB), and 117 Combat Medical Badges (CMB). As a testament to the sacrifice, troopers from Task…

View original post 531 more words

Brady’s Fearmongering On Suppressors Beyond Ridiculous

H/T Bearing Arms.

When you do not have the facts you distort the truth and try to use fear as a tactic.

Anti-gunners often like to present themselves to people as something of experts on firearms. In truth, they’re experts in telling people how bad guns are, regardless of anything approaching facts. In truth, they often get actual facts about firearms hilariously wrong. These so-called “experts” don’t really know anything at all about guns as a whole.

A prime example comes to us via Mark Olivia, writing at our sister site, Townhall.

Gun control has a problem with the truth. They can’t shoot straight.

Brady: United Against Gun Violence is the latest example of just making it up as they go and thinking no one will notice. Officials there sent out a plea for money claiming the Trump administration’s rollback of a 2002 State Department ban on suppressor exports is putting U.S. service members’ lives at risk. The fundraiser email read as follows:

“The harm is clear: This repeal will increase the risk that U.S. service members will be shot or killed with American-made guns and accessories. 

“This repeal is immoral. It’s unpatriotic. It’s lethal.”

It’s also complete BS. Brady should learn to conduct a basic fact check. Even checking Wikipedia would suffice.

Suppressors are just a muffler for a gun. They’re not the Hollywood depiction of the “pffft” puff sound glamorized by the silver screen. Suppressors reduce the noise of gunfire to around 140 decibels, the threshold where instant and permanent hearing loss occurs. It’s still about as loud as a jackhammer.


Further, it’s beyond ridiculous to think that America’s enemies are unable to get their hands on suppressors without them being available for purchase at our local gun stores.

First, the Taliban and ISIS have plenty of sources for guns that have nothing to do with the American firearms market. That means they can get their paws on suppressors easily enough. Hell, they can probably manufacture their own within the territory they control. It’s freaking 19th-century technology, after all. (Yeah, I know, suppressors of today are different than those first ones, but the point remains that it’s not rocket science.)

They don’t need them to be on the American market for them to be on the end of their weapons.

More than that, though, I think Brady knows this. They’re simply hoping their donors are too stupid to know. The bad part is, they’re probably right. The average anti-gunner is absolutely clueless on firearms. They legitimately think terrorists in foreign nations obtain their firearms primarily through the civilian gun market here in the United States and that if we start selling suppressors, we’ll end up with every terrorist in the world using them.

Well, that’s not a real threat.

The real threat is in groups like Brady continuing to attack our essential liberties because they can’t fathom that law-abiding Americans not only can own these items without murdering millions, but do so on a regular basis. They can’t imagine that a safety device would be used for non-nefarious purposes.

You see, that’s the point Brady misses. Suppressors aren’t magic. They don’t eliminate the sound of a gunshot. Even if they could, the crack of the round breaking the sound barrier could still be heard. Suppressors only make it so people don’t get hearing damage when they pull the trigger. That’s it.

But Brady can’t fundraise off that, so they make it out like it it’s a clear threat to our troops. Meanwhile, those same troops look at claims like this and laugh. At least, those with any experience with suppressors do.

New Survey Claims Most Gun Owners Favor Gun Control

H/T Bearing Arms.

I wonder how the survey was worded?

Anti-gunners love to argue that their opinions are the mainstream ones. They tend to say that everyone really agrees with them except for gun owners and that we really need to get with the times. While some surveys have shown that, others have contradicted the claim.

Honestly, when it comes to public opinion, it really depends on a lot of factors including just how questions are phrased.

Plus, opinions change rather quickly.

Yet it seems that there’s a new survey claiming that most gun owners support gun control.

The majority of U.S. gun owners support measures such as background checks, but report not vocally supporting these policies because they feel disrespected by health advocates.

A new Boston University School of Public Health (BUSPH) study sheds new light on the opinions and practices of U.S. gun owners, casting doubt on the way gun owners have been portrayed in policy discussions and media, and even how they perceive themselves.

