Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 66

Thread: Roosevelt police kill gunman

  1. #1
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795

    Roosevelt police kill gunman

    So this story has very little to do with this site, except perhaps as an example that even in a rural, pro-RKBA area of a pro-RKBA State, a man walking around with a gun in hand is going to raise eyebrows.

    At the end of the day, turns out the now deceased suspect was a convicted felon and prohibited person (for the record I don't agree with lifetime bans on RKBA). One felony was an aggravated assault in a DV case. The others were financial fraud.

    What few details are known have been reported at the Deseret News.

    Not enough information yet to determine whether the shooting was truly justified or not. But notice that even gun owning residents were concerned about the man's conduct prior to the police making contact.

    Some excerpts:

    Quote Originally Posted by Deseret News
    Police shot and killed a man Sunday that they say was wielding a handgun and acting erratically near the Uintah Basin Medical Center.

    ... [Police] made contact with him at 12:38 p.m. and determined that he had a gun, according to Duchesne County Sheriff's Lt. Jeremy Curry.

    After negotiations and non-lethal attempts to disarm Kevin Vance Norton, a Roosevelt police officer shot him at 1:27 p.m., Curry said. Officers immediately put Norton into the back of a patrol truck and drove him to the hospital, reaching the emergency room in three minutes, the lieutenant said.

    Norton died about 30 minutes later.

    Gabriel Burnham, who lives in the area, said he stopped his car when he saw a man wearing a T-shirt and jeans walking up the road with a gun in his hand. The man's truck was parked on the side of the road, he said.

    "I thought what is he doing," Burnham said. "My first thought was do I need to go back and grab my gun."

    Burnham had seen an off-duty officer. Several uniformed officers quickly joined the off-duty officer with their guns drawn and were looking into a culvert, he said. At the point, Burnham said, he turned around and drove away.

    "If there was going to be shooting," he said, "I didn't want to be around."

    ...

    Norton, 36, was on probation for a felony at the time of his death, meaning he was prohibited from possessing firearms, Curry said.

    Court records show he was convicted of aggravated assault and fraudulently obtaining employment compensation, both third-degree felonies, in September 2012 and sentenced to 36 months probation. The assault incident involved domestic violence, according to court records.

    The Utah Bureau of Investigations is investigating the shooting and the Uintah County Attorney's Office will determine whether the officer's use of force was justified, Curry said.

    Roosevelt police officers are equipped with body-mounted cameras; however, authorities would not say Sunday if the shooting was recorded.

    ...

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  2. #2
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Well, that was a fair, balanced, and informative story. (/sarcasm).

    Lots of derogatory information about the deceased. Nothing about the shooter--not even his name. Nothing about how many times he's been accused of excessive force, how many other shootings he's been involved in.

    Big wide gaping hole in the story about why the trigger was pulled.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  3. #3
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,279
    By all means, being a convicted felon gives the police special privilege to kill people. (sarcasm)

    Next step would be to eradicate their family so they cannot breed. (more sarcasm)
    It is well that war is so terrible otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  4. #4
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,279
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    Well, that was a fair, balanced, and informative story. (/sarcasm).

    Lots of derogatory information about the deceased. Nothing about the shooter--not even his name. Nothing about how many times he's been accused of excessive force, how many other shootings he's been involved in.

    Big wide gaping hole in the story about why the trigger was pulled.
    You missed it, the trigger was pulled because he was a convicted felon...
    It is well that war is so terrible otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  5. #5
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Obviously, the police may not have even known the man's identity when he was confronted and ultimately shot. So they likely didn't know his record either....though in a town as small as Roosevelt it is possible at least one officer recognized him on sight.

    No, the information about the man's criminal record (including aggravated assault in a domestic violence case) simply helps placate us about whether the deceased was likely to engage in some conduct to justify the police shooting him. Past behavior, while no guarantee, is the most likely indicator of future conduct we generally get. Now, on the topic of his record, let me just say again, very clearly, that I oppose lifetime loss of rights. That goes double when the crime doesn't even apparently warrant jail time. 36 months of probation but the guy can never touch a gun again?!?!?!

