1.Anywhere Posted to Prohibit

2.After Verbal Request to Leave/Public & Private Establishments or Events when asked by operator/sponsor/owner/agent. 

3.Businesses Serving Alcohol for Consumption on Premises when posted with ARS 4-229

4.Polling Places on Election Day (75’ Rule-Same as Politicians)

5.School Grounds (CCW Exception, not loaded, under control of adult, not visible from exterior of means of transportation, means of transportation locked. 1000’ if no CCW, Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990)

6.Commercial Nuclear Generating Stations

7.Military Installations

8.Indian Reservations (Must have permission of Tribal Police Chief)

9.Game Preserves

10.National Parks (CCW permit holder exception)

11.Jails & Correctional Facilities

12.Federal Buildings

13.Airports (In or Beyond Security Checkpoint)

14.Where Federal, State or Local/Municipal Law Prohibit Weapons

Warrior Mindset:

 https://www.amazon.com/Warrior-Mindset-Dr-Michael-Asken/dp/0964920557/ref=sr_1_3?crid=2D4ITFY6XJ7KY&keywords=warrior+mindset&qid=1572197539&sprefix=warrior+mind%2Caps%2C201&sr=8-3 

On Combat:

 https://www.amazon.com/Combat-Psychology-Physiology-Deadly-Conflict/dp/B00FJWP7MK/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=on+combat&qid=1572197566&sr=8-1 

On Killing:

 https://www.amazon.com/Killing-Psychological-Cost-Learning-Society/dp/B002EAS5KQ/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=on+killing&qid=1572197603&s=audible&sr=1-1 

 The Gift of Fear: Survival Signals That Protect Us from Violence:

 https://www.amazon.com/Gift-Fear-Survival-Signals-Violence/dp/B071W2JPGS/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=gift+of+fear&qid=1572197633&s=audible&sr=1-1 

  Those of you who know about the late Colonel Jeff Cooper of Gunsite, then you would know about his State of Awareness Color Codes. For those of you new to this theory it is quite simple. The color codes are as follows: White (unaware of one’s surroundings), Yellow (relaxed and general state of awareness of one’s surroundings), Orange (Focused on specific threat or attention to specific direction), and Red (Reaction or in the fight).  At Guardian, we strive to add reality into our  training curriculum. By adding these traits to our training, we must talk about a condition that the late Colonel Cooper did not speak of but one that another visionary instructor and psychologist, Lieutenant Colonel Dave Grossman, speaks of daily, Condition Black.  Guardian has added this color to Colonel Cooper’s color codes because Condition Black is pure panic and as a gunfighter you must know the potential impact on winning a critical defensive encounter with a criminal threat. Condition Black is commonly referred to in circles as the “fight, flight, or freeze” response.

Lt. Colonel Grossman describes Condition Black in his Killology studies:  

This serves the function of reducing bleeding from wounds, but also reduces blood supply to limbs. Loss of peripheral vision is one of the most clear symptoms of this state of consciousness, sometimes accompanied by a loss of depth perception and/or distortion of near-vision. Auditory exclusion may also occur, which is not necessarily complete deafness, but a form of ‘selective hearing’ – orders or shouts from comrades might be heard, but the din of battle may be barely audible background noise. Rational cognitive processes are supplanted and instinctive reactions may be wildly beyond any level of reasonable reaction, including freezing (a typical phobic reaction), voiding of bladder, bowels or stomach, and acts of heroic or cowardly recklessness. Motor skills are also reduced to their most basic level. In this state the midbrain is controlling much if not all of the body’s reactions and related movements. We all have had experiences of trying to talk to an extremely angry or frightened person – the more angry or frightened they become, the less rational they become. This is because the animal-like midbrain is dominant with the forebrain, with its rational aspects, largely silenced. (Grossman, 2007)  

Many people, students, fellow instructors, as well as fellow officers, ask me about why I speak of panic and why would I want to introduce such negative outlooks into training for the unspeakable or terrible circumstances of a lethal force encounter?  I explain to them that by speaking reality and realizing our weaknesses and potential failure points, we can only improve. If we speak and act on our strengths only, we can never improve our weaknesses. Yes, we must have a winning attitude when it comes to a life/death scenario such as a lethal force encounter, but we must be critical of ourselves in training and make mistakes in training. Yes, we must push ourselves to make mistakes (mistakes that do not result in unsafe actions) because making mistakes in training is realizing and finding a failure point in our training and experience. By continuing this training in an uncomfortable state, we improve in mindset and skill and can ready ourselves for combat (lethal force encounter), because if that day comes, you will most certainly be uncomfortable.  Lt. Colonel Grossman speaks of this as “stress inoculation”. 