The survey results, published in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine, show that the majority of gun owners support many gun violence prevention policies, including background checks, permit requirements, and prohibitions for individuals with domestic violence restraining orders. But most of these gun owners report that they do not make their support public because they are alienated by the rhetoric of gun violence prevention advocates.

“Most people think gun violence prevention is a contentious issue, but our survey reveals that gun owners overwhelmingly support policies such as universal background checks and red flag laws,” says study co-author Claire Boine, a research scholar at BUSPH.

These numbers come from the 2019 National Lawful Use of Guns Survey which asked 2,086 admitted gun owners about their opinions.

The study found that:

Nearly 70% of gun owners reported that a reason for their reluctance to engage in gun violence prevention was that they feel alienated because they perceive gun control advocates as blaming them for the gun violence problem, not understanding gun ownership, and not understanding much about guns.

Which is certainly accurate.

However, does that mean these people represent gun owners at large about the rest? Well, maybe not.

You see, the panel wasn’t a bunch of random people selected out of the phone book. No, these were people who signed up on the site KnowledgePanel, which means they’re people who were interested in being surveyed. Now, that might not sound like a big difference, but it also may suggest a part of their psyche may have wanted to be asked about gun control.

This is something the researchers acknowledged.

The primary limitation of this paper is the possibility of selection bias, both in terms of the representativeness of the initial panel and potential nonresponse bias. Previous research has demonstrated that the KnowledgePanel produces estimates that are nationally representative21 and the demographics of this sample are similar to those of gun owners nationally in the General Social Survey.10A comparison of survey respondents and nonrespondents revealed that there were no differences in terms of political party or ideology. The survey completion rate of 57% is excellent for an Internet panel survey and is far higher than the range typically seen with nonprobability, opt-in panels (2%–16%).22

So, while KnowledgePanel does tend to represent the public at large, there is an anomaly with regard to the response rate. That may suggest a minority clamoring to be heard rather than representative of gun owners at large.

However, while the researchers acknowledge the possibility of selection bias, they don’t seem to really believe that to be the case. (From the first link above):

Ironically, only 8% of survey respondents identified themselves as being like the typical gun owner, according to the survey. “The NRA pulled one of the biggest illusions in history by making 8% of gun owners feel like they are the majority, and the other 92% feel like the minority. The NRA does not represent gun owners in this country, and it is time for the media and policymakers to give a voice to the silent majority,” [study co-author Claire] Boine says.

And that, of course, represents all you need to know about the researchers.

The National Rifle Association represents millions of people. Namely, their membership. There are other gun owners who aren’t members simply because they think the NRA is too extreme. Others won’t join because they think the NRA is too willing to compromise. To say they’ve pulled an “illusion” is to accuse them of something akin to fraud. That’s simply not the case.

As for the study, it should be noted that we’re still missing some key information. In particular, what the questions are.

For example, many gun owners support background checks for new gun purchases at gun stores. A question that’s improperly phrased may make a respondent think of these background checks only to have the study authors decide they really support universal background checks. That’s why we need the actual questions; so we can determine whether the study left room for misunderstanding or tried to ask leading questions.

While I’m sure the anti-gunners will make much of this study, they shouldn’t. Right now, it’s mostly sound and fury, signifying nothing.

To Hell With Professional Sports

H/T Town Hall.

I used to be an Atlanta Braves fan and I followed the Colts from the days of Johnny Unitas.

I quit watching baseball during their steroid scandal I also quit watching football when the kneeling started.

I do not miss professional sports.

At the outset, I have to say that I’ve never been the biggest sports fan on the planet. So it isn’t a big sacrifice for me to say I’m not going to watch professional sports this year, or maybe ever again. I never actively shunned pro sports, and as a kid I wouldn’t have missed a Tigers or Lions game for just about anything in the world, I just found other things to do as I got older. But I’d wander back for interesting games or championships – there are few things a person isn’t directly involved with that are as exciting as a contest between great athletes when the stakes are high. But with the embrace of radicals like Black Lives Matter by all the leagues, I’m going to make a point of not watching any of it.

