• 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.

Man Follows Biden's Advice, Gets Charged By Police and Rifle Confiscated

Gil223

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2012
Messages
1,392
Location
Weber County Utah
The news story goes, that Joe Biden once said:
"... put [up] that double barreled shotgun and fire two blasts outside the house.’ You don’t need an AR-15—it’s harder to aim, it’s harder to use, and in fact you don’t need 30 rounds to protect yourself. Buy a shotgun! Buy a shotgun!”

Well, this particular Oregon man (an Iraq and Afghanistan war veteran) didn’t use a shotgun. He actually had an AR-15. Someone was trying to break in the back door of his apartment on Sunday night, and he told the criminal that he was armed and that he would fire one and only one warning shot. “This is the end result,” he explained to a local news station. “You break into someone’s house, there’s consequences,” As Walter Sobchak from The Big Lebowski would have said, “You are entering a world of pain.”

As for the military vet who took Joe Biden’s advice, he was charged with Unlawful Use of a Weapon, Menacing, and Reckless Endangering. They also confiscated his rifle, because it was “used in the commission of a crime.”
Police said that there was no justification for what Thompson did in firing a warning shot. Since Thompson told the police that he was trying to protect his property, there was no legal reason for him to use lethal force. The only time a citizen may use deadly force is when he believes his life is in danger. I guess this is just what happens when you take the Vice President’s advice.
For details: http://politicaloutcast.com/2013/05...e-and-has-his-guns-confiscated/#ixzz2UtUEXH63

I guess Biden forgot to mention the "Upon arrival, the police will promptly charge you with a crime" part. Here's what PsMO... the weapon wasn't "used in the commission of a crime", it was used in the termination of a crime already in progress. Overlooking the fact that Biden is a farging idiot, how does "lethal force" find it's way into this scenario? In order to be considered "lethal/deadly", wouldn't the "force" need to be applied directly to some creature that could actually die? It sounds like the cops were just piling on as many charges as they could dream up. In the complete article it mentions that this activity took place in Oregon, but it doesn't mention the city (my guess would be northern Oregon, around the Salem-Portland area - that's where the left-wing loonies are concentrated). If this action took place in say, Grants Pass OR, and if the gun owner was charged with anything at all it would be something like "misdemeanor discharging a firearm within the city limits", and his punishment would be, "Say three Hail Armalite's, then go and sin no more." Apparently the cops in whatever town that was have no discretionary powers in their interpretation of what constitutes a crime, and they enforce the letter of the law, without regard for the law's intent. However, I suppose I should find such actions unsurprising, given the amount of pressure being brought to bear on firearms owners by the left-wing Administration and its minions in the DOJ and DoHS. :( Pax...



 

MKEgal

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
4,385
Location
in front of my computer, WI
Thompson told the police that he was trying to protect his property
Problem #1: he listened to Biden
Problem #2: he didn't know the laws in his state *
Problem #3: he talked to police more than simply to say "he was trying to break in even after he knew I was home, I was afraid he would try to kill me, I'll give a full statement once I've talked with my lawyer"

* would someone please post a link to the Oregon self-defense, property defense, & castle doctrine / stand your ground law(s), whichever exist?
 

Gil223

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2012
Messages
1,392
Location
Weber County Utah

joanie

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2013
Messages
306
Location
..
Wasn't that Biden's advise to women? I took it to mean that Biden was spearheading a program to arm women with shotguns. Still waiting for mine. I don't know if we're supposed to be talking about this, isn't this handgun discussion only? In any case, I might only get one shot with my break open 16ga, I'm going to do my best to make that one shot count.

Also I don't know if it's such a good idea to sound a warning, seems to me it just gives the intruder information to counter you with, or pinpoint your location.
 

We-the-People

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
2,222
Location
White City, Oregon, USA
This happened in my town.

There's more to this story than we know. The police have been reported as saying that they found no evidence of any attempted break in, we don't know what the homeowner said to police.....but we do know he is talking a lot and has given a news interview that I don't think was in his best interest.

He is charged with
166.220 Unlawful use of a weapon [FELONY] (but I don't think that will stick if he can get the attempted break in to the jury)
163.190 Menacing [CLASS A MISDEMEANOR]
163.195 Reckless endangerment [CLASS A MISDEMEANOR]

I suspect they'll try to get him to plead on Reckless endangerment, keep his weapon, and try to yank his firearms rights. At the moment we're not sure if he's gotten REAL representation or has a public defender.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,525
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
If I were his lawyer, I'd recommend holding out for a plea deal that will leave him with his RKBA intact. They will probably go for that to get this one over.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>
 

Gil223

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2012
Messages
1,392
Location
Weber County Utah
I don't know if we're supposed to be talking about this, isn't this handgun discussion only?
You have completely missed the point of this thread. It isn't about the particular type of firearm he used, it's about the attitude of the police toward an individual with a firearm. If he had chosen to use a handgun, the result would have been UNCHANGED - the same charges would be filed against him. This is the "News and Political Alerts" forum, and this article contains news that could have some impact on any of us.
:monkeyPax...
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,169
Location
earth's crust
Used to be in Louisiana you could shoot anyone on your property - that was it. On someone else's land? Taking your chances...

That's the way it should be. Clear & concise, no "well, you could have done this or that"

Wonder if its still that way in LA...
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,525
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
I wonder if it ever was that way. Considering who made the assertion and the outlandish nature of the assertion, I'd bet no.
 

HP995

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2012
Messages
730
Location
MO, USA
This is ridiculous. I read that the guy attempting to break in ran into police and was arrested - yet the police want to go after victim with no evidence of attempt to break in.

Gil223: as many charges as they could dream up

Yes! It's dangerous to give a warning shot, I would hate to be hit by a stray warning shot, but if he fired into dirt and no one was hurt, their agenda is clear with all those charges.
 

We-the-People

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
2,222
Location
White City, Oregon, USA
The "system" always "piles on charges" so they can scare the defendant with big scary possible prison sentences. They do this even if they know they have no chance of winning (correction, no legal case, who knows what a jury will buy off on). Then they offer a "sweet" plea deal that fits with their political agenda (such as a charge that has no jail time, but pulls your RKBA).

95+ percent of all criminal cases never see a court room. If We The People demanded our right to trial the system would screech to a stop.
 

HP995

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2012
Messages
730
Location
MO, USA
The "system" always "piles on charges" so they can scare the defendant with big scary possible prison sentences. They do this even if they know they have no chance of winning (correction, no legal case, who knows what a jury will buy off on). Then they offer a "sweet" plea deal that fits with their political agenda (such as a charge that has no jail time, but pulls your RKBA).

Amen! Well put.

Let us know if you hear local updates on this?
 
Top