Oregon Michael Strickland, guilty of 21 counts

[coyote223]

Don't go where you aren't wanted or except the consequences of doing so. Kind of like showing up at a black panthers meeting wearing a swastika and complaining because they weren't nice to you. Strickland knew what he was getting into. They knew him and he knew them. This is my opinion.

I thought he made his living doing such things? Sure he should have known the dangers, but isn't that a risk all media types take? Just like cops hob knobbing with the finest scumbags America produces,,,

 

[Stomper]

I would remind some of you that Oregon doesn't have "brandishing" laws. Legal terms matter.


As for the train (wreck) of thought on, "going where you're not wanted, and you should accept the consequences if you do"... this occurred in a public place, so if I decide you're not wanted in a given public place and proceed to "muscle" you out of the area and maybe even whip your a$$ for the trouble you've caused me in doing it... you'd still have the same stated opinion about that, yeah?

 

[So Low 2]

It was brandishing.

No, its called self defense.

 

[JRuby]

I would remind some of you that Oregon doesn't have "brandishing" laws. Legal terms matter.


As for the train (wreck) of thought on, "going where you're not wanted, and you should accept the consequences if you do"... this occurred in a public place, so if I decide you're not wanted in a given public place and proceed to "muscle" you out of the area and maybe even whip your a$$ for the trouble you've caused me in doing it... you'd still have the same stated opinion about that, yeah?

It's called intent - his purpose was to record their actions so that they could be ridiculed. If he was simply walking / transiting through the area and minding his own business and was threatened then I would be supporting him. His intent was to stick his nose in others business and had done so previously. He went looking for a problem and found one. I do not support his actions and knew what he was doing. I see him no different than any other antagonist out to prove a point and got in over his head. Maybe he will be smarter next time

 

[Koda]

Is it illegal to ridicule someone?

But it is illegal to mob attack someone, as well as roit, and "protest" without a permit...

Im still baffled by the lack of support for Strickland buy gun rights supporters.



minor spelling edit

 

[JRuby]

Is it illegal to ridicule someone?

But it is illegal to mob attack someone, as well as roit, and "protest" without a permit...

Im still baffled by the lack of support for Strickland but gun rights supporters.

we will simply disagree - gun rights do not give you a right to go pick a fight and then claim self defense.

 

[nwslopoke]

Im still baffled by the lack of support for Strickland but gun rights supporters.

While he was judged by a biased system (who wants to take a knee for that?) I don't support bad judgment. I'm sure there were others not in agreement with the protest. Why aren't they in the same situation?

Michael took the actions he wanted and now has to live with the consequences. Anyone who carries better accept when they present a gun it better be under the right conditions. This is a biased system in a biased town. Same as the preacher in Lake Oswego. Biased system. Who knew?

 

[Koda]

we will simply disagree - gun rights do not give you a right to go pick a fight and then claim self defense.

I agree, I just dont believe he was there to pick a fight, he was exercising his free speech as much as the protestors were. His motivation for being there was strictly political and in absolutely none of any video hes ever published has he ever instigated a physical fight. There is zero evidence he was there that day to pick a fight.


And from a legal point of view, if one starts a fight.... Then disengages, he does then have a legal justification to self defense.

 

[JRuby]

I dont believe this to be correct "if one starts a fight.... Then disengages, he does then have a legal justification to self defense" unless some time is considered.

 

[Certaindeaf]

I agree, I just dont believe he was there to pick a fight, he was exercising his free speech as much as the protestors were. His motivation for being there was strictly political and in absolutely none of any video hes ever published has he ever instigated a physical fight. There is zero evidence he was there that day to pick a fight.


And from a legal point of view, if one starts a fight.... Then disengages, he does then have a legal justification to self defense.

Yeabut he isn't a pinko commie so it's crucifixion time.

 

[Koda]

I dont believe this to be correct "if one starts a fight.... Then disengages, he does then have a legal justification to self defense" unless some time is considered.

It would be really, if not virtually impossible to prove, and thus foolish to try to use. But leagally, if you make a real attempt to disengage your no longer a threat to the other beligerant so they lose their right to use force on you.

 

[JRuby]

It would be really, if not virtually impossible to prove, and thus foolish to try to use. But leagally, if you make a real attempt to disengage your no longer a threat to the other beligerant so they lose their right to use force on you.

