Defensive Arts
Gun Deals
Low Price Guns
Buster Beaver Cerakote
Sporting Systems
Advertise on Northwest Firearms
J&B Firearm Sales
Oregon Rifleworks
HighLine Firearms
Oregon Arms & Ammunition
Simply Triggers

Oregon Antifa Wins, Self Defense Loses in Oregon Appeals Court

Messages
6,878
Reactions
25,952
I recommend going back and re watching the videos of this incident, make note of the dudes who were moving around to flank Mike, basically telling him to GTFO, while at the same time, preventing him from backing out further, it is at that point Mike actually draws his weapon, and when this whole thing takes off! This was pointed out several times pre trial and even during the first! What really stinks is that every one KNOWS that was the justification needed, and yet they deny it when the so called "Experts" are put on the stand!
Everybody knows Mike got the shaft from the PORTLAND CRIME SYNDICATE, and now the State! Off to the State Supreme Court, which will likely uphold this, as we already know they are unbiased, NOT! Mike will get no justice until this leaves the state and goes on to higher courts who will actually apply the law fairly and equally!
Yes, in the video you won't see Mike pulling out his pistol when he was being bumped into and pushed. He maintains a cool head and attempts to back his way to safety as the crowd follows and jeers.

Pause it at the moment he pulls it out and notice the flanking maneuver. If you look closely on replay you will see him catch it out of the corner of his eye. At that point he correctly assesses an imminent threat he can't control any other way.
 

nwslopoke

Messages
2,589
Reactions
6,566
Unfortunately it would APPEAR the unintended consequence of proving self defense is actually shooting someone or someones after you permit them to attack you.

Isn't that better(sarcasm)? I shot my actual attackers instead of giving them a chance to rethink their actions. Portland is still in America and people are allowed in public places whether you agree with them or not.
 
Last edited:

bbbass

Messages
11,436
Reactions
24,384
If I thought I might be in danger from a Riot of Antifa members, I'd keep my butt at the house and watch their shenanigans on the news, from the comfort of my recliner. :D

Again, I don't know Mr. Strickland well enough to say that he was, "doing his job." I could walk around filming people with my iPhone, but I still wouldn't call myself a "reporter."
Well yes, a prudent civilian would for sure do that. As members have discussed in the past, a very high % would not be there at those types of occasions. I don't want to go into Portland even on a good day!!! ;)

Isn't it good that we have independent journalists/blogger/whatever that can go, are willing to go, into the fray in Portland and document things like what happened to Andy Ngo. Isn't it in the public interest to know what Antifa violence is?

I don't know Mr. Strickland either, but NWFA members I trust implicitly admire him and his work... I'm gonna have to go with that!!
 
Last edited:

bbbass

Messages
11,436
Reactions
24,384
Yes, in the video you won't see Mike pulling out his pistol when he was being bumped into and pushed. He maintains a cool head and attempts to back his way to safety as the crowd follows and jeers.

Pause it at the moment he pulls it out and notice the flanking maneuver. If you look closely on replay you will see him catch it out of the corner of his eye. At that point he correctly assesses an imminent threat he can't control any other way.
Yup!!

Back to my earlier post, one of the valid reasons to apply force up to and including deadly force due to "disparity of force" is "FORCE OF NUMBERS" ie, NUMBER OF ASSAILANTS!
 
Messages
3,270
Reactions
6,994
Stricklands youtube page was "laughing at liberals" right? He wasn't unbiased the way the news should be, but he didn't get to defend himself from known violent parties who had attacked him before.

While I think he is personally a turd he got a raw deal from the justice system in my opinion.
That's called punditry. Of course, the consequences of one's punditry depends on whether your platform is legacy media in which case there are no negative personal consequences no matter the outcomes (e.g., Rachel Maddow cheerleading efforts that violated civil rights via perjury to the FISA Court but who thankfully failed to ignite global thermonuclear war with Russia over the 2016 election), or whether you are an independent journalist or new media pundit, in which case you can be subjected all manner of abuse (e.g. Bryan Carmody (*) in San Fran where the mayor sent the police on a Constitution violating raid).

