• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Cop-killer dead; NOW start asking questions

Glocked and Loaded

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2009
Messages
160
Location
Everett, Washington, USA
imported post

I am not suggesting to allow people to drive drunk, it was just a point. I just don't think it is right that laws are enforced so literally. The law's are there to protect us. And now are being used to control us.

It makes sense that people shouldn't be shooting a gun in the middle of the street, but why cant I shoot my gun in my backyard? Or driving 70 in a 60 in crazy traffic when everybody is going 20 would probably lead to an accident. But what good reason is it to give me a ticket for 10 over when there is not many cars around and it is safe to do so?

The law was intended to protect us, and now its just a business where the law is used to make money. Yet what do we do about it?
 

Capn Camo

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2009
Messages
165
Location
E TN
imported post

Yes, it IS time to start asking questions:

1.) How did this thread go so far off topic already, its just the first PAGE

2.) why is it acceptable to circumvent due process just because this perp had a bad rap?

3.) why is the referenced article on Examiner little else but a list of ad-hominem attacks and off topic comments? The question posed is feedback on news articles, but Examiners response is to attack the accused (no-wait-he cant be accused, hes DEAD)

4.) Why do police in general these days know nothing else but to shoot SOMETHING at SOMEONE?

4a.) from 4.) why are PDs using MILITARY tactics and essentially becoming militarized?

4b.) further from both 4.) and 4.a) consider that PDs are hiring ex-Military who know nothing ELSE but to SHOOT SOMETHING AT SOMEONE

5.) Why wasnt this man taken into custody instead of killed? See 4.) above.

5a.) Since it was known this man was on the loose and probably still local, why werent PDs travelling by 2's or 3's wearing body armor/plates? They have superior defenses, cars, bright lights...

5c.) Why is it that police know nothing else but to "shoot to kill?"

5d) from 5c.) recall (if you were paying attention ) the videos of Federal Marshalls training on an airliner mockup to shoot to injure, then shoot to kill a terrorist on an airplane (wanna talk about a tactically tough situation? there it is)

5e.) further from 5c.), why do police shoot to kill those armed with a knife etc.

5f.) further yet from 5c.)

6.) Why is it / will it be justifiable since it was a result of a cop killing vs. an ordinary Citizen? Does the end justify the means?

7.) Why is it, then, that his execution before trial will be justified based on a criminal history that WOULD HAVE ended if the system had not failed and let him out earlier.

He DIED to cover up not the Local PDs actions, but the failure of others in other States.

8.) Why does Examiner use red herring (off topic) to evade the question(s) posed on the papers websites as to whether this killing was justified?

9.) the perp is ACCUSED of murder. He was killed without trial and deprived of DUE PROCESS. Is this the MO for others who kill or is it only acceptable to gun down an ACCUSED in the streets when its after a Cop killing

The questions just dont end.

What it boils down to is circumvention of both DUE PROCESS and Possee Comitatus.
 

Metalhead47

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2009
Messages
2,800
Location
South Whidbey, Washington, USA
imported post

Capn Camo wrote:
Yes, it IS time to start asking questions:

1.) How did this thread go so far off topic already, its just the first PAGE

2.) why is it acceptable to circumvent due process just because this perp had a bad rap?

3.) why is the referenced article on Examiner little else but a list of ad-hominem attacks and off topic comments? The question posed is feedback on news articles, but Examiners response is to attack the accused (no-wait-he cant be accused, hes DEAD)

4.) Why do police in general these days know nothing else but to shoot SOMETHING at SOMEONE?

4a.) from 4.) why are PDs using MILITARY tactics and essentially becoming militarized?

4b.) further from both 4.) and 4.a) consider that PDs are hiring ex-Military who know nothing ELSE but to SHOOT SOMETHING AT SOMEONE

5.) Why wasnt this man taken into custody instead of killed? See 4.) above.

5a.) Since it was known this man was on the loose and probably still local, why werent PDs travelling by 2's or 3's wearing body armor/plates? They have superior defenses, cars, bright lights...

5c.) Why is it that police know nothing else but to "shoot to kill?"

5d) from 5c.) recall (if you were paying attention ) the videos of Federal Marshalls training on an airliner mockup to shoot to injure, then shoot to kill a terrorist on an airplane (wanna talk about a tactically tough situation? there it is)

5e.) further from 5c.), why do police shoot to kill those armed with a knife etc.