    Roosevelt is not some liberal, east-coast, anti-gun big city. Most Utahns have to look it up on a map. Rural area. Gun owners who don't generally carry a gun because there is no need kind of a place. But something about the deceased caught the attention of and worried even local gun owners. Walking up the road with a handgun in hand seems to be a big part of that.

    I will await further details before presuming to form an opinion about whether the shooting was justified or not.

    Sadly, I have to contemplate the possibility that the police may have used deadly force sooner than as a last resort. And this ignores the effects of the law. A prohibited person with a gun in hand is looking at a long prison sentence even if he had no ill intent at all. Maybe it is time to just commit suicide by cop.

    But that means I also need to reserve judgment against the officers in the moment who may have acted entirely appropriately in defense of their own lives.

    I think the most germane topic for this board, at this point, is to contemplate whether any would be willing to chalk this up as an "OC incident." The fellow was openly carrying a firearm...though in violation of at least one law that many of us believe is unjust. OTOH, how many are willing to accept as "one of our own" a convicted felon on probation who is legally (however unjustly) prohibited from touching a firearm.

    Thoughts?

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  6. #6
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post
    SNIP I think the most germane topic for this board, at this point, is to contemplate whether any would be willing to chalk this up as an "OC incident." The fellow was openly carrying a firearm...though in violation of at least one law that many of us believe is unjust. OTOH, how many are willing to accept as "one of our own" a convicted felon on probation who is legally (however unjustly) prohibited from touching a firearm.
    Excuse me? When did carrying a handgun in the hand or wielding a handgun (both conditions appear in the article) become OC in the context of OCDO?

    It has been a long-established guideline on this forum that, "This web site is focused on the right to openly carry properly holstered handguns in daily American life." (emphasis mine)(see forum rule about long gun carry)

    Who are these "our" to who your refer in "one of our own?" And, why would there be any question about it in the context of OCDO since the gun was not carried properly holstered?
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  7. #7
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    Excuse me? When did carrying a handgun in the hand or wielding a handgun (both conditions appear in the article) become OC in the context of OCDO?
    During the protests at the Washington State capital in January or so.

    See http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...public-gallery

    and especially the photo in the first post at

    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...public-gallery

    We had no shortage of regulars here who made their case that carrying a gun in hand was a perfectly legitimate form of OCing. In those threads, the firearms were mostly long guns to boot. Certainly a handgun along a road in rural Utah is no more concerning than a long gun in the Washington State capital Senate and House galleries.

    But funny how asking whether any are willing to accept this convicted felon as a fellow "OCer" changes the tone of the discussion.

    The first three comments appeared to be attacking the cops (or media reports) and/or defending the deceased.

    Now suddenly you accept that he was "wielding" the gun...which puts a slightly different spin on what initial impression one might have of the police using deadly force when negotiations and non-lethal efforts to disarm him failed.

    I'm still reserving judgment until we get some additional details.

    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    It has been a long-established guideline on this forum that, "This web site is focused on the right to openly carry properly holstered handguns in daily American life." (emphasis mine)(see forum rule about long gun carry)
    You are, of course, absolutely correct. And I'm pleased to see your devotion to abiding to forum rules.

    Obviously, my question about whether this felon was a fellow OCer was grossly misplaced and you may consider this my apology for asking the question, even rhetorically.

    I look forward to your continued devotion to these rules the next time any of our fellow forum members decide to defend conduct such as took place in the Washington State capital on the part of those who were wielding firearms and carrying guns in hand, rather than confining their conduct to properly holstered handguns.

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  8. #8
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post
    SNIP During the protests at the Washington State capital...
    Here's what the article said:

    Police shot and killed a man Sunday that they say was wielding a handgun and acting erratically near the Uintah Basin Medical Center.
    Are you really trying to compare gun-rights protests equivalently to that?

