Police: 17-year-old shot robbing home with two other men.

[permatex]

http://www.the33tv.com/news/kdaf-police-17yearold-shot-robbing-home-with-two-other-men-20120709,0,3588102.story

Tragic waste of a life.
Hope they throw the book at the two men.

[HALO141]

1. Obviously, the home owner was a racist.

(In before the hoyt.)

[permatex]

2. No doubt. nt.

[Meiko]

3. The whole story is weird

I need to watch the video again or find a site with a more in depth report.

[Loudly]

4. Guns as solution to guns.

This wasn't a burglary. They entered the home with the intention of committing armed robbery against the occupants.

Emboldened by possession of a gun to commit this crime.

[beevul]

5. You forgot to remind us all how many "points awarded", shares.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/searchresults.html?q=guns+solution+guns+sharesunited&sitesearch=democraticunderground.com&sa=Search%21&domains=democraticunderground.com&client=pub-7805397860504090&forid=1&ie=ISO-8859-1&oe=ISO-8859-1&cof=GALT%3A%23008000%3BGL%3A1%3BDIV%3A%23336699%3BVLC%3A663399%3BAH%3Acenter%3BBGC%3AFFFFFF%3BLBGC%3A336699%3BALC%3A0000FF%3BLC%3A0000FF%3BT%3A000000%3BGFNT%3A0000FF%3BGIMP%3A0000FF%3BFORID%3A11&hl=en

[Tuesday Afternoon]

9. shares? uhm --

I got that.

[Spoonman]

6. "Emboldened by possession"

OK

Vehicles in general "embolden" you to drive drunk
Knifes "embolden" you to stab someone
Poisons "embolden" you to kill your spouse
Spoons "embolden" you to over eat
New shoes "embolden" you to run from the police

Guns do not have some mystical, magical, supernatural ability to influence the individuals behavior that is in possession of one.

To believe that is quite simply ignorance on steroids!


The reality of this is simple - greed and stupidity "emboldened" these criminals!

[friendly_iconoclast]

11. There are a few animists that post here in the Gungeon. Loudly/sharesunited is one of them.

[Clames]

12. Don't forget...

...that lighters embolden you to commit arson and USB flash drives embolden you to be a hacker. I have a pen in my pocket so I might be forging checks later.

[DWC]

117. Extremely well stated

I am saving "...quite simply ignorance on steroids" to my favorite quotes.

Semper Fi,

[slackmaster]

7. So, zero points awarded according to your scoring system?

That seems... ...familiar.

[4th law of robotics]

8. Then presumably crimes such as burglary would primarily exist in areas with broad access to guns

and would be relatively unheard of in places without guns.

Could you cite a source for that?

[Lizzie Poppet]

10. There are more home invasion crimes in the UK than the US.

There are more home invasion crimes in the UK than the US. This could be seen to indicate a greater confidence that the people in the home will not possess firearms "emboldens" the home invaders.

Just sayin'...

[Hoyt]

13. Actually, that is not remotely true.

[Lizzie Poppet]

14. In fact, it is.

It's not the easiest crime to track, statistically, as neither the US nor the UK specifically track "home invasions," instead placing these crimes under the broader category of "robbery," "burglary," 0r "aggravated assault," depending on teh specific circumstances of the crime reported. However, it's possible to make a factually-supported estimate, based on both robbery and burglary rates per capita. Using data collected by the US' Uniform Crime Statistics (Dept of Justice) and the UK's British Crime Reports (available as a statistical bulletin from the Home office), numerous agencies, including the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, have noted that the UK's rates in both categories is significantly higher than that of the US. The same is true for aggravated assault, although the margin is not as wide. Given that a home invasion is overwhelmingly likely to be reported as one of those three crimes, it would be virtually impossible for the UK's home invasion rate not to exceed that of the US.

Sorry, but you haven't a leg to stand on here.

[Hoyt]

15. When you quote something like that, it is customary to give a link to the source.

Would love to see what right wing gun site you got that from.

[gejohnston]

16. When will you? NT

[Meiko]

17. Hey Hoyt

how you doing today. For the sake of us who are apparently uninformed could you list a few sites that are acceptable to use for gun and crime data. Be a sport and help us out, OK?

[Hoyt]

18. I just want to know site the post above came from?

It's pretty clear when you read it that the site is questionable.

But, just so you know, free Republic, Stormfront, most gun lover sites, etc., aren't objective.

If you'll tell me where you hang out to discuss shooting people, I'll be glad to comment on the site.

I'm doing fine thank you. Hope you are safe too.

[Lizzie Poppet]

63. It came from me, using data gathered from multiple sources.

I cited the two main original sources in the post (the US Dept. of Justice's Uniform Crime Statistics reports and the UK Home Office's British Crime Report). I share your suspicion of partisan political sources, actually, but I don't mind using them as gateways to better sources. If a partisan site doesn't include any form or reference or bibliography, I generally consider it useless for research (although often quite useful for entertainment purposes).

Aggregation sources (like the two mentioned above) often rely on research form separate, independent sources. Sometimes those sources are of dubious reliability, although the detrimental effect on the aggregator's overall reporting can obviously be minimized by employing multiple data sources.

In any case, if you consider the Dept. of Justice and the Home Office to be "questionable" data sources, one is left to wonder just what data you actually find reliable. I begin to suspect the answer is "any that support your biases."

[permatex]

64. I think he has proven time and again

that the only data he supports is his feelings, opinions, and, as you say, his biases.

[Hoyt]

65. I don't consider DOJ questionable, I am wondering about your conclusions.

such as "it would be virtually impossible for the UK's home invasion rate not to exceed that of the US."

In any event, how many people get hurt in home invasions in UK since guns are seldom a factor? How many kids don't shoot themselves or others, because daddy can't leave a loaded gun around? How many criminals don't go in blasting since the don't have guns? How many policemen don't have to worry as much about some criminal or "law-abiding" gun owner shooting them?

