Medford Police: Being "Proactive"

[Just Jim]

Aha! I always know I've won a debate when the other side resorts to name calling and insults and abandons or ignores facts.

You just had your azz kicked.

Stick a fork in you. You're done!!

Bye!

It's one thing to ignore facts and another to make them up and be caught doing it

What I suspect will happen now is a lawsuit that goes after those who joined in abusing the guys rights and they will lose and we will all pay for their disobeying the law. Somebody needs to be fired. Opps that's what started all this, the government crashed the economy and fired workers. More to come.

jj

 

[durango#95]

Thought you were done with the thread?

Yours has been the most childish behavior I have witnessed on this board.

You spent 18 pages playing games pretending to know, or knowing what all the details were, all the while you were belittling other posters because of their opinions. Opinions, which based on information available, were quite reasonable. If there was something that we did not know, like specific threats being made, then obviously our opinions would have been different.

I dont know if you are as connected to the case as you claimed.

For the sake of your community I hope you do not work for law enforcement. Bragging about having inside information that you are not at liberty to discuss with the public, and then acting like a child in relation to other posters is extremely unprofessional.

My thought is that you are more likely an internet commando, know-it-all loud mouth boot-licking authority loving tool. You are fine with other people having their rights violated and property confiscated as long as big brother says that it was "for the children".



I would also like to point out that THE POLICE WERE WRONG ABOUT HIM BEING A THREAT. And that he was released immediately after the eval was complete. He was NOT a threat to anyone.

Mr. Pyles should be talking to a good attorney and file suit against ALL departments involved, not to mention a solid defamation case against whomever it was that called to police.

There was no disaster averted here. Only a violation of the rights of an AMERICAN CITIZEN. This case also goes to show that no matter what, gun owners (even staunch 2A supporters on here) can be shifted into the gun-grabber camp, just as long as the authorities say that the person is a threat.

This post deserves:
:banana::banana:

Thank you for eloquently posting what I, and I'm sure a few others here were thinking.
And to tionico: Spot on IMO!!

 

[Devryn]

wow, two hunnerd comments..... hit anyone's buttons? I feel like I've run a marathon, reading this whole thing.

OK, there are a few items that concern me still
I'm all good with LEO being proactive, rather than just showing up to take pics and measurements of who fell where in the shootemup they feared. Funny thing, they react this way when a state agency is involved, but let a woman and child be in the same situation, with what is often VERY solid reason to fear, and they sit on their hands and use the "we can't DO anything until there's been a CRIME committed" song and dance. So, some situations are "more deserving" of having the law selectively applied, right?

Somewhere back in the begining of this, we learn this same Supe at ODOT has aced two other employees recently. Seems he's got a pattern of dustups with his underlings. Maybe HE is the one should be under evaluation?

Set that aside... SOMEONE came forward with statements, opinions, suppositions, and went to LEO about them. LEO based their decision to act on those accusations (what else can I call them?) Has anyone seriously gone to evaluate these statements? Substantiate them, check with other possible sources? If so, we've not heard.

OK, so they roll the SWAT team... why? Cause he's got guns. Well, I suppose that means ANY action to ANY place with a known presence of arms warrants SWAT action? Over the top.

The guy comes out, after being promised he won't be cuffed, won't be taken away.. "voluntarily" coming out... sees the coppers all over the place, three ayem (who's head is really clear being blasted out of a sound sleep at that hour, walking out into his front yard and seeing wall to wall cops, the SWAT unit, etc?

So, the coppers lied, they cuffed him and took him away anyway.."he came willingly". Well, given those options, arrest with an army present to back it up, or "come along quietly now", what would any sane person do? (hey, I could make a case that, after that, he's sane no eval, go back to sleep, we're done). As pointed out, the "evaluation" does NOT confer upon him the right to legal representation... as would an arrest. He avoides the stigma of an arrest record, but not much more.

Then, he's out in a matter of hours? Hey, I thought this guy was dangerous? About that time, the cops should be all over his accuser..... perhaps requiring HIM to be evaluated as a danger to others.... could have got someone killed, acting on his say so. THEN WHAT??

OK, so they've got "information" the guy might be a danger to someone. How about simply watching him.... let him wake up on his own, fix and eat a nice brekkie, hop into his car..... trail him (they couuld put a bug GPS to track it.... easy peasy, and fully legal with a warrant. OH, and speaking of a warrant, did they HAVE one to use if he'd refused to go along peacefully? Just never served it cause he went "voluntarily"? This would be a plus...).

Suppose he pops his new HK into the boot, and heads out. Where is he going? Back to his office to settle some scores? Fine.... let him get there, remove the gun from the boot, start walking inside..... THEN strike, and neutralise his very real and plausible threat. Oh, he's not going to the office, he's headed out and up Jackson to a remote gravel pit..... or to the local target range to get used to his new toy.... do a little plinking......

Nah, the whole thing stinks. WHO reported what, and on what basis? Are the cops reevaluating the statements that spawned this whole thing? So far, they've got suppositon, someone's "opinion" that he's a 'possible threat"... and the FACT that he has guns (along with some ninety million other law-abiding Americans). The response was more than a bit heavy handed...... and unnecessarily intrusive. I can only guess the source and content of the "report" they got... but when the word of one man can put another in the lockup, with no trial, court evaluation, confrontation of one's accusers, the Constitution is a pile of firestarter on the floor.
So, the shrinks released him as "OK" in a few hours.


The cops have agreed to return his guns, and, by unsubstantiated accounts, he has them back. Solid evidence he really posed no substantial threat. How many thousands of dollars were spent on the show of force, investigation, and now, defense of their actions? SOMEONE bigger than the various LEA involved needs to take this thing apart and examine it. It still, in spite of what "inside information" Gunner might have, stinks. I know how I'd feel if I got dumped out of MY warm bed at oh three hundred to find my place surrounded, guns out, and the "promise" we won't cuff you or haul you off......

First thing, I'd demand to see the warrant. If none, I'd say adios. Back to bed. Bust in if you want to, it ain't that hard, and you'd BETTER have that warrant. If they do, show me it, I'd read it, then demand a lawyer. End of their game. NO agreeing to follow, NO agreement to allow search or seizure, unless specifically named in the warrant.. then I'd lead them to the named property and hand it them. OK, you've got the named property, let me get some more clothes on, and close up the house, because I'm going with you. We're done, everyone has to leave, you;ve no further business here. all the terms of the warrant are met.

I am glad to see OFF involved...... I think they've a good head on them, and will closely examine the details, and help with whatever actions might be appropriate.

This is the best bit of info on here yet. Thank you for that!!

 

[eriknemily]

Does anybody know if OFF has a legal fund set up for Mr. Pyles yet? This entire situation is so stinking vague and quite frankly absurd I would be willing to fork out a few non-tax dollars to find out why tax dollars were used in the way that they were. I live over on the coast and even from here the whole thing stinks

Regardless of the legitimacy (or illegitimacy) of this event we the people MUST know why and how this took place and who was calling the shots. Much, much more information is needed. I believe LE will have a hard time convincing people that this was legit. All this business of 'we can't disclose any information' won't help their cause at all.

I think I'll contact Mr. Starret at OFF and see if any legal fund is in the works.

 

[Just Jim]

This is the kinda stuff that escalated into Randy Weaver and Waco. Police doing things like this is against the law and the loonies see it then some jerk blows up a building. Guess history is never learned but repeated, sad to say.

jj

 

[Gunner3456]

Does anybody know if OFF has a legal fund set up for Mr. Pyles yet? This entire situation is so stinking vague and quite frankly absurd I would be willing to fork out a few non-tax dollars to find out why tax dollars were used in the way that they were. I live over on the coast and even from here the whole thing stinks

Regardless of the legitimacy (or illegitimacy) of this event we the people MUST know why and how this took place and who was calling the shots. Much, much more information is needed. I believe LE will have a hard time convincing people that this was legit. All this business of 'we can't disclose any information' won't help their cause at all.

I think I'll contact Mr. Starret at OFF and see if any legal fund is in the works.

Someone might want to check with Mr. Pyles and see if he's interested in pursuing this first. After all, only he can release the information about why he was placed on administrative leave, and also what happened (other than buying several weapons suddenly thereafter) which caused several police agencies to become "extremely concerned" that Pyles would retaliate against his employer."

Right now neither the Roseburg City Police, the Douglas County Sheriff's Dept., the Oregon State Police, nor the Medford City Police can say a word because all of that is confidential personnel information. They can say they were "extremely concerned," but under the law they can't say why.

Mr. Pyles could say why if he chose to.

Does he want that personal information made public as it would have to be under the rules of discovery if he filed suit? Or is it possible he would rather it not be made public?