By pushing ourselves to uncomfortable levels in training, our skills improve and our breaking point towards Condition Black takes more stimuli and time, which is what we wish in any lethal force encounter. As Lt. Colonel Grossman says about lethal force incidents (combat):  You do not rise to the occasion in combat, you sink to the level of your training. Do not expect the combat fairy to come bonk you with the combat wand and suddenly make you capable of doing things that you never rehearsed before. It will not happen. (Grossman, 2)  In closing, we must be ready for whatever comes our way, be it an armed attacker, an intruder in your home, or simply refusing to be a victim, the central theme to this is preparing your skills physically, but most importantly, mentally. This is the cornerstone of "What are you doing today to prepare for tomorrow?".  Stay safe and keep your mind sharp!  

References 

Cooper, J., Kirchner, P., & Awerbuck, L. (2006). Principles of Personal Defense (Rev ed.). Boulder, CO: Paladin Press. 

Grossman, D. (2009). On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society (Rev ed.). Boston, MA: Back Bay Books. 

Grossman, D., & Christensen, L. W. (2011). On Combat: The Psychology and Physiology of Deadly Conflict in War and Peace (3rd ed.). Millstadt, IL: Human Factor Research Group. 

 Grossman, D., & Molloy, B. P. (2007, Jan 1). Why Can't Johnny Kill? The Psychology and Physiology of Interpersonal Combat. The Cutting Edge: Studies in Ancient and Medieval Weaponry, 1(1), 189-202. Retrieved from http://www.killology.com/MolloyGrossman2007.pdf Grossman, D., Asken, M., & Christensen, L. W. (2010). Warrior Mindset. Millstadt, IL: Human Factor Research Group.    

We at Guardian are always at the cutting edge of firearms instruction as well as law and legal aspects of firearms ownership, possession, carrying, and use. 

*** THIS DOES NOT APPLY TO CBD PRODUCTS DUE TO IT BEING UNDER THE "HEMP STANDARD" ***  

As many of you know or do not know, there was a pivotal case that was brought to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit pertaining to a person who is a registered patient or caretaker of a medical marijuana patient in relation to their right to firearm purchasing and/or possessing. This was argued and filed on August 31, 2016. As of now, this is the supreme law of the land.  

Here is some quick background on the case: S. Rowan Wilson, the plaintiff in this civil suit, was issued a Nevada marijuana registry card (medical marijuana card) on May 12, 2011 in the state of Nevada. On October 4, 2011 she then went to Custom Firearms & Gunsmithing in Moundhouse, Nevada to purchase a firearm. The owner of the firearms licensee (gun store) then informed her to stop filling out the background questionnaire for the transfer of a firearm (ATF Form 4473) specifically pertaining to question 11e which specifically asks: “Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?”  

If the applicant answers “Yes” to this question, the applicant cannot be transferred a firearm from the firearm licensee (purchasing a firearm from a gun store). The store owner knew S. Rowan Wilson was a Nevada marijuana registry card holder and the gun store owner refused transferring (selling) the firearm pursuant to United States federal law banning the use, consumption, and possession of marijuana, a Schedule I drug and transferring firearms to unlawful users of said drug under U.S. federal law. According to the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, a Schedule I Drug is defined as: Schedule I drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse. Some examples of Schedule I drugs are: heroin, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), marijuana (cannabis), 3,4 methylenedioxymethamphetamine (ecstasy), methaqualone, and peyote .

The firearm licensee refused to transfer the firearm to Wilson due to the prohibition under U.S. federal law if: Turning to federal firearms provisions, under 18 U.S.C.§ 922(g)(3) no person “who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance” may “possess . . . or . . . receive any firearm or ammunition.” In addition, it is unlawful for “any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person . . . is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance.” Id. § 922(d)(3).  

