Military Veteran’s AR-15 Confiscated by Police – But the Reason Why Is the Real Story

[Father of four]

Those cops that shut up the pickup truck driven by the old ladies down in SoCal, did they get disarmed?

Not the last time I heard. The Chief was thinking about reprimanding the cops, but don't hold your breath.

 

[Father of four]

Cops can fire warning shots as well.

But when us civilians to do it, its considered a criminal act? Weird...:nuts:

 

[Nightcrawler]

Cops can fire warning shots as well.

Bull*** . . cops can't fire warning shots. Do your homework before spewing misinformation.

 

[Father of four]

Bull*** . . cops can't fire warning shots. Do your homework before spewing misinformation.

The cops get to darn near do what ever they choose to do and get away with it. We all know it.

 

[Father of four]

But why shoot warning shoots when you are unaccountable for doing the real thing.

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

Medford was pretty bad 20 years ago, not sure about now. Back in 1992 and 93... It also seemed like there were a lot of patrol cars, with nothing better to do.

I must have been pulled over by the same cop. Beautiful summer morning in 1992 I was driving to work in Medford when bam lights and woop, woop. I was just out of school and still driving a beater car, but everything worked. Young cop ran all my paperwork and kept looking for something wrong. Accused me of speeding when I wasn't. I asked to see the radar and he said "it looked like I was speeding". Jerk made me late for work. When I told the story at the office one of my co-workers asked if I was driving resting my arm on the rolled down window. "Well yes, was that illegal?" No, but since I tan dark I was probably pulled over for suspension of DWH (Driving While Hispanic).

The same thing happened years later when my wife and I had a surprise baby and needed to get a crappy old minivan. My Mexi-van got pulled over four times that summer for no reason. Lesson learned, save up for a decent car and use sunscreen!

 

[speeddemon94]

Bull*** . . cops can't fire warning shots. Do your homework before spewing misinformation.

Gosh, I'm really sorry...Cops pretty much do what ever the hell they want, regardless of the rules. Have a look at the real world before spewing misinformation.

 

[Stomper]

It is stated in the ORS that the use of deadly force is justified upon a perpetrator who is attempting to break into any structure that is a dwelling (building where one is living). It doesn't say the perpetrator has to actually enter the dwelling, and it doesn't say you CAN'T vocalize "this is a warning shot" when you use deadly force with a firearm. Granted warning shots are a bad choice in most circumstances (not all), but why give a perp a second chance to come back later, prepared with friends and/or their own hardware,

Although the home owner seems like he's a good guy in the brief TV interview I saw, he didn't strike me as the sharpest tool in the shed with an over-simplified take on life. Given all the (known) circumstances, I know I could beat the rap in court just representing myself let alone with a competent attorney... Maybe even force those (particular) dick-headed cops to apologize.

 

[BigStick]

I agree with the "Biden" defense, but Stopmer makes a great point. If he was justified in using lethal force, it shouldn't matter if he intended to hit him or not. Looks like the cops were just looking for something to charge him with because they like being the only people with guns.

 

[Botte Hork]

I must have been pulled over by the same cop. Beautiful summer morning in 1992 I was driving to work in Medford when bam lights and woop, woop. I was just out of school and still driving a beater car, but everything worked. Young cop ran all my paperwork and kept looking for something wrong. Accused me of speeding when I wasn't. I asked to see the radar and he said "it looked like I was speeding". Jerk made me late for work. When I told the story at the office one of my co-workers asked if I was driving resting my arm on the rolled down window. "Well yes, was that illegal?" No, but since I tan dark I was probably pulled over for suspension of DWH (Driving While Hispanic).

The same thing happened years later when my wife and I had a surprise baby and needed to get a crappy old minivan. My Mexi-van got pulled over four times that summer for no reason. Lesson learned, save up for a decent car and use sunscreen!

Got pulled over once in CA, but the highway patrol officer was very pleasant and professional. It's sad when the officer is really looking for revenue or pleasing the klan-gene, but I find most officers, fortunately, a pleasure to deal with. Regarding the veteran's AR: the warning shot was plain stupid. I am convinced the 2A rights should be fully uninfringed, but I can recommend every gun owner to read the law and understand it.

I think Dave Workman has a book that might be useful. Haven't read it yet, but I guess it takes legislation and puts it a little more in layman's terms that we all can understand and comprehend.



BTW: Surprise baby? Those things take 3 quarters of a year to show up. I know what you mean, my son was not really planned, but that doesn't mean not less loved.

 

[dario541]

This event took place here in my home town of Medford, Or. It tells how a man had his gun stolen by the police for firing a warning shot at a crook.
It is outrageous! I have long thought that this State has "On-the-job-protection" for criminals. We do not have the "Castle Doctrine." If a criminal breaks into your home, you have to try to flee. If the door is blocked you have to try to get out through the window. In other words, if you face up to a home breaker, you are usually considered to be the worst criminal! If you can, you have to run away.
I think that the Oregon government protects its criminals because Law Enforcement needs crooks to justify its big fat wages, big fat benefits and big fat pensions! In other words: no crooks; no need of a huge police force!
Again I say: Oregon has "on-the-job" protection for crooks!
Sometimes I'm tempted to move. Is there any state where crooks are considered to be criminals?

