• 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.

Kinda stiff fine for brandishing

thebigsd

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
3,535
Location
Quarryville, PA
Yep, he definitely deserved that fine. He had absolutely no reason to pull that gun out. He should be happy his penalty wasn't worse, they could have shot him.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
Yep, he definitely deserved that fine. He had absolutely no reason to pull that gun out. He should be happy his penalty wasn't worse, they could have shot him.

Really?

The article didn't give much detail. A group of Feds from an agency I never heard of, came to his home....

Fill in the blanks for me since you have inside information???:question:
 

thebigsd

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
3,535
Location
Quarryville, PA
Really?

The article didn't give much detail. A group of Feds from an agency I never heard of, came to his home....

Fill in the blanks for me since you have inside information???:question:

Just going off of what is in the article. Sounds like it went to court and then he was subsequently sentenced. If they had had guns drawn first maybe I could see it. He drew first on federal agents.

The DCIS work under the Inspector General.

http://www.dodig.mil/inv/dcis/

This article gives a little more information.

http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/...a-owner-fined-250000-drawing-gun--ar-1146172/

Like I said the penalty could have been much worse. He could of been given jail time or could have been shot in response to his drawing a weapon. If the details change to show some legitimate reason for him to draw his weapon I will change my opinion accordingly.
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
Just going off of what is in the article. Sounds like it went to court and then he was subsequently sentenced. If they had had guns drawn first maybe I could see it. He drew first on federal agents.

The DCIS work under the Inspector General.

http://www.dodig.mil/inv/dcis/

This article gives a little more information.

http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/...a-owner-fined-250000-drawing-gun--ar-1146172/

Like I said the penalty could have been much worse. He could of been given jail time or could have been shot in response to his drawing a weapon. If the details change to show some legitimate reason for him to draw his weapon I will change my opinion accordingly.

While the news stories provide scant detail, there seems to be a "between the lines" matter of under what authority the two agents were on the gentleman's property while investigating an alleged crime relating to the gentleman's nephew. That matter is the presence or absence of a warrant. Absent a warrant one may tell officers of the government to go pound sand on their way to getting off your property. Depending on their response to your instruction to get off the property and the invitation to do other things as well, there might arise any of a number of situations where the production of a handgun might be both prudent and legal. On the other hand there are probably more situations where the production of a handgun is neither prudent nor legal. In any case, the "sending a message" seems to be juist that - sending a message that one had better not, under any circumstances, do anything but bow to the might and majesty of the government and its minions.

With the absence of any details we will probably never know if the agents had the actual authority to invade the gentleman's property, or if their behavior in doing so sans a warrant would have made a reasonable/prudent person believe he was faced with the imminent and unlawful threat of death or bodily injury.

What I find most telling is the government's (prosecutor and judge) attitude that this gentleman "belongs" in prison but they do not want to incur the cost of treating his medical needs so instead they will slap him with the largest fine they can.

stay safe.
 

t33j

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2009
Messages
1,384
Location
King George, VA
Suppose he was unprovoked and completely in the wrong. $250k would be absurd for anyone with a typical middle class salary but the article says he owned a marina. Perhaps the fine amount was a consequence of his economic status and tailored to him personally.

Just pointing it out, not really saying I agree with it or not.
 
Last edited:

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
Suppose he was unprovoked and completely in the wrong. $250k would be absurd for anyone with a typical middle class salary but the article says he owned a marina. Perhaps the fine amount was a consequence of his economic status and tailored to him personally.

Just pointing it out, not really saying I agree with it or not.

Fines and other judicially imposed punishments are not supposed to be "tailored" to the economic status of the defendant. They are supposed to be within the guidelines of the, in this case, federal sentencing guidelines.

We have no idea if the punishment was within the guidelines or not, and since I'm not being paid to do so I'm not going to go look them up. Apparently the gentleman is willing to accept what the court dished out.

stay safe.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
Suppose he was unprovoked and completely in the wrong. $250k would be absurd for anyone with a typical middle class salary but the article says he owned a marina. Perhaps the fine amount was a consequence of his economic status and tailored to him personally.

Just pointing it out, not really saying I agree with it or not.