(*) San Francisco to Pay $369,000 for Police Raid of Journalist's Home
 
Messages
3,270
Reactions
6,994
... I watched his own video and honestly, it doesn't paint him in a positive light. The people confronting him had no weapons and they were not charging after him (in the videos, you can see him slowly walk backwards and the protesters are not speeding towards him). They are yelling at him to leave, GTFO, etc. not making any verbal threats to injure or attack him. My opinion: Is there a confrontation? Yes. Are words exchanged? Yes. Does it warrant a firearm being introduced into to the mix? No.
I came to pretty much the same conclusion. I watched the video at quarter speed looking for weapons -- if they were there (and that is possible) they weren't captured on video. It also seems like he pulls his gun only after the guy with the giant news-cam intervened and he had backed up and gotten distance. That would have been a good place to turn and run (I know many don't like that suggestion -- feels cowardly and all that -- but it is the way the law works).

That said, I think the court's unwillingness to address his past experiences with these people is misguided. The decision to pull out a firearm for SD seems rationally related to who is coming after you. If it's a group kindergarten kids rushing, yelling and pushing without any visible weapons -- that is not going to be reasonable. If it is a bunch of gang members with face tattoos and aggressive behavior, that's a different matter, and it seems very relevant to consider past interactions one may have had with other gang members. Antifa is a gang so attributing danger to random participants based on experience with certain participants, is rational and I think the court should have put that on the scale. Saying all that though, I still feel the video isn't that supportive for the reasons I stated above.
 
Messages
3,270
Reactions
6,994
I recommend going back and re watching the videos of this incident, make note of the dudes who were moving around to flank Mike, basically telling him to GTFO, while at the same time, preventing him from backing out further, it is at that point Mike actually draws his weapon ...
That's the problem with video like his -- I can't tell that is when he drew the gun and that circumstance looks quite different from a little later when you finally do see the gun when the legacy-media cameraman has intervened.

If the circumstances were as you described, the video hurt Strickland.
 
Messages
529
Reactions
798
  • Marines
  • Law Enforcement
The issue is, if nobody is willing to record their antics, you won't see anything on the news except fluff pieces they want to push.
I'm going to assume that we're both watching the same video and I didn't see a lack of people filming. By my count, there was at least 9 people filming this incident and probably many more people who were out of camera view. I do understand what you're saying though.

However, I'm not going to travel to Mexico with a camera so I can prove to the world that cartel members are bad people. Same thing for going to Portland to film one of these Antifa parties.

If you, I, or anyone else chooses to do so, we could get our head busted in, or be put into a scenario where we're forced to act. And then our actions are picked apart for years about whether they were right or not. No thanks. I'm too old and too poor to play that game.
 
Messages
3,270
Reactions
6,994
... However, I'm not going to travel to Mexico with a camera so I can prove to the world that cartel members are bad people. Same thing for going to Portland to film one of these Antifa parties.

If you, I, or anyone else chooses to do so, we could get our head busted in, or be put into a scenario where we're forced to act. And then our actions are picked apart for years about whether they were right or not. No thanks. I'm too old and too poor to play that game.
I'm in 100% agreement -- I wouldn't go either. I am grateful that some choose to take that risk.
 
Messages
67
Reactions
91
I've met him. He is not a turd. He is polite and well spoken, especially when he has testified to politicians in defense of your right to protect yourself and your loved ones.

He is unpopular by politicians that didn't want him filming and publishing things they said in public meetings where they only said things meant for lock step supporters. Many of these things were contrary to what they said at press releases, but "among friends" would say their real thoughts.

If you bother to watch his videos you will get to see those politicians who like to tell you they don't want to take your guns away in public say exactly the opposite in what they thought were closed meetings. You will get to hear him threatened several times and at a minimum get told he wasn't welcome and even get ejected. You will get to hear Ginny Burdick admit she wants registration.

People don't like their lies and ill plans revealed and that's what Strickland did before his First Amendment rights were stripped.

Yeah, what a turd.
We all get to form our own opinions about people, events, etc. I have never met him,I think he got screwed, I don't believe the charges had merited, I think the Appeals Court ruling is incorrect and I hope the Supreme Court of Oregon makes some common sense decisions. I used to watch his videos all the time. I enjoyed when he let the far left speak their minds and hang themselves by their own actions and words. So you assume incorrectly that I've never watched his videos. Do you remember Daylight Disinfectant's youtube, similar vein. Have I established my bonifides yet?

I think he crossed over into agitation and became a provocateur and was essentially looking for the conflict. His ammo count when he was arrested makes him look bad. He inserted himself into the situation clearly knowing the likely outcome.

