OFF Alert Re: Medford Outrage

[chris61182]

Maybe suicide?

And how would they know that? They never talked to him.

 

[New York]

Can you imagine the blowback on the police if they had done nothing and he had actually killed someone? I guess they were pretty much in a damned if you do/damned if you don't situation.

This is the best point that has been made in this entire thread. Granted they WAY LE responded may be questionable, but I don't feel they had any choice, but to respond. Leave it to the courts to figure out if their response was over the top or not.

Cougfan2 - They did not have a warrant. Read your Constitution.

Also, if we leave it up to the courts to decide, you essentially have the fox guarding the hen house...which is all too often the case.

Federal Court Approves Traffic Stop Tasering Of Pregnant Woman
http://tinyurl.com/y9pmsrn


NY

 

[matt_w]

Cougfan2 - They did not have a warrant. Read your Constitution.

They also didn't bust into his house. He could have told them to go pound sand but he gave himself up willingly. His choice.

 

[Jamie6.5]

By the police's own reports there was no probable cause, then mysteriously and with out explanation 20 minutes later they decided they should anyways.

Knock it off. Probable cause is a criminal issue and term. This was civil. This was lawful.
Geez....

It's not "civil" until the cops are off duty, out of uniform and acting of their own volition. As long as they are on-duty, under orders, in uniform and carrying department weapons, this is a criminal matter.
And the police committed a crime by not having a warrant that they couldn't get because Mr. Pyles had committed no crime, and had generated inadequate probable cause.

Spin it however you like. Your arguments make no sense.

 

[Jamie6.5]

He could have told them to go pound sand but he gave himself up willingly. His choice.

Next time you have multiple tactical weapons pointed at you, call me and let me know how you are going "willingly" okay?

 

[matt_w]

Next time you have multiple tactical weapons pointed at you, call me and let me know how you are going "willingly" okay?

Like I said, his choice. If you truly believe you have done nothing wrong and your privacy is important to you, don't be a coward. Your personal freedoms aren't kept by suing after the fact, but by doing the right (translation: hard) thing when the time comes.

 

[Ravenous]

You might not like it and I might not like it but the only way to fix it is to amend or repeal the current law. It may not be right morally but it is right on paper and in the end that is all that matters(to the politicians/sheriff/judges anyway). Arguing isn't going to solve the problem at all.

 

[Ravenous]

Like I said, his choice. If you truly believe you have done nothing wrong and your privacy is important to you, don't be a coward. Your personal freedoms aren't kept by suing after the fact, but by doing the right (translation: hard) thing when the time comes.

Well stated

 

[matt_w]

I think the last thing I would do in such a situation would be to arm myself, and I doubt seriously that the cops would come in blazing!

(I could probably sue for more though when they break down my door and tear gas me, also the resulting NWFA thread would be 5x longer)

 

[New York]

They also didn't bust into his house. He could have told them to go pound sand but he gave himself up willingly. His choice.

You're kidding right? Either that or you're obviously confused.

"Any rational person would recognize the danger in refusing the orders of dozens of heavily armed cops....your home is surrounded by SWAT teams from multiple jurisdictions. There are men in helmets with machine guns everywhere. Snipers are aiming at your home. You are told to come outside. You are promised you won't be arrested, handcuffed or removed from your property."

All those promises were broken and they DID go into his house against his will and confiscated his stuff after he was cuffed.

Good grief, read the alert.

https://www.oregonfirearms.org/

 

[matt_w]

All those promises were broken and they DID go into his house against his will and confiscated his stuff after he was cuffed.

You expect a negotiator to keep his promises?

Also, if the article is right in making it out as bad as it sounded, any "rational" person would know his rights and call his lawyer right away. And if he didn't have a lawyer, at least he's at home and can look one up in the phone book.

 

[Jamie6.5]

You expect a negotiator to keep his promises?

Curiously enough, considering that he is an agent of the Government and acting in an official capacity,...
Yes I would.

When the police lie and break the law and/or their promises, they are no better than common criminals, and the AG should be on their back about it.

But since this state's upper echelon politicos are all from the anti-gun progressive party, we can't rely on that.

So we have to raise **** in the forums we have available.

 

[matt_w]

Curiously enough, considering that he is an agent of the Government and acting in an official capacity,...
Yes I would.

