Man Arrested Near Capitol After IED, Rifle, Ammunition Allegedly Found in Jeep

[nitrovic]

imported post

Doug Huffman wrote:

nitrovic wrote:

Doug Huffman wrote:

Overflowing with irony.

They've all been rendered safe right now because they're in the custody of Capitol Police,

Where is the irony?:uhoh:

A sting - badabump - stung! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony

First one must know what is 'irony'. I would not expect a flatfoot to know such a literary thing.

Flatfoot?? Dang, how old are you Doug???:lol:

 

[nitrovic]

imported post

I don't understand how this thread went from a story about police doing a seemingly good job protecting the public and our elected officials to borderline police bashing. What's that all about?

 

[PT111]

imported post

nitrovic wrote:

I don't understand who this thread went from a story about police doing a seemingly good job protecting the public and our elected officials to borderline police bashing. What's that all about?

Just the natural progression of threads on this board.

 

[Thundar]

imported post

So what did this guy do wrong?

 

[Sonora Rebel]

imported post

Thundar wrote:

So what did this guy do wrong?

Well... he rigged explosives (IED's) by puttin' 'powder' in a grenade body with a firecracker for the detonator. That's totally illegal anywhere.

The 'AK"... Not somethin' you'd take onna huntin' trip... altho ya could I guess. 'Looks like this guy was a 'goof' rather than somebody who'd taken the wrong turn off 95.

 

[Sonora Rebel]

imported post

Thundar wrote:

So what did this guy do wrong?

Apparently eveerything.

 

[Thundar]

imported post

Sonora Rebel wrote:

Thundar wrote:

So what did this guy do wrong?

Well... he rigged explosives (IED's) by puttin' 'powder' in a grenade body with a firecracker for the detonator. That's totally illegal anywhere.

The 'AK"... Not somethin' you'd take onna huntin' trip... altho ya could I guess. 'Looks like this guy was a 'goof' rather than somebody who'd taken the wrong turn off 95.

I understand what the law says about explosives, but putting that aside, what did he do wrong?

 

[FightingGlock19]

imported post

Thundar wrote:

Sonora Rebel wrote:

Thundar wrote:

So what did this guy do wrong?

Well... he rigged explosives (IED's) by puttin' 'powder' in a grenade body with a firecracker for the detonator. That's totally illegal anywhere.

The 'AK"... Not somethin' you'd take onna huntin' trip... altho ya could I guess. 'Looks like this guy was a 'goof' rather than somebody who'd taken the wrong turn off 95.

I understand what the law says about explosives, but putting that aside, what did he do wrong?

Why leave out he had explosives? Why be so trusting of people, in general? Just because the guy is a civilian and had guns in his Jeep doesn't automatically make him a good guy.

 

[41 Magnum]

imported post

Near the capitol.........WITH a home-rigged hand grenade?That's plenty wrong right there. At that point the rifle is just window dressing.

Hell, I doubt anyonewith the proper license is stupidenough togo near the capitol with dynamite, and then stop and ask for directions, without thinking about the possible ramifications.

 

[Doug Huffman]

imported post

The news reports are of 'powder'. We don't trust the lamestream media to properly identify a firearm, why would they properly identify an unknown substance of powdery consistency when they call vinegar and baking soda in a soda bottle a "bomb"?

The cops have no commission to personally protect the public and exercise their power only for the benefit of the tyrant leviathan and its sycophants.

 

[41 Magnum]

imported post

I'm not saying that they are right. But would anyone you know do what he did and expect anything else? The capitol building? With a possibly live grenade? Even a drilled out hollow one will get you more attention than you would ever want.

Before I get jumped on as an anti-freedom troll: Look, they took it slowly over a200 year span, we're going to have to take it back piece by piece, or risk a revolution. Not that it should be this way, it just is. I'd rather try the slow and steady way first. You dohave to admit that since the sunset of the AWB, we ARE making very steady progress. I.e.: massive CCW expansion, SCOTUS(both judges and decisions), we told the UN where to get off, etc.

 

[Doug Huffman]

imported post

Tolerance is trivial for those with no convictions.

 

[Armed]

imported post

Ya gotta admit - if the guy was even the least bit politically aware of theanti-gun situation in DC.... why the hell wouldhe stop a DC cop to ask for directions with *anything* that might suggest that he has weapons in hisvehicle - in open sight?!