5f.) further yet from 5c.)

6.) Why is it / will it be justifiable since it was a result of a cop killing vs. an ordinary Citizen? Does the end justify the means?

7.) Why is it, then, that his execution before trial will be justified based on a criminal history that WOULD HAVE ended if the system had not failed and let him out earlier.

He DIED to cover up not the Local PDs actions, but the failure of others in other States.

8.) Why does Examiner use red herring (off topic) to evade the question(s) posed on the papers websites as to whether this killing was justified?

9.) the perp is ACCUSED of murder. He was killed without trial and deprived of DUE PROCESS. Is this the MO for others who kill or is it only acceptable to gun down an ACCUSED in the streets when its after a Cop killing

The questions just dont end.

What it boils down to is circumvention of both DUE PROCESS and Possee Comitatus.

dude, seriously? are you even aware of this perp's death? he's a suspected cop hunter, known to be armed & dangerous, stalking a cop whose back is turned, cop sees him, recognizes him, orders him down at gunpoint, and he keeps coming. the officer fired in SELF DEFENSE and any of us would have done likewise in the same circumstances. this fool denied HIMSELF due process. and shoot to wound?? are you for real? every respected voice in the self defense community has spoken out on the fallacy of shoot to wound. its hard enough for even a trained person like a cop to hit center of mass under stress. and in case you didnt know, he was altrady wounded! at least one gsw to the abdomen that was probably going septic by then. lot of good THAT wound did to stop him, eh?
 

Capn Camo

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2009
Messages
165
Location
E TN
imported post

Youre reponse is:

1.) Off topic. The thread is about answering Daves questions, not mine

2.) ad hominem. You are doing the same thing the article does by blaming the man who was killed while deliberately ignoring his RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS.

Do you even know what DUE PROCESS IS?

Do you know who Dave WOrkman is?

Do you know WHY hes asking?

Youd ought to rethink that response, because what youre trying to do is throw out our ENTIRE LEGAL SYSTEM and replace it with YOUR OWN OPINION>

Thats what the ANTI GUNNERs do.

Nor did I see that you took any time to THINK and RESPOND to the points I raised.
 

Glocked and Loaded

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2009
Messages
160
Location
Everett, Washington, USA
imported post

I do not think it is off topic. The thread started with a fact. Then it said to ask questions, however was not specific as to what or why. Leaving us with an opportunity to ask whatever question we wish to ask as that is all that was asked of us.

I see no problem with the guy being killed. Even if it was not justified but can easily be played off like it was. As long as they knew it was the guy with no possible chance of mistaking identity. If your friends of family where killed and you know 100% who it was and came across the person before the cop's and the scenario is where you can kill them justifiably or shoot to wound and wait for the cops to come arrest them and then spend a bunch of tax money to patch up the holes and then have them sit around in prison until they get a lethal injection, what would you do?

He was Guilty until proven innocent. I can prove it. If the cops found him and where able to restrain him they would have arrested him and took him to jail. Innocent people are usualy not arrested. I am innocent of what happened there and I did not get arrested or shot.
 

Metalhead47

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2009
Messages
2,800
Location
South Whidbey, Washington, USA
imported post

Capn Camo wrote:
Youre reponse is:

1.) Off topic. The thread is about answering Daves questions, not mine

2.) ad hominem. You are doing the same thing the article does by blaming the man who was killed while deliberately ignoring his RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS.

Do you even know what DUE PROCESS IS?

Do you know who Dave WOrkman is?

Do you know WHY hes asking?

Youd ought to rethink that response, because what youre trying to do is throw out our ENTIRE LEGAL SYSTEM and replace it with YOUR OWN OPINION>

Thats what the ANTI GUNNERs do.

Nor did I see that you took any time to THINK and RESPOND to the points I raised.

dude, i dont have enough battery left to deflate your assinine tangents. the perp was not denied due process by anyone but himself.

THE. COP. SHOT. IN. SELF. DEFENSE.
 

TechnoWeenie

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2007
Messages
2,084
Location
, ,
imported post

As far as the DUI/DWI thing...

What's wrong with posting an officer at the exit of a bar, politely enter into a conversation with people who exit, and ask if the guy is willing to take the Breathalyzer...

Tell him if he fails, he'll be offered a ride home, if he passes, he's good to go. If he refuses, it's on him.

Sounds like a lot better idea than waiting for a crash..