I think everyone who posted is right to some degree considering what we know TJ.

There are three issues though.

First, would he be convicted if not killed. Absolutely! That's a fight you won't win even if you win the gunfight.

Second, was he justified. Skidmark said it all.

This fellow violated my golden rule. Never try to intimidate someone with a gun. Pull the gun and pull the trigger...period.
The old adages still apply. Draw me not without reason, sheath me not without honor.

Last is his age. There are very few good things about getting older but one, especially when you know you're near the end...is that you an put honor above reason or fear, because there's very little to lose. The fellow was 79.
I doubt he cares about a fine because I doubt he pays it.
I doubt he would care about jail time because that just makes the Feds pay for the funeral.
I doubt he cares about being killed because it beats going in a hospital bed.

I'd say the agents were the lucky ones!
 
Last edited:

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
Alright, I concede that I made the assumption that he was unprovoked. Please beat me up and then accept me back into the community. ;-)

All is forgiven!:eek:

images
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
Some people have a line thgat they won't allow anyone to cross. This includes the Government.

A RUGGED Australian rancher whose feats of survival in the Outback inspired the movie character Crocodile Dundee was killed in a shootout, policesaid yesterday.
From his hiding place in the bushes along a highway, Rodney William Ansell, 44, ambushed and killed Sergeant Glen Huitson. Another officer returned fire, killing Ansell, 30 miles south of the Northern Territory capital of Darwin. His barefoot body was found with two high-powered rifles.
Officers had spent the previous 12 hours searching for a man who had attacked a nearby house on Monday, injuring two people. Assistant police commissioner John Daulby said it was thought Ansell was responsible for that attack too.
Ansell became a local hero in 1977 after being swept out to sea and landing on a small island with nothing but wallabies and cattle to sustain him for two months. Only a visit by an Aboriginal tribe saved him. His exploits were celebrated in a book and a documentary film.
Ansell's story inspired actor Paul Hogan to write Crocodile Dundee. The film, in which Hogan starred, became an international hit in 1986.
Much of the humour was inspired by Ansell's book tour in Sydney. He reportedly insisted in sleeping in his sleeping bag in a five-star hotel and was mystified by the bidet, a scene recreated in the movie, which was followed by a 1988 sequel.
But Ansell's fortunes fell sharply. Financial difficulties forced him to sell his Melaleuca ranch in the early 1990s, and he blamed the government for not compensating him properly during a disease eradication programme that cost him 3,000 head of cattle. He was also reportedly bitter that he never profited financially from the movies. In 1992, Ansell was convicted of stealing cattle and fined for assaulting a rancher.
Then, on Monday night, police responded to reports that a man had fired shots at locals.On Tuesday two officers were preparing to dismantle a road block they had set up to capture the attacker, when a motorist stopped to ask for directions.
Suddenly shots flew from a roadside bush, injuring the motorist and piercing Sgt Huitson's bulletproof vest. His partner returned fire, killing Ansell.
The attack left police baffled. "If this person wanted to secret himself he could have easily done that, if he wanted to escape he could have easily done that. He was a bushman," assistant commissioner Daulby said.
 

user

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,516
Location
Northern Piedmont
Sorry, "special agents."

Exactly, merely employees of a federal agency. And, if the property owner ordered them off and they didn't go, then they're merely criminals. If that happened, and they, for whatever reason, pulled guns on him without retreating, then he was entirely within his rights to blow them away, much less brandish the firearm. But, as has been observed, I am not in possession of the facts, and am merely speculating. But the point is that a person who pulls a gun in the commission of a criminal offense does not have the "perfect" right to self-defense, but the "imperfect" right. That means he cannot be considered "innocent" unless he has cancelled his part in the instigation of the ruckus and has retreated to the point where he cannot retreat further before he is entitled to use deadly force in self-defense.

By the way, it's not all that steep a fine. The maximum fine is $2,500.00, and people get fines for misdemeanors in that range as a usual thing. I'm surprised it wasn't steeper, given a conviction.

Say, does anyone know whether this guy had an attorney, and if so, who that attorney was?
 
Last edited:
Top