December 8, 2025 • 11 mins
Guy Relford, "The Gun Guy," joins to talk about an officer killer pleading 'insanity,' mass murders being down in 2025, and more.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
You're listening to the Hammer and Nigel Show.
Speaker 2 (00:02):
Yeah, my name is Nigel Jason and Himmer right over
there with a very special guest on the hotline. He
is a two A attorney firearms instructor. Damn fine American guy,
Relford Guy. We're eating some Harry and Izzys sliders in here.
We set this up because we thought you would be
in studio, but since you're not here, I guess we're
(00:23):
just gonna have to eat all of your food.
Speaker 1 (00:26):
That hurts me a lot. You know. That's on my
death row meal. If I ever had a last meal
to order, Harry and Izzy sliders would be right at
the top of the list. They're so good.
Speaker 2 (00:36):
Hey, who's a sponsor in this segment?
Speaker 1 (00:38):
Here? My friend? Hey, thanks as always to our sponsor.
That's Premiere Arms in Brownsburg with the largest selection of
new use and historic firearms in the Midwest. And Pa
Jewler is located in the farmhouse right out front. Check
them out a thirty seven and fifty four South Green
Street in Brownsburg or Premiere Arms dot com.
Speaker 2 (00:55):
Okay, so this first question, it's not necessarily a gun
or two a question, but you're a defense attorney and
I kind of need to get inside the mind of
a defense attorney here. So Carl Boards, that's the guy
that killed Officer Noah shanav Oz. He's going for some
sort of insanity deal to avoid the death penalty. Had
(01:18):
his competency hearing last week, two of the three experts
that were up there said he was not mentally competent
to stand trial. Now it feels like to me, as
an outsider guy, I saw this same movie with Brian
Leets Killer to where I feel like he knows exactly
what he's doing, but they're going to try to trick
(01:40):
enough people to say that he's got something wrong with
him so he can escape the death penalty. Like, if
I were a defense attorney, why would you not just
tell your client, hey, where pajamas? Act like a lunatic
yell in the courtroom because you can probably avoid the
death penalty. Does that make sense? Shove peanut butter up
your butt and then eat it in front of the judge. Right,
(02:02):
I'm afraid that's where we're at right now.
Speaker 1 (02:05):
Well, yeah, what really is going on here, though, guys,
is something a little different than what you're describing, Because
there are several different issues, including whether or not a
defendant is competent to stand trial. That's much different than
an argument at sentencing to say that they shouldn't have
(02:29):
the death penalty for some reason related to mental health,
or even different than that. That's different than arguing not
guilty by reason of insanity, or separately, there's a different
potential sentence, which is guilty but mentally yield. These things
are all different consideration. That's sentencing and whether or not
somebody gets a death penalty. That's not really what we're
talking about yet. In this case, what he's arguing is
(02:53):
that he's not competent to stand trial. Not competent to
stand trial doesn't mean the case gets dismiss It doesn't
even influence a sentence at the end of the case
if he's found guilty. It's just a it's a procedural
step that's really required by the Fourteenth Amendment and requirements
of due process to say that a defendant must be
(03:14):
confident enough to understand the proceedings and assist their attorney
in their defense, because if they if they're so out
of it because of mental illness or otherwise that they
can't assist in their own defense and understand the proceedings.
Then they're being deprived of their right to affair trial
under the fourteenth Amendments. So that's what we're that's where
we are now. Now, if he's found incompetent, and you know,
(03:37):
I read a couple of articles that said that two
out of three quarter pointed psychiatrists came in and said, yeah,
he's not competent to stand trial. All that means at
this stage of the proceedings is that any trial would
be put on hold. They pause the proceedings and they
send him in a secure facility, so he's locked up.
(03:58):
They send him for mental health treatment. When they say
he's currently incompetent, make him competent so they can prescribe
him medication. They do whatever other treatment they the doctors
prescribe for him, and they then take the amount of
time necessary to make him competent through treatment and or
(04:18):
prescriptions medication. And then they come back once he's competent
and put him on trial and he goes he would
as if the proceedings had not been paused. That's different
than not guilty by reason of insanity or guilty but
mentally ill, And it's different than what the jury or
the judge should consider on issues of sentencing.
