Dangerous hothead at wolf creek

[willy1]

To bad Alex Baldwin wasn't here? He could fugue it out?

 

[Hotdog 7]

I would have sided with the OP until he said he'd have shot them dead right there if there would have been no consequences. Yikes. That old couple sounds about as annoying as they come.

Agreed. The brass goblins can wait instead of annoying range users by trawling the area with their lightbars on to try and compel the shooters to leave. I think most everyone would agree that the tweakers were in the wrong until OP made his comment about how he would've killed them if he (legally) could have. If your response to someone annoying you is to want to kill them you need to seek mental health treatment ASAP.

I wish law enforcement made more frequent visits to Wolf Creek just to check the area. In the years I've been shooting there I've never seen a sheriff or state trooper stop by once. When I was younger and would shoot at Browns Camp I'd occasionally see Tillamook County Sheriff's cruise by and sometimes they'd stop and chat with people shooting.

 

[American123]

Biggest issue here from my perspective is the target shooter received a death threat. Alone in the wood at night with with no witnesses, that could easily be followed up on in the future and most likely remain unsolved.

Guy just as easily could have popped the people in question and been in the same scenario.

Being out in the woods far enough away from society that you only run into a handful of people can be a very dangerous situation. That "in-between" distance of being immersed in society and being way out of the way where no-one else is. Won't be surprised based on the OP if that doesn't end in a homicide in the future.

Generally speaking two idiots getting into conflict is where a lot violence stems from anyway.

 

[old greg]

Biggest issue here from my perspective is the target shooter received a death threat. Alone in the wood at night with with no witnesses, that could easily be followed up on in the future and most likely remain unsolved.

Guy just as easily could have popped the people in question and been in the same scenario.

Being out in the woods far enough away from society that you only run into a handful of people can be a very dangerous situation. That "in-between" distance of being immersed in society and being way out of the way where no-one else is. Won't be surprised based on the OP if that doesn't end in a homicide in the future.

Generally speaking two idiots getting into conflict is where a lot violence stems from anyway.

Yeah whats the legality on someone issuing a death threat after someone else attempts to spall them? Is that attempted murder?

 

[Lazyfaire]

Yeah whats the legality on someone issuing a death threat after someone else attempts to spall them? Is that attempted murder?

Any self defense claim will have to question how it started and who did that. The odd couple may have been weird and unsettling, but the OP fired shots near them. No "I'm fearing for my life etc". IMO -at fault.

But why in f**ks sake say it in a public forum?!!

 

[Mikej]

WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT!!!???

I wasn't talking about your misspelling (brass vs. bras), although that's funny, too.

$195.00/pound for turning in spent brass is pretty righteous! Where do I go to get that price?

Sometimes I wonder about me. You'd think English wasn't may first language! And you have to know typing was never attempted by me until we got my Dad 'n laws old 486. And I still haven't caught on!
Thank God For spell check!!!

 

[American123]

Yeah whats the legality on someone issuing a death threat after someone else attempts to spall them? Is that attempted murder?

The structure of your sentences is a bit unclear to me, but how I am interpreting it is the shooter being charged with attempted murder, is that right?

Huge stretch to claim shooting a target is an attempt to harm the other people. Like - ridiculous stretch.

The law/courts have specific criteria t what classifies as 'attempted murder.'

Many grievous attacks on another person still fall under the assault category, or assault with a deadly weapon, and that's assuming the 'victim' was even harmed, which in this case, they weren't.

Just as a general point though. Telling other people "I'm going to kill you." Is not protected under the first amendment.

 

[raftman]

The structure of your sentences is a bit unclear to me, but how I am interpreting it is the shooter being charged with attempted murder, is that right?

Huge stretch to claim shooting a target is an attempt to harm the other people. Like - ridiculous stretch.

The law/courts have specific criteria t what classifies as 'attempted murder.'

Many grievous attacks on another person still fall under the assault category, or assault with a deadly weapon, and that's assuming the 'victim' was even harmed, which in this case, they weren't.

Just as a general point though. Telling other people "I'm going to kill you." Is not protected under the first amendment.

To be fair, prosecutors can be quite creative when they want to, and in Oregon may be willing to be, when a case involves guns.

I would imagine the behavior in question may be better described as some sort of criminal negligence rather than attempted murder, but even then I would think some sort of injury has to actually happen, but I'm no lawyer.

 

[Jcon268]

Huge stretch to claim shooting a target is an attempt to harm the other people. Like - ridiculous stretch.

The law/courts have specific criteria t what classifies as 'attempted murder.'

There has to be some assumed responsibility on both ends. On the shooter's end that if he is aware of someone down range at ANY time, he withholds from firing.

On the "brass scrapper's" end in that they know they are on a live firing range with a person presently shooting and by placing themselves anywhere past the firing line, they subject themselves to unlimited bodily harm or death willingly.

It seems like the scrappers were trying to police the range for this uh.....gentleman....shooting past the twilight hours. But unless they can produce some official badge of authority, I think they were the one's who should have first contacted the police. Two hardheaded parties trying to impose their will on one another without an arbiter to settle such matters appropriately.

 

[Member 53328]

Both parties are just as retarded as one another. I'm not going to side with one simply cause he owns a gun and "belongs" to our community.

Owning a gun comes with a responsibility. Yet many don't see it as such.

 

[RVTECH]

IMHO it is/was the SHOOTERS responsibility to 'raise the bar' and not escalate the situation.

Shooting is a hobby, a pastime and occasionally an undertaking to hone our skills for defensive purposes if ever necessary an therefore as as RESPONSIBLE shooters and gun owners WE need to show responsibility and rationality - especially around tweekers, miscreants and wastrels we might encounter.

However (and once again if even real) the guy essentially lowered himself to the lever of the 'tweekers' and with no control of his emotions got fired up and escalated the situation.

Again IMO the guy is probably somewhat younger, possibly an arrogant sort who carries a 'chip on his shoulder' and tries to intimidate and dominate everyone around him. Trust me - I see these types often and I am NOT impressed.... (remember my 'friend' I have mentioned once or twice?)

 

[rhollister71]

i wonder and havev a gut feeling this OP is the same jack tard that threatened cogs with the locked gate and spent all day on 4 by himself w his kid and proceeded to brag and thank everyone for it.
edit...i mean the facebook clown the OP is referring to

 

[Bill Siegle]

Years ago I was at a range on public land. In the area there were only a couple of authorized shooting spots. Myself and an older gentleman who needed to drive his truck down range to set up targets. I was near to heading out when a couple dirt bike riders come in and start climbing the walls of the pit. Older guy has a few words with them that I could not hear but I did hear the rider's response and see finger salutes. They ran up the hill and one rider crested the hill. His partner stalled out about 3/4 up. As he restarted his bike, BOOM!!!!! Impact about two feet to his right!!! Old guy returned the salute, chambered another round, and got behind his scope. The two riders went over the hill and didn't come back down. I packed up and left as I didn't want to be anywhere near this situation. I agreed with the old guy's attitude but it falls under the "NOPE" category for things I'd do. What's just isn't alway legal! Not sure what the old guy was shooting but it was a big powerful round.

 

[OneArgus]

You know why :
Walmart is tightening open carry - Guys like this
Oregon carry in capital is now a problem - Guys like this

Hey, its your right to own a firearm. It is not your right to shoot it in public.
When you are on any place but your own property, or paid range, and you decide to shoot?
It will be in public occupied spaces.
Shooting in the direction people are at, is why laws get put in place.

Damn, glad I am old now. If I was 20 id never be able to have what I do, thanks to nimrods like this.

Oh well no one cares, especially this guy. Wait until they require permits to shoot on public land.
And require training to do so, because of guys like this.

Rant Over.

Argus.

 

[kmk1012]

You know why :
Walmart is tightening open carry - Guys like this
Oregon carry is capital is now a problem - Guys like this

Hey, its your right to own a firearm. It is not your right to shoot it in public.
When you are on any place but your own property, or paid range, and you decide to shoot?
It will be in public occupied spaces.
Shooting in the direction people are at, is why laws get put in place.

Damn, glad I am old now. If I was 20 id never be able to have what I do, thanks to nimrods like this.

Oh well no one cares, especially this guy. Wait until they require permits to shoot on public land.
And require training to do so, because of guys like this.

Rant Over.

Argus.

I'm a little confused after reading your post

 

[Jcon268]

You know why :
Walmart is tightening open carry - Guys like this
Oregon carry is capital is now a problem - Guys like this

Shooting in the direction people are at, is why laws get put in place.

While this might be true, I'm sure this guy was well aware of the law. The fact he was shooting past dark proves he doesn't care. The law is only good when there's someone around to enforce it. Otherwise it's about as effective as a gun free zone sign, another thing to ignore. Idiots like him aren't thinking about life in a concrete cell when they do crap like that. Same when they tell people online about how they "would have killed them." Peak entitlement

 

[Diamondback]

Its too easy to dismiss as a false flag, but mentioning a very well known …brass..couple.. is just too specific. Also, why on a gun forum and not a portland general if they are they are just trying to elicit a response? Similar to them posting the story here instead of to Willy week.

"Sounds pretty strange to me"
You have been around portland right?

Tech savvy Leftists love to do this kind of thing on Right sites, screenshot it, then immediately go to ISP's, platform providers etc and demand takedown. They used to try that crap all the time at Redstate when I was a mod there...

 

[American123]

You know why :
Walmart is tightening open carry - Guys like this
Oregon carry is capital is now a problem - Guys like this

Hey, its your right to own a firearm. It is not your right to shoot it in public.
When you are on any place but your own property, or paid range, and you decide to shoot?
It will be in public occupied spaces.
Shooting in the direction people are at, is why laws get put in place.

Damn, glad I am old now. If I was 20 id never be able to have what I do, thanks to nimrods like this.

Oh well no one cares, especially this guy. Wait until they require permits to shoot on public land.
And require training to do so, because of guys like this.

Rant Over.

Argus.

So people who break the existing laws, lead politicians to seek to pass more laws to be made that the people who already break the law won't follow either?

Does that logic check out for you?

Let's not pretend that the rabid-anti liberty left cares one iota about people breaking the law. They have a goal of total disarmament, regardless.

 

[OneArgus]

So people who break the existing laws, lead politicians to seek to pass more laws to be made that the people who already break the law won't follow either?

Does that logic check out for you?

Let's not pretend that the rabid-anti liberty left cares one iota about people breaking the law. They have a goal of total disarmament, regardless.

It is what it is, public use of a firearm falls under public use laws.
Lets not pretend, that there is a not defied left or right any longer.

And seriously, if one owns a firearm you should be thinking how your small actions will no doubt be blown up.

Reality, its a concept many choose to ignore.

Argus

 

[American123]

It is what it is, public use of a firearm falls under public use laws.
Lets not pretend, that there is a not defied left or right any longer.

And seriously, if one owns a firearm you should be thinking how your small actions will no doubt be blown up.

Reality, its a concept many choose to ignore.

Argus

Claiming there is not a defined political boundary is absurd.