I'd much rather a bunch of UNARMED "home invaders" invade my house (in the highly unlikely event that would occur), than a bunch armed to the teeth from assault weapons they either stole -- or bought in a back alley -- from the gun nut down the street.

[Lizzie Poppet]

68. The conclusion is based on this:

"I am wondering about your conclusions. such as 'it would be virtually impossible for the UK's home invasion rate not to exceed that of the US.'"

The conclusion is based on home invasions being categorized in almost all cases as either robbery, burglary, or aggravated assault. The UK has higher per capita rates for those crimes than does the US (those DoJ and Home Office stats). Thus for the home invasion rate to be higher in the US, that crime would have to constitute a markedly higher proportion of those three broader categories than it does in the UK. I know of no evidence that suggests this is the case.

[bongbong]

85. Another funny thread from the gun-relgionists

"I don't have to prove anything pro-gun I post as a fact, but I will nick-pick anything you anti-gunners post, even factual links, until you get tired of refuting my lies!"
and ....
"You anti-gunners never post links, just your feelings!"

The gungeon definitely reeks of being a near-clone of freeperville.

[permatex]

94. Didn't you get enough posts deleted yesterday?

[shadowrider]

99. You mean an anti-gun religionist acually had posts deleted???

Be still my heart.

[permatex]

101. 3 of them yesterday.

[shadowrider]

106. Dang. I thought all the anti-gun religionists had teflon better than Gotti n/t

[permatex]

107. I don't know who alerted on them

but I applaud whoever did it.

[Meiko]

66. Thanks

Actually I don't hang out at any other sites. I do browse other gun sites for firearms information or news occasionally but I get tired of the fear mongering. DU is the only forum I regularly post on. It's hard to find any progressive sites that offer anything but negative information about firearms. The Democratic party has been involved in the anti gun movement for awhile and it's hard for people to change, many will never see the other side of the argument and that's their right but it makes it hard to find accurate info.

It's nice to able to post stories and other firearms related issues here but I don't want to link to sites that are right wing, it's just not a good thing to do and it upsets people. Have a good day.

[permatex]

19. Customary to give a link to the source?

That, coming from you, is hilarious.

[Hoyt]

20. Why don't you give us an example of a quote I've posted like that without a link.

[permatex]

21. Not a quote

But when asked for a link or proof that the shooter in Dallas was a racist, you kept deflecting.
How about you accusing many of us here of supporting Weaver or Koresh, when asked to provide links to supposed support, once again, you deflected.
Need I go on?

When we provide links, you refuse to acknowledge for belittle them.
I can do this all day.

[Hoyt]

22. That's totally different - obviously an opinion (and highly likely one too).

[permatex]

23. Read the rest of the post

And your supposed opinion sounded more like your "facts".

[Hoyt]

24. You don't like the opinion because it taints your beloved guns. This is a political site.

That means a lot of opinions are posted here. However, when you quote something, attribution is expected.

[permatex]

25. Here Hoyt. just for you

Last edited Thu Jul 12, 2012, 08:22 PM - Edit history (1)

http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/weaver/randytestimony.html
Here's some more from the ATF agent in charge.
http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/weaver/byerlytestimony.html

[Hoyt]

32. That's great, poor old weaver would do things differently if he had it to do over (from your links).

I'm sorry, the racist ruined his life when he started hating people and conspiring to harm or kill them.

Now, back to the question at hand.

[permatex]

36. You are so predictable

did you even read the 2nd link? did you?
Pretty clear of wrongdoing by the agent in charge. Pretty clear Weaver was set up, pretty clear he wasn't a member of the Aryan Nation. But you just continue sticking your head in the sand
I presented facts, what did you persent?

[Hoyt]

41. You are predictable too. You'll support racist weaver, but cheer right wingers going after Holder.

[permatex]

42. Ahhhhhhhh

more bullshit, provide proof or links where I cheer right wingers going after AG Holder.
provide proof or links where I said I support Weaver, what I do support is the 1A, what I don't support is govt. sanctioned murder
I detest what Weaver stood for back then, but I do support his right to to express what he believes w/o fear of being targeted for entrappment or murder.

[shadowrider]

100. It's customary to provide a link when accusing someone of cheering on right wingers

That is according to you.

[PavePusher]

54. Can you cite to evidence of this "conspiring to harm or kill them"?

Or is this just something else you made up?

[Hoyt]

35. By the way, "Mr. Weaver" is full of shit, having been coached. That's an opinion if you can't tell.

[permatex]

39. Your stating it as a fact

So provide the proof or links that he was coached. I watched the hearings back in 95, Weaver came across as someone who deeply regretted what had happened, but he certainly didn't come across as being coached.
Did you watch the hearings Hoyt? Well. did you?

[Hoyt]

43. Permatex, did you read this part of weaver's testimony. Ya gotta like Senator Feinstein's approach.

Senator Feinstein.

Senator FEINSTEIN. Thank you, very much, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Weaver, you mentioned receiving a letter from the probation officer. Was that the letter dated February 7?

Mr. WEAVER. Yes, ma'am, I believe it was.

Senator FEINSTEIN. And in this letter, which I am holding, the probation officer indicates that they did not have your phone number and gave you a number to call. Did you call that number?

Mr. WEAVER. Could you repeat that? I am sorry, ma'am. Could you repeat that question, please?

Senator FEINSTEIN. Yes, I will. Let me read you the letter, dated February 7, which you just said you had.

"On January 18, 1991, you were released on pre-trial supervision pending your trial set for March 20, 1991. You contacted our office, and I advised you we would be getting back with you as soon as we received the paperwork from Magistrate Ayers. I have long ago received the paperwork but have been unable to locate a telephone number. Accordingly, with this letter, I am requesting you to contact me"—and he gives you a number—"as soon as possible. You may call collect if you choose."
Did you return that, did you make that call?