Speaker 2 (04:40):
And I'm glad you broke it down that way because
it just looked like, from an outsider's perspective, we were
going down the slippery slope of every single cop killer
is going to say that they're not competent. So are
they going to escape the death penalty? You know?
Speaker 1 (04:54):
Yeah? No, What really is going to happen is he's
going to get sent off if he's found in competent. Now,
may find him competent, because it's up to the judge
at the end of the day. Now he relies heavily
on expert testimony. But if they find him incompetent to
stand trial at this point again he just gets treated.
Then whether it's medication or otherwise, they send him back.
(05:15):
They have a trial. Now he can also say, and
this is different. It's obviously related because it's related to
his mental health. But he could say I'm not guilty
by reason of insanity. That's a different standard completely. What
that means is not that he's not competent to stand trial.
It means that at the time of the offense, when
he shot Noah shot events that he either didn't understand
(05:37):
the nature of what he was doing and the consequences
of his actions, or he was incapable of controlling his
actions because of mental illness. And if that is the
determination at a trial, that's actually not guilty by reason
of insanity, which means by definition, he would not get
the death penalty. But it also doesn't mean he goes free.
(05:59):
That means they go through civil commitment proceedings where they
lock him up in a mental institution. Then separately, a
jury could find him guilty but mentally ill. That means
he goes to prison, but he gets mental health treatment
while he's in prison. So there are various outcomes once
a defendant raises their mental health, whether it's to stand
(06:19):
competency to stand trial that's where we are now, or
at trial that they can go for not guilty by
reason of insanity. Now that to your first question, could
avoid the death penalty, and it also means you do
your time in a mental institution. If you're found not
guilty by reason of insanity, you don't do your time
(06:41):
in prison. You do it in a mental institution. If
that's your preference, which most people would probably say yes.
So this will play out in a whole series of
different ways. But where we are now is in that
first stage of competency, which could just result in a delay,
not anything else.
Speaker 2 (06:56):
Monday Gun Day with Guy Roelford, the gun Guy, here
at ninety three WIBC. So here's a headline that people
can take a couple different ways. Guys, mass murders down
twenty five percent in the year twenty twenty five. So
this is a headline where you're going to see like
Joe Hogg set and Ryan Meers doing victory lapse. Right,
(07:18):
mass murders down twenty five percent. Look how well liberal
cities are doing. But guy, there's another side to the
statistic as well.
Speaker 1 (07:27):
Right, well there is and but what's interesting to me
is this is a nationwide number, and we're talking about
mass killings. So you're talking about four or more people
killed in one incident. Now, these could be four gang
bangers that all are shooting, you know, shooting each other up.
It could be a drive by people shooting into a party.
(07:48):
It could be a typical what we think of as
as a active shooter situation where somebody walks into a
grocery store or whatever and starts shooting people. But anytime,
four people will die in one incident and aha, that's
a mass shooting. And what's interesting to me is those
numbers are down year to year, and that's a heck
(08:10):
of a number, and to me, it coincides. I don't
I don't put the credit for that in the hands
of anyone other than the fact that there are more
law abiding citizens walking around armed today than ever before,
both because more people have bought guns, also because more
and more states are going to constitutional carry, and also
(08:33):
because since the bruined decision by the Supreme Court that
mandated places like New York and Hawaii and California and
others drop there may issue system for issuing licenses, that
more and more people have licenses to carry. So I
think you're seeing more and more law abiding citizens carrying guns,
which is why those mass shootings are down. Because we
(08:53):
know and it sounds like a cliche and people don't
like it because they attribute it to NRA, but it's
fundamentally true that the best way to stop a bad
guy with a gun is a good guy with gun
with a gun, and there are more good guys with
guns out there, and good ladies out there armed able
to stop these things before they happen. Just like happening
in the Greenwood Park mall right here in the Indianapolis area.