I won’t miss basketball at all. The game is boring. I know it’s “fast-paced,” but it’s really not. It takes forever and all that matters is the last two minutes. Each team seems to get 50 timeouts, which sometimes allows them to take the ball out at half-court rather than under the basket. I never cared enough to find out why.

It’s also just not exciting. The first time you saw a buzzer-beating shot to win a game may have been exciting, but haven’t you seen it a thousand times by now? And how many times can anyone get worked up over a 7-foot-tall guy with long arms jumping a foot to slam a ball through a hoop? It seems like everything spectacular that could be done already has been. It’s up and down the court like a really boring tennis match.

That the league has decided to overtake the NFL as the most-woke league in the world only made my resolve harder. That they’re going to paint “Black Lives Matter” and have messages on the backs of their jersey, and undoubtedly protest during the national anthem, killed what little interest I had in even knowing who won the championship.

As for the NFL, again, I don’t care. I didn’t grow up with a professional football team, I grew up with the Detroit Lions. Watching perpetual basement dwellers dwell in the basement is about as exciting as it sounds. The Lions have won one playoff game in the Super Bowl era (in 1991) and only make the playoffs via fluke.

Professional football for me is a distraction on the TV on Sundays – I don’t really look at the action unless it sounds like something exciting is happening. When the kneeling during the anthem started, I stopped even doing that. Now that they’ve gone all-in for Black Lives Matter, I’ll find something else to play in the background.

Baseball is back already (though games are being canceled due to COVID-19 outbreaks), and aside from videos on Twitter, I haven’t bothered to care. A 60-game season does mean anyone can win the World Series this year, but whoever does win will be there prostrating themselves on the altar of a bunch of left-wing radicals. I love baseball, but I love my country more.

It’s not that baseball players are kneeling during the anthem, it’s that the league has caved to the mob and brought politics onto the field. All these leagues have.

Sports served as a distraction from whatever else was happening in the world and our lives, now it’s the manifestation of the Democratic Party’s demands of conformity. I’m not interested in conformity. A bunch of different colored like-minded drones chanting anti-American slogans is not my idea of diversity.

If I want to be preached to, I’ll call a priest, not millionaires who play a game for a living. If I want to learn something, I’ll read a book, not seek out the “feelings” of someone in a profession known for having proxies take their classes for them. And if I want a distraction from the stress of daily life, I’ll practice self-dentistry before I give these pampered, privileged narcissists a second of my time.

Personally, if their whole seasons collapsed and had to be canceled because they snuck an infected super-spreader into their bubble, I’d be just fine with that.

Sports could have been bigger than ever, more important than ever, and could have helped bring the country together during the pandemic by being the distraction people need from everything we’ve lost. Instead, like everything else, liberal politics was rammed into it to the point that it’s just another appendage of the Democratic Party. You couldn’t pay me to be a Democrat, I sure as hell am not about to fund any of their fellow travelers. Until they get the politics out of sports, I’m getting the sports out of my life.

America’s Biggest Retailers Now Walking Back Mandatory Mask Policy

H/T Western Journal.

While major retailers have walked back their mask policy here in Indiana we are required to wear mask due to the Executive Order from our governor.

If we need a mask why do we have to stand 6 feet apart?

If we need to stand 6 feet apart why do we need a mask?

A gap is emerging between the rules as they are written and the ones that are lived out at the entrances of major American retailers.

Although many major retailers have policies in effect across every state that require shoppers to wear masks, enforcing those policies is becoming a second priority to avoiding confrontations.

Walmart, The Home Depot, Lowe’s, Walgreens and CVS are among those that will not bar a maskless customer, according to CNN.

