-
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.
-
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.
Oregan Swat raid man who was fired and bought firearms..
- Thread starter jwidman
- Start date
Thundar
Regular Member
imported post
Wow. This is quite disturbing. Theyconfiscated his property. They have no reason to hold it. They delay giving it back to him. Sounds quite scary to me. You know, we just decided to be proactive.
Wow. This is quite disturbing. Theyconfiscated his property. They have no reason to hold it. They delay giving it back to him. Sounds quite scary to me. You know, we just decided to be proactive.
kwikrnu
Banned
imported post
ODOT worker wants guns; police say they'll comply
March 12, 2010
By Anita Burke
Mail Tribune
MEDFORD — The Medford man whose firearms were seized by police Monday when he was taken into protective custody has asked for their return and police say they will comply with the request.
David J. Pyles sent an e-mail to police Thursday, asking them to return the items taken from him when a SWAT team and negotiators descended on his Effie Street home early Monday. He forwarded copies to legislators and media outlets.
Medford Police Chief Randy Schoen said the department plans to return the seized weapons today.
"He gave them up voluntarily and we don't have a court order to hold them," Schoen said. "We will give them back to him."
The seizure of Pyles' weapons prompted a debate among gun rights advocates and those who said police acted appropriately after being informed of a potentially threatening situation.
Medford police said they started watching the Effie Street home Sunday night in response to law enforcement concerns about the resident — later identified as Pyles — after he was placed on administrative leave from his job on Thursday.
The Oregon Department of Transportation said Pyles is a development planner who started working there in February 2004.
Medford police described him in a news release as disgruntled and said police knew he had legally purchased a Heckler & Koch .45-caliber handgun, a Walther .380-caliber handgun and an AK-47 rifle since being placed on leave.
Information compiled by Oregon State Police, Medford and Roseburg police, and Jackson and Douglas county sheriff's departments prompted concerns that Pyles could be a threat. The news release noted that police were "extremely concerned" that he might retaliate against his employer.
"We wanted to make sure nothing bad happened," Schoen said.
In an effort to defuse the situation before people started their daily routines on Monday, a SWAT team and negotiators moved in during the pre-dawn hours.
"He came out voluntarily," Schoen said, noting that he then directed police to the recently purchased weapons, as well as another handgun and a shotgun he owned.
All the firearms were seized for "safekeeping" and the man was taken to Rogue Valley Medical Center for a mental-health evaluation, police said. He was released several hours later.
Medford police Lt. Bob Hansen said police generally try to return found, stolen or seized property to its rightful owner as soon as possible and have a procedure for doing so, to ensure that there are not ownership or legal issues. If the property was seized as evidence, courts have the final say on when it can be returned.
Reach reporter Anita Burke at 541-776-4485, or e-mail aburke@mailtribune.com.
ODOT worker wants guns; police say they'll comply
March 12, 2010
By Anita Burke
Mail Tribune
MEDFORD — The Medford man whose firearms were seized by police Monday when he was taken into protective custody has asked for their return and police say they will comply with the request.
David J. Pyles sent an e-mail to police Thursday, asking them to return the items taken from him when a SWAT team and negotiators descended on his Effie Street home early Monday. He forwarded copies to legislators and media outlets.
Medford Police Chief Randy Schoen said the department plans to return the seized weapons today.
"He gave them up voluntarily and we don't have a court order to hold them," Schoen said. "We will give them back to him."
The seizure of Pyles' weapons prompted a debate among gun rights advocates and those who said police acted appropriately after being informed of a potentially threatening situation.
Medford police said they started watching the Effie Street home Sunday night in response to law enforcement concerns about the resident — later identified as Pyles — after he was placed on administrative leave from his job on Thursday.
The Oregon Department of Transportation said Pyles is a development planner who started working there in February 2004.
Medford police described him in a news release as disgruntled and said police knew he had legally purchased a Heckler & Koch .45-caliber handgun, a Walther .380-caliber handgun and an AK-47 rifle since being placed on leave.
Information compiled by Oregon State Police, Medford and Roseburg police, and Jackson and Douglas county sheriff's departments prompted concerns that Pyles could be a threat. The news release noted that police were "extremely concerned" that he might retaliate against his employer.
"We wanted to make sure nothing bad happened," Schoen said.
In an effort to defuse the situation before people started their daily routines on Monday, a SWAT team and negotiators moved in during the pre-dawn hours.
"He came out voluntarily," Schoen said, noting that he then directed police to the recently purchased weapons, as well as another handgun and a shotgun he owned.
All the firearms were seized for "safekeeping" and the man was taken to Rogue Valley Medical Center for a mental-health evaluation, police said. He was released several hours later.