If you wish to further read about case law pertaining to 18 U.S.C.§ 922(g)(3), please read United States v. Dugan, 657 F.3d 998 (9th Cir. 2011), for further explanation and affirmation of this law.  

18 U.S.C.§ 922(g)(3) was further explained by an open letter from the BATFE to all firearms licensees on September 21, 2011: [A]ny person who uses or is addicted to marijuana, regardless of whether his or her State has passed legislation authorizing marijuana use for medicinal purposes, is an unlawful user of or addicted to a controlled substance, and is prohibited by Federal law from possessing firearms or ammunition. Such persons should answer “yes” to question 11.e. on ATF Form 4473 . . . and you may not transfer firearms or ammunition to them. Further, if you are aware that the potential transferee is in possession of a card authorizing the possession and use of marijuana under State law, then you have “reasonable cause to believe” that the person is an unlawful user of a controlled substance. As such, you may not transfer firearms or ammunition to the person, even if the person answered “no” to question 11.e. on ATF Form 4473.  

After Wilson, the plaintiff, was denied transfer of said firearm, she filed the abovementioned law suit (tort) against the U.S. government, specifically, Loretta Lynch (U.S. Attorney General), BATFE, B. Todd Jones (Acting Director of BATFE), Arthur Herbert (Assistant Director of BATFE), and The United States of America. These individuals were the defendants in this civil suit.  

This case was first held at the United States District Court for the District of Nevada. Wilson alleged that the defendants, specifically the U.S. government, impugned on her 2nd Amendment rights to bear arms, her 1st Amendment rights due to the government pushing anti-marijuana and anti-gun violence efforts on Wilson’s conduct, and finally Wilson’s 5th Amendment right to procedural due process and equal protection pertaining to her rights of the accused and civil liberties.  

The government was represented by 3 U.S. Attorneys specializing in appellate law and civil law. The plaintiff was represented by 2 attorneys from a private legal firm out of Las Vegas, Nevada.  

The case was reviewed by United States District Court for the District of Nevada and Chief Judge Gloria Navarro dismissed all claims of Wilson’s civil rights violations.  

Subsequently, Wilson filed an appeal to the next higher court: the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco, California. This case was reviewed by 3 judges of the Ninth Circuit Court and the findings of the lower court were upheld (affirmed) by the higher court.  

The findings of the District Court of Nevada and the 9th Circuit Court had the opinion that Wilson’s 2nd Amendment claim lacked standing due to the fact that she was an unlawful user of or addicted to a controlled substance (according to U.S. federal law) based on the opinion of the court:  

However, the Open Letter does not make a blanket assertion that all registry card users are marijuana users, it simply clarifies that a firearms dealer has “reasonable cause to believe” an individual is an unlawful user if she holds a registry card.  

Moreover, legislative determinations also support the link between drug use and violence. In particular, Congress enacted 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3), which bars unlawful drug users from possessing firearms, “to keep firearms out of the hands of presumptively risky people.” Dickerson v. New Banner Inst., Inc., 460 U.S. 103, 112 n.6 (1983). It is beyond dispute that illegal drug users, including marijuana users, are likely as a consequence of that use to experience altered or impaired mental states that affect their judgment and that can lead to irrational or unpredictable behavior. See Carter, 750 F.3d at 469–70. They are also more likely to have negative interactions with law enforcement officers because they engage in criminal activity. Id. Finally, they frequently make their purchases through black market sources who themselves frequently resort to violence.  

It may be argued that medical marijuana users are less likely to commit violent crimes, as they often suffer from debilitating illnesses, for which marijuana may be an effective palliative. They also may be less likely than other illegal drug users to interact with law enforcement officers or make purchases through illicit channels. But those hypotheses are not sufficient to overcome Congress’s reasonable conclusion that the use of such drugs raises the risk of irrational or unpredictable behavior with which gun use should not be associated.  

The District Court and 9th Circuit Court affirmed:  

In Dugan, we held that the Second Amendment does not protect the rights of unlawful drug users to bear arms, id. at 999–1000, in the same way that it does not protect the rights of “felons and the mentally ill,”  

Wilson’s 1st Amendment claim was dismissed due to the government’s anti-marijuana and anti-gun violence efforts were incidental and that they did not violate her 1st Amendment rights. Also Wilson’s 5th Amendment claims were dismissed because she “… did not have a constitutionally protected liberty interest in simultaneously holding a registry (medical marijuana) card and purchasing a firearm, nor was she a part of suspect or quasi-suspect class”.  

