JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
so does this mean if the ATF fabricates a warrant to raid my place, they don't need a NO KNOCK warrant, they can shoot my watch geese and farm dogs first, then break in my doors? Just so happens I have metal doors with steel frames on all entrances, so they have justification to use heavy equipment to break in the metal frames and doors and since my disabled wife sleeps in the living room in her medical bed, but has a Smith 686 under her pillow, they are justified in shooting her first before my son or I respond to the noise?
Justification? Absolutely not, but that doesn't mean they'll be held accountable. Ruby Ridge, Waco, and Malheur have shown us that big government will protect their assassins every time. The dice are loaded, and the house always wins.
 
Not a good day for the ATF. That's for sure. Allegations of no knock and a dead suspect are not signs of a job done well. But I have 2 thoughts that I think are being overlooked

(1) I've consistently heard police say they like to serve warrants as early in the morning as possible - everyone is still in their pajamas and rarely puts up a fight. Given the white collar and no criminal history background of the defendant, the ATF was probably shocked at his response; and

(2). If this guy was really buying huge quantities of guns and then selling them for a big markup because he wasn't requiring a background check he was essentially knowing he was selling to criminals. Otherwise people would simply buy cheaper through a dealer. For someone with a great job to get involved with something this shady suggest substance abuse, gambling, or something very wrong with him mentally and/or emotionally. It also suggests he was facing a long prison term. Accordingly, he may have fired the first shot because he didn't want to get arrested. Assuming he thought criminals were raiding him instead of law enforcement, while possible in a no-knock situation, is not necessarily true
 
Not a good day for the ATF. That's for sure. Allegations of no knock and a dead suspect are not signs of a job done well. But I have 2 thoughts that I think are being overlooked

(1) I've consistently heard police say they like to serve warrants as early in the morning as possible - everyone is still in their pajamas and rarely puts up a fight. Given the white collar and no criminal history background of the defendant, the ATF was probably shocked at his response; and

(2). If this guy was really buying huge quantities of guns and then selling them for a big markup because he wasn't requiring a background check he was essentially knowing he was selling to criminals. Otherwise people would simply buy cheaper through a dealer. For someone with a great job to get involved with something this shady suggest substance abuse, gambling, or something very wrong with him mentally and/or emotionally. It also suggests he was facing a long prison term. Accordingly, he may have fired the first shot because he didn't want to get arrested. Assuming he thought criminals were raiding him instead of law enforcement, while possible in a no-knock situation, is not necessarily true
Look at you using logic and rational thought and all!

Not sure how well that will go over round here, but still . . . good job! :)
 
so does this mean if the ATF fabricates a warrant to raid my place, they don't need a NO KNOCK warrant, they can shoot my watch geese and farm dogs first, then break in my doors? Just so happens I have metal doors with steel frames on all entrances, so they have justification to use heavy equipment to break in the metal frames and doors and since my disabled wife sleeps in the living room in her medical bed, but has a Smith 686 under her pillow, they are justified in shooting her first before my son or I respond to the noise?
In their mind I am sure they are justified in whatever actions they take. We are the problem you see, as we stand between them and total state control just by virtue of not wanting to be controlled. They have been handed several stinging losses in the courts over recent decades and I am sure they are trying to figure out ways to not go to court, and laying out a few hundred million for wrongful death cases probably seem cheaper to them than losing another action in court and having to figure out a way around that precedent too. Plus they probably think it sends a message to other uppity gun owners. Comply or be killed. I am not sure this can end in any other way than Civil War 2, but maybe someone will figure something out that does not meant burning down our entire society first.
 
Look at you using logic and rational thought and all!

Not sure how well that will go over round here, but still . . . good job! :)
Assumptions all around. It could just as easily be argued that this guy thought what he was doing was perfectly legal, as he was in a state that allowed private party transfers. It is just as easy to assume he thought he just found a decent side hustle to fuel his new hobby and had no idea he was a target of law enforcement activity. I mean really, if you were not plugged into the wider 2A community, would you really be super aware of all the gotcha laws on the books? You can sell guns in a private party state, but how many people know that means not too many, and not for a profit, else the ATF takes offense. How is someone not well versed in that law supposed to know what is and is not allowed, especially when the ATF will not put numbers on things and especially when the normal news so misrepresents what these laws actually mean?

Unless someone can point out solid evidence of malicious intent on this guy's part it is well within reasonable to assume he simply had no idea he had run afoul of the law, and that his first contact with any law enforcement action resulted with him dead. He quite possibly died without even knowing he had run afoul of the law. So yeah, it is possible that he knew he was going to jail, but if that was the case he certainly did not take any steps to prevent that. Did he want to get caught, start a shootout and get killed? Possibly, but all the other alternatives are just as much, if not more so, plausible.

But, you know, the ATF sure as hell made sure we would never find out the answers, on account of the only guy who really knew is now dead. And it sure as hell looks like they meant it to be that way with how they ran this operation. No cameras, no knock, no raid unless he was home. There is a whole lot there that says "we wanted plausible deniability to shoot him" and not a whole lot of decision making that said they wanted to gather evidence and perform a no-fuss arrest. And we know that the ATF has operated this way in the past, so please tell me why the hell we should give them the benefit of the doubt now?

Like I said, the ATF wanted this guy dead, just like they wanted a whole bunch of other people dead in the past. They got their way then, and they got their way now. Challenge still stands; change my mind.
 
so does this mean if the ATF fabricates a warrant to raid my place, they don't need a NO KNOCK warrant, they can shoot my watch geese and farm dogs first, then break in my doors? Just so happens I have metal doors with steel frames on all entrances, so they have justification to use heavy equipment to break in the metal frames and doors and since my disabled wife sleeps in the living room in her medical bed, but has a Smith 686 under her pillow, they are justified in shooting her first before my son or I respond to the noise?
Simple answer: yes. Over and over again. No one is ever held personally responsible. Perhaps your heirs will get a settlement, which they will have to share with their legal team. Only the taxpayers will have to pay.
 
Last Edited:
Simple answer: yes. Over and over again. No one is ever held personally responsible. Perhaps your heirs will get a settlement, which they will have to share with their legal team. Only the taxpayers will have to pay.
the organizer of the gun shows in Arkansas said this situation achieved it's goal
over 20 of his regular vendors who rented tables at his show dropped their applications as sellers
when he called to see why they were no longer participating, they told him they didn't want the ATF shooting them in their homes
I guess in the mind set of the ATF, the lose of one gun owning citizen is not detrimental to their over all goals
according to Malinoski's lawyer, he was not aware of the resent change in Federal laws on private gun sales,
they just issued a warrant and raided his home, never sent him a "cease and desist" letter in advance
 

Upcoming Events

Centralia Gun Show
  • Centralia, WA

New Classified Ads

Back Top