    Also, you seem to have not answered my question about who this "our" is that you referred to.
    Last edited by Citizen; 05-04-2015 at 06:15 PM.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  9. #9
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    Here's what the article said:

    Police shot and killed a man Sunday that they say was wielding a handgun and acting erratically near the Uintah Basin Medical Center.
    Are you really trying to compare gun-rights protests equivalently to that?
    Are you going to believe the police when they say a man they shot acted "erratically"?

    I will accept objective observations like "gun in hand".

    But "erratically" is much more subjective, wouldn't you agree?

    From the photos of the "protestors" wielding long guns in hand in the Washington legislative galleries I see guns beyond waved overhead. I recall some discussion/debate/allegations about bolts being charged and other handling.

    My point in posting this article is cause some introspection about what is or is not legitimately accepted as proper, safe, or peaceful gun possession/handling vs where do lines get crossed such that reasonable men (LAC or agents of the state) can legitimately and reasonably conclude that the possession is no longer peaceful, but now poses a danger and threat to the rights of others.

    The limited responses (and non responses) so far, have been fascinating. Thank you.

    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    Also, you seem to have not answered my question about who this "our" is that you referred to.
    I thought that was clear from the context of my first post, Citizen.

    "One of our own" in the context of the question "how many are willing to accept this man as 'one of our own'" clearly refers to each of us individually as we view ourselves as part of the OC/RKBA community. When an OCer stops a crime and saves innocent lives, we have no shortage of individuals who are willing to align themselves with that person. When people carry guns in hand into a State capital, we have plenty of folks who defend such conduct.

    How many want to align themselves with this fellow? And what is the material, objective difference (thus far) between his possession of a firearm and what happened in Washington (other than the cops didn't shoot the folks in Washington)?

    For the record, I agree with your implication that a firearm carried in hand crosses a line and moves from OC to something else: maybe civil disobedience, maybe just somewhat provocative, maybe overtly threatening. I also agree with your assessment of the rules of the forum on this topic.

    Sadly, there are some who disagree as evidenced by the vigorous defense of the conduct in Washington State.

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  10. #10
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,885
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post
    So this story has very little to do with this site, SNIP...

    Charles
    piper, please make sure you understand this is my personal opinion and not in any way meant to lead you to personally chastise me...

    since it has little to do with this site...who truly cares...

    and to watch you expand this issue which has little to do with this site...who truly cares to read your pontifications on something that has little to do with this site!

    ipse
    Last edited by solus; 05-04-2015 at 07:40 PM.
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  11. #11
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by solus View Post
    piper, please make sure you understand this is my personal opinion and not in any way meant to lead you to personally chastise me...

    since it has little to do with this site...who truly cares...

    and to watch you expand this issue which has little to do with this site...who truly cares to read your pontifications on something that has little to do with this site!
    So you insult me but you don't want that to lead me to be unhappy about that? Gotcha.

    Who is to say this has little to do with this site. Citizen and WalkingWolf are long-standing and respected members of this site. They have certainly drawn out concerns about how the police handled this and how the media reported on it. And there are clearly many on this site who believe it perfectly appropriate to "OC" a firearm in hand. I personally disagree, but who am I to chastise them over their believes despite forum rules about properly holstered handguns and all that?

    But since you truly don't care to read my "pontifications", you may want to just avoid my posts and the entire Utah section as I do tend to post on issues within my State of residence. Limit yourself to reading those things that you find useful rather than reading and then posting needlessly offensive comments about things you claim nobody would care about.

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  12. #12
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974
    No, he is not one of "ours". OCDO is about the responsible carry of firearm for self-defense and by extension the larger question of 2A rights, infringement, political action to regain 2A rights, etc.

    Wandering around in public with a loaded handgun in hand with its inherent dangers of a negligent discharge wounding or killing an innocent is not responsible carry of a firearm.

