• 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.

Colorado police kill homeowner for demanding warrant

protias

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
7,308
Location
SE, WI
http://reason.com/blog/2011/05/25/would-meek-compliance-have-sav

The state troopers were investigating a minor accident that resulted, at most, in minimal damage to a neighbor's lawn. They suspected Jason was responsible for this minor accident and may have been driving under the influence of alcohol. But that provided no legal justification for proceeding without a warrant, drawing their guns, and attempting to kick down Jason's front door. It certainly provided no justification for shooting him dead.

Jason was killed because he did what every American has the right to do. He insisted that police comply with the Fourth Amendment and obtain a warrant before entering a person's home.
 

SFCRetired

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
1,764
Location
Montgomery, Alabama, USA
Good Lord!! Where does this crap end! :cuss:

When we, the people, get good and sick and tired of this crap and demand that our courts punish to the fullest extent of the law any law enforcement officer who commits crimes while hiding behind the authority that we, the people, granted him.

In this case, I would like to see the person who fired the shots convicted of capital murder and sentenced to life without parole. His accomplice should be convicted as an accessory with a minimum of life.

Unless there are facts here which we have not been told. Doesn't sound like it, though.
 

M-Taliesin

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2011
Messages
1,504
Location
Aurora, Colorado
Howdy Folks!
When cops break the law, then there is no law.
All you really have is anarchy.
And citizens end up dead.

I hope these men are tried for the appropriate crime....
Murder in the first degree.
Just because you wear a badge doesn't mean you can just go around killing citizens.
Carve the case up however one may, the man was shot dead in his own home. By cops. Without any warrant. Since when does demanding a warrant merit a death sentence?

Why are these jokers even wearing the uniform of state police officers?
The only uniform they should be wearing is the one they'd get in Canyon City when they find themselves sentenced to the prison there to await their date with the needle!

Guns don't kill people. Cops kill people. At least those who have absolutely no business being cops to begin with.

Blessings,
M-Taliesin
 
Last edited:

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
Don't forget to mention that these officers have been arrested for their criminal activity.

Yep -

"Last fall a grand jury indicted Lawyer on charges of criminally negligent homicide, second-degree assault, illegal discharge of a firearm, first-degree criminal trespassing, prohibited use of a weapon, and criminal mischief. Firko faces two counts of first-degree criminal trespass, two counts of criminal attempt to commit first-degree criminal trespass, and criminal mischief. They have not been tried yet. In addition to Lawyer and Firko, the ACLU, which represents Kemp's parents, is suing Sgt. Chad Dunlap, who also was at the scene, and two training officers who it argues "were responsible for the constitutionally deficient training of Lawyer, Firko, and Dunlap."
http://reason.com/blog/2011/05/25/wo...iance-have-sav
 

EricDailey X-NRA

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2011
Messages
209
Location
Wake County, NC
Arrested for...?

Don't forget to mention that these officers have been arrested for their criminal activity.


May 25 2011

"Last fall a grand jury indicted (Trooper) Lawyer on charges of criminally negligent homicide, second-degree assault, illegal discharge of a firearm, first-degree criminal trespassing, prohibited use of a weapon, and criminal mischief.

"(Cpl.) Firko faces two counts of first-degree criminal trespass, two counts of criminal attempt to commit first-degree criminal trespass, and criminal mischief. They have not been tried yet.

"... is suing Sgt. Chad Dunlap, who also was at the scene, and two training officers who it argues "were responsible for the constitutionally deficient training of Lawyer, Firko, and Dunlap." Mark Silverstein, the ACLU of Colorado's legal director, explains:..."

http://reason.com/blog/2011/05/25/would-meek-compliance-have-sav




These seem like very weak charges to me.
 

SouthernBoy

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
5,837
Location
Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
From the article:
"In concluding "there is no right to reasonably resist unlawful entry by police officers," the Indiana Supreme Court cited the potential for violence when citizens fail to comply with illegal demands by armed government agents."


Thank God I live in Virginia where this does not apply. We do have the right to resist illegal actions by officers of the law who are clearly acting illegally under the color of law. There is case law to back this up.
 

M-Taliesin

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2011
Messages
1,504
Location
Aurora, Colorado
May 25 2011

These seem like very weak charges to me.

Howdy Eric!
I could not possibly agree more. When somebody with a badge commits murder (considering this man was shot dead by an LEO) they should be charged with murder.
He shot an unarmed man dead in his own home while illegally trying to violate his 4th and 14th amendment rights. He killed the man. Shot him square in the chest without any reasonable need to kill him.

To me, that sounds like murder. Any other citizen in a similar situation would have been charged with murder, why not these yokels?

Blessings,
M-Taliesin
 

GLOCK21GB

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 22, 2009
Messages
4,347
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
When we, the people, get good and sick and tired of this crap and demand that our courts punish to the fullest extent of the law any law enforcement officer who commits crimes while hiding behind the authority that we, the people, granted him.