Mr. WEAVER. No, sir, or, no, ma'am. I do not believe I had any contact with them after that.

Senator FEINSTEIN. So, you never responded to this letter, is that correct?

Mr. WEAVER. That is right.

Senator FEINSTEIN. OK. So, you knew they were trying to reach you?

Mr. WEAVER. Yes, ma'am.

Senator FEINSTEIN. Are you aware, in October 1991, the U.S. marshals Service entered into negotiations with you via intermediaries to try to arrange for you to turn yourself in?

Mr. SPENCE. I did not understand the question.

Mr. WEAVER. Or the dates. Could you—

Senator FEINSTEIN. In October 1991, the U.S. Marshals Service entered into negotiations with Mr. Weaver through intermediaries.

Mr. WEAVER. Do you have the names of the intermediaries?

Senator FEINSTEIN. No, I do not. I am asking you, did anybody talk to you about turning yourself in?
Mr. WEAVER. I believe there were several people sent up there— neighbors, supposed-to-be-friends, even people coming up we did not know—and some of them said that they had talked to Federal marshals and they were supposedly bringing me messages or questions from them and I would send them back, yes.

Senator FEINSTEIN. Did they ask you to turn yourself in?

Mr. WEAVER. I cannot remember that, to be honest with you. I think what they would say is what would it take to resolve this issue? Questions like that.

Senator FEINSTEIN. And what did you tell them?

Mr. WEAVER. I said I wanted assurances that my family would be okay, that the property would stay there and I wanted the ATF to admit they were wrong, I wanted my .22 pistol back, and I wanted the sheriff to apologize for calling me paranoid and dangerous.

Senator FEINSTEIN. OK. But you did not agree to turn yourself in at any time or come down off the mountain, despite these entreaties, is that correct?

Mr. WEAVER. I would tell them that, yes, they said, what would it take to resolve the issues? And I told them, and then they would come back and say, well, that is not going to resolve the issues. And then other than that, that is all we said.

Senator FEINSTEIN. OK. How many weapons did you have?

Mr. WEAVER. I cannot remember. It must have been 10, 11, or 12, maybe, including BB guns.

Senator FEINSTEIN. Fourteen sound correct?
Mr. WEAVER. Yes, OK.

Senator FEINSTEIN. And were they all loaded?
Mr. WEAVER. Most likely.

Senator FEINSTEIN. And how many rounds of ammunition did you have in your home?

Mr. WEAVER. I am going to guess—I have seen different reports—personally, I am going to guess between up to maybe 20,000 rounds and half that was .22 ammunition that I believe an undercover agent gave to me, lots of .22 ammunition.

Senator FEINSTEIN. So, 20,000 rounds of ammunition?

Mr. WEAVER. Approximately.

Senator FEINSTEIN. And all of the weapons were loaded?

Mr. WEAVER. Yes, ma'am.

Senator FEINSTEIN. And did you have any explosive materials?

Mr. WEAVER. The only thing explosive would have been we had some blasting caps

that had been given to me by a guy that I barely knew and I cannot remember. It must have been, well, it was prior shortly, very shortly prior to my arrest on the original gun charge.

They gave me about four or five or six blasting caps. That is the only explosives I had.

Senator FEINSTEIN. On how many occasions did you sell weapons?

Mr. WEAVER. I could not even remember, ma'am, over the years. Buy, sell, and trade weapons, all legal.

Senator FEINSTEIN. Hundreds or dozens or?

Mr. WEAVER. At least, well, probably close, up to 100, I will say.

Senator FEINSTEIN. Up to 100 and did you know it was illegal to sell sawed-off shotguns?

Mr. WEAVER. I figured without a permit, yes.

Senator FEINSTEIN. And you were aware of the fact that you were illegally in possession of these weapons?

Mr. WEAVER. Yes, ma'am.

Senator FEINSTEIN. OK. Did your children actually wear Nazi armbands and shout Nazi slogans at neighbors?

Mr. WEAVER. I do not remember my children ever wearing a Nazi armband. I would have to say, no, to that, and I never heard them yell any slogans at any neighbors. When we drove the kids past the neighbors or were around the neighbors and we knew they were mad, we just said, be cool, be calm. Now, if my children were down there taunting the neighbors at any time, I would have to take their word for that, but I know that the neighbors had had it in for my children for a long time and had taunted them, too.

Senator FEINSTEIN. Did you possess Nazi armbands?

Mr. WEAVER. I did not, no, never.

Senator FEINSTEIN. Did you possess any Nazi swastikas?

Mr. WEAVER. Swastikas, maybe. I had a—I have to go to the restroom really bad.

_________________________

You gotta love the last one.


I suppose you guys will now post that compared to "us" he wasn't well armed.

[permatex]

44. I never said that Weaver wasn't wrong

and he admitted it also. still, you seem to think that justifies the murder of his son and wife. Funny how you comment on that portion of his testimony and not the rest. I wonder why that is.
Did you read the 2nd link also? Clearly shows that ATF agent Byerle was caught twisting the facts or outright lying.
Do you approve of fed. agents outright lying that helped lead to the ultimate deaths of a Marshal, a 14yo boy and Weaver's wife?

Still haven't provided those quotes or links to me supporting Weaver.
I, again, wonder why. Do you plan to anytime in the near future?

You just keep doing what you do, I've shown you to be completely wrong about the Weaver incident but you would rather ignore the evidence and keep spouting your usual junk.

[Hoyt]

47. Feinstein: Mr. Weaver do you have any swastikas. Weaver: I gotta go to bathroom really bad.

To keep his worthless racist ass out of jail, he refused to turn himself in, and literally hid behind his family.