(09:15):
So I think that's what you're talking about is bad
guys don't know who's armed, don't know who can pull
a gun from concealment and stop what they're intending to
do before they accomplish their objectives. That's going to dissuade
people from going down that road to begin with. Or
like we saw in Greenwood, you could end up in
a disruption before we even reach those numbers.
Speaker 2 (09:36):
All right, guy, we're up against it here. But I
do want to play one more SoundBite here. I want
to play audio from Erica Kirk, Charlie Kirk's widow, who
was part of a panel discussion recently, or I should
say was on stage doing a discussion about still being
a Second Amendment supporter even after the murder of her husband.
Speaker 3 (09:56):
I wouldn't wish upon anyone I have been through and
I support the Second Amendment as well I do.
Speaker 4 (10:07):
And what I've realized through all of this is that
you can have individuals that will always resort to violence.
Speaker 3 (10:18):
And what I'm afraid of is that we are living
in a day and age where they think violence is
the solution to them not wanting to hear a different
point of view. That's not a gun problem, that's a human,
deeply human problem.
Speaker 2 (10:39):
Guy, I've got about thirty seconds. I just wanted to
get your reaction to that.
Speaker 1 (10:43):
Yeah, I was so glad to see her say that.
I mean, someone who's been the victim here, the political
assassination of her husband would be very easy for her
to shift review on the Second Amendment. So I was
just I'm a fan of her. She catches a lot
of grief from a lot of directions. I'm a fan
of hers, and I was really glad to hear her
say that. I think that's exactly the right message.
Speaker 2 (11:01):
If somebody wants to become a client of yours, or
maybe they've got questions, maybe they want to be trained.
You're a trainer of firearms. How can they find you?
Speaker 1 (11:11):
You like? Contact me through Twitter, man, give me a
follow while you're on there. It's just at Guy Ralford
on X or Twitter at Guy Ralford.
Speaker 2 (11:17):
Guy, you're the best. We appreciate you, brother.
Speaker 1 (11:20):
Sure, guys, thanks so much.
You're listening to the Hammer and Nigel Show.
Speaker 2 (00:02):
Yeah, my name is Nigel Jason and Himmer right over
there with a very special guest on the hotline. He
is a two A attorney firearms instructor. Damn fine American guy,
Relford Guy. We're eating some Harry and Izzys sliders in here.
We set this up because we thought you would be
in studio, but since you're not here, I guess we're
(00:23):
just gonna have to eat all of your food.
Speaker 1 (00:26):
That hurts me a lot. You know. That's on my
death row meal. If I ever had a last meal
to order, Harry and Izzy sliders would be right at
the top of the list. They're so good.
Speaker 2 (00:36):
Hey, who's a sponsor in this segment?
Speaker 1 (00:38):
Here? My friend? Hey, thanks as always to our sponsor.
That's Premiere Arms in Brownsburg with the largest selection of
new use and historic firearms in the Midwest. And Pa
Jewler is located in the farmhouse right out front. Check
them out a thirty seven and fifty four South Green
Street in Brownsburg or Premiere Arms dot com.
Speaker 2 (00:55):
Okay, so this first question, it's not necessarily a gun
or two a question, but you're a defense attorney and
I kind of need to get inside the mind of
a defense attorney here. So Carl Boards, that's the guy
that killed Officer Noah shanav Oz. He's going for some
sort of insanity deal to avoid the death penalty. Had
(01:18):
his competency hearing last week, two of the three experts
that were up there said he was not mentally competent
to stand trial. Now it feels like to me, as
an outsider guy, I saw this same movie with Brian
Leets Killer to where I feel like he knows exactly
what he's doing, but they're going to try to trick
(01:40):
enough people to say that he's got something wrong with
him so he can escape the death penalty. Like, if
I were a defense attorney, why would you not just
tell your client, hey, where pajamas? Act like a lunatic
yell in the courtroom because you can probably avoid the
death penalty. Does that make sense? Shove peanut butter up
your butt and then eat it in front of the judge. Right,
(02:02):
I'm afraid that's where we're at right now.