    Long gun carry is another issue, not the focus of OCDO. However, having missed the WA thread about people racking their long guns and screwing around with loaded mags all in a very public and populated area then building (thanks for the link - I was somewhat stunned by the entire incident) is also not responsible carry of a firearm.
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  13. #13
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by solus View Post
    piper, please make sure you understand this is my personal opinion and not in any way meant to lead you to personally chastise me...

    since it has little to do with this site...who truly cares...

    and to watch you expand this issue which has little to do with this site...who truly cares to read your pontifications on something that has little to do with this site!

    ipse
    +1

    For myself, I was thinking more along the lines of why would anybody on OCDO align themselves ("one of own") with someone "wielding a gun erratically", and that OC, as OCDO has traditionally viewed it, is carrying in a holster. Not with emphasis on forum rules as rules, but just that's kinda been the mission for years.

    I happen to agree with Utbagpiper that FIPF (felon in possession of a firearm) is a nutty law. But, I woulda found a different example than the OP article. And, I darn sure wouldn't have tried to connect the article example to OCDO by asking about making him "one of our own".
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  14. #14
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,885
    ROF....are you truly serious...insulted you...oh my...

    further, you divert my post of pointing out, as you stated in the first sentence, belong on OCDO, by saying what you posted was appropriate cuz WW and Citizen responded to your invalid post therefore life is good cuz of their blessing...

    did you miss WW first post was full of sarcasm while his second was challenging Citizen's comments

    oh my goodness...I just can't stop laughing...

    ipse...
    Last edited by solus; 05-04-2015 at 10:12 PM.
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  15. #15
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    So he was trolling to see who would take his bait?

    So far nada did.

    Citizen please read those links he posted, they are good for a laugh.
    Last edited by sudden valley gunner; 05-04-2015 at 10:38 PM.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  16. #16
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    And, lets not forget that he himself set the tone for his own thread by titling it "Roosevelt Police Kill Gunman". He didn't title the thread, "Roosevelt Police Kill OCer". And, he didn't title the thread, "Roosevelt Police Kill One of Our Own." He titled it, "Roosevelt Police Kill Gunman."
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  17. #17
    Regular Member J_dazzle23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    675
    So this guy, at the time of the call to the STATE, was just walking down the road simply carrying a gun, doing as he pleased.

    Waving it around and acting erratically is a different matter. And legally, they are both a no go. But....

    Still interesting...

  18. #18
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    Connecting this incident, handgun in hand, to the WA Statehouse incident, LGs in hand (to my knowledge nobody was arrested in the WA incident), is a reiteration of the Op's distaste for those who peaceably exercise their 2A right in a manner distasteful to the OP. The links to the WA thread contain the OP's views on the peaceable carry of LG's depicted in that thread.

    The perp failed to yield to the requests of LE and the inevitable result was manifest.
    After negotiations and non-lethal attempts to disarm Kevin Vance Norton, a Roosevelt police officer shot him at 1:27 p.m., Curry said.
    If the ex-perp was a threat, why did he not engage the cops with his firearm?

    Based on the facts available at this time the cop was justified. I do not believe that a contrary conclusion will be reached after the investigation has been completed.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  19. #19
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    Connecting this incident, handgun in hand, to the WA Statehouse incident, LGs in hand (to my knowledge nobody was arrested in the WA incident), is a reiteration of the Op's distaste for those who peaceably exercise their 2A right in a manner distasteful to the OP. The links to the WA thread contain the OP's views on the peaceable carry of LG's depicted in that thread.

    The perp failed to yield to the requests of LE and the inevitable result was manifest.If the ex-perp was a threat, why did he not engage the cops with his firearm?

    Based on the facts available at this time the cop was justified. I do not believe that a contrary conclusion will be reached after the investigation has been completed.
    Too bad we only have one side of the story. I have learned never to trust what the cops report.

    Could be the cops got tired of dealing with him and like a cop in Everett Washington they decided to "just end this".
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  20. #20
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    Too bad we only have one side of the story. I have learned never to trust what the cops report.