Retailers got into the regulation business because navigating a changing landscape of coronavirus rules in multiple states became more of a hassle than it was worth.

“This was the right time to implement the requirement in our stores to stop the spread of coronavirus and protect workers and customers,” a Walmart representative told CNN. “Our requirement is going [to] result in many more people wearing masks than before.”

Retailers had hoped states would make it easy and declare a single standard.

“Many retailers feel like they have to act since some governors haven’t,” Melissa Murdock, spokeswoman for the Retail Industry Leaders Association, told CNN. On July 6, the group urged the National Governors Association to adopt uniform rules on wearing face coverings.

But with different states at different stages of loosening or tightening lockdown rules depending upon the spread of the coronavirus, that plea went nowhere.

A leader of a group supporting employees said the rules were always hollow.

“Either security or management needs to tell people that they must wear a face mask in order to be served. It’s no different than wearing shoes or a shirt,” said Stuart Appelbaum, president of the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union.

If companies “are not requiring customers to wear a mask within their store, then they never had a requirement. All they had was a public relations stunt.”

Customers are pushing back — some of them literally.

According to WDBO-AM and FM in Orlando, Florida, a June episode posted to Facebook showed a man at a Florida Walmart shoving an apparently younger and much larger Walmart employee out of the way to get into a store. Although the man made it into the store, he was eventually tracked down and persuaded to leave.


After incidents like that, and numerous others recorded around the country, it’s little wonder major retailers are skittish about any confrontations between their employees and customers in a nation of more than 300 million people.

According to CNN, the men and women Walmart stations to face customers are known as health ambassadors. According to CNN, Walmart’s talking points instruct the “ambassadors” that when a customer refuses to wear a mask, despite being offered one, to “let them continue to shop.”

“With every requirement there are exceptions that have been established to avoid escalating the situation and putting our associates in harm’s way,” a Walmart representative told CNN. “Our goal is to keep associates from a physical confrontation in the stores.”

Lowe’s also said that there are limits to how aggressive employees will get.

“We will not ask our associates to put their safety at risk by confronting customers about wearing masks,” a Lowe’s representative said.

A representative of The Home Depot indicated to CNN that there is a limit to tolerance of customer stubbornness, and said “if a customer becomes combative or habitually refuses to comply, we’ll take further action to prevent them from entering our stores.”

Leslie Dach, former Walmart executive vice president of corporate affairs and government relations, said the mask policy is not just about health.

“Customers want to shop at places they feel safe,” he said. “Having customers wear masks protects employees and protects customers.”

Below the Radar: H Res 101

H/T AmmoLand.

There is a link at the end of this article to contact your House member to voice your support for H Res 101.

United States – -(AmmoLand.com)- You may wonder why we are taking time from actual bills to instead cover a House resolution. We did cover one House resolution and one Senate resolution at times earlier this year, though, and we did so because while they didn’t have the force of law, they could still tilt the playing field – and voting for or against them means elected officials are taking a stand.

That is why H Res 1013 is important for Second Amendment supporters. This resolution, introduced by Representative Russ Fulcher (R-ID), not only expresses some common sense, but it also could put anti-Second Amendment extremists in a bit of a tough spot. Fulcher is in his first term in the House of Representatives, and this resolution is a very promising sign that he is not only going to be a reliable supporter of our rights, but also a skilled tactician in the advancement and defense of those rights.

Reading the text reveals just what Fulcher has done in support of the Second Amendment during this turbulent time. As many left-wing mayors and city councils cut or disband police departments, they have turned around and pushed for more gun control as violent crime rose. See Chicago mayor Lori Lightfoot as one case in point (in the case of Chicago, enforcing current federal laws could do much to end the violence).

But even when fully funded, the old maxim that when seconds count, the police are minutes away has been proven time and time again. It will be even more true when left-wing politicians slash the police budget. This reality – one that anyone with common sense – is what Fulcher’s resolution addressed.