Speaker 1 (02:05):
Well, yeah, what really is going on here, though, guys,
is something a little different than what you're describing, Because
there are several different issues, including whether or not a
defendant is competent to stand trial. That's much different than
an argument at sentencing to say that they shouldn't have
(02:29):
the death penalty for some reason related to mental health,
or even different than that. That's different than arguing not
guilty by reason of insanity, or separately, there's a different
potential sentence, which is guilty but mentally yield. These things
are all different consideration. That's sentencing and whether or not
somebody gets a death penalty. That's not really what we're
talking about yet. In this case, what he's arguing is
(02:53):
that he's not competent to stand trial. Not competent to
stand trial doesn't mean the case gets dismiss It doesn't
even influence a sentence at the end of the case
if he's found guilty. It's just a it's a procedural
step that's really required by the Fourteenth Amendment and requirements
of due process to say that a defendant must be
(03:14):
confident enough to understand the proceedings and assist their attorney
in their defense, because if they if they're so out
of it because of mental illness or otherwise that they
can't assist in their own defense and understand the proceedings.
Then they're being deprived of their right to affair trial
under the fourteenth Amendments. So that's what we're that's where
we are now. Now, if he's found incompetent, and you know,
(03:37):
I read a couple of articles that said that two
out of three quarter pointed psychiatrists came in and said, yeah,
he's not competent to stand trial. All that means at
this stage of the proceedings is that any trial would
be put on hold. They pause the proceedings and they
send him in a secure facility, so he's locked up.
(03:58):
They send him for mental health treatment. When they say
he's currently incompetent, make him competent so they can prescribe
him medication. They do whatever other treatment they the doctors
prescribe for him, and they then take the amount of
time necessary to make him competent through treatment and or
(04:18):
prescriptions medication. And then they come back once he's competent
and put him on trial and he goes he would
as if the proceedings had not been paused. That's different
than not guilty by reason of insanity or guilty but
mentally ill, And it's different than what the jury or
the judge should consider on issues of sentencing.
Speaker 2 (04:40):
And I'm glad you broke it down that way because
it just looked like, from an outsider's perspective, we were
going down the slippery slope of every single cop killer
is going to say that they're not competent. So are
they going to escape the death penalty? You know?
Speaker 1 (04:54):
Yeah? No, What really is going to happen is he's
going to get sent off if he's found in competent. Now,
may find him competent, because it's up to the judge
at the end of the day. Now he relies heavily
on expert testimony. But if they find him incompetent to
stand trial at this point again he just gets treated.
Then whether it's medication or otherwise, they send him back.
(05:15):
They have a trial. Now he can also say, and
this is different. It's obviously related because it's related to
his mental health. But he could say I'm not guilty
by reason of insanity. That's a different standard completely. What
that means is not that he's not competent to stand trial.
It means that at the time of the offense, when
he shot Noah shot events that he either didn't understand
(05:37):
the nature of what he was doing and the consequences
of his actions, or he was incapable of controlling his
actions because of mental illness. And if that is the
determination at a trial, that's actually not guilty by reason
of insanity, which means by definition, he would not get
the death penalty. But it also doesn't mean he goes free.
(05:59):
That means they go through civil commitment proceedings where they
lock him up in a mental institution. Then separately, a
jury could find him guilty but mentally ill. That means
he goes to prison, but he gets mental health treatment
while he's in prison. So there are various outcomes once
a defendant raises their mental health, whether it's to stand
(06:19):
competency to stand trial that's where we are now, or
at trial that they can go for not guilty by
reason of insanity. Now that to your first question, could
avoid the death penalty, and it also means you do
your time in a mental institution. If you're found not
guilty by reason of insanity, you don't do your time
(06:41):
in prison. You do it in a mental institution. If
that's your preference, which most people would probably say yes.
So this will play out in a whole series of
different ways. But where we are now is in that
first stage of competency, which could just result in a delay,
not anything else.