    Could be the cops got tired of dealing with him and like a cop in Everett Washington they decided to "just end this".
    Technically we have two sides of the story, the cop's side and the citizen's, who called the ex-perp in, side. Obviously, the ex-perp's side don't count at this juncture.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  21. #21
    Campaign Veteran MSG Laigaie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Philipsburg, Montana
    Posts
    3,137
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post
    1. So you insult me but you don't want that to lead me to be unhappy about that? Gotcha.

    2. Who is to say this has little to do with this site.
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    3. I was thinking more along the lines of why would anybody on OCDO align themselves ("one of own") with someone "wielding a gun erratically", and that OC, as OCDO has traditionally viewed it, is carrying in a holster. Not with emphasis on forum rules as rules, but just that's kinda been the mission for years..
    1. A lame attempt to make LEOs look bad. An insult in itself.

    2.
    You did.

    3.
    This would be more appropriate at an anti-cop site. The BG was not carrying a well holstered pistol, he was brandishing. Threads like this serve no purpose here other than to inflame others.
    "Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the people's liberty teeth (and) keystone... the rifle and the pistol are equally indispensable... more than 99% of them by their silence indicate that they are in safe and sane hands. The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference .When firearms go, all goes, we need them every hour." -- George Washington

  22. #22
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by solus View Post
    ROF....are you truly serious...insulted you...oh my...

    ...
    Your semi-literate opinions are duly noted, insofar as I can discern them.
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  23. #23
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    Connecting this incident, handgun in hand, to the WA Statehouse incident, LGs in hand (to my knowledge nobody was arrested in the WA incident), is a reiteration of the Op's distaste for those who peaceably exercise their 2A right in a manner distasteful to the OP. The links to the WA thread contain the OP's views on the peaceable carry of LG's depicted in that thread.
    You've missed the key point as the discussion has evolved.

    Where is the line between peaceable and threatening.

    I have ZERO distaste for those who are truly peaceable and respectful of the rights of others in their possession of firearms.

    I have little tolerance for those who are unsafe, those who fail to respect the rights of others, and those who are not truly peaceable.

    So where is the line drawn and how?

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  24. #24
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post
    Your semi-literate opinions are duly noted, insofar as I can discern them.
    I dunno about you, but by this point, I woulda started steering my own thread back towards my original topic.

    While defending against criticism is only fair--when it can be defended--I cannot imagine John and Mike maintain this forum just so we can fight with each other.
    Last edited by Citizen; 05-05-2015 at 04:36 PM.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  25. #25
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    And, lets not forget that he himself set the tone for his own thread by titling it "Roosevelt Police Kill Gunman". He didn't title the thread, "Roosevelt Police Kill OCer". And, he didn't title the thread, "Roosevelt Police Kill One of Our Own." He titled it, "Roosevelt Police Kill Gunman."
    Which tone you seemed to take exception to....right up to the point I questioned whether this was just a case of OC.

    Be careful lest you put yourself in the position of the newspaper editor in the middle of a ratings war with his cross-town rival. He declared one day to his staff, "Starting today, whatever the other paper is for, we are against. And whatever they are against, we are for."

    Upon hearing this news, his rival chuckled, "Let's see how he responds to our editorial tomorrow opposed to Polio and in favor of childhood literacy."

    More importantly than present personality conflicts, however, is the opportunity for discussion of where lines are and how we choose to view things. I trust most of us agree that the lifetime ban on possession for "felonies" (especially those without any jail time imposed) are offensive. But does our knowing he was a prohibited person and thus violating laws affect how we view him and his exercise of his "rights" (legally forfeited)?

    I trust we all agree that a guy walking up a street with a gun on his hip should not be bothered by police at all. Constitutionally, this should be true anywhere Old Glory is flying. But it must be true in locations like Utah where a properly holstered gun presents no obvious statutory violation.

    At what point are fellow citizens and the police justified in questioning or even prohibiting how a gun is carried in public? And does the line move based on whether the conduct is part of announced "OC protest" or is just one guy doing his own thing?

    I don't claim to know easy answers to these issues. I do think this case presents an interesting opportunity to discuss them, especially given your and WW's original response, and your seeming change in tone once I made some connections you hadn't previously considered.

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •