AbNo
Regular Member
imported post
Glock34 wrote:
Glock34 wrote:
Ever seen the movie Snatch? You know, the night before the Pikeys move out?
-
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.
-
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.
Oregan Swat raid man who was fired and bought firearms..
- Thread starter jwidman
- Start date
deepdiver
Campaign Veteran
imported post
Certainly on some levels this is scary but in other ways it reinforces that we are a nation a laws and, hopefully at the end of this, that the system works. While the LEO seem to have been awfully heavy handed in their "proactive" approach he was released and he did get his property back quickly and he is pursuing legal recourse. That is how our system is designed to work. Our system does not guarantee that the gov't won't overstep but it does have recourse for when they do.
Certainly on some levels this is scary but in other ways it reinforces that we are a nation a laws and, hopefully at the end of this, that the system works. While the LEO seem to have been awfully heavy handed in their "proactive" approach he was released and he did get his property back quickly and he is pursuing legal recourse. That is how our system is designed to work. Our system does not guarantee that the gov't won't overstep but it does have recourse for when they do.
45acpForMe
Newbie
imported post
We are of course just speculating on why the police decided to monitor him and call in swat. The circumstances of his disgruntlement and any threats or implied threats could have caused this. I just want to make sure the gubbermant doesn't make this standard operating procedure for situations that don't call for this type of force.
While we have a recourse after the government oversteps the defined boundaries, that doesn't help someone if they shoot first and ask questions later. Thankfully they talked to him first on the phone and didn't apply a no-knock warrant at 3am.
Hopefully more facts will come out and either he will sue the government or it will be revealed that the police had good and sufficient reason to act the way they did. After all if they found suicide notes explaining why he was going to kill everyone at his office, this proactive action may just have saved lives.
We are of course just speculating on why the police decided to monitor him and call in swat. The circumstances of his disgruntlement and any threats or implied threats could have caused this. I just want to make sure the gubbermant doesn't make this standard operating procedure for situations that don't call for this type of force.
While we have a recourse after the government oversteps the defined boundaries, that doesn't help someone if they shoot first and ask questions later. Thankfully they talked to him first on the phone and didn't apply a no-knock warrant at 3am.
Hopefully more facts will come out and either he will sue the government or it will be revealed that the police had good and sufficient reason to act the way they did. After all if they found suicide notes explaining why he was going to kill everyone at his office, this proactive action may just have saved lives.
BARELY ILLEGAL
Regular Member
imported post
Glock34 wrote:
[sarc]Why goodness, no, our Constitution is still in effect and our republic is sound; there's no need to discuss such things. I'm sure this was just a one-time fluke occurance:[/sarc]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-nuKOwB4Dw
Glock34 wrote:
[sarc]Why goodness, no, our Constitution is still in effect and our republic is sound; there's no need to discuss such things. I'm sure this was just a one-time fluke occurance:[/sarc]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-nuKOwB4Dw
Citizen
Founder's Club Member
imported post
kwikrnu wrote:
I am reminded that US vs Mendenhall has something relevant to say:
We conclude that a person has been "seized" within the meaning of theFourth Amendmentonly if, in view of all of the circumstances surrounding the incident, a reasonable person would have believed that he was not free to leave. Examples of circumstances that might indicate a seizure, even where the person did not attempt to leave, would be the threatening presence of several officers, the display of a weapon by an officer, some physical touching of the person of the citizen, or the use of language or tone of voice indicating that compliance with the officer's request might be compelled. (emphasis added by Citizen).
Heh, heh, heh. I cannot imagine a SWAT team arrayed tactically in your front lawn wouldn't amount "the threatening presence of several officers." Nor, can I imagine a SWAT team deployed without "display of a weapon by an officer."
kwikrnu wrote:
I am reminded that US vs Mendenhall has something relevant to say:
We conclude that a person has been "seized" within the meaning of theFourth Amendmentonly if, in view of all of the circumstances surrounding the incident, a reasonable person would have believed that he was not free to leave. Examples of circumstances that might indicate a seizure, even where the person did not attempt to leave, would be the threatening presence of several officers, the display of a weapon by an officer, some physical touching of the person of the citizen, or the use of language or tone of voice indicating that compliance with the officer's request might be compelled. (emphasis added by Citizen).
Heh, heh, heh. I cannot imagine a SWAT team arrayed tactically in your front lawn wouldn't amount "the threatening presence of several officers." Nor, can I imagine a SWAT team deployed without "display of a weapon by an officer."
AbNo
Regular Member
imported post
45acpForMe wrote:
How do we know this guy wasn't fired because a hoplophobe coworker heard about an intended purchase or a mail order that was arriving at the shop?
His Brady Bunch boss hears about this (directly or through a coworker), places the guy on leave, then calls the cops and LIES to them about how he was acting.
All because the guy is afraid of inanimate objects.
Say it can't happen? Want to buy a bridge?
45acpForMe wrote:
Actually, this made me think of something.
How do we know this guy wasn't fired because a hoplophobe coworker heard about an intended purchase or a mail order that was arriving at the shop?
His Brady Bunch boss hears about this (directly or through a coworker), places the guy on leave, then calls the cops and LIES to them about how he was acting.
All because the guy is afraid of inanimate objects.
Say it can't happen? Want to buy a bridge?
altajava
Newbie
imported post
AbNo wrote
AbNo wrote
This scenario makes more sense than the disgruntled employee who needs an intervention. When has a PD ever returned firearms in 24 hours, in any situation, much less a situation that was described in the original article. Somebody screwed the pooch big time and I don't think it was Mr. Pyles.
kwikrnu
Banned
imported post
altajava wrote:
I think itis something special fora department to return guns w/o a court order.I would guess theyusually make it as hard as they can.
altajava wrote:
I think itis something special fora department to return guns w/o a court order.I would guess theyusually make it as hard as they can.
imported post
In oregon there is NO waiting period like california, you can walk in to a gun store and after a back ground phone check to state police you can walk out of gun store with as many guns as you want, thats right ak47, and asault weapons are legal in the state of oregon the laws are different here, not like california.
In oregon there is NO waiting period like california, you can walk in to a gun store and after a back ground phone check to state police you can walk out of gun store with as many guns as you want, thats right ak47, and asault weapons are legal in the state of oregon the laws are different here, not like california.
Interceptor_Knight
Regular Member
imported post
Por.308 wrote:
Actually, AK47s and other fully automatic assault weapons are regulated by the NFA...
You must be referring to WASR 10s and other semiautomatic rifles based on the AK platform and other semiautomatic sporting rifles based on the AR15, etc....:dude:
Por.308 wrote:
Actually, AK47s and other fully automatic assault weapons are regulated by the NFA...
You must be referring to WASR 10s and other semiautomatic rifles based on the AK platform and other semiautomatic sporting rifles based on the AR15, etc....:dude:
GLOCK21GB
Campaign Veteran
imported post
Interceptor_Knight wrote:
Interceptor_Knight wrote:
:lol:.....roflPor.308 wrote:
Actually, AK47s and other fully automatic assault weapons are regulated by the NFA...
You must be referring to WASR 10s and other semiautomatic rifles based on the AK platform and other semiautomatic sporting rifles based on the AR15, etc....:dude:
Interceptor_Knight
Regular Member
imported post
Por.308 wrote:
If it's semi only, it ain't an AK47...
The firearms you are referring to have different nomenclature. Calling a Maadi, a MAK-90, or a WASR, etc semiautomatic sporting rifle an "assault rifle" is using the language of the antis. Calling them all AK47s in news reports makes it sound like they are all machine guns.
Por.308 wrote:
If it's semi only, it ain't an AK47...
The firearms you are referring to have different nomenclature. Calling a Maadi, a MAK-90, or a WASR, etc semiautomatic sporting rifle an "assault rifle" is using the language of the antis. Calling them all AK47s in news reports makes it sound like they are all machine guns.
Sonora Rebel
Regular Member
imported post
I own a 24 year old Norinco Type 56 S-1.Enough time forit to aquire certain egonomic an functionalfeatures that send the Bradyites into a tiz. I call it an 'AK"... 'cause nobody knows what a Type 56 S-1 is. At any rate... I see such a major lawsuit here as to stagger the mind. Firstly from whoever dropped the dime on him in the first place. Did they sign a swornaffidavit? There seems to have been no warrent issued (or considered). Did Medford PD initiate this on their own? On hearsay from a complainant?