Without gerry Spence , his ass would be rotting in jail where it belongs. As to Spence, I hope he finds satisfaction in helping the racist get off.

[permatex]

48. Like I said

Funny how you zero in on just one part of the testimony and leave the rest of it out. Very, very telling.

It was very easy for Gerry Spence to win the case, the govt. fucked up badly. But you go ahead and keep screaming racist everytime you are shown to be completely ignorant of the facts.
I have more than made my point and you have more than shown that your mind is closed.
Do you have any proof yet that I support the RW going after AG Holder?
Any proof that I support Weaver as a person yet?
You must have some proof, otherwise you wouldn't have accused me of those things would you.............

Oh, wait.

I've done my job here, we're done.

[Hoyt]

49. What - you gotta go to the bathroom really bad?

[gejohnston]

50. so let's see

police entrapment is OK with you, as long as it is people you don't like
machine gunning children in the back is OK with you as long as you don't like their parents
you are OK with cops violating laws and civil rights, as long as it is the "other"
you are OK with police sharp shooters shooting someone who is no threat to anyone, as long as you don't like them
are you sure you are at the right site?
Are you going to answer my question about when is it OK to shoot kids in the back?

[Hoyt]

51. Weaver was not "entrapped" into anything he hadn't done before.

Sorry, he is a racist gun trafficker ready to have his illegal guns used to shoot or intimidate those he/they hate.

I know there are plenty of right wing gun owners/carriers who fear they could be similarly "entrapped."

Government has a duty to protect the citizenry from terrorists like him. And I don't fault them for going after the Family Weaver and risking their lives in the process. Glad we have that kind if dedication. Maybe, drones in the future will be more effective with these terrorist groups.

[gejohnston]

52. hate to tell you this but

you sound like right wingers about busting medical pot stores.
Since you have not proven anything, and everything you said is demonstrably false, I fucking give up.

And I don't fault them for going after the Family Weaver and risking their lives in the process. Glad we have that kind if dedication.

So, you are ok with machine gunning children and nursing mothers at long distance as long as they are not "your kind of people". You answered yes by omission. That is the most despicable bullshit I have ever seen in my life. That makes you no better and no different than Ready and his band of Walter Mitty soldiers.
When the Massey mine caved in were you among the one writing it off as "just a bunch of inbred hillbillies" who deserved to die because they live in WV? Were you a Pinkerton goon in an earlier life? What is your fucking problem?
I'm bookmarking this one. Every time you bitch about "toter kills violent attacker" I'm going to throw this in your face.

[Hoyt]

53. No, I'm not for raiding clinics. But we are talking terrorism with weaver.

As to the mines, I'll defer to Woody G., etc.

[gejohnston]

56. Weaver was not convicted of a crime

was not a terrorist. I was not talking about Randy Weaver. I was talking about Sam and Viki Weaver. Sam was the 14 year old child, younger than Martin, who was MACHINE GUNNED IN THE FUCKING BACK AND YOU HAVE NO FUCKING PROBLEM WITH THAT.

[Hoyt]

57. Is Sammy one who fired on agents? Would like to see proof and

circumstances of supposed shooting in the back including context. I'll read it..... unless it's one of those long, contorted right wing fabrications.

Did you like part in Senate hearings where weaver said, "I gotta go to bathroom really bad" when asked about his swastikas.

His response to Fenstein's question regarding having explosives was similarly evasive but so damn obvious.

Yes sir, weaver is suited for an NRA board seat.

[gejohnston]

58. careful of what you asked for

We are not talking Weaver, we are talking about machine gunning children in the back and lying about it.

Is Sammy one who fired on agents? Would like to see proof and

circumstances of supposed shooting in the back including context. I'll read it..... unless it's one of those long, contorted right wing fabrications.

Doesn't fucking matter. The agents did not identify themselves and did not have anything saying "police". The cop fired first. That gave Sam every legal right in the US and Canada to shoot back. Sam only saw some asshole shooting his dog. He shot back and ran. There he was machine gunned in the back. It is not relevant anyway because the cop did not identify himself when he shot the dog. Sammy was not armed and was running away when the cop open fired. It is in the court transcript. The cops tried to Harris open fired after Sam and the dog were dead. Since the cop DID NOT IDENTIFY HIMSELF BEFORE SHOOTING, HARRIS HAD EVERY RIGHT AND WAS ACQUITTED OF MURDER. The agent that killed his mother was known to have said "he wanted to kill someone".

Did you like part in Senate hearings where weaver said, "I gotta go to bathroom really bad" when asked about his swastikas.

Not relevant. Does not excuse the US Marshall machine gunning a child in the back while he was running. The cops tried to blame it on Weaver, but they were caught in a lie when ballistics experts proved that the shots came from the cop's Colt 9mm SMG.

His response to Fenstein's question regarding having explosives was similarly evasive but so damn obvious. Yes sir, weaver is suited for an NRA board seat

Not relevant either, and neither was Fensteins question. She didn't give a rats ass about the truth because it was the ATF and Weaver was not "her kind of people" just like she supported the Iraq invasion because hubby would make money off of Bush's bogus war. Oh, you didn't know faux liberal Fenstein and her old man are war profiteers?

Essentially, the jury found that Mr. Harris and Mr. Weaver acted in self-defense in the shooting death of Deputy Federal Marshal William Degan on Aug. 21. The marshal was one of several agents who had been spying on Mr. Weaver for 16 months, preparing for an arrest. Mr. Weaver was wanted on a warrant for failure to appear at a trial on a 1991 gun charge, but he never left his mountaintop cabin during the surveillance.

After the killing of the marshal, Mr. Weaver's wife, Vicki, was shot to death by a Federal sharpshooter while she was holding her 10-month-old baby, and his 14-year-old son, Samuel, was killed by a bullet wound in the back from another marshal.