The story simply validates my suspicion that he's a nut-job looking for trouble.

 

[nitrovic]

imported post

Doug Huffman wrote:

The news reports are of 'powder'. We don't trust the lamestream media to properly identify a firearm, why would they properly identify an unknown substance of powdery consistency when they call vinegar and baking soda in a soda bottle a "bomb"?

The cops have no commission to personally protect the public and exercise their power only for the benefit of the tyrant leviathan and its sycophants.

:uhoh:, tell that to the cops who ran in the burning buildings on 9-11 to save civilians.

 

[DreQo]

imported post

There's no need for us to support this guy. If a man stopped and asked a cop for directions tomy house with an illegal make-shift grenade in his car, I'd hope they'd do something about it! Trying to turn this into a 2nd amendment violation is not smart, and it makes us all look bad.

I am curious about what the guy's intentions and state of mind were, though. I'm guessing he's either just that dumb to think that he wasn't doing anything wrong, he was planning on doing something bad with the weapons, or he thinks he's going to be able to sue over rights violations and make some money.

 

[DreQo]

imported post

double-tap

 

[Phoenixphire]

imported post

Just making a point here....


There is a bit of hypocrisy that occurs here.

People rage on about how the right to keep and bear arms should not be infringed, but when this story comes around, people start jumping on the "he must be a nut" bandwagon.

One: None of these news articles state that the individual had made any threats, or was any danger to anyone.

Two: He was in possession of a grenade, a longarm, a sidearm. None of these items would be something that a solider would not have.

Three: He has no criminal record, other than the "crime" of possessing a firearm and grenade without a permit.



SO, for all of you who claim that the right to keep and bear arms should not be infringed:

What has he done, that he does not have a right to do? Furthermore, this right is protected under the Constitution. What law, that meets the requirements of the Constitution, has he violated?

 

[Doug Huffman]

imported post

nitrovic wrote:

, tell that to the cops who ran in the burning buildings on 9-11 to save civilians[sic].

Fellow citizens, fool. I was military and retired from the DoD/DoN. Now we are citizens.

I wonder how many citizens perished in the WTC on 9/11/91 after running in to save their fellows?

Either we are equal or we are not......

Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth.

 

[Grapeshot]

imported post

DreQo wrote:

There's no need for us to support this guy. If a man stopped and asked a cop for directions tomy house with an illegal make-shift grenade in his car, I'd hope they'd do something about it! Trying to turn this into a 2nd amendment violation is not smart, and it makes us all look bad.

I am curious about what the guy's intentions and state of mind were, though. I'm guessing he's either just that dumb to think that he wasn't doing anything wrong, he was planning on doing something bad with the weapons, or he thinks he's going to be able to sue over rights violations and make some money.

Sometimes I think we are too quick to jump to the defense of someone because of our perceived notions when firearms are mentioned in a news release - this is a good case in point. If some of the early observations/opinions prove to be rash statements, we run the risk of tainting our image and thereby diminish the value of what we say and do here. It's the Chicken Little thing.

It is far better to gather information, ask questions, even hypothicize but don't jump to defend nor condemn too early - it just serves to further enhance any negative ideas anyone my have of this group. That's just IMHO.

Yata hey

 

[DreQo]

imported post

Grapeshot wrote:

DreQo wrote:

There's no need for us to support this guy. If a man stopped and asked a cop for directions tomy house with an illegal make-shift grenade in his car, I'd hope they'd do something about it! Trying to turn this into a 2nd amendment violation is not smart, and it makes us all look bad.

I am curious about what the guy's intentions and state of mind were, though. I'm guessing he's either just that dumb to think that he wasn't doing anything wrong, he was planning on doing something bad with the weapons, or he thinks he's going to be able to sue over rights violations and make some money.

Sometimes I think we are too quick to jump to the defense of someone because of our perceived notions when firearms are mentioned in a news release - this is a good case in point. If some of the early observations/opinions prove to be rash statements, we run the risk of tainting our image and thereby diminish the value of what we say and do here. It's the Chicken Little thing.

It is far better to gather information, ask questions, even hypothicize but don't jump to defend nor condemn too early - it just serves to further enhance any negative ideas anyone my have of this group. That's just IMHO.

Yata hey

Well put, Grapeshot. I may be condemning this one a little too quickly. I think it is safe to say, however, that the man lacks common sense at the very least.