Hero Oregon Dad Showed the Importance of Defying Restrictive Gun Laws

Laws against guns on school grounds don’t deter murderers and shouldn’t threaten good Samaritans.

Last week, not only did Oregon's restrictive gun laws fail to stop a shooter intent on killing innocent people, but a passing good Samaritan had to violate those laws to end the murder spree. Fortunately, authorities don't appear intent on prosecuting Kaylub Giamanco, father to two girls who attend the school, for ignoring the ban on guns on school grounds to save lives. But the law is clearly more of a threat to people with good intent than it is to those bent on doing harm. Such laws should and must be defied, but lawmakers need to remove these legal minefields before they do more damage.

You are reading The Rattler from J.D. Tuccille and Reason. Get more of J.D.'s commentary on government overreach and threats to everyday liberty.

"I want to start by thanking and praising the quick thinking and courage of the Silver Rail Elementary School staff and parents—and the first responders who rushed to the scene," Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek commented in a press release after the attack by a 16-year-old shooter at Silver Rail Elementary School in Bend, Oregon. "And to the community member who heroically intervened to stop further loss of life, your actions carry a heavy emotional burden—and my thoughts are with you."

That community member was Kaylub Giamanco, who had two daughters at the school. He was reportedly driving past when he saw the shooter approaching Silver Rail with a shotgun in hand. Giamanco parked his vehicle, grabbed his firearm, and followed the shooter, who had blasted his way through the facility's locked doors.

The shooter murdered four people, but Giamanco was able to kill him before he did any more damage. In the incident, the murderer obviously violated the law. But so did Giamanco.

"Oregon gun laws are rated as the 12th strictest in the nation according to data collected by gun violence prevention group Everytown for Gun Safety, but they didn't stop the shooting of four elementary school children and two teachers at a Bend elementary school on Thursday," wrote Lillian Mongeau Hughes of The Oregonian. (Reports say three children and a teacher were murdered, with two others injured.)

The gun-control group Everytown for Gun Safety boasts that "Oregon has passed a broad range of gun safety laws in recent years, including a requirement that guns be securely stored whenever they are not in their owner's immediate control, a prohibition on guns at the state capitol, and a law that gives universities the authority to prohibit guns on their grounds."

The similarly restriction-oriented Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence gives Oregon an A- for its laws, ranking the state 11th out of 50. The group notes that the state "allowed local governments to limit firearms in government buildings."

Of specific interest in this case, the state adopted a law in 2021 that, among other things, says "the governing board of a community college or a district school board" may adopt policies banning guns on school grounds, even for those "licensed to carry a concealed handgun."

Importantly, the Bend–La Pine Schools, which include Silver Rail, mandate that "no person on grounds of the schools controlled by the Board of Directors for Bend–La Pine Schools (including in school buildings) shall bring to, possess, conceal or use a weapon or firearm at any property under the jurisdiction of Bend-La Pine Schools, any activities under the jurisdiction of the district, or any interscholastic activities administered by a voluntary organization (i.e., Oregon School Activities Association). This prohibition includes those who may otherwise be permitted by law to carry such weapons or firearms."

The prohibition applies to the Silver Rail murderer, though it was unlikely to be a concern to a person already intent on slaughter. It also applies to Giamanco, who stopped the attack and who must now—probably successfully, given the case's high profile—rely on the authorities to not enforce their own laws.

Giamanco is by no means alone in taking the initiative to stop an attack. I've written in the past about Jordan Salinas and others in the Twin Falls incident, as well as Elisjsha Dicken at the Greenwood Park Mall in Indiana. The actions of bystanders are crucial given the evidence that would-be mass murderers must be countered with defensive force within the first 30 seconds to avoid a double-digit body count.

There were 634 active attacks in the United States between 2000 and 2025, according to the Advanced Law Enforcement Rapid Response Training (ALERRT) Center at Texas State University. ALERRT defines an "active attack" as an incident in which "an individual or individuals is actively killing or attempting to kill multiple unrelated people in a public space." Of those, 374 were resolved before police arrived, with 29 concluded by civilians shooting the perpetrator and another 60 attackers otherwise subdued by civilians.

That's certainly not a full count of actions by armed citizens to defend themselves and others. The 2026 National Firearms Survey finds that "guns are used defensively by firearms owners in approximately 2.2 million incidents per year. In most defensive incidents no shot was fired (76.3%), about half (50.8%) involved more than one assailant, and in 70.6% of incidents respondents report that the defensive use was successful, such that no crime remained to be reported to the police."

Undoubtedly, many of those incidents aren't reported to the police because people who have just averted a threat to themselves or others don't want to get entangled with a legal system that is all too often hostile to self defense. If all has ended well, why risk arrest for violating a law that would have prevented you from defending yourself or that you may not even have known about?

As The Oregonian points out, Oregon's "strong laws" didn't stop the shooting. Those laws ban murder, of course. They also specify that "guns be locked, stored in gun safes or in specialized gun rooms as a way to keep children from accessing firearms," according to the report. "Police have not said if those laws were violated." They also ban guns on the grounds of schools with restrictive policies.

The thing about criminals, though, is that they don't obey laws. That's especially true of those who plan murder sprees they don't intend to survive. The consequences the perpetrators anticipate involve death, and if that's not a deterrent, the potential prosecution of their moldering corpses holds little weight.

Unfortunately, legal peril can be a deterrent to good people who intend no harm. The threat of authoritarian laws and malicious prosecutors who enjoy state protection could convince some people to leave the means of self defense at home. Fortunately, Kaylub Giamanco wasn't one of them.