To summarize this case, if you are planning on obtaining a medical marijuana card from your local state, by U.S. Federal Law, you are breaking the law if you obtain said card or registration. If you attempt to purchase, transfer, or possess a firearm or ammunition while possessing even a medical marijuana card, you are breaking the law. If you have in your possession a firearm or ammunition, along with a medical marijuana card, as well as marijuana in your possession, you are breaking the law, specifically U.S. Federal Law. There are also state and local laws pertaining to the possession of marijuana, how its stored, where it can be consumed, and if firearms are able to be purchased or possessed. This article specifically addresses U.S. Federal Law. Please check your local state laws, or even better, attend one of our Arizona CCW courses.  

Unless this case is brought before the U.S. Supreme Court of the United States (USSCOTUS) in the form of a writ of certiorari and overturned, this case clearly delineates the law pertaining to unlawful user of or addicted to a controlled substance and firearm ownership, possession, and purchasing, specifically marijuana, but also other illicit drugs as described under U.S. Federal Law by the Drug Enforcement Administration and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives.  

Like it or not, we at Guardian, do not have an opinion on this case, we are only presenting the facts of this case, the opinions of the court, the laws of this land, and specifically instructing you on laws. We do not offer legal advice or counsel, we are not bar certified attorneys or esquires, we are instructors and law enforcement professionals. The final word in this case is the opinion of the court as dictated in the case brief in the references section of this article.  

We at Guardian wish this article was educational, insightful, and thought-provoking. We truly care about your well-being and safety both from a criminal attack, as well as you following the laws in being a law-abiding, responsible, and informed armed citizen. We hope to see you at an upcoming class. 

Full Legal Brief:

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/14-15700/14-15700-2016-08-31.html 

 What are you doing to keep yourself safe? 

Is it enough? 

Are you willing to explore new opportunities to keep your client and yourself safer? 

Realtor Safety Seminar 

What can you do today for your office, your clients, and especially yourself? 

Both the story of an Arkansas real estate agent, Beverly Carter, who was mercilessly murdered and buried in a shallow grave in 2014, and a real estate client being gunned down in Fort Lauderdale during a home showing in 2015, show that safety is an ever-paramount issue within the real estate business. These cases involved the victimization of successful people, and in particular to Beverly Carter’s situation, a successful woman alone in a vacant house. 

The Washington Post described Beverly Carter’s tragic death on 10/1/14: 

“Selling real estate is a solitary profession that involves escorting virtual strangers into sometimes vacant properties at a moment’s notice. Advertising – usually accompanied by an agent’s photograph and phone number – is virtually a requirement for the majority of agents who work for commission... I think safety training should be mandatory, according to Tracey Hawkins, a former real estate agent that teaches safety procedures to real estate professionals.” (Phillip, 2014). 

Keeping these issues in mind, we developed Guardian Realtor Safety Seminar. This seminar is designed to offer understanding in victimization prevention procedures pertaining to your career. It also offers tips for physical security, cyber security, and helps build awareness that you can use in both your career and life in general. The goal of this course is to show you some of the tools and tactics available to you, the dangers around you, and to empower you with the knowledge needed to prevent you from being a victim, or if the worst happens, to survive. 

Our instructors are current and experienced professionals in their field of expertise and provide not only the finest training to our citizens, but military and law enforcement. 

With our knowledge and experience, Guardian can provide procedures for office safety, client safety, as well as your own personal safety. We can provide insight into a criminal’s mind and their behavior. This course is intended to keep our communities safe, especially you, the real estate agent. 

References: 

Phillip, A. (2014). Arkansas real estate agent’s murder highlights perils of the job. The Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2014/10/01/arkansas-real- estate-agents-murder-highlights-perils-of-the-job/. 

Swanson, B. (2015). Realtor’s client murdered during home showing. Housing Wire. Retrieved from http://www.housingwire.com/articles/33126-realtors-client- murdered-during-home-showing.