Medford police Lt. Bob Hansen said police generally try to return found, stolen or seized property to its rightful owner as soon as possible and have a procedure for doing so, to ensure that there are not ownership or legal issues. If the property was seized as evidence, courts have the final say on when it can be returned.
Reach reporter Anita Burke at 541-776-4485, or e-mail aburke@mailtribune.com.
eye95
Well-known member
imported post
He gave the weapons up "voluntarily"???
Yeah, a SWAT team descends on you and says, "Please." Yep, that's the definition of "voluntary"!
He gave the weapons up "voluntarily"???
Yeah, a SWAT team descends on you and says, "Please." Yep, that's the definition of "voluntary"!
kwikrnu
Banned
imported post
kwikrnu wrote:
In Tennessee if you are taken to a mental facility "voluntarily" I think it does not affect your ability to have a handgun carry permit or buy guns. I believe that if you are involuntarily committed you lose your handgun carry permit forever and are no longer eligable to buy guns.
I wonder if this man was coerced into going in for the evaluation.
Did the police ask where the guns were or did they demand and just say they asked...If my street was blocked, my neighbors evacuated, and swat was at my door I would do pretty much anything the cops asked at that point.
kwikrnu wrote:
In Tennessee if you are taken to a mental facility "voluntarily" I think it does not affect your ability to have a handgun carry permit or buy guns. I believe that if you are involuntarily committed you lose your handgun carry permit forever and are no longer eligable to buy guns.
I wonder if this man was coerced into going in for the evaluation.
Did the police ask where the guns were or did they demand and just say they asked...If my street was blocked, my neighbors evacuated, and swat was at my door I would do pretty much anything the cops asked at that point.
kwikrnu
Banned
imported post
eye95 wrote:
This guy was smart, resistance against a swat team would have been futile.
eye95 wrote:
This guy was smart, resistance against a swat team would have been futile.
kwikrnu
Banned
imported post
Man, guns held by police spur controversy
March 12, 2010
By Anita Burke
Mail Tribune
MEDFORD — A phone call from a police negotiator that jolted David J. Pyles awake in the predawn hours of Monday continues to jangle the nerves of observers monitoring the way authorities took the Medford man into protective custody and seized his firearms.
Pyles came forward Thursday to reclaim his legally purchased weapons, publicly identifying himself in an e-mail sent to Medford police and forwarded to state legislators and selected media outlet.
He also said he has contacted the Oregon Firearms Federation for possible legal assistance. Pyles directed questions to that group and said he would make only limited statements until he had consulted with an attorney.
Kevin Starrett, director of the Canby-based lobbying organization — which also has a foundation for protecting gun rights through court cases — had been monitoring the incident that landed Pyles in the hospital for a mental health evaluation and resulted in five of his guns being held by police for "safekeeping."
"It's chilling," he said.
"I don't know if this is just a gun case," Starrett said. "It's about whether your freedom can be taken away without a criminal case or charges against you."
Starrett recounted the details of the case that Pyles shared with him. The federation had agreed not to identify him, so Starrett didn't use Pyles' name, but in the wake of Pyles' own public statements, the Mail Tribune is naming him.
Pyles told Starrett that he had a conflict with a superior at work, but was working to resolve it through union processes.
The Oregon Department of Transportation confirmed that Pyles has worked there as a planner since February 2004. ODOT Communications Director Patrick Cooney said the department couldn't discuss personnel or security matters.
Pyles told Starrett he initially thought the early morning call must be a prank, but looked out to see his yard surrounded by police.
"They asked him to come out and said they wouldn't handcuff him, arrest him or take him off the property," Starrett recounted.
However, Pyles said, he then was handcuffed and taken to Rogue Valley Medical Center for evaluation.
"Because we had information that he could be a danger to others, we wanted a medical professional to evaluate him," Medford police chief Randy Schoen said.
Police have maintained that Pyles' surrender was voluntary, but Starrett noted that an intimidating presence of officers with rifles and SWAT gear can force people to agree to things they wouldn't normally do.
"The thing that is really troubling to us is that this was not an arrest," he said. "People in protective custody don't even have the rights a person who has been arrested does."
When undergoing a mental health screening, a person doesn't have a guaranteed right to an attorney, for example, he said.
The evaluation took several hours and Pyles was released before noon on Monday.
Starrett expressed concern that police hadn't offered a clear explanation of what prompted their action.
David Fidanque, executive director of the Oregon chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, said his organization wasn't likely to get involved in an incident of this type, but said Pyles could have a case against police if he were taken into custody improperly.
He noted that police can't take people into custody based only on a concern, but said he understood their worries that someone could be hurt.