So there this guy is... surrounded byJBT's pointin' guns at him 'n possibly someone on a bullhorn. No crime committed... but they take him away... enter his home and sieze his property (under duress) w/o warrent. I've been to Medford several times many moons ago. 'Seems like a nice little town. 'Soon to be 'Pylesville' after this one tho...
I own a 24 year old Norinco Type 56 S-1.Enough time forit to aquire certain egonomic an functionalfeatures that send the Bradyites into a tiz. I call it an 'AK"... 'cause nobody knows what a Type 56 S-1 is. At any rate... I see such a major lawsuit here as to stagger the mind. Firstly from whoever dropped the dime on him in the first place. Did they sign a swornaffidavit? There seems to have been no warrent issued (or considered). Did Medford PD initiate this on their own? On hearsay from a complainant?
So there this guy is... surrounded byJBT's pointin' guns at him 'n possibly someone on a bullhorn. No crime committed... but they take him away... enter his home and sieze his property (under duress) w/o warrent. I've been to Medford several times many moons ago. 'Seems like a nice little town. 'Soon to be 'Pylesville' after this one tho...
B
Bikenut
Guest
imported post
Could this whole incident be a trial balloon for how things could go if national health care is passed?
Nope, I'm not paranoid, just been watching how things have been going since the last election.
Could this whole incident be a trial balloon for how things could go if national health care is passed?
Nope, I'm not paranoid, just been watching how things have been going since the last election.
Alexcabbie
Regular Member
imported post
Grab a guy on his own front lawn, cufff him, stuff him, carry him to the nuthouse and sieze his property "for safekeeping" without so much as a by-your-leave? Because he stomped out of the office after being "placed on leave" contemplating termination?
Whatever boneheaded commander okayed this - words fail me - utter violation of just about every right a common citizen has should be fired and I am not sure that criminal charges of abuse of authority might not apply here.
And, needless to say he should file a lawsuit for at least eight figures Make it nine. I will betcha there are rivers of drool pouring out of law offices up and down the State as they dream about representing this poor schmoe.....:cuss:
Grab a guy on his own front lawn, cufff him, stuff him, carry him to the nuthouse and sieze his property "for safekeeping" without so much as a by-your-leave? Because he stomped out of the office after being "placed on leave" contemplating termination?
Whatever boneheaded commander okayed this - words fail me - utter violation of just about every right a common citizen has should be fired and I am not sure that criminal charges of abuse of authority might not apply here.
And, needless to say he should file a lawsuit for at least eight figures Make it nine. I will betcha there are rivers of drool pouring out of law offices up and down the State as they dream about representing this poor schmoe.....:cuss:
AbNo
Regular Member
imported post
Sonora Rebel wrote:
The Chinese are about the only people to use the "Type" descriptor for their rifles.
Type-81, Type-95 (QBZ95), Type 56, Type 63, Type 86S, Type 88,
See also: Type 54 pistol,
Also, Norinco is a commonly-known maker of Chinese knock-offs.
Sonora Rebel wrote:
Type-56: Chinese Made.
The Chinese are about the only people to use the "Type" descriptor for their rifles.
Type-81, Type-95 (QBZ95), Type 56, Type 63, Type 86S, Type 88,
See also: Type 54 pistol,
Also, Norinco is a commonly-known maker of Chinese knock-offs.
AbNo
Regular Member
imported post
Ah, cripe! double post!
Alexcabbie wrote:
Ah, cripe! double post!
Alexcabbie wrote:
See the sixth post on this page.
GLOCK21GB
Campaign Veteran
imported post
AbNo wrote:
AbNo wrote:
Norinco makes the best Knock offs, specially the older Milled receiver models.Sonora Rebel wrote:Type-56: Chinese Made.
The Chinese are about the only people to use the "Type" descriptor for their rifles.
Type-81, Type-95 (QBZ95), Type 56, Type 63, Type 86S, Type 88,
See also: Type 54 pistol,
Also, Norinco is a commonly-known maker of Chinese knock-offs.