Let's not forget that Mr. Pyles voluntarily left his home, went for an evaluation, was returned home, and his guns were returned in a timely fashion. What does he have to sue about?

Does anyone find it interesting that when Mr. Pyles has spoken to the press, he hasn't said a word about what happened that led up to this, but instead has been mum about details? Link If anything, the most that can be found is that he thanked the police for returning his weapons. He also thanked the press for "their interest" in this matter but he still didn't give them any details.

Everyone has an opinion. The only one who can permit the release of details from which to make a judgment is Mr. Pyles.

Let him file suit so all the details will come out. Then maybe people will be less apt to jump to conclusions next time.

 

[Gunner3456]

This is the kinda stuff that escalated into Randy Weaver and Waco. Police doing things like this is against the law and the loonies see it then some jerk blows up a building. Guess history is never learned but repeated, sad to say.

jj

Please tell me what the police did which was "against the law?"

Randy Weaver and Waco out of this? Wow.

 

[Just Jim]

Please tell me what the police did which was "against the law?"

Randy Weaver and Waco out of this? Wow.

Geez, Gunner I won't talk to a man who can't tell the truth. You made up things in this and if you hadn't been caught I doubt you would have told the truth and fessed up. An honorable man tells the truth and his words mean something. I just don't waste time wiith those who can't tell the truth. Find somebody with time to waste on you, can't trust a word you say now.

jj

 

[Gunner3456]

Geez, Gunner I won't talk to a man who can't tell the truth. You made up things in this and if you hadn't been caught I doubt you would have told the truth and fessed up. An honorable man tells the truth and his words mean something. I just don't waste time wiith those who can't tell the truth. Find somebody with time to waste on you, can't trust a word you say now.

jj

See, you can't answer the question intelligently so you attack the messenger. Personal attacks are always the way out when you're outwitted.

I made a mistake and "manned up" and corrected it. I simply named the wrong county, but the main point didn't change.

Now, if you really think this equals Randy Weaver or Waco or someone blowing up a building on the part of law enforcement, you are beyond help.

You won't actually address the many points I made and questions I asked because you can't. All you can do is attack me personally.

That's the pure definition of losing a debate.

 

[Just Jim]

Gunner, the debate was lost when you didn't tell the truth. Yes after someone caught you then you told the truth. There is no point in a discussion with a man who doesn't know right from wrong because people will forever wonder if you will make up more stories. You didn't win any debate sir, you have lost your honor as far as I am concerned and I wish you would move along to someone who might still believe you. I shall not reply any further to you.


jj

 

[husker]

This may be over but the damage is done. Everyone knows what has happend. If he applies for a job what do you think this will do to him?
How much is that worth?

 

[Just Jim]

This may be over but the damage is done. Everyone knows what has happend. If he applies for a job what do you think this will do to him?
How much is that worth?

Of course you are right sir. Haveing a police department surround your house cuff you and take you to jail in front of your neighbors ruins ones reputation too. Guy should come out of this with a pile of cash. Our cash of course

jj

 

[Mountainman]

This has been a very interesting thread to read. I believe in peoples rights and hope the LEO's involved in this BS get nailed to the cross. It is also very interesting to see the moron sheeple posting on here trying to justify this, you know who you are. I thought this was a guns and gun rights site. If you will not stand up for all your rights go to the ACLU site where they will support you for every right except for your guns. Now I know who to listen to and who are full of $hit!

 

[Gunner3456]

Gunner, the debate was lost when you didn't tell the truth. Yes after someone caught you then you told the truth. There is no point in a discussion with a man who doesn't know right from wrong because people will forever wonder if you will make up more stories. You didn't win any debate sir, you have lost your honor as far as I am concerned and I wish you would move along to someone who might still believe you. I shall not reply any further to you.


jj

You haven't responded to any of my points or my questions. You have sunk to simply attacking the messenger. You can't raise an intelligent debate.

There is something wrong with your mind.

You don't know any of what My Pyles did or why he doesn't appear to want to talk about what he did, yet you blindly defend him.

Now, since even after I apologize for misspeaking, you still want to attack my honor, I'm finished with you.