It simply states that it is the “sense of the House of Representatives” that any jurisdiction that cuts police budgets or which shuts down police departments should not be adding “undue restrictions” on the right to keep and bear arms, and in fact should remove them. What are “undue restrictions?” Fulcher points to the Heller and McDonald rulings in the resolution, and this is where a floor vote on this resolution would put anti-Second Amendment extremists in a tough spot.

A close reading of Heller would note that it extends the protection to firearms that are commonly used for lawful purposes. This would include modern multi-purpose semiautomatic long guns and the standard-capacity magazines they use. So, in essence, the House adopting this resolution would tell places that are cutting cops to also get rid of semiauto bans, among other infringements – all so that people could protect themselves since defunded cops would likely take longer to respond.

Of course, opposing the resolution could easily be used to paint anti-Second Amendment extremists as unconcerned about people’s safety. They defund the cops, take away your rights, and what is left to protect you? Not much.

Second Amendment supporters have the chance to find out how their Representatives stand on this issue. They should not hesitate to contact their Congressman (or Congresswoman, as the case may be), politely urge them to support H Res 1013.




If you can’t pass Biden’s test, you can’t have a gun!


A great reason to reelect President Trump in November.

Will Biden Award Gold Stars to People
Who Can Pass His Gun-Ownership Test?

Jews Will Have a Really Hard Time With That

Vice-President pick, expected in August, must agree
or cannot be the choice: No test, no gun for you.

Democrats have settled on a gun plan for the nation, published it in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, and all they need now are control of both Houses and the White House. Their presidential candidate favors it, and he must pick a running mate who also favors “No Guns for Jews” and everyone else—unless you can meet their standards—which they aren’t revealing. What standards?

“It shall be unlawful for any individual who is not licensed under this section
to knowingly purchase, acquire, or possess a firearm or ammunition.”

The license requires undefined training, including taking and passing a class, a written test, passing a shooting test, demonstrating knowledge of firearms laws, and knowing the government’s concept of safe use, with undisclosed conditions, times and places, instructor qualifications and duration—to keep the guns you already own, or get any new ones. Absolutely nothing prevents “officials” from creating impossible classes and fees. They tried exactly that with Rep. Bobby Rush (D–Ill.) in 2009, under HR 45, but lacked the votes.

“What may be worst of all,” said Rabbi Raziel Cohen, a certified firearms instructor known as The Tactical Rabbi and a JPFO Ambassador, “is the unspecified ‘sound mind and character’ requirement, which could be anything, as determined by some government authority, to ‘make a determination of suitability.’ It is completely arbitrary, and they must realize that. Jews—and everyone, could be disarmed by this plan. It is totally unacceptable,” he said.

“The rights in the Bill of Rights are not subject to government approval or testing and qualifications,” said author Alan Korwin, a consultant to JPFO. “This scheme is an offensive affront to every American citizen,” he said, “worse than a poll tax or tattooed ID numbers. They are asking you to earn a gold star, OMG!”

Below The Radar: Background Check Completion Act of 2020

H/T AmmoLand.

There is a link to Congress at the end of this article.

United States – -(AmmoLand.com)- Sometimes, Second Amendment supporters do not need a lengthy discourse to show their fellow gun owners just how unreasonable anti-Second Amendment extremists are. Sometimes, it takes less than a half-dozen pieces of paper. Sound crazy? No, it isn’t.

Here’s how you can do it. First, you just need to print out the GPO’s official version of S 4068, the Background Check Completion Act of 2020, introduced by Senator Richard Blumenthal, who has long had a record of attacking our Second Amendment rights. That takes two pages. Then you can print out the text of 18 USC 922(t), which covers the National Instant Check System (NICS). That takes three pages for just that section (all of 18 USC 922 runs about 28 pages).

With those five pieces of paper, you can prove that anti-Second Amendment extremists are lying when they say they claim to support the Second Amendment, but just want “reasonable” restrictions. Reading the text of S 4068, it makes a small deletion but causes a massive shift for those who are trying to exercise their rights.