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

No, Oregon law does not require a duty to retreat. Is Jackson County still pretty conservative? Maybe a jury will let him off so he can get his AR back and not have his 2A Rights taken away.

 

[speeddemon94]

Yep, Jackson Co. is still pretty conservative, outside of Ashland anyhow...If he handles himself well in grand jury he will likely be okay. But if for one minute he lets any doofus show while in that court room, he's done.

And speaking of Oregon LEOs being well paid, there was a time in the mid to late 90's that the Medford P.D. was in the top 10 in the nation for starting wages for a new officer. It was something like 3200/month in 1997, IIRC.

Pay cops on the same pay scale as military, promote based on merit, and you'd see attitudes change.

 

[Father of four]

BTW: Surprise baby? Those things take 3 quarters of a year to show up. I know what you mean, my son was not really planned, but that doesn't mean not less loved.

Congratulations to you and Mrs.Hork....


Oops...no new babies. Never mind.

 

[Kevatc]

Man defended himself from a criminal adequately, now he is the criminal.

Lesson: in the eyes of the police and the state, SOMEONE is always the criminal. It seems that it's literally impossible for them to respond to a call nowadays without finding a crime and someone to charge with it - notice how I phrased that.

bubblegum these Medford police.

Is it legal to discharge a gun within city limits? Aside from that is it a good idea EVER to discharge a gun inside of a dwelling unless the bad guy is actually in your home and you have no choice left but to defend yourself? Is there a safe direction to discharge a gun in an apartment complex?

This event took place here in my home town of Medford, Or. It tells how a man had his gun stolen by the police for firing a warning shot at a crook.
It is outrageous! I have long thought that this State has "On-the-job-protection" for criminals. We do not have the "Castle Doctrine." If a criminal breaks into your home, you have to try to flee. If the door is blocked you have to try to get out through the window. In other words, if you face up to a home breaker, you are usually considered to be the worst criminal! If you can, you have to run away.

Ah, no .... no you don't.

If I had the ability to move to a tactically better position within my home I would do so but if not, once I feel my life is in jeopardy, and the intruder has the opportunity and ability (by breaking the threshold in my opinion) then I don't have to retreat. I can defend myself, anyone in my home, and my property.

 

[RVTECH]

“When I’m dealt with a stressful situation, being a veteran from Iraq and the Afghanistan war, it’s natural. I just jump into combat mode. I told him, ‘I’m going to give you a warning shot’,” Thompson explained.

As a veteran myself I can appreciate his rational but the reality is he was not in Iraq or Afghanistan and his attempt to compare his actions to a combat situation was an admission of stupidity, or ignorance. A persons' military experiences or training does not justify illegal actions.

 

[Stomper]

As a veteran myself I can appreciate his rational but the reality is he was not in Iraq or Afghanistan and his attempt to compare his actions to a combat situation was an admission of stupidity, or ignorance. A persons' military experiences or training does not justify illegal actions.

Agreed, the military is full of "sledgehammers" that only have one "mongo break stuff" mode of operation, and from the brief news interveiw he strikes me as such. That's all well and good for "general operations" on the battlefield, but a "ball-peen hammer" and "rubber mallet" approach (in addition to "sledgehammer" skills) should be utilized too. Of course that takes a bit of wisdom, and it seems so few of the populace are capable of grasping and utilizing it.

 

[RVTECH]

and it seems so few of the populace are capable of grasping and utilizing it.

The few that do usually don't wind up in a national news story.

 

[orygunmike]

It is comments like this that can and will be used against you should you find yourself being proscecuted for using deadly force.

People taking advice from people who don't know the law will end up in trouble.

I would agree with one of the first posts, my dad started taking me shooting around 6-7 years old. He always told me if you ever have to pull a gun on someone make sure you kill them.
That always stuck with me more than anything.

 

[orygunmike]

Stop defending stupid gun owners. | Legal Issues, Self defense | GrantCunningham.com

When you defend stupid people .... it makes you look stupid.

This event took place here in my home town of Medford, Or. It tells how a man had his gun stolen by the police for firing a warning shot at a crook.
It is outrageous! I have long thought that this State has "On-the-job-protection" for criminals. We do not have the "Castle Doctrine." If a criminal breaks into your home, you have to try to flee. If the door is blocked you have to try to get out through the window. In other words, if you face up to a home breaker, you are usually considered to be the worst criminal! If you can, you have to run away.
I think that the Oregon government protects its criminals because Law Enforcement needs crooks to justify its big fat wages, big fat benefits and big fat pensions! In other words: no crooks; no need of a huge police force!
Again I say: Oregon has "on-the-job" protection for crooks!
Sometimes I'm tempted to move. Is there any state where crooks are considered to be criminals?