JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
So all of a sudden everyone loves "red flag laws?"

IMG_3526.jpeg
 
I don't really think that we know everything the police have withheld in order to effect an arrest. I do think that they do/must justify their action in holding the weapons. Maybe the guy made terroristic threats. Maybe a friend heard him ranting about wanting to ill someone. It may have been his ex, but we just don't know. But maybe they can't let the guy out on bail/no bail and hand him the guns back.

I want the police/sheriffs to defend & protect us from such threats, but I do believe such actions must be publicly justified in court by a judge, and the guy must have his 'day in court' re: withholding his firearms. If he is a threat to the public he should be remanded until trial.
 
Biden's FBI killed a disabled Senior for talking trash online and Biden's DOJ is imprisoning a young man for seven months because he posted an anti-Hillary meme!

Oregon took the First and Second Amendment Rights away from a citizen journalist for drawing his Glock 26 while retreating to ward off an advancing mob. I do not trust Oregon on this one.
 
How would they charge attempted murder and unlawful discharge of a firearm from journal post or confidential tips? Wouldn't someone need to actually fire a weapon or physically attempt to kill someone for those charges to be applied?

If he just said some things wouldn't that be more terroristic threats?

I wonder if those firearms he had were loaded and rounds chambered...
 
How would they charge attempted murder and unlawful discharge of a firearm from journal post or confidential tips? Wouldn't someone need to actually fire a weapon or physically attempt to kill someone for those charges to be applied?

If he just said some things wouldn't that be more terroristic threats?

I wonder if those firearms he had were loaded and rounds chambered...
I would certainly expect that a charge of unlawful discharge would necessitate a discharge of a firearm.
 
I've seen no real evidence released to the public so far.
Alright.

Because the conjecturing gets around the globe before the truth ever gets it's pants on.

I read in an earlier post that a guy was going through a divorce. If he had an ERPO sic'd after him I'd immediately wonder if it was legitimate or was vindictive in nature.

The other issue becomes intent. You can own guns and be unhappy with life situations and still not go on murdering rampages…

So I'd be curious what actual evidence there is. Is there a manifesto, like the one that tranny chick who shot up the Christian school had that the police never released to the public because it was too damming to leftist causes?

Oh look, dog whistle, never mind, on to the next thing we should be clicking on and "oh my goodnessing"
 
If it was never released, how do you know what it said? 🤔
I'm using my superpower called "deductive reasoning" and acknowledging the fact it was never released, because of a reason….

Here's an anecdotal piece of leftist ideology in practice for you to consider:

UW Seattle years ago, stopped including the race/skin tone of campus crime alerts because they almost 100% of the time referenced a "black male" perpetrator. The admin/staff in charge said they 'didn't want to contribute to stereotypes so they removed that aspect of the descriptor.' After that, campus safety alerts read like this:

"Male in red sweatshirt and blue jeans is being sought by police for a robbery at gunpoint which happened along 15th ave at approximately 7:30pm."
 
I'm using my superpower called "deductive reasoning" and acknowledging the fact it was never released, because of a reason….

Here's an anecdotal piece of leftist ideology in practice for you to consider:

UW Seattle years ago, stopped including the race/skin tone of campus crime alerts because they almost 100% of the time referenced a "black male" perpetrator. The admin/staff in charge said they 'didn't want to contribute to stereotypes so they removed that aspect of the descriptor.' After that, campus safety alerts read like this:

"Male in red sweatshirt and blue jeans is being sought by police for a robbery at gunpoint which happened along 15th ave at approximately 7:30pm."
It must have really bothered them that the campus crime alerts were lacking diversity.
 
We know police received a tip on Monday about the person "planning a violent attack on an event". We don't know whom the tip came from, and what accompanied the tip in terms of proof. We can probably assume that the ERPO was issued based on the tip, though I suppose it could have been issued earlier for other reasons. We know court documents reference alleged targets that include specific roles at the event (belayer, spectator, etc), so while it sounds like there were not particular people being targeted (which would explain the use of the term "generalized anger"), that level of detail is suggests something more concrete than groundless suspicion.