It'd be a completely voluntary thing, no coercion, no repercussions for refusing. PLUS if the officer notices slurred speech, stumbling, etc while in the voluntary interaction, then refuses the breathalyzer, and the guy then gets in his car, it's grounds for a stop as he has RS he's under the influence.

Two officers, one to transport, say from 10-2, that's 8 hours of labor (2 officers x 4 hours), plus whatever gas they use (minimal). Hell, even if they only stop one DUI a WEEK, the 600$ in labor/time would be well worth it. That's someones life/house/car, etc that's saved. It definitely would fall under the 'community caretaking' clause for those bean counters who want nothing to do with it.
 

TiP

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
46
Location
Beaverton (Ugh!), Oregon, USA
imported post


Oh man, I was right there with you until this:

Glocked and Loaded wrote:

Innocent people are usualy not arrested.



Excuse me for a second while I :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

.....

:banghead:

Now then, carry on.

TechnoWeenie wrote:
-snip-

Tell him if he fails, he'll be offered a ride home, if he passes, he's good to go. If he refuses, it's on him.

-snip-

Let me guess, by "home", I assume you mean straight to the station for booking? Drunk in Public and whatnot.

Look, I feel bad for the families of the officers who lost their lives -- I certainly didn't want them to die -- but expecting them to 'do the right thing' andgenuinely care about the publicis not always a wise idea. Their primary purposesare to enforce the law and generate revenue for the State... and they'll do it anyway they can, with honesty when necessary, and when it's not necessary, they'll do it underhandedly. Now, I'm hoping things are a little different up north, but where I'm from, you absolutely CAN NOT trust these people to see you as anything more than a tally mark on their monthly arrest/citation report. (For more information, see the book "Arrest-Proof Yourself" by Dale C. Carson & Wes Denham.) Unless, of course, they see you OCing and consider that 'brandishing', like an ex-cop-turned-towtruck-driver did with me at a 7-11 a couple of months ago.

Sorry friends, I'm not trying to ruffle feathers per-se, but when I saw that, I simply had to say something. Also, for the record, I agree with Captain Camo's questions;I just wish I had some answers that were positive.

Anyway, carry on.
 

TechnoWeenie

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2007
Messages
2,084
Location
, ,
imported post

TiP wrote:

Oh man, I was right there with you until this:

Glocked and Loaded wrote:

Innocent people are usualy not arrested.

 

Excuse me for a second while I :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

.....

:banghead:

Now then, carry on.

TechnoWeenie wrote:
-snip-

Tell him if he fails, he'll be offered a ride home, if he passes, he's good to go. If he refuses, it's on him.

-snip-

Let me guess, by "home", I assume you mean straight to the station for booking?  Drunk in Public and whatnot.

Nope. His house, friends house, wherever he's staying the night. He does not have to take the offer, but obviously if he's illegal to drive and gets in his car anyway, in front of the officer... That's his own dumb ass.

Look, I feel bad for the families of the officers who lost their lives -- I certainly didn't want them to die -- but expecting them to 'do the right thing' and genuinely care about the public is not always a wise idea.  Their primary purposes are to enforce the law and generate revenue for the State... and they'll do it anyway they can, with honesty when necessary, and when it's not necessary, they'll do it underhandedly.  Now, I'm hoping things are a little different up north, but where I'm from, you absolutely CAN NOT trust these people to see you as anything more than a tally mark on their monthly arrest/citation report.  (For more information, see the book "Arrest-Proof Yourself" by Dale C. Carson & Wes Denham.)  Unless, of course, they see you OCing and consider that 'brandishing', like an ex-cop-turned-towtruck-driver did with me at a 7-11 a couple of months ago.

Sorry friends, I'm not trying to ruffle feathers per-se, but when I saw that, I simply had to say something.  Also, for the record, I agree with Captain Camo's questions; I just wish I had some answers that were positive.

Anyway, carry on.
 

TiP

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
46
Location
Beaverton (Ugh!), Oregon, USA
imported post

TechnoWeenie wrote:
Nope. His house, friends house, wherever he's staying the night. He does not have to take the offer, but obviously if he's illegal to drive and gets in his car anyway, in front of the officer... That's his own dumb ass.