Mr. Harris, charged with first-degree murder in the death of Mr. Degan, was exonerated of all charges and released. Mr. Weaver was found guilty of two charges related to his failure to appear at the 1991 trial and remained in jail.

http://www.nytimes.com/1993/07/09/us/rebuking-the-us-jury-acquits-2-in-marshal-s-killing-in-idaho-siege.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm

The FBI sniper who killed the wife of a white separatist in the siege at Ruby Ridge, Ida., in 1992 invoked his Fifth Amendment privilege Tuesday and refused to describe to a Senate subcommittee the circumstances of the crucial event. Sniper Lon Horiuchi took the Fifth Amendment after the Senate Judiciary subcommittee on terrorism refused to give him limited immunity from prosecution. Immunity for Horiuchi could have complicated criminal inquiries being conducted by the Boundary County, Ida.

http://articles.latimes.com/keyword/randy-weaver/featured/5

Oh here is a bonus:

In October 1996, E. Michael Kahoe, Chief of the FBI's
Violent Crimes and Major Offenders Section, was charged with, and
later pleaded guilty to, obstruction of justice charges relating
to his destruction of an FBI "After Action Critique" on the Ruby
Ridge matter. He is scheduled for sentencing on September 11

http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/1997/August97/337crm.htm

[Hoyt]

61. You are right, doesn't matter -- weaver committed crimes against humanity. Should have thought

about consequences before.

He had ample opportunity to surrender his racist, gun trafficking ass -- but he chose to hide behind his family with his guns, explosives, and hate.

Did Sammy fire at agents -- appears so. Was Sammy armed, yes. Did Sammy fire at agents -- yep.

At that point Sammy got shot in the arm, did he spin around and get hit in the back? I don't know. If agents just sat there and shot Sammy in the back running away, I'd have to criticize agents. But, Sammy fired at agents and one of the agents were killed. Sammy was doing what his fine racist, terrorist dad taught him. Heck, we have fine members of gun culture right here who apparently have no real problem shooting an unarmed teenager fleeing the scene of a minor theft. But, Sammy is just some fine young teenager who shot at federal agents trying to arrest his racist, terrorist dad.

I'll do some more reading on how Sammy got shot in the back and arm when I have time. If Sammy wasn't armed and didn't fire at agents -- that's not right. If Sammy fired at agents, . . . . .. well dad should have brought his son up better.

All the rest is just right wing gun talk.

Weaver was a racist, weaver was willing to sell guns to racist terrorist (and they weren't going to use them for Olympic target shooting), weaver had numerous opportunities to surrender, weaver hid behind his family, weaver trained his family in terrorism, weaver should have thought of the consequences before becoming a terrorist and conspiring to help other terrorists terrorize innocent people.

[gejohnston]

69. you missed the point

Did the agent fire at Sammy for no reason and without identifying himself, killing the dog? Yep
Did Sammy fire back in self defense? Yep. He had no way of knowing the machine gun fire from behind trees was a cop. Sammy acted in legal self defense, no jury in the US or Canada would have convicted him. You missed that part, not that you give a shit because it was a poor kid in Idaho that was murdered.
Did Sammy flee? yep
Did the agent fire another burst from his SMG after Sammy was fleeing?yep
Did the rounds hit Sammy in the back? Yep.
Did Harris kill the agent? yep.
Was Harris convicted of murder? Nope. The jury ruled it was legitmate self defense for the reasons stated above.
Did the USMS claim Weaver shot Sammy? Yep.
Did a police ballistics expert prove the USMS lied and proved the rounds in fact came from the USMS issue Colt sub machine gun? Yep.
Did one of the FBI agents in charge go to prison for obstruction of justice? Yep.

That is what the facts of the case were, that is why the tax payers coughed up millions of dollars to the Weaver family. That is why an FBI agent is in prison.

[permatex]

70. Thank you

Hoyt makes it so easy to tear apart his "facts/opinions".

[Hoyt]

71. Doesn't matter -- sammy was following in his dad's racist, terrorist footsteps. Marshals say they

did identify themselves. Besides -- and I realize sammy was probably home schooled by a bunch of racist terrorists -- if dad's story was correct, sammy should have known marshals were going to arrest his dad. Sammy was stupid, sammy fired at agents, randy should feel responsible for sammy's demise, and they are all a bunch of fuckin losers for their racism, terrorism.

That's just my opinion and nothing I have read changes my opinion of that. To bad dad, trying to save his ass, let all that happen to his family. When you hate people, sell altered guns that would likely be use to intimidate people, move your family to a racist compound, etc., you need to be responsible for your actions.

[gejohnston]

72. They claimed

but they were proven liars on that and several other things. So, I don't give a shit what the ass covering pigs claimed. That is why the jury aquitted Harrris and the FBI head cheese pled guilty and went to prison.

That's just my opinion and nothing I have read changes my opinion of that. To bad dad, trying to save his ass, let all that happen to his family. When you hate people, sell altered guns that would likely be use to intimidate people, move your family to a racist compound, etc., you need to be responsible for your actions.

talking about yourself Hoyt? Sammy committed no crime. It was hardly a compound.

[Hoyt]

73. I know, these were fine gun loving racist, terrorists.

[gejohnston]

74. marshals lied

If you want to play that game. I don't think any facts could change your opinion because you don't care about facts. One thing I noticed. Naw, not going to say it. I don't think you are parodying the gun control movement after all. I think you are an wantabe iverglas trying to bait us to violate the ToS. The other possibility is too dark even for me to imagine.

[permatex]

75. I've come to the definite conclusion

that is exactly what he is trying to do. He is so obvious its funny.

[permatex]

83. So you finally admit it

Facts don't matter, just your opinions.
Thanks for clearing that up.

[PavePusher]

110. WHAT Terrorism?

What terrorism was Weaver planning to accomplish?

I'll ask yet again, with weary patience, for a citation for that.