Well there's your problem then. Never trust anyone that benefits from you doing what they tell you to do.

Problem solved!

edit: In that case, I shouldn't trust gunner...

 

[Gunner3456]

Well that's better than the last chapter in this saga when you kept contending the he went of his own free will.

So say he had refused to come out of the house?
What would have been the outcome?

Tear gas through the windows?
SWAT battering his door down?
Take him out via .308 through the window?

It would have depended entirely on what he did. Your guess is as good as mine what they would have done with tear gas or a sudden burst entry or whatever they thought was safest under the circumstances for Pyles and the police. C'mon - you have to be there and have it happen to make that call.

You can be sure that had he refused to come out they would have spent many, many hours trying to talk him into coming out.

They were however there to take him, and take him they would have.

 

[PhysicsGuy]

Okay guys, I hate to close down threads that are gun related, but seriously, this trolling and flaming has to stop.

 

[Trlsmn]

OK thread cleaned and reopened. We want 2nd amemdement discussion here at NWFA that's what this forum is about.

What we don't need is Ad Hominem attacks diverting the scope of the discussion from "the topic" to "the person". We must realize that there will be differing opinions, this is a good thing, if everyone had the same opinion there would be nothing to discuss and we could talk about the weather though I believe some here could argue about that.

 

[Jamie6.5]

Like I said, his choice. If you truly believe you have done nothing wrong and your privacy is important to you, don't be a coward. Your personal freedoms aren't kept by suing after the fact, but by doing the right (translation: hard) thing when the time comes.

So in the dark of pre-dawn, with no witnesses available, (neighbors had been roused and evacuated) you are forced to make a choice between death or submission.
Is that truly your idea of a free country where the constitution guarantees you the right to be secure in your own home unless due process has been followed? (warrant signed by a judge based on sworn affirmation)

If the issue were about anything OTHER than guns the ACLU would be all over the MPD,OSP JCSD etc.
Reality dictates that they gave him no real choice.
And that is what has so many people (like myself) riled up.
That is not the USA the country's founders envisioned.
It is not the country my forefathers fought and sacrificed for.

It is not a country I would choose to live in.
And I believe if the fed's excuse for an AG, Eric Holder, wasn't so anti gun, he'd be all over Oregon's AG.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Can you imagine the blowback on the police if they had done nothing and he had actually killed someone? I guess they were pretty much in a damned if you do/damned if you don't situation.

This is the best point that has been made in this entire thread. Granted they WAY LE responded may be questionable, but I don't feel they had any choice, but to respond. Leave it to the courts to figure out if their response was over the top or not.

So on the mere accusation that this guy was dangerous (by an apparent "bad actor" supervisor) the following is justified?

1) SWAT team at 3 AM terrorizing this guy at his home

2) Virtual arrest and commitment to a mental institution for "evaluation"?

3) Breaking and entering or at least invading his home to steal his firearms ?

Am I still living in the USA?

 

[Gunner3456]

So on the mere accusation that this guy was dangerous (by an apparent "bad actor" supervisor) the following is justified?

1) SWAT team at 3 AM terrorizing this guy at his home

2) Virtual arrest and commitment to a mental institution for "evaluation"?

3) Breaking and entering or at least invading his home to steal his firearms ?

Am I still living in the USA?

Those are pretty over the top descriptions of what actually happened, and very inaccurate as to legal and actual descriptions of what happened.

If you want to hate cops, that's up to you. If you want to actually understand what they did and how they did it and why it was lawful, you have to be willing to try to see the other side.

I've tried my best but I feel I'm wasting my breath. It doesn't seem to matter whether I kid you about it or get in your face about it, the same broken record keeps coming back.

I can't reach you.

 

[Cougfan2]

Cougfan2 - They did not have a warrant. Read your Constitution.

Also, if we leave it up to the courts to decide, you essentially have the fox guarding the hen house...which is all too often the case.

Federal Court Approves Traffic Stop Tasering Of Pregnant Woman
http://tinyurl.com/y9pmsrn


NY

I have read the constitution. The courts are governed by the constitution with the SCOTUS having the final say. Please tell me under current law how this is not a matter for the courts.

If you disagree with the courts or the constitution, elect representatives who will vote for a constitutional convention and see what you get out of that cluster flump.