I don't know man, once they realise all the tickets they could be writing for "Drunk in Public" offenses and how that would bolster their monthly reports, I think they'd more than likely put two and two together and just keep a stack of blank ticket forms and zipcuffs on a table next to their little station out in front of the bar. Without a rewrite of the legislation defining Drunk in Public (i.e. 30ft. radius around the doors to a bar not technically being "in public" for purposes of that statute) I think they'd gleefully fill paddywagon after paddywagon of arrestees and ship them 'downtown' for processing as soon as they realised they legally could, rubbing their hands together as they salivate over thoughts of their monthly arrest report.

But, that's just my take on it. With the change to the law I mentioned above, however, I actually think that's a pretty good idea.
 

TechnoWeenie

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2007
Messages
2,084
Location
, ,
imported post

TiP wrote:
TechnoWeenie wrote:
Nope. His house, friends house, wherever he's staying the night. He does not have to take the offer, but obviously if he's illegal to drive and gets in his car anyway, in front of the officer... That's his own dumb ass.

I don't know man, once they realise all the tickets they could be writing for "Drunk in Public" offenses and how that would bolster their monthly reports, I think they'd more than likely put two and two together and just keep a stack of blank ticket forms and zipcuffs on a table next to their little station out in front of the bar.  Without a rewrite of the legislation defining Drunk in Public (i.e. 30ft. radius around the doors to a bar not technically being "in public" for purposes of that statute) I think they'd gleefully fill paddywagon after paddywagon of arrestees and ship them 'downtown' for processing as soon as they realised they legally could, rubbing their hands together as they salivate over thoughts of their monthly arrest report.

But, that's just my take on it.  With the change to the law I mentioned above, however, I actually think that's a pretty good idea.

I'll contact local PD and see whats up, if not, I'll see if I can get a few volunteers to help out.

There's a news piece that would put us in a good light. OCers offering drunks free rides home to avoid being on the road drunk...
 

Glocked and Loaded

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2009
Messages
160
Location
Everett, Washington, USA
imported post

TechnoWeenie wrote
I'll contact local PD and see whats up, if not, I'll see if I can get a few volunteers to help out.

There's a news piece that would put us in a good light. OCers offering drunks free rides home to avoid being on the road drunk...
It would be a good community service idea. Probably wouldn't be hard to get the bar to help pay for gas. I would be more then happy to help, my only problem would be as I have no income I don't see myself using what little money I have to drive people around in my car using my gas, and having them barf all over my car.

Maybe getting a contract with some bar's to deliver there drunk patrons home for a charge. Like a taxi but cheaper and paid for by the bar or maybe donations by all the people against drunk driving, I mean if there so against drunk driving then here is something they can do about it.
 

amzbrady

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2009
Messages
3,521
Location
Marysville, Washington, USA
imported post

Capn Camo wrote:
Yes, it IS time to start asking questions:

1.) How did this thread go so far off topic already, its just the first PAGE


Yea huh. ADHD.Isnt it amazing how that happens? I was just thinking the same thing as I was flipping between here and you tube and Face book, but then got up to get a beer, and saw the Hotdogs, so I went to see if we had hot dog buns, and saw we had english muffins, and thought egg sandwiches tomorrow morning would be awesome, then my mom called and asked what size clothes my daughter wears for christmas, and we started talking about one of her friends and she asked me to email her some photos of my sons graduation, so I sat back down at the computer and sent them then started playing Halo, and then, um, uh, what was I talking about? Oh well, doesnt matter, I gotta take the trash out.
 

killchain

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2009
Messages
788
Location
Richland, Washington, USA
imported post

So if we strike the DWI laws from the books, someone driving drunk and endangering my life and the life of my wife, do I have the right to shoot him in defense?

Your view on DWI laws are wrong.

We have DWI laws for a reason. Because more people are injured and killed by drunk drivers than firearms annually in the United States.

"691,000 firearms criminal offenses."

http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp

"950,000 DUI/DWI offenses. This number is trending down from closer to 1.2 million a decade ago. Out of those 950,000, a full 1/3 were repeat offenders."

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090422180332AAItnZF

31% of traffic fatalities

http://www.madd.org/About-Us/About-Us/Statistics.aspx
 

killchain

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2009
Messages
788
Location
Richland, Washington, USA
imported post

And BACK ON TOPIC:

I knew that guy would resist. He needed to be put down like a sick animal, which is what he was.

And someone needs to bust someone's balls for dropping the ball and letting this child rapist and cop killer out of his hole.
 
Top