You are trying so hard to sell Bush-league "Terra, terra, terra" that it's mind-boggling to watch your verbal gymnastics. Similar to Bush though, what you are selling is foul, of no use as fertilizer-only poison, and you suck at it.

[Hoyt]

119. So you consider racism, trafficking guns, having blasting caps, etc., normal gun culture behavior?

We ain't just talking just being bigoted, we are talking participating with Ayran Nation and offering to assist them in attaining guns to carry out their evil deeds. I call that "terrorism," but sounds like you consider it "law abiding" gun culture behavior."

[PavePusher]

120. Oddly, that doesn't at all resemble anything I just said.

You are making shit up again.

Stop.

Nor have you presented any evidence to support your assertions.

Stop.

[sarisataka]

59. Am I hearing this correctly

The pro-control side goes on about 'we don't live in a war zone.'

Government has a duty to protect the citizenry from terrorists like him. And I don't fault them for going after the Family Weaver and risking their lives in the process. Glad we have that kind if dedication. Maybe, drones in the future will be more effective with these terrorist groups.

Is someone on a Democratic site advocating for extra-judicial executions of US citizens, on US soil, using military resources, because they have been accused of being terrorists?

Is it that "we don't live in a war zone yet?" and to hell with the legal process, just take them out...

[gejohnston]

60. yes, and machine gun the

children and pets of them and anyone who isn't "his kind of people" too.

[Hoyt]

121. You have nothing to worry about if you don't conspire with bigots, traffic guns, possess explosives,

etc.

[oneshooter]

122. I posses explosives.

Got about 18lb in fact. You got a problem with that?

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[Hoyt]

130. Yes, if you are conspiring with Ayran Nation, some local militia group, etc.

I used blasting caps and dynamite to close an abandoned fox den once - highly disappointed in explosion. But, would find possession of it by a local bigot "club" to be concerning.

[oneshooter]

133. And if I am not? If I am only using it for my own pleasure?

[Hoyt]

135. I think we'd need further information. If a neighbor in an adjoining apartment had 18 lbs. of

explosives, I think that would be grounds for an investigation, especially if he he says it's for his own "pleasure."

If you are on a large piece of property, I'd (and I think law enforcement) would be a little less concerned. However, anyone possessing quantity of explosives needs to be investigated if for no other reason to ensure it's safely stored and not easily stolen. I thnk that is prudent.

[oneshooter]

137. I generally buy 20-25lbs at a time, and I pay a shipping premium to have it delivered to my home.

It is stored away from the house in a cinder block building, and that is the only item in the building. I have had as much as 100lb in that building at one time. Many times others also buy in bulk, we join together to buy larger amounts to get a lower price per, and save on shipping also. When it arrives I call them and they come by to pick it up.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[friendly_iconoclast]

138. If you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about, eh?

[sarisataka]

139. Wow

that says something about your views, as an answer to my question. Will you support Obama in creating a US Komitet gosudarstvennoy bezopasnosti if he starts thinking like you? It will be very useful for you http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KGB#Suppressing_internal_dissent

Might I suggest rather than summarily executing a large percentage of the US population you could have re-education camps set up for those who may not be too far gone?

Perhaps you might want to rewrite the Loyal Citizens Contract:
http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2005/12/loyal-citizens-contract-with-american.html

[permatex]

62. Judging by your posts

your no better than the RW.
You seem to be at the wrong site here, FR seems to fit you better on this subject.

[PavePusher]

55. Was any of that justification for the government to kill a dog and two people...

who had done nothing wrong?

Yes or No?

[shadowrider]

102. Sometimes I just gotta wonder

Back when Hoyt was a robber, did he get hit in the head with too many cans of beans?

[permatex]

105. Or run over by a bicycle front tire.

[PavePusher]

111. I guess I don't get an answer, huh?

Was the question too hard? Was it too difficult to narrow down to a simple yes or no? Really, you can add all the nuance you want...

Again: Was any of that justification for the government to kill a dog and two people who had done nothing wrong?

[gejohnston]

26. with all of the false allegations of racism around here

one poster being called a racist because of a homophone, and the accuser was not aware of the phrase's origin. You are always accusing us of racism, or at least implying it. So, I'm going to ask you this: Why are defending rouge cops machine gunning 14 year olds in the back? Or is it only some 14 year olds?

[Hoyt]

33. Nope, I am accusing right wing Tbagging gun carriers of racism. You guys only help enable them.

As I've said before, to keep your relatively small group happy with your guns, we have to allow millions more like this to carry guns in public and intimidate innocent people (and god knows what they will do if we have a national disaster and these fuckers try to take over) --

[pipoman]

38. More judgemental liberalism, eh?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=47587

[permatex]

45. Help enable them

thats hilarious. BTW, what are they doing thats illegal?

[gejohnston]

46. I don't see any 14 year old kids here

so you are OK with children being shot in the back, with submachine guns no less, if you don't like what their parents are like? Or is it only western kids? Poor kids? White kids?
Where do you draw the line where it is OK to machine gun children?

Where did SPLC get the photo?

[Hoyt]

78. You guys post stories of some yahoo with guns shooting teens all the time.

And you post those stories with great pride.

Sammy was recruited into terrorism by his dad -- that's who deserves blame, not some agent doing his job against terrorist. They have a tough job with all the friggin gun goofs acting like militias, police wannabes, and other such crud.

[gejohnston]

79. prove it

when? There is a difference between an 18 YO home invader and some kid running for his life. I don't buy the rest of your shit.

[shadowrider]

103. So by that logic, would you have a problem with cops shooting OWS people

in the back because they're (or someone associated with them), causing or participating in a riot? (Putting innocent people in danger)?

Or would you have a problem with that?

[PavePusher]

112. "...not agent doing his job against terrorist."

Is summary execution now the job of government agents, especially on our own territory?

Yes or no answer, please.