In this case, I would like to see the person who fired the shots convicted of capital murder and sentenced to life without parole. His accomplice should be convicted as an accessory with a minimum of life.

Unless there are facts here which we have not been told. Doesn't sound like it, though.

COMMENTS REMOVED BY ADMINISTRATOR: Calls for insurrection are not welcome here.


--Moderator Statement--
This response definitely crosses the line and violates OCDO rules.


OK, LISTEN UP !!! I WAS NOT CALLING FOR, IN SIGHTING OR ADVOCATING FOR AN INSURRECTION / REBELLION / OR CIVL WAR........I WAS MERELY SAYING ONE IS MORE THAN LIKELY POTENTIAL AROUND THE CORNER, DUE TO STUFF LIKE WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY POSTED !!! ! I also said the SMART PEOPLE should prepare for such an eventuality ! I think it's funny you get all bent out of shape for something that WAS NOT A COC VIOLATION ! Your going to a lawyer, so I am going to assume you can read. When you change your all important COC you need to POST it every-time it has been altered so no one can be accused of violating it....

Anyone who is not 100% out ragged at the POLICE STATE this country has become is a clueless, waste of life that should be supporting Obama !



(15) WE ADVOCATE FOR THE 'LAW-ABIDING' ONLY: Posts advocating illegal acts of any kind are NOT welcome here. Even if you feel that a law is unconstitutional we do not break it, we repeal it or defeat it in the courts.

HOW ARE YOU GONNA DEFEAT UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAWS IN THE COURTS WHEN THE SUPREME COURT IS ADVOCATING FOR A POLICE STATE & TAKING AWAY OUR RIGHTS ????????????? Answer That 1 LAWYER !
 
Last edited:

OldCurlyWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2010
Messages
907
Location
Oklahoma
Don't forget to mention that these officers have been arrested for their criminal activity.


IF the article posted was reasonably accurate, no, they were not. There should also be a charge of Manslaughter at a bare minimum. Then add under color of authority and that brings it up to the equivalent of murder without premeditation.
 
Last edited:

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
IF the article posted was reasonably accurate, no, they were not [arrested]...

Reread the article. They were indicted. They may not have been thrown-down-on-the-pavement-and-cuffed-type arrested, but, at the very least, they had to turn themselves in and were booked. They were arrested. I would have thought that the charges would be stiffer, but the grand jury heard the case against the officers and chose the charges.
 

papa bear

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2010
Messages
2,222
Location
mayberry, nc
From the article:
"In concluding "there is no right to reasonably resist unlawful entry by police officers," the Indiana Supreme Court cited the potential for violence when citizens fail to comply with illegal demands by armed government agents."


Thank God I live in Virginia where this does not apply. We do have the right to resist illegal actions by officers of the law who are clearly acting illegally under the color of law. There is case law to back this up.

what would you do to stop them? anything you do could give them probable cause. you can't touch them, or point a gun in their direction. if you do you have broken a law. sorry to lazy to cite.


BTW, this is one instance where the ACLU got it right, IMO
 
Last edited:

Thundar

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
4,946
Location
Newport News, Virginia, USA
A clear answer from the Declaration of Independence.
when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

COMMENTS REMOVED BY ADMINISTRATOR: Calls for insurrection are not welcome here.


--Moderator Statement--
This response definitely crosses the line and violates OCDO rules.


OK, LISTEN UP !!! I WAS NOT CALLING FOR, IN SIGHTING OR ADVOCATING FOR AN INSURRECTION / REBELLION / OR CIVL WAR........I WAS MERELY SAYING ONE IS MORE THAN LIKELY POTENTIAL AROUND THE CORNER, DUE TO STUFF LIKE WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY POSTED !!! ! I also said the SMART PEOPLE should prepare for such an eventuality ! I think it's funny you get all bent out of shape for something that WAS NOT A COC VIOLATION ! Your going to a lawyer, so I am going to assume you can read. When you change your all important COC you need to POST it every-time it has been altered so no one can be accused of violating it....

Anyone who is not 100% out ragged at the POLICE STATE this country has become is a clueless, waste of life that should be supporting Obama !



(15) WE ADVOCATE FOR THE 'LAW-ABIDING' ONLY: Posts advocating illegal acts of any kind are NOT welcome here. Even if you feel that a law is unconstitutional we do not break it, we repeal it or defeat it in the courts.

HOW ARE YOU GONNA DEFEAT UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAWS IN THE COURTS WHEN THE SUPREME COURT IS ADVOCATING FOR A POLICE STATE & TAKING AWAY OUR RIGHTS ????????????? Answer That 1 LAWYER !
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
When on the private property of someone else (OCDO) it is best to follow their rules and not insult them. Too that is simple courtesy.

I've yet to see a Social Lounge thread locked, but I'll bet it could happen.
 

