Shawna Cox Video from Inside LaVoy's Truck

a reply to: Xcathdra

So do consider being shot at while exiting the vehicle with his hands up illegal?

a reply to: Xcathdra
'They belong in jail for their crimes'

For what, trying to wake people up?

John_Rodger_Cornman's post sums it quite nicely. They challenged authority and the authority didn't like that.

Whether any of you want to admit it to yourself or not, watching that video from inside the SUV will give you a pretty good idea of how much heart you really have for your fellow human beings.

originally posted by: Flatcoat
a reply to: Xcathdra

So do consider being shot at while exiting the vehicle with his hands up illegal?

Given the totality of circumstances nope. He would be alive had he not fled.

a reply to: Fraiser

Thats just it they arent challenging anything. They arent demanding change and they certainly have not used any system to get change. When they dont recognize the federal government explain what they are challenging and how.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: Granite

The vid is quite damning, we needed some ground audio to match the fbi vid and lo and behold it shows what many of us expected it too.....

Can someone please explain to me why the American Authorities be it Police/FBI /ATF or whatever seem to have no Problem Shooting People??? ( I am EX British Army and have been all over the World on Duty and have myself disarmed armed Suspects) so dont give me the he might of been armed bull**** I constantly see this why?????????????? why do they just shoot People?????? theese are Human beings? excessive force in America and the disrespect for human life is truly shocking and terribly sad.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: Granite

The vid is quite damning, we needed some ground audio to match the fbi vid and lo and behold it shows what many of us expected it too.....

Can someone please explain to me why the American Authorities be it Police/FBI /ATF or whatever seem to have no Problem Shooting People??? ( I am EX British Army and have been all over the World on Duty and have myself disarmed armed Suspects) so dont give me the he might of been armed bull**** I constantly see this why?????????????? why do they just shoot People?????? theese are Human beings? excessive force in America and the disrespect for human life is truly shocking and terribly sad.

a reply to: Mririshman

a reply to: Xcathdra

Look Guys I am not saying an Officer has not got the right to defend himself, he obviously should and the above Video demonstrates this. However there are enough Videos on the web showing excessive use of force on behalf of the Police.
Once again I am not saying all Police are lunatics, however some of the Videos do depict extreme negligence and disregard for human life and the Video explains the obvious and did not really answer my question.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Flatcoat
a reply to: Xcathdra

So do consider being shot at while exiting the vehicle with his hands up illegal?

Given the totality of circumstances nope. He would be alive had he not fled.

That's a blatant cop-out (pun intended) and you know it. Please explain how it is legal to shoot at a person, suspect or not, with his hands in the air in the universal sign of surrender. Especially considering there were other people in the vehicle at the time. And since when is "fleeing" a crime punishable by death with the sentence carried out immediately?

a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

When the vehicle becomes a weapon. As it approached the road block it was a weapon as it could have hit the road block and injured or killed officers. As is it nearly struck an OSP officer. That's the law. Lavoy should have complied at the first stop so as not to put those in his vehicle in harms way or forced them to get out of the vehicle.

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: SoulSurfer

He asked for an escort at a stop that was intended to be an arrest for him...that's not how that works. He should have complied at the first stop.

The night prior he had arranged a meeting with the sheriff. Under the constitution of the United States, the Sheriff holds more power than the president of the United States. The Sheriff has the power under the constitution to arrest any president if he finds them guilty of criminal acts.

That being said, the sheriff has more authority than the Federal Agents.


Don't argue with me on this, go argue with the founding fathers who wrote it down in 1776. I am only a messenger, so "don't shoot me"

a reply to: SoulSurfer

You are confused. The Sheriff would have had to be there AT THE STOP. You can't say "but I was on my way to the sheriff and he has jurisdiction here" when you get pulled over. So yes, I will argue with you, because you are wrong.

a reply to: SoulSurfer

No he doesn't. At least not when it comes to matters of federal law. We've seen a number of cases where sheriffs were under investigation for corruption by the Feds. If a sheriff had more authority than the Feds in his jurisdiction what's to stop him from just kicking the Feds out?

a reply to: SoulSurfer

This the kind of ignorance that is rampant in this country. The same attitude that this bunch in Oregon had. " What I believe is correct because I say so."

Mr. Surfer, you might want to provide some quotes from the Constitution with some argument to back it up, because what you believe really sounds like a bunch of bull s**t.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: BatheInTheFountain
a reply to: Xcathdra

So as a "Cop", can you tell me how the Supreme Court states that you cannot shoot at vehicles for simply fleeing without a CLEAR and imminent threat to an officer or People

And what exactly Lavoy and Family DID, to create that threat, as to deserve being fired upon with LIVE AMMO.

I don't care if you were an LEO. Answer the question.

I did...

and I showed you where the tenn vs gardner ruling says as much. Its what the officer perceived the moment force was used. Going back to the list you want to dismiss provides you with the justification. As I said just because you dont understand it does not mean its invalid and can be ignored.

Actions you insist on ignoring
He resisted a lawful detention / stop / arrest. He engaged in a motor vehicle pursuit. He had other people in the car. He avoided spike strips. He continued driving towards the road block without stopping. He almost hit an officer. He jumped out of the vehicle. He ignored verbal commands from the first stop and from officers at the final stop. He reached into his coat several times after being told not to. He was armed. He made comments he would not go to jail. He kept telling police to shoot him while ignoring commands.

He, and those in his vehicle, posed no threat of death or great bodily harