Who NEEDS a Gun in Wisconsin

[Shotgun]

imported post

bnhcomputing wrote:

So that brings us back to my original set of questions, which I re-phrase:

He was NEVER disarmed, NEVER handcuffed, NEVER arrestedand he DID discharge his firearm.

1. Where did the rounds go? They have to be in somebodies property.

2. Why then was Para detained, disarmed, and arrested? Isn't this discrimination?

3. I gave two other examples, where we can argue the citizens "threatened" someone but isn't a verbal threat less violent than actually firing a weapon?

Not sure about the "NEVER disarmed" comment. The court record says"

"Defendant is not to possess any dangerous weapons during the pendency of the case." That order was given on 3/24/08 and the case was resolved on 7/16/08 with a judgment of conviction. So, in the court's opinion he was to be disarmed during that entire period.

And Pointman, the record DOES show that the "weapons enhancer" was dismissed. If you click on the "court records events" link for his case it gives greater detail. Since he initially made a not guilty plea, but eventually changed it to "guilty" I think it's reasonable to infer that a deal was worked out with the DA. The DA made a motion to drop the enhancer in exchange for the guilty plea.

 

[bnhcomputing]

imported post

Shotgun wrot

Not sure about the "NEVER disarmed" comment. The court record says"

"Defendant is not to possess any dangerous weapons during the pendency of the case." That order was given on 3/24/08 and the case was resolved on 7/16/08 with a judgment of conviction. So, in the court's opinion he was to be disarmed during that entire period.

And Pointman, the record DOES show that the "weapons enhancer" was dismissed. If you click on the "court records events" link for his case it gives greater detail. Since he initially made a not guilty plea, but eventually changed it to "guilty" I think it's reasonable to infer that a deal was worked out with the DA. The DA made a motion to drop the enhancer in exchange for the guilty plea.

Right. He fires the weapon on May 15,2007. He isn't "disarmed" until March 24, 2008. That's OVER ten (10) months. In the other two examples I cited, the accused were disarmed the same day.

Isn't that a double standard?

 

[Shotgun]

imported post

Maybe somebody will want to get a copy of the criminal complaint. We don't know if the police were called the night he shot at the pole. Maybe the neighbors just wrote a letter to the department complaining, launching an investigation. If you're complaining that cop give other cops a break, it's no newsflash, they probably do! I've been pulled over for speeding 3 or 4 times, but have never been given a ticket. Looks like cops give non-cops a break sometimes too. Not all "discrimination" is illegal. Only when it's based on race, religion, sex, etc.