John Pierce

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
May 5, 2006
Messages
1,777
OK, LISTEN UP !!! I WAS NOT CALLING FOR, IN SIGHTING OR ADVOCATING FOR AN INSURRECTION / REBELLION / OR CIVL WAR........I WAS MERELY SAYING ONE IS MORE THAN LIKELY POTENTIAL AROUND THE CORNER, DUE TO STUFF LIKE WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY POSTED !!! ! I also said the SMART PEOPLE should prepare for such an eventuality ! I think it's funny you get all bent out of shape for something that WAS NOT A COC VIOLATION !

I did not get bent out of shape. I simply edited the post to remove a comment I felt did not reflect well on our mission here at OpenCarry.org. Bent out of shape would be a ban and you are not banned.

Your going to a lawyer, so I am going to assume you can read. When you change your all important COC you need to POST it every-time it has been altered so no one can be accused of violating it....

I am not sure what you mean by COC. I will assume you mean TOS or Forum Rules? If so, the applicable rules are:

(2) RIGHT TO EDIT AND DELETE POSTS: We reserve the right to edit or remove posts for any reason, at any time, at our sole discretion.

and

(15) WE ADVOCATE FOR THE 'LAW-ABIDING' ONLY: Posts advocating illegal acts of any kind are NOT welcome here. Even if you feel that a law is unconstitutional we do not break it, we repeal it or defeat it in the courts.

Anyone who is not 100% out ragged at the POLICE STATE this country has become is a clueless, waste of life that should be supporting Obama !

Two things ... first, we ARE all outraged by these examples of the 4th Amendment being trashed. But that is not the same as saying that a revolution is imminent. And second, there are plenty of pro-gun, pro-4th Amendment people who did vote for President Obama. We need to reach out to all of those who will work with us to enhance our rights.

HOW ARE YOU GONNA DEFEAT UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAWS IN THE COURTS WHEN THE SUPREME COURT IS ADVOCATING FOR A POLICE STATE & TAKING AWAY OUR RIGHTS ????????????? Answer That 1 LAWYER !

The Supreme Court has taken the wrong stance on issues before and they will do so again. There is a saying that "Bad facts make bad law" and that is what has happened here. Remember that the Supreme Court has, at times in history, upheld slavery, denial of the right to vote, and many other infringements that would seem unbelievable in today's light. We proceed as did those who lost those cases ... by changing societal pressures and beliefs to insure that new justices are more amenable to civil rights and overturn the bad decisions. It is that simple. It is a long and arduous battle but it has the benefit of being a winnable battle and one that allows us all to live long lives to see the grandchildren we will be passing the benefits on to.

Now compare that to the options you seem to feel are inevitable that lead only to chaos and tragedy. :banghead:
 

stainless1911

Banned
Joined
Dec 19, 2009
Messages
8,855
Location
Davisburg, Michigan, United States
Admin, I have always been a little puzzled about OCDOs stance on a civil war. Im not trying to go head to head with you here, but I think that such an insurrection would not be illegal in the eyes of the forefathers, IMO, if we brought them here in a time machine, they would become the leaders and generals in such a war, starting it immediately. They instructed us to conduct one long before things would deteriorate as far as they already have. It would be tragic yes, and obviously illegal, the new american .gov doesnt want to be overthrown, but the forefathers told us to overthrow it. The .gov has created a system that only works for them. Only certain people that fit the mold can be elected, only certain things that those filtered electorates can be presented to us for a vote, and if the people vote for, or want the opportunity to vote for something that is obviously the will of the people, the .gov will override it, ignore it or squash it. Consider the health care plan, the bailout, foreign oil, prohibition, the patriot act, rampant censorship, a standing army of LEO, and many many more.


................--Moderator Statement--
Consider that this is a line of discussion does NOT fit within the parameters of OCDO.


There should be no confusion about this. OCDO is about promoting/defending OC primarily and RKBA as a secondary consideration. That is the limit - there is no entering certain arenas even if one might feel justified in connecting the dots in that order.
 
Last edited:

Brion

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2011
Messages
160
Location
Goldsboro, NC
I'm scared to ask but I'm going to. What would happen, if I'm sober blowing 0.00 and police break into my home, and knowing such activity was going to happen, I grab my firearm and defend my home. i.e. neutralize the situation. North Carolina CC class stays that someone actively braking into your home to commit what you believe to be a felony you can defend against with deadly force.

I don't know what they were gonna do to me when they got in. And was is unlawfull arrest fall under?

Anyway, I'm sick and tired of citizens getting shot for stuff like this. What happens if all this went down just like it says only instead the homeowner did have a weapon, took cover and two LEOs died?
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
The key will be what you reasonably believe. If you reasonably believe that you are defending yourself against dangerous criminals, then you would be right to shoot. However, the truth of this will be established at a jury trial many months afterward, with every detail of the situation scrutinized by an unfriendly police department and prosecutor.

If you know that the people breaking in are LEOs, it's going to be nigh onto impossible to prove a reasonable belief that justifies a self-defense shooting.
 
Top