Reach reporter Anita Burke at 541-776-4485, or e-mail aburke@mailtribune.com.
Man, guns held by police spur controversy
March 12, 2010
By Anita Burke
Mail Tribune
MEDFORD — A phone call from a police negotiator that jolted David J. Pyles awake in the predawn hours of Monday continues to jangle the nerves of observers monitoring the way authorities took the Medford man into protective custody and seized his firearms.
Pyles came forward Thursday to reclaim his legally purchased weapons, publicly identifying himself in an e-mail sent to Medford police and forwarded to state legislators and selected media outlet.
He also said he has contacted the Oregon Firearms Federation for possible legal assistance. Pyles directed questions to that group and said he would make only limited statements until he had consulted with an attorney.
Kevin Starrett, director of the Canby-based lobbying organization — which also has a foundation for protecting gun rights through court cases — had been monitoring the incident that landed Pyles in the hospital for a mental health evaluation and resulted in five of his guns being held by police for "safekeeping."
"It's chilling," he said.
"I don't know if this is just a gun case," Starrett said. "It's about whether your freedom can be taken away without a criminal case or charges against you."
Starrett recounted the details of the case that Pyles shared with him. The federation had agreed not to identify him, so Starrett didn't use Pyles' name, but in the wake of Pyles' own public statements, the Mail Tribune is naming him.
Pyles told Starrett that he had a conflict with a superior at work, but was working to resolve it through union processes.
The Oregon Department of Transportation confirmed that Pyles has worked there as a planner since February 2004. ODOT Communications Director Patrick Cooney said the department couldn't discuss personnel or security matters.
Pyles told Starrett he initially thought the early morning call must be a prank, but looked out to see his yard surrounded by police.
"They asked him to come out and said they wouldn't handcuff him, arrest him or take him off the property," Starrett recounted.
However, Pyles said, he then was handcuffed and taken to Rogue Valley Medical Center for evaluation.
"Because we had information that he could be a danger to others, we wanted a medical professional to evaluate him," Medford police chief Randy Schoen said.
Police have maintained that Pyles' surrender was voluntary, but Starrett noted that an intimidating presence of officers with rifles and SWAT gear can force people to agree to things they wouldn't normally do.
"The thing that is really troubling to us is that this was not an arrest," he said. "People in protective custody don't even have the rights a person who has been arrested does."
When undergoing a mental health screening, a person doesn't have a guaranteed right to an attorney, for example, he said.
The evaluation took several hours and Pyles was released before noon on Monday.
Starrett expressed concern that police hadn't offered a clear explanation of what prompted their action.
David Fidanque, executive director of the Oregon chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, said his organization wasn't likely to get involved in an incident of this type, but said Pyles could have a case against police if he were taken into custody improperly.
He noted that police can't take people into custody based only on a concern, but said he understood their worries that someone could be hurt.
Reach reporter Anita Burke at 541-776-4485, or e-mail aburke@mailtribune.com.
eye95
Well-known member
imported post
kwikrnu wrote:
kwikrnu wrote:
Maybe so, but not resisting is entirely different from acting "voluntarily"!
kwikrnu
Banned
imported post
eye95 wrote:
The second story is more chilling.
"Pyles told Starrett he initially thought the early morning call must be a prank, but looked out to see his yard surrounded by police.
"They asked him to come out and said they wouldn't handcuff him, arrest him or take him off the property," Starrett recounted.
However, Pyles said, he then was handcuffed and taken to Rogue Valley Medical Center for evaluation."
eye95 wrote:
The second story is more chilling.
"Pyles told Starrett he initially thought the early morning call must be a prank, but looked out to see his yard surrounded by police.
"They asked him to come out and said they wouldn't handcuff him, arrest him or take him off the property," Starrett recounted.
However, Pyles said, he then was handcuffed and taken to Rogue Valley Medical Center for evaluation."
GLOCK21GB
Campaign Veteran
imported post
kwikrnu wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppMQ2Jvekfg
kwikrnu wrote:
Maybe so, but i still think he should have done this....:lol:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppMQ2Jvekfg
45acpForMe
Newbie
imported post
Old Grump wrote:
Wasn't it the USSR that sent people away to psychiatric institutions if they didn't like their political views? Overheard interrogation 2011, "Comrade, we have been monitoring your patriotic rants online and find your ideas of liberty disturbing! For the safety of our socialist community we believe that you will need to stay at our psychiatric hospital indefinitely. Thank goodness our esteemed President for life had the fore-knowledge to confiscate your guns late last year or capturing you would have been more ... difficult."
Old Grump wrote:
The universal remote control is optional. It can be installed only if one of the standard options (rocket launcher, grenade launcher, or flame throwers) are substituted out. Rumor has it there were several complaints of peoples TV's accidentally blowing up or melting when the user errantly tried to change the channel. The bayonet is now standard.