 

[durango#95]

Gunner:
You keep talking like Pyles was PE #1. If he truly was menacing and threatening, and so unstable, and such a danger that it warranted this type of action. Why the H$ll are the guns back in his hands now? (hand delivered no less) Why did he pass his P.E.? Why are there NO CHARGES? Why are there no warrants? Why is this super dangerous EVIL EVIL nasty uni bomber type of mad man free to roam the streets of our town??????
You keep talking like this guy threatened you personally, you come across as tho you have it in for this man. Yet with all your inside info. LE can't seem to find ANYTHING legal to do to/charge him with.
Perhaps you should divulge all you insider info to the cops, obviously they don't know as much about this crazy man as you do.
To be honest, at this point, I'm not sure I care what Pyles did to set off the alarms. What ever it was, it's obvious it was not a crime, or crazy, or any of any one else's business.
Now the guy is stuck with the type of notoriety that no one wants. And will in all likely hood spend a few years trying to put his life back in order over this.
But as you have stated, you think he got what he had coming to him?!?!?!
I guess in you eyes his rights don't mean as much as LE's interests.

 

[chicobravo]

You haven't responded to any of my points or my questions. You have sunk to simply attacking the messenger. You can't raise an intelligent debate.

There is something wrong with your mind.

You don't know any of what My Pyles did or why he doesn't appear to want to talk about what he did, yet you blindly defend him.

Now, since even after I apologize for misspeaking, you still want to attack my honor, I'm finished with you.

Apparently he is talking. Looks like he was able to get his property back as well. <broken link removed>

Apparently the guys from OFF are defending him as well and make some great points about various rights being violated. This stinks to high heaven, and looks like it is getting worse. I am supportive of the police 95% of the time, but if this crap happens again, that percentage will quickly change.

An interesting thought: if the police are so worried about mental health and guns as a threat, then maybe they should have done something about their own before he wasted his wife and two friends. Apparently there were some pretty clear signs long before this happened. Those findings should be interesting.



<broken link removed>

 

[chicobravo]

Someone should link this story to the drudgereport.com

Note to self



......done.

 

[Gunner3456]

Apparently he is talking.

I don't see where he offered any information as to why he was put on administrative leave, or why the police in several departments across Southern Oregon might have had serious concerns. Please copy/paste those statements for me? It seems to me he's being silent which means the public knows nothing, and should at least withhold judgment for now, don't you think?

Why is he remaining silent about any details? If you had been so wronged, wouldn't you be yelling to the rafters at anyone who would listen? I would.

Looks like he was able to get his property back as well. <broken link removed>

Yes, we already posted that. He passed his psych evaluation and was then released from protective custody.

Apparently the guys from OFF are defending him as well and make some great points about various rights being violated.

How much do they know for sure, or is this another knee jerk reaction? Have they deposed everyone involved to get the facts? The answer is no, of course. Even if they filed suit it would be months before the could depose people under oath.

This stinks to high heaven, and looks like it is getting worse. I am supportive of the police 95% of the time, but if this crap happens again, that percentage will quickly change.

Based on what? What, exactly do you know that makes you so certain that the police didn't act in good faith? I repeat: What would the public be saying today if the police "had serious concerns," did nothing, and then another guy walked into a workplace and shot the place up?

Couldn't this be a case where the police were d@mned if they did and maybe d@mned if they didn't?

An interesting thought: if the police are so worried about mental health and guns as a threat, then maybe they should have done something about their own before he wasted his wife and two friends. Apparently there were some pretty clear signs long before this happened. Those findings should be interesting.

Well, if they had done something and then prevented it, would they then be under the criticism that they are now over this? After all, the guy hadn't done anything "yet," right? Again, aren't they d@mned if they did and d@mned if they didn't? I don't know this, but isn't it possible that these workplace shootings we all know about had some affect on decision making?

<broken link removed>

The police couldn't even release this guy's name. Durango said above:

"No the guy is stuck with the type of notoriety that no one wants. And will in all likely hood spend a few years trying to put his life back in order over this."

Let's get it that even the Mail Tribune says that this guy released his own name to them, and that's the only way they could get it. The police and the hospital kept the guy's name confidential due to personnel and hipaa laws.

It appears to me that it's everyone except the police who are giving this guy the notoriety, starting with him giving his name to the press. If he had clammed up, even his employer wouldn't know about this.

 

[Gunner3456]

Someone should link this story to the drudgereport.com

Note to self



......done.

And so much for all of those who are worried about this guy's privacy. Let's just put his name out there for everyone and forever, OK?

 

[pokerace]

[QUPlease tell me what the police did which was "against the law?"OTE][/QUOTE]

They had no warrant.




They entered his home and confiscated his firearms.They took him into custody with out an arrest warrant.I do think that is enough to come down on the leo's