Giamanco's example at Silver Rail Elementary School is one to be emulated. If we're to protect ourselves, our children, and our neighbors, we have a right and a duty to defy laws that seek to disarm us and put us at the mercy of human predators. But we shouldn't have to suffer the threat of such laws to exercise our natural self-defense rights. Given the inability of weapons restrictions to deter crime and the harm they pose for good people, government officials need to eliminate these embarrassing restrictions and get out of our way.

I sent the following letter to Oregon papers, and of course it will not be published.

Bend-La Pine Schools Superintendent Steve Cook said at the press conference, “I don’t have any words for what this community is feeling right now. I don’t think anybody does. We are heartbroken, we are horrified. Please hold your children, hold your loved ones tight tonight. Let them talk, let them cry. Let them know we are going to rally and care for one another in this community.”

Superintendent Cook has made such a comforting statement in light of the fact they have established all schools as psychopath hunting preserves according to the following policy.

“Bend-La Pine Schools in Deschutes County, Oregon, has a zero tolerance policy for firearms on all school grounds and in district sponsored activities, prohibiting anyone — including those legally permitted to carry — from bringing, possessing, concealing, or using a weapon or firearm.”

Regardless of this and similar incidents, don’t expect serious review of the policy.

There are only two places I don’t carry. My doctor’s office and the gym. I was carrying in the doctor’s office once and they suddenly announced I needed an x-ray. Given the location I knew the gun would show. So, I slipped it out of my pocket keeping it hidden, I thought, and laid my notebook and schedule on top of it. The techs probably saw it but didn’t say anything. I thought I managed to palm it unseen, a small .380, back into my pocket. But when the doctor came in to see me, he was furious. Red in the face and I actually thought he’d strike me. It was truly frightening. He didn’t say anything about the gun, but his body language and outrageous behavior gave away his thoughts. Fortunately, I haven’t had to see him again. But there’s a constant danger of needing another x-ray. Also, the hospital is upgrading their security with scanners and three-hundred-pound black females with guns. (Can’t tell you how safe three-hundred-pound female rent-a-cops make me feel.)

The gym is a small private business white woman and black male owned. There are multiple signs regarding guns and weapons. But the clientele seems to be very pleasant people and a plethora of cops and deputies. Basically, there’s no way to hide it and I don’t go at times when I’d feel threatened. Also, it has cameras everywhere.

Everywhere else...I’m packin.’ I’d rather be arrested than dead. In the People’s Republic of Tallahassee there hasn’t seen a Republican in office since Reconstruction I’d be arrested even if I stopped a known shooter. I have carry insurance for that.

My personal problem is, I’m 72. I’ve recently had several surgeries, and I walk slowly and painfully. I watched a special where they interviewed violent criminals in prison and asked them how they selected victims. Yep, they profiled me. I have twice been the victim of “the knockout game” during riots while I was in high school during forced integration. The way that works is, even if you’re situationally aware, you’re scanning for dangers approaching at the speed everyone is moving. The attacker times it perfectly with your motion and he sprints in from your blind side. You wake up sometime later, bleeding. When I’m heading to my car, I’m scanning much farther out.

Fluck’em. I ain’t goin’ down easy.

Most of the gun-sane states have a "Safe Harbor" statute that exempts the citizen from prosecution for a firearm-related offense if the firearm was used in a justifiable matter (making room for unforeseen circumstances such as this).

Also, the Heller Decision set the stage for having ALL safe storage laws declared unconstitutional.

From the Plaintiff's complaint in Heller:

"...Similarly, the requirement that any lawful firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock makes it impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self-defense and is hence unconstitutional...."

The majority held with this and all other terms of the Plaintiff's filing, meaning that any requirement that renders a firearm "...impossible for citizens to use ... for the core lawful purpose of self-defense ... is hence unconstitutional...."

As yet that ruling has only been applied to trigger locks in that one case but the precedent is crystal clear and will be exploited by 2A/RKBA cases in the future.

That doctor would be fired right there and now. Wouldn’t be the first time either. My current providers and their staffs know I carry after several years of visits/etc. The XRay, MRI, CAT scan lab etc folks have never been a problem either.
The local hospital and clinic have signs at their entrances “Open Carry Prohibited On Premises”. Concealed carry is fine. This is flyover country Kansas.
If I bothered to ask I would probably find a sizeable percentage also carry. Of course I’m not going to ask - that’s private.
I have been asked opinions by some - if I have a good answer I give it, otherwise tell them where to look.

Also - You can conceal carry in the Kansas statehouse.

“75-7c21. Concealed handguns in state capitol. (a) An individual may carry a concealed handgun in the state capitol if such individual is not prohibited from possessing a firearm under either federal or state law, and is either: (A) 21 years of age or older; or (B) possesses a valid provisional license issued pursuant to K.S.A. 75-7c03, and amendments thereto, or a valid license to carry a concealed handgun issued by another jurisdiction that is recognized in this state pursuant to K.S.A. 75-7c03, and amendments thereto.”

Cute, Huh?

Fortunately, authorities don't appear intent on prosecuting Kaylub Giamanco,...

I expect it is only a matter of time before they do prosecute Mr. Giamanco for something. They can simply wait until the heroic incident has faded from public memory. Then they can pounce.

Gun laws in Oregon are designed to punish those who offend government officials. That is their major purpose.

And there almost certainly will be pressure on his employer to get him fired, so that he cannot afford a legal defense.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.