[Meiko]

76. Isn't that big guy

on the left the one who killed himself not long ago?

[bongbong]

87. Amazing

It's truly amazing how vigorously these gun-relgiionists defend a Neo-Nazi.

And, in a completely unrelated question, I wonder who gets paid for wasting so much time here on DU? Do their checks come from Waples Mill Road?

[Trunk Monkey]

108. Waples Mill Road?

What's at Waples Mill Road?

[PavePusher]

113. I haven't seen ANY defense of a "Neo-Nazi".

There's been plenty of attack on the uncontrolled actions of government agents gone rogue.

I'll ask you the same question I've asked Hoyt. Yes, Weaver was almost certainly a prime asshole.

Was any of that justification for the government to kill a dog and two people who had done nothing wrong? Yes or no answer, please.

[bongbong]

88. Careful

Careful when you post pictures like that. Some of the gun-relgionists might have to start typing with one hand.

[Hoyt]

95. I bet. Don't have any "proof" for our buddy, but highly likely IMO.

[permatex]

97. Didn't get enough of your posts deleted yesterday did you?

[aikoaiko]

34. "highly likely opinion?" It's only a highly likely opinion from you

[4th law of robotics]

28. "Sometimes things are clear without the need to study them"

What's good for the goose . . .

[sarisataka]

29. Beat me to it

[4th law of robotics]

30. That is rapidly becoming one of my favorite quotes

and the fact that the guy who wrote it (within a few days) has demanded everyone else provide proof of every claim . . . well that's just gravy.

[sarisataka]

31. I do like the double standard

of I can throw out every libelous comment I like and never have to back it up because it is an 'opinion' (even when assuming facts or disputing reported facts) but everyone else must quote a 'reliable' source.

[permatex]

37. Kinda sounds like

he starting to realize his position is untenable and he is becoming more and more shrill.
I mean, just look at some of his statements.
I provide 2 links the the Weaver Sen. testimony clearly showing Weaver was set up and entrapped and the ATF agent in charge, Herb Byerle was caught several times stretching the truth and outright lying, and he STILL deflects.

[Hoyt]

84. Links to testimony of a lying racist terrorists means little to me.

[permatex]

86. Hey Hoyt , we get it,

you don't give a shit about facts. After reading some of your past posts in the archives, I don't take a fucking thing you say seriously.
Like this gem:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=118&topic_id=471849#471995

After reading this gem, and after a I stopped laughing, I realized just what your all about.

[Hoyt]

96. Weavers supplied no facts. When pressed, he could only say, "gotta go to bathroom, really bad. "

That's the kind of crap you get from the weavers of the world.

[permatex]

98. Didn't read the second link did you?

Thats ok, you just keep believing what you want to w/o any proof of what you claim. We expect that.

Weaver was a racist POS, no doubt, I never said otherwise, but your blaming him for govt. misconduct, govt. lying, govt. sanctioned murder, is, well, breathtaking.
Saying that he was a member of the Aryan Nation and actually lived on their compound is an outright lie, and I've proved it in the second link that you obviously didn't read. The infomant and ATF agent Byerle confirmed that he was not a member.

Give it up Hoyt, you've been shown to be less than truthful about the whole incident.

[shadowrider]

104. "Weavers of the world". Dang, I thought everyone was a Zimmerman n/t

[4th law of robotics]

123. "Further, every citizen should report anyone carrying a gun in public "

"Maybe even hold them until police arrive."

How does he propose making that work?

You there with the gun! I am completely unarmed and terrified of guns so stop or I'll . . . insist you stop again!

[pipoman]

40. sharesunited has no shame..nor does any aliases he may inhabit..

[AtheistCrusader]

67. Interesting to see him and HankyDub back with new accounts.

One might even say 'odd'.

[slackmaster]

81. It's just a coincidence.

[Trunk Monkey]

109. I don't get it

I seem to remember Hanky Dub posting that he had been PPR'd and now was back. Isn't that in and of itself a violation of the TOS?

I seem to remember reading one of the rules that said basically: If we PPR you and you come back and we find out it's you we will PPR again regardless of whether or not you're obeying the rules this time

[tularetom]

27. A homeowner who may or may not be an asshole shot an intruder who definitely was one

Why is this even worthy of posting here?

This isn't a George Zimmerman stalking incident, it isn't a case of SYG. It's a matter of a homeowner confronted with armed intruders inside his own fucking home who reacted as I'd like to think most people would.

But this thread follows a predictable pattern. Somebody posts a story about a merchant/homeowner shooting somebody who broke into his/her store or home, the usual suspects react with outraged generalizations about firearms ownership and the whole thread degenerates into accusations, finger pointing and name calling. Informed discussion is lost and emotional reactions take over.

I have my own opinions. If somebody broke in here, and I was able to, I'd have no qualms about shooting them. It's a rural area and we keep several loaded firearms in drawers and closets in the house because we can't depend on our sheriff's department for a prompt response.

But that's just my opinion. I don't know whether or not it applies to anybody else so I avoid pointing any fingers.

[richmwill]

77. I agree with your opinion.

It seems some people here would try the "Hey, stop that- please? Just let me call the police and then can you please wait here for them to arrive? Ok?" approach.

[gejohnston]

82. The place could use a better class of "anti" and some

agnostics and even "as a gun owner this one is........."fill in the blank

[bongbong]

89. Predictable

> But this thread follows a predictable pattern.

Sometimes not so predictable. On this thread you get to find out who spends a lot of time vigorously defending Neo-Nazis.

[gejohnston]

90. or rouge cops

who machine gun children in the back.

[bongbong]

91. Ever so vigorous!

Keep defending Neo-Nazis. Very Democratic of you!

[gejohnston]

114. Defending cops

who machine gun children, very Democratic and Liberal of you.