I hope like heck never to find out one way or another.

 

[Flopsweat]

I hope like heck never to find out one way or another.

I'm pretty sure we know one place not to test that theory, right?

I feel for the guy. I get that he may have made himself more of a target than the average attendee, but I don't believe that I'm in any position to say that he was looking for a fight. I'm not sure anyone else is either. And the guys who threatened him were certainly more at fault than he was.

 

[Lazyfaire]

My question has always been "When he was backpedaling down the street while being pursued by the crowd, where were the police?" They suddenly appeared when he started to defend himself , because they were 'minutes away'. I do think that he, to some degree, was part of the problem. He was recognized for who he was, a documenter of the leftist tactics and that is why he was pursued. Still, he should have been protected. I will NEVER live in Multnomah Co or in Portland. You are not safe in either.

 

[3MTA3]

I would remind some of you that Oregon doesn't have "brandishing" laws. Legal terms matter.


As for the train (wreck) of thought on, "going where you're not wanted, and you should accept the consequences if you do"... this occurred in a public place, so if I decide you're not wanted in a given public place and proceed to "muscle" you out of the area and maybe even whip your a$$ for the trouble you've caused me in doing it... you'd still have the same stated opinion about that, yeah?

And make sure you drink out of the "Gun Owners Only" fountain... I don't see how so many fail to get it...

 

[erwin643]

Ha! Learned something today!

I see it is an unfortunate situation for Strickland. I don't see him as some savior of the 1st amendment and appropriate user of the 2nd. He's just some poor schmuck trying to do what he thought was a good thing for everyone (Filming protesters). Maybe it shouldn't be "Play stupid games, win stupid prizes" How about "Play risky games win risky prizes"? The guy shouldn't have pulled his gun. He should of backed up and RAN! Had people chased him very far THEN he pulled his gun, he wouldn't be in this situation. I think there's a lesson for anyone who carries here for sure. AVOID PULLING YOUR GUN until absolutely necessary!

It came to mind when looking at the charges that the same charges could be leveled against DUII drivers. How many people has the driver driven past? There's a charge for each one! He could have veered of the road and hit someone! They had a psychologist up on the stand to say Strickland was prone to escalating a situation, indicating he would be likely to shoot someone! Crazy stuff. I'm pretty disappointed in Strickland's lawyers. How about they put a bunch of the protesters under the magnifying glass? See if any of them had a likelihood of beating someone? Maybe Strickland could find a lawyer to file civil charges against those goons that were following him, and trying to flank him in the video?

In the end Strickland messed up, jumped the gun, so to speak? A farce of a trial by a judge who certainly hates the 2nd amendment due to the crazy sentencing and removal his rights and livelihood. And the angry mobs from the left continue to mess things up with their protests, get arrested and then released!

BTW, what's up with that sick avatar image of yours, of some elderly man giving the finger?

 

[Stomper]

BTW, what's up with that sick avatar image of yours, of some elderly man giving the finger?

What is wrong with his avatar?!

 

[Mikej]

BTW, what's up with that sick avatar image of yours, of some elderly man giving the finger?

That's my Father, at 90, a few months before he passed, and my Mother. My brother and I bought them a surprise all expense paid dinner to the best steakhouse in Salt Lake City which included a limo ride. Dad was a having fun behind the tinted windows. I couldn't be there, but brother was. Maybe he egged him on for a pic? I dunno? Dad was the nicest guy in the world and there wasn't a person I ever knew that didn't like him. He passed 12/24/10.

 

[Certaindeaf]

That's my Father, at 90, a few months before he passed, and my Mother. My brother and I bought them a surprise all expense paid dinner to the best steakhouse in Salt Lake City which included a limo ride. Dad was a having fun behind the tinted windows. I couldn't be there, but brother was. Maybe he egged him on for a pic? I dunno? Dad was the nicest guy in the world and there wasn't a person I ever knew that didn't like him. He passed 12/24/10.

I think when he said "sick", he meant it in the cool meaning way as is common with the yutes of today. yo

 

[Mikej]

I think when he said "sick", he meant it in the cool meaning way as is common with the yutes of today. yo

That's why I just put out the simple answer. These kids today! What language!