Under current law, if NICS cannot be completed in three business days, a federally licensed dealer can still transfer a firearm. While the setup of NICS is not ideal, the current setup has several points that make it much fairer than various licensing and waiting period schemes:

  • It presumes that someone seeking to buy a firearm is law-abiding.
  • It places the burden to deny a firearms transaction on the government.
  • It also does not subject someone trying to exercise their rights into an indefinite wait.

Blumenthal’s bill changes that. It removes the three business day limit on a delay. In other words, if there is a delay for whatever reason (NICS is down, confusion), a law-abiding citizen is denied the right to purchase a firearm until the delay gets resolved, and without the time limit, that can be potential for some serious, life-threatening abuse.

Imagine what IRS workers under Lois Lerner did to the Tea Party’s applications for tax-exempt status being applied to firearm purchases run through NICS. The injustices faced by potentially millions of law-abiding gun owners (especially when demand for firearms shoots through the roof, as it has in recent weeks) would be appalling. Worse, the tragedy of Carol Bowne would be repeated across the entire country. And many of those trying to infringe on our Second Amendment rights claim they stand with women.

But in Blumenthal’s mind, that’s all okay. Because to him, gun ownership isn’t a right – it’s a privilege that should be determined by the government. Second Amendment supporters should contact their Senators and Representative and urge them to oppose S 4068.

GOP Unveils Proposed, Next Round of Corona Stimulus

H/T The Washington Free Beacon.

The DemocRats in the House will say this is not enough money.

Senate Republicans on Monday officially unveiled details of their proposal for the latest round of coronavirus stimulus, officially igniting last-minute negotiations overshadowed by a still-turbulent economy.

The GOP plan includes roughly $1 trillion in new spending meant primarily to shore up the flagging market, as unemployment persists over 10 percent. At the same time, it sets a far less expansive spending agenda than the House Democrats’ plan that was introduced in May and contains over $3 trillion in spending proposals.

That sets up what is likely to be a chaotic week of inter-party and inter-branch negotiations. Congress will face additional pressure thanks to the pending expiration of the earlier-passed federal expansion of unemployment insurance, which will elapse at the end of the month. Yet that same expansion, as well as other proposed measures, may run afoul of opposition even within the Senate GOP, particularly among fiscal hawks wary of an exploding deficit.

The proposal’s most contentious portion is likely to be its changes to federal supplementation of unemployment insurance. In August and September, the GOP plan will guarantee payment of $200 per month to those on unemployment over and above their state payments; in October that would transition to guaranteeing wage replacement of 70 percent to those without a job, up to $500 a month.

That’s a major cut to the status quo under the CARES Act, passed in March, which paid out an additional $600 per month—essentially guaranteeing a $15 per hour replacement wage. Democrats want to preserve that arrangement, while some Republicans worry that it is discouraging workers from returning to the workforce, contributing to a slowed economic recovery. The $200 approach is also a stop-gap, as many states work to adapt outdated unemployment systems to cope with making a fixed percentage payout.

The GOP proposal would also include another round of $1,200 stimulus checks to Americans making less than $75,000 a year, including another $500 for all dependents. And it would push billions to local schools in the process of reopening, further fund the popular Paycheck Protection Program, and create a five-year legal liability shield for employers who fear being sued over coronavirus safety.

Conspicuously absent from the proposal is more money for state and local governments, an ongoing source of tension with Democrats who fear the downstream fiscal impact of impending state financial insolvency. But it would increase flexibility for how states spend the $150 billion already allocated to them under the CARES act.

All of these proposals represent Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s (R., Ky.) counterproposal to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s (D., Calif.) $3.5 trillion proposal from May. A final bill will likely meet somewhere in between, and will also seek the approval of White House negotiators.