Ultimately every one of us will be judged on the reasonableness of our use or threatened use of force by the cop on the scene, the DA, and a Judge or Jury. It's a fact that actions in one County in our State is criminal while the exact same act in another is not. That's the system we have, like it or not, in this case I do not like it. My opinion about the man doesn't change that I think he got a raw deal.

Hopefully I explained that above. It's my opinion, I offer it freely so it's worth exactly that.

Also the testimony from the cop who said anytime you draw your gun you should be shooting, if that's actually what he testified to he needs to hand in his badge as he perjured himself on the stand.
 
Messages
82
Reactions
124
My opinion on the matter isn't going to be well received, so it goes. I see little difference between one guy wearing all black and a bandanna and the next guy donning 5.11 tactical head to toe. That stated, we jump to conclusions that aren't founded in fact. Go to the rallies, observe them, at least watch the footage. The fair majority of people on either side do not fit the stereotype. My dad has a saying he taught me when I was young, "rotten eggs make the whole fridge stink."

On paper I disagree with the case. But I question how many of you really watched the video. Read Michael's statement in the posted link and then go watch the video - they don't match. He wasn't surrounded by masked people dressed in black, quite the opposite actually. He wasn't beaten and bloody. He didn't have his back against the wall. He stood near an intersection at SW 3rd ave with reasonable distance between him and alleged attackers and had reasonable means of egress before unholstering his weapon. When he drew his firearm he was not in immediate danger - as represented by the lack of physical trauma to his person, the lack of weapons present, and the distance between him and those he was engaged verbally with. Training varies based on class and trainer, but nothing I've ever learned would ever condone his actions. I don't disagree that he was scared for his safety, maybe a few guys roughed him up before camera rolled and he was obviously separated from his pack - a decision mind you he made willingly as a citizen journalist. That said I don't condone our court system throwing the book at him. He acted emotionally in a situation where his training and licensure should have overridden, and he did so in a city hellbent on making examples out of people like him.
 

bbbass

Messages
11,436
Reactions
24,384
I would have to squint really hard to see how a "reasonable" person could justify pulling a firearm.
M'kay... I looked, and I can't see where "reasonable person" is stated in the Oregon law regarding self defense.

To whit:

Except as provided in ORS 161.215 (Limitations on use of physical force in defense of a person) and 161.219 (Limitations on use of deadly physical force in defense of a person), a person is justified in using physical force upon another person for self-defense or to defend a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force, and the person may use a degree of force which the person reasonably believes to be necessary for the purpose. [1971 c.743 §22]

Under this law, it should be apparent that it is indeed "subjective" to the perception of the person.
 

bbbass

Messages
11,436
Reactions
24,384
Hopefully I explained that above. It's my opinion, I offer it freely so it's worth exactly that.
I must be dense, because I didn't see anything you wrote that explains why you think he is a turd.

Was it this:

I think he crossed over into agitation and became a provocateur and was essentially looking for the conflict. His ammo count when he was arrested makes him look bad. He inserted himself into the situation clearly knowing the likely outcome.
If so, then you must believe that Antifa thugs are even bigger turds... but I think I missed it if you said so.
 
Messages
529
Reactions
798
  • Marines
  • Law Enforcement
To whit:

Except as provided in ORS 161.215 (Limitations on use of physical force in defense of a person) and 161.219 (Limitations on use of deadly physical force in defense of a person), a person is justified in using physical force upon another person for self-defense or to defend a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force, and the person may use a degree of force which the person reasonably believes to be necessary for the purpose. [1971 c.743 §22]

Under this law, it should be apparent that it is indeed "subjective" to the perception of the person.
You're right, it is subjective. Unfortunately, in a court of law, a defendants actions are judged objectively. From the video that I'm seeing, there is a balding white male with a black shirt and a black bag that has his hands up, in front of him. He has his hands up in front of himself, showing Mr. Strickland his palms and wasn't acting in an aggressive manner whatsoever. He had this stance before Mr. Strickland drew his firearm. He had this stance after Mr. Strickland drew his firearm and yet, Mr. Strickland pointed his firearm at this guy. I'm willing to bet that this guy was one of the counts of Unlawful Use of a Weapon and possibly others.

Mr. Strickland may have believed that his safety was at risk, but that doesn't give him carte blanche to point his firearm at anyone in his vicinity.

