JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
So, he's wearing a bullet proof vest, then in a public place on a blow horn says he's got a plan to kill Antifa, suffers from psychological problems that he's on disability for, gets put put into a Mental hospital for 20 days and has his firearms removed...Got it.
 
Aside from the military service, probably not much different than the average Antifa member. We know them to be arming up. Just wonder how many of them have have had a visit from the FBI.
 
I've seen antifa members opening threatening violence and to kill people but have never heared of any of them paying any consequences. The only more concerning thing about a vet is he knows how to get it done.
 
One is prohibited from possessing firearms if they have been committed involuntarily or deemed mentally incompetent. This guy was committed and qualified to be deemed incompetent. The mechanisms are already in place to deal with these guys. ERPOs are for when the state is too lazy for due process.
 
I've met people at the range that scare me enough to think they should never touch a firearm for everyone's safety - even without knowing their mental history.

A couple of tours does leave a bit of resentment and hostility with some scars to boot. Afa was just an oxidizer to an already flaming catalyst for this guy.

Some good thoughts his way... maybe a prayer or two.
 
From the article:

"If antifa gets to the point where they start killing us, I'm going to kill them next," Kohfield, 32, said. "I'd slaughter them and I have a detailed plan on how I would wipe out antifa."


Dangerous.....I could imagine a scenario where someone might say......

"If harm comes to me or my group (family or friends), then I will cause harm back to them."

So, depending on who you like or dislike....... And note the use of the word "IF". Well, someone might be locked up and lose their rights. Never mind, that to some, it was/might be considered to be a conditional statement (considering the entirety of the circumstances) of a "reasonable warning" (message being verbalized) not to cause any harm.

But, there it is.......a jury will not be able to decide prior to your loss of rights.

Aloha, Mark

PS....
"An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth."

Ooooo...…...:eek:
 
Last Edited:
Also from the article:

..."That threat pushed the FBI's Joint Terrorism Task to take a series of extraordinary steps against Kohfield, including temporary seizure of a cache of his firearms under Oregon's new "red flag" law aimed at preventing gun violence, The Oregonian/OregonLive has learned."
————————

Cache hmm. Sounds ominous. Scary. Dark. Hidden. Abnormal. Threatening, in and of itself.

————————
More from the article:

..."According to Lemman, the state court administrator, Kohfield surrendered an AR-15, a pistol, a rifle and a shotgun."...

————————

More than likely some other article on this will be using terms such as "Arsenal" and noting how much of an ammunition "stockpile" he has.
 
SO, the FBI is involved, enforcing Oregon's Red Flag Law? Why not one of Oregon's Premiere Law Enforcement Agencies?
Something smells a little fishy here! Granted the dude's rant was over the top and highly ignorant and his threat should be taken seriously, BUT, which agency and which law applies here? RED FLAG wouldn't cover Domestic Terrorism, so............................
 
He was in a mental state worthy of a 20 day commitment at the VA hospital mental ward. So he wasn't just some dude standing on the corner voicing his opinion.
 
And then, on the other hand, Wifey had a derelict hanging around her place of work yesterday that had been 86ed from the premises . When she told him he had to leave he said he could get a gun and shoot her in the head. She called 911 and they couldn't be bothered to send an officer. Near THREE hours later they called to apologize they hadn't sent anyone because they had a "Homicide". They never sent anyone.

Amazing! :mad:
 
Here's the kicker...
No "Red Flag Law" was even necessary (and doubtfully even used) in this instance. Just a lot of bs PR. Every step in this guys notice and investigation and resulting disarmament has been SOP for over a decade in a case like his.

They just really, really wanted to say "Red Flag Law" as often as they can.
*Especially* trying to insist that the Feds needed to use "Oregon's" Red Flag Law to help them do this. That's a total crock.
 
Call a semi auto rifle an assault weapon. Call someone with a different point of view, the far right or an extremist. That is wrong on all counts, but there it is.

Government has limited power and authority so it changes the name to something it can control and subjects the citizens to comply. I have not seen anywhere leftest groups being arrested based on threats alone.

From what I read, the guy said, if he was attacked. Not that he was initiating an attack. Like saying, if you don't turn in your guns...
 

Upcoming Events

Centralia Gun Show
Centralia, WA
Klamath Falls gun show
Klamath Falls, OR
Oregon Arms Collectors April 2024 Gun Show
Portland, OR
Albany Gun Show
Albany, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top