Speaker 2 (06:56):
Monday Gun Day with Guy Roelford, the gun Guy, here
at ninety three WIBC. So here's a headline that people
can take a couple different ways. Guys, mass murders down
twenty five percent in the year twenty twenty five. So
this is a headline where you're going to see like
Joe Hogg set and Ryan Meers doing victory lapse. Right,
(07:18):
mass murders down twenty five percent. Look how well liberal
cities are doing. But guy, there's another side to the
statistic as well.
Speaker 1 (07:27):
Right, well there is and but what's interesting to me
is this is a nationwide number, and we're talking about
mass killings. So you're talking about four or more people
killed in one incident. Now, these could be four gang
bangers that all are shooting, you know, shooting each other up.
It could be a drive by people shooting into a party.
(07:48):
It could be a typical what we think of as
as a active shooter situation where somebody walks into a
grocery store or whatever and starts shooting people. But anytime,
four people will die in one incident and aha, that's
a mass shooting. And what's interesting to me is those
numbers are down year to year, and that's a heck
(08:10):
of a number, and to me, it coincides. I don't
I don't put the credit for that in the hands
of anyone other than the fact that there are more
law abiding citizens walking around armed today than ever before,
both because more people have bought guns, also because more
and more states are going to constitutional carry, and also
(08:33):
because since the bruined decision by the Supreme Court that
mandated places like New York and Hawaii and California and
others drop there may issue system for issuing licenses, that
more and more people have licenses to carry. So I
think you're seeing more and more law abiding citizens carrying guns,
which is why those mass shootings are down. Because we
(08:53):
know and it sounds like a cliche and people don't
like it because they attribute it to NRA, but it's
fundamentally true that the best way to stop a bad
guy with a gun is a good guy with gun
with a gun, and there are more good guys with
guns out there, and good ladies out there armed able
to stop these things before they happen. Just like happening
in the Greenwood Park mall right here in the Indianapolis area.
(09:15):
So I think that's what you're talking about is bad
guys don't know who's armed, don't know who can pull
a gun from concealment and stop what they're intending to
do before they accomplish their objectives. That's going to dissuade
people from going down that road to begin with. Or
like we saw in Greenwood, you could end up in
a disruption before we even reach those numbers.
Speaker 2 (09:36):
All right, guy, we're up against it here. But I
do want to play one more SoundBite here. I want
to play audio from Erica Kirk, Charlie Kirk's widow, who
was part of a panel discussion recently, or I should
say was on stage doing a discussion about still being
a Second Amendment supporter even after the murder of her husband.
Speaker 3 (09:56):
I wouldn't wish upon anyone I have been through and
I support the Second Amendment as well I do.
Speaker 4 (10:07):
And what I've realized through all of this is that
you can have individuals that will always resort to violence.
Speaker 3 (10:18):
And what I'm afraid of is that we are living
in a day and age where they think violence is
the solution to them not wanting to hear a different
point of view. That's not a gun problem, that's a human,
deeply human problem.
Speaker 2 (10:39):
Guy, I've got about thirty seconds. I just wanted to
get your reaction to that.
Speaker 1 (10:43):
Yeah, I was so glad to see her say that.
I mean, someone who's been the victim here, the political
assassination of her husband would be very easy for her
to shift review on the Second Amendment. So I was
just I'm a fan of her. She catches a lot
of grief from a lot of directions. I'm a fan
of hers, and I was really glad to hear her
say that. I think that's exactly the right message.
Speaker 2 (11:01):
If somebody wants to become a client of yours, or
maybe they've got questions, maybe they want to be trained.
You're a trainer of firearms. How can they find you?
Speaker 1 (11:11):
You like? Contact me through Twitter, man, give me a
follow while you're on there. It's just at Guy Ralford
on X or Twitter at Guy Ralford.
Speaker 2 (11:17):
Guy, you're the best. We appreciate you, brother.
Speaker 1 (11:20):
Sure, guys, thanks so much.
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.