[gejohnston]

116. did you pass the fourth grade?

since when was defending the rule of law and the BoR defending a Nazi, was not. The whole "sins of the father falls on the son" routine is very old testament and very right wing.

[gejohnston]

129. I'll take that as a no

you didn't pass the fourth grade.

[bongbong]

131. I'll take that as a yes

That you've passed the NRA class called "How To Catapult The Propaganda".

[permatex]

118. Instead of getting your posts deleted,

why don't you do something informative and provide links to any of us defending neo nazis?
Betcha can't.

Only thing going on here is us condemning govt misconduct, govt lying, govt sanctioned murder.

[bongbong]

92. Hidden posts

I'm waiting for which one of the gun-religionists will alert on one of my posts in this thread.

Wouldn't want to offend any of those tough guys with their rugged guns! They're SOOOOOOO sensitive!

[bongbong]

93. Splling

How come the spelling abilities of so many gun-religionists resemble the spelling abilities of teabaggers?

[gejohnston]

115. why do so many gun grabbers seem to have the reasoning ability

of teabaggers creationists?

[bongbong]

127. Very good

"I know you are but what am I?"

Brings me right back to 2nd grade!

[Clames]

134. Hope the irony isn't lost on you.

Mr. I-can't-spell-too-well-myself anti-gun-religionist...

[4th law of robotics]

124. "who spends a lot of time vigorously defending Neo-Nazis."

I get you now. You're doing a parody, a satire of what an anti-gun nut acts like.

[bongbong]

128. Sadly, no

Just finding out who vigorously defends Neo-Nazis.

[4th law of robotics]

132. That would be anyone who doesn't favor a complete ban on firearms I take it?

Damn founding fathers. They were neo-nazis before regular-nazis even existed.

[ileus]

80. Homeowner did what he had to do...safety first

You can't take chances with unknown variables....lives are one the line.

[Hoyt]

136. Homeowner did what he chose to do -- don't think he "had" to shoot her in this case.

I know that kind of "rule-of-thumb" appeals to many who excessively arm up, but it's an over simplification.

[permatex]

140. Wait just a minute

you've said that you have no problem with people defending themselves in their homes.
You sure seem to want to excuse the perps no matter what. Why is that? Perhaps you side with your fellow robbers?

[Hoyt]

141. Not "no matter what", but tie goes to homeowner. I"d like to know what happened.

If girl was killed in unusual circumstances, I'd like to know some "facts. "

[permatex]

142. What "unusual facts"?

She entered the home with the two men with the intent to rob, homeowner shot girl defending his home. Now, unless other facts come out, what is the problem?
You always seem to find fault with the gun owner instead of the thugs who initiated the events. I have yet to see you place the blame where it rightly belongs, mainly on the thugs.
Why is that?

[Hoyt]

143. We don't have any facts. No I don't side with "thugs." Nor, do I think it is always OK homeowner

opens fire. We have no info on whether these people were armed; whether they'd ever been at homeowner's place; where they were; etc.

I know you guys would like it to be open season on shooting unarmed people, but I think we know too little to just pat homeowner on back and cheer over shooting 17 year old girl.

If anyone has additional info from the original article, please provide a link?

[permatex]

144. Who here has cheered her death?

They were in the house uninvited, her and her two accomplises are responsible for her death, it's tragic that she's dead, but if she hadn't been there, she would still be alive. Here's a little bit more info. Looks like one of her accomplises may have shot her.
http://thesop.org/story/20120713/claudia-hidics-aberrant-behavior-is-better-explained-in-a-police-report.html

[MicaelS]

145. Straight from the Ft Worth Star Telegram..

http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/07/09/4088381/teen-shot-to-death-in-robbery.html

FORT WORTH — A former Euless Trinity High School student found shot to death last month in Fort Worth was apparently caught in cross fire during a botched robbery she helped plan, according to arrest warrant affidavits released Monday night.

Claudia Hidic, 17, pretended to be a hostage of two men who had entered a home in the 3000 block of Overton Park West, threatening the occupants with a gun and stealing drugs and an iPhone, the affidavits say.

But she had actually recruited the men to steal money and guns from the home, only to be shot in the head when one of several people inside pulled a pistol to defend themselves and shots were exchanged, the documents say.

The affidavits provide new details in a case that has sparked interest, from the close-knit Tanglewood neighborhood where Hidic was found, to Euless, where she withdrew from high school in February.

More at link...

You want more facts, there's a link on the right side of the page to a PDF of the arrest warrant for Curtis Fortenberry, who was Hidic's partner in crime, and alleged killer.

Reading the warrant it looks like a dispute between drug dealers and drug buyers. Looks like Hidic, Fortenberry and Terrance Crumley, went there to buy, sell or steal drugs, and Hidic planned the whole thing.

Read point 19 on page 7 of the PDF. I'd say Hidic caused her own death.

[Hoyt]

146. If in fact they went THERE to buy drugs, sounds like the homeowner/occupants ain't so innocent.

If the homeowner and occupants were just some nice folks, then, I would agree we likely had a justifiable shooting.

However, sounds like homeowner and occupants may have bad as the "supposed" robbers. Not to mention, the girl appears to have sold a gun to the homeowner a few days before. The whole story is bizarre so far -- and, I don't think we are dealing with what most would call a "law-abiding" gun owner.

Thanks for posting.

More proof, perhaps, that changing drug laws would go a long way to stopping this kind of stuff.

[sarisataka]

147. It does not sound like the home owner was an outstanding citizen

and likely should be investigated for other non-related issues, there is this

But she had actually recruited the men to steal money and guns from the home

[MicaelS]

148. I think Hell Has Officially Frozen Over...

I agree with you on all points.

[Hoyt]

149. I have it marked. The news reports must have been written by idiots because you really have to dig

to figure out what went on.

Or maybe it is just one strange case, and all involved made a living stealing from each other.