We know he had multiple firearms in his possession when he was taking into custody - nothing illegal about weapons possession by itself, but when accompanied with a tip about the person planning a violent attack it definitely becomes more concerning. I mean, if the police had received a tip about someone planning a mass shooting, they learned the subject threw his guns in the car and went to the venue, but they took no action and the guy ended up killing people, they'd be crucified by the public for letting it happen.
 

"Garner is facing 27 charges including four counts of attempted murder, and 15 counts of unlawful use of a weapon."

Not sure how that works…….

I'm waiting to find out the "Truth" in regards to this whole scenario. Not holding my breathe in this liberal sh!thole though.

I'm sure if the "suspect" identified as something else or his pigment was a bit different we wouldn't be hearing a peep.
 
I'm using my superpower called "deductive reasoning" and acknowledging the fact it was never released, because of a reason….
I like to use my less-super power of looking for news articles with information relevant to the subject In this instance that led me to this:



TL:DR the cops say they will release all the documents when the investigation is closed and the ones most actively trying to keep them from being disclosed are The Covenant School, the church that shares its building, and many of the school's parents, including those whose children were murdered.

And why would the police, a group more than likely NOT leftist, care if releasing them would harm "the leftist cause"?

Oh, and the murderers parents are claiming they 'own the rights' to all of the relevant writings and want them, but mad twist time!

"He said that the shooter died without having a will and therefore has no other heirs, so whatever those writings, i.e., the manifesto, he says they belong to the parents, and the parents are going to assign their interest in those writings to the school."

 
I like to use my less-super power of looking for news articles with information relevant to the subject In this instance that led me to this:



TL:DR the cops say they will release all the documents when the investigation is closed and the ones most actively trying to keep them from being disclosed are The Covenant School, the church that shares its building, and many of the school's parents, including those whose children were murdered.

And why would the police, a group more than likely NOT leftist, care if releasing them would harm "the leftist cause"?

Oh, and the murderers parents are claiming they 'own the rights' to all of the relevant writings and want them, but mad twist time!

"He said that the shooter died without having a will and therefore has no other heirs, so whatever those writings, i.e., the manifesto, he says they belong to the parents, and the parents are going to assign their interest in those writings to the school."

So take your inferior super power a bit further and ponder why… who does it harm for that manifesto to be made public?
 
To be charged with attempted murder, wouldn't one first need to actually attempt it? Planning isn't attempting. Conspiracy to commit, perhaps, but how has he attempted it? Just wondering since the details are so lacking. I'll wait to hear his side of the story.

This reminds me of the Nobel Peace Prize given to Obozo for something he might do someday in the future...
 

"Garner is facing 27 charges including four counts of attempted murder, and 15 counts of unlawful use of a weapon."

Not sure how that works…….

I'm waiting to find out the "Truth" in regards to this whole scenario. Not holding my breathe in this liberal sh!thole though.

I'm sure if the "suspect" identified as something else or his pigment was a bit different we wouldn't be hearing a peep.
I don't know the details of the case but in Oregon "attempted" means taking substantial steps towards the commission of a crime. I could see the argument of loading your car with firearms and ammunition then driving from Portland to Deschutes County with the intent to murder people taking a substantial step toward those crimes.
 
I don't know the details of the case but in Oregon "attempted" means taking substantial steps towards the commission of a crime. I could see the argument of loading your car with firearms and ammunition then driving from Portland to Deschutes County with the intent to murder people taking a substantial step toward those crimes.
All I am saying is I need to see some evidence/proof. My faith in the justice system in America (especially in Oregon) is non existent. The government doesn't care about our rights.

I've read worse "attempts" on this forum on killing people and burying them out back. Joke or not.
 
All I am saying is I need to see some evidence/proof. My faith in the justice system in America (especially in Oregon) is non existent. The government doesn't care about our rights.

I've read worse "attempts" on this forum on killing people and burying them out back. Joke or not.
I get it. I've seen the Justice system fail multiple times. I was just stating what Oregon considers "attempt."
 

Upcoming Events

Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR
Redmond Gun Show
Redmond, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top