Annotation 2020-04-07 112737.jpg
 

bbbass

Messages
11,436
Reactions
24,384
You're right, it is subjective. Unfortunately, in a court of law, a defendants actions are judged objectively. From the video that I'm seeing, there is a balding white male with a black shirt and a black bag that has his hands up, in front of him. He has his hands up in front of himself, showing Mr. Strickland his palms and wasn't acting in an aggressive manner whatsoever. He had this stance before Mr. Strickland drew his firearm. He had this stance after Mr. Strickland drew his firearm and yet, Mr. Strickland pointed his firearm at this guy. I'm willing to bet that this guy was one of the counts of Unlawful Use of a Weapon and possibly others.

Mr. Strickland may have believed that his safety was at risk, but that doesn't give him carte blanche to point his firearm at anyone in his vicinity.

View attachment 680691
Hmmmm, and here I thought courts based their decisions on the law. <sigh>

Soooo, earlier in the vid there was a diff guy with his hands up, but was nevertheless advancing in a crowd of aggressors (ever been bitten by a dog that was wagging it's tail, I have) and AFAIK this is a typical Antifa tactic also used by thugs and counter attackers elsewhere. Then you found the one guy that had his hands like that in a video that shows the gun already drawn, according to you before Mr. Strickland drew (I can't find a vid that shows that particular guy with his hands up before the draw), yet he was surrounded by aggressors, not just that one guy. Which was, IMO, reason to draw and sweep around to keep EVERYBODY away. *

You are welcome to how you see it, I'm welcome to how I see it. But if I was on a jury, I'd have to consider the totality of the circumstances and vote not guilty. Ever been on a jury? Despite judges instructions on the law (and here the law clearly states "reasonably believes" **), interpretation of "what happened" is very subjective, and THEN the law is applied objectively (not always) by the judge in the penalty phase. Actually, I've seen people guilty of murder get very little time, while others guilty of stealing $10 have gotten long sentences... that's not objective application of the laws. :(

Mr. Strickland may have believed that his safety was at risk, but that doesn't give him carte blanche to point his firearm at anyone in his vicinity.
Actually, it does:

* Which was, IMO, reason to draw and sweep around to keep EVERYBODY away."

Except as provided in ORS 161.215 (Limitations on use of physical force in defense of a person) and 161.219 (Limitations on use of deadly physical force in defense of a person), a person is justified in using physical force upon another person for self-defense or to defend a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force, and the person may use a degree of force which the person reasonably believes to be necessary for the purpose. [1971 c.743 §22]

** In almost all other cases that I know of, the defendant only needed to be able to articulate why he "reasonably believed" he was in immanent peril. I have to wonder why this is any different. Hint: It's Portland, the judges lean a certain way regarding firearms, and the other way regarding Antifa.
 
Last edited:
Messages
529
Reactions
798
  • Marines
  • Law Enforcement
The one guy with his hands up is the best example that I could find in the video. I'm sure there were plenty of other people out there witnessing this event that wasn't acting in an aggressive manner, wasn't threatening him, but they still got a firearm pointed at them.

If that's your interpretation of the ORS, that's totally fine with me friend. Unfortunately the court didn't see it this way with Mr. Strickland's actions.
 

UPCOMING EVENTS

Oakanogan Gun Show
Oakanogan County Fairgrounds
175 Rodeo Trail, Okanogan, WA 98840, USA
Cerberus Training Group - Run the Gun Pistol
Cerberus Training Group
47 Cattle Dr, Goldendale, WA 98620, USA
Cerberus Training Group - Run the Gun Rifle
Cerberus Training Group
47 Cattle Dr, Goldendale, WA 98620, USA

LATEST RESOURCE REVIEWS

  • Adaptive Firing Solutions
    5.00 star(s)
    Steve is awesome. He's helped me with two Form 4 transfers so far. I live 45 minutes away and happily make the drive to support such a great vendor!
  • TJ Gun Sales
    2.00 star(s)
    My form 4 cleared on 04/10/2020 I had to fight tooth and nail for TJ's to find my tax stamp. There was never any urgency or concern in their...
  • Lucky Sporting Goods
    5.00 star(s)
    Excellent service
  • 36 Pit
    3.00 star(s)
    I'm probably just reiterating what others have said, but I like hearing (seeing) myself speak. This gets 3 stars because when the place isn't...
  • Cascade Loan & Sporting Goods
    3.00 star(s)
    I am giving this review because at one time I was a really big customer there. Back in the day, I bought at least a dozen used guns from Cascade...
Top Bottom