But the coming week’s negotiations may pit not only party against party, but party members against each other. The GOP package was originally expected on Thursday, but delayed as final details were hashed out, following a heated Senate GOP lunch last week where Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas) raised fears about the ballooning deficit, while Sen. Tom Cotton (R., Ark.) argued that bringing a halt to spending could spell electoral doom.

Some House Democrats, meanwhile, were unhappy with Pelosi’s original package. Several more moderate members described the bill as “little more than an effort to appease the most liberal members of the caucus” back in May.

All of that adds up to what is likely to be a contentious week of negotiations on Capitol Hill, especially as a second wave of coronavirus infections likely slows the surprisingly swift economic rebound in June. With unemployment payments lapsing and rent coming due, legislators will likely face pressure to act swiftly to forestall economic and social catastrophe.

Florida Sheriff Literally Praying, for Death Penalty After Criminal’s Alleged Heinous Spree: ‘He’s a Thug, He’s a Criminal’

H/T Western Journal.

Even if this thug does get the death penalty it will take years for him to be executed.

A Florida sheriff on Wednesday said he was praying that a man charged in three murders gets the death penalty.

Polk County Sheriff Grady Judd announced Wednesday that police had arrested Tony “TJ” Wiggins, 26, in connection with the deaths of three men who were slain at a Florida lake earlier this month, according to CBS News.

William Robert Wiggins, 21, the suspect’s brother, and Mary Whittemore, 27, the suspect’s girlfriend, were charged as accessories.

Damion Tillman, 23, Keven Springfield, 30, and Brandon Rollins, 27, were killed in what Judd has described as a massacre at a remote boat ramp near Frostproof, a small community in Polk County.

During a news conference, Judd spoke about the suspects, expressing particular disdain for TJ Wiggins.

“I’m sure somebody thinks he ought to have counseling and pretrial release. Our goal, and we pray, that the state attorney can seek the death penalty. He needs to receive a fair trial, the appropriate appeals, and then be executed,” Judd said.


“And you know what? Legally, we can’t execute him like he did those three guys who were just trying to fish on Friday night, nor would we suggest that the system be as barbaric as his conduct toward our three victims,” he said.

Judd said TJ Wiggins was a career law-breaker.

“TJ is someone who his criminal history should shock your conscience. It does mine,” he said.

“TJ started to be arrested when he was 12 years old. He is currently only 26 years old. TJ has 230 felony criminal charges in his arrest history. I didn’t stutter. He had 230 charges in his arrest history. Fifteen convictions and two times to state prison at only 26,” he said.

Judd spared no words in assessing Wiggins.

“He’s a thug. He’s a criminal. He’s pure evil in the flesh. He’s wild and he’s out of control.”

Wiggins was cited by people who knew him as a possible suspect, Judd said.

“He’s just violent. He’s currently out on bond for breaking a guy’s arm with a crowbar during a fight, waiting to go back to trial on other felony charges,” he said. “This is a guy who they said would just walk up and punch you for no reason, or no reason to you, certainly a good reason to him.

“You look at the Florida statutes as it appears with criminal conduct, he’s got some arrest history, everything from burglary and theft, to aggravated battery, to resisting law enforcement officers, to battery on law enforcement officers, to battery on people that are 65 years or older, the elderly.”

After finding a Dollar General bag in the truck of the victims, police investigated and saw that the suspects and victims were in a nearby Dollar General store at the same time. There did not appear to be animosity displayed when the suspects and one of the victims spoke to each other, according to Judd.

The evidence began to pile up.

“The shell casing at the scene, the shell casing at TJ’s house, were all fired from a Smith and Wesson handgun and both the shell casing at home and at the scene were fired from the same weapon, the weapon that committed the massacre in the hands of TJ,” he said.

Judd said that based on what Robert Wiggins told them, the three friends were tracked to the lake, where an argument ensued over whether one of the victims sold the engine of a truck owned by TJ. The argument quickly escalated into gunfire.

When the shooting was over, “They immediately go to McDonald’s in Lake Wales and order 10 double cheeseburgers and two McChickens,” Judd said.