Wasn't it the USSR that sent people away to psychiatric institutions if they didn't like their political views? Overheard interrogation 2011, "Comrade, we have been monitoring your patriotic rants online and find your ideas of liberty disturbing! For the safety of our socialist community we believe that you will need to stay at our psychiatric hospital indefinitely. Thank goodness our esteemed President for life had the fore-knowledge to confiscate your guns late last year or capturing you would have been more ... difficult."
KBCraig
Regular Member
imported post
eye95 wrote:
eye95 wrote:
The alternative to "voluntary" wold be called "holed up in a standoff with police". And then even though they had no warrant nor legal basis to enter his home nor to seize him, they would have done so "for officer safety".
NightOwl
Regular Member
imported post
Hope that guy finds a good attorney, sounds like a pretty strong case.
Hope that guy finds a good attorney, sounds like a pretty strong case.
AbNo
Regular Member
imported post
eye95 wrote:
eye95 wrote:
Makes for a good court case later.
Puddin99
Campaign Veteran
imported post
Looks like the weapons have been returned.
http://www.ktvl.com/articles/police-1194262-local-guns.html
Police gave a local man his guns back today after taking them from him earlier this week.
Police called David Pyles of Medford a "disgruntled" employee after being put on administrative leave by his employer, the Oregon Department of Transportation. Police say Pyles bought three guns within a couple days and were afraid he might have a plan to retaliate against ODOT, so they took his guns away in the middle of the night. Pyles was taken to a local hospital for a mental health exam and passed.
After writing a letter to the Medford Police Department asking for his guns back, police returned all of his weapons in less than 24 hours.
Pyles won't say if he's seeking any further legal action, but says he is looking for a lawyer. The Oregon Firearms Federation, a group that's been supporting Pyles, says his civil rights were taken away from him.
Pyles won't say why he bought the weapons or if he's upset with his employer. He says that's a personell issue.
The Medford Police Department says now that they've returned Pyles' guns this case is closed.
I think this is far from closed though.
Looks like the weapons have been returned.
http://www.ktvl.com/articles/police-1194262-local-guns.html
Police gave a local man his guns back today after taking them from him earlier this week.
Police called David Pyles of Medford a "disgruntled" employee after being put on administrative leave by his employer, the Oregon Department of Transportation. Police say Pyles bought three guns within a couple days and were afraid he might have a plan to retaliate against ODOT, so they took his guns away in the middle of the night. Pyles was taken to a local hospital for a mental health exam and passed.
After writing a letter to the Medford Police Department asking for his guns back, police returned all of his weapons in less than 24 hours.
Pyles won't say if he's seeking any further legal action, but says he is looking for a lawyer. The Oregon Firearms Federation, a group that's been supporting Pyles, says his civil rights were taken away from him.
Pyles won't say why he bought the weapons or if he's upset with his employer. He says that's a personell issue.
The Medford Police Department says now that they've returned Pyles' guns this case is closed.
I think this is far from closed though.
kwikrnu
Banned
imported post
Puddin99 wrote:
Puddin99 wrote:
They wish. This is just another abuse of the system.
BARELY ILLEGAL
Regular Member
imported post
Glock34 wrote:
The Constitution is not being followed and needs to be restored.
http://restoretheconstitution.wordpress.com/about/
Glock34 wrote:
It won't be long now, Just wait until all police depts across the USA become proactive, like they did with this guy, How long will it take before someone fights back ? Because what they did was basically the first recorded case of civilian Gun Confiscation < am I wrong or am I correct ? The man had committed no crime, yet they knocked in his door, arrested him ( kidnapping is more like it ) threw him in a mental institution & took his guns :uhoh: WTF ??!!!! I say very nice Gestapo tactics, is this the Nazi states of America ?
Welcome to Amerika, did someone here recently say the - Republic is strong, the Constitution is sound and we should be happy today while planning for an even better tomorrow. Because It sure don't look that way
If the Constitution is so sound, then how could this have happened ?
The Constitution is not being followed and needs to be restored.
http://restoretheconstitution.wordpress.com/about/
BARELY ILLEGAL
Regular Member
imported post
kwikrnu wrote:
kwikrnu wrote:
Well, hypothetically, IF he would have been able to get on the phone to some buddies in the area outside of the SWAT cordon...............
AbNo
Regular Member
imported post
But we won't go there. :uhoh:
But we won't go there. :uhoh:
GLOCK21GB
Campaign Veteran
imported post
AbNo wrote:
AbNo wrote:
can we say fire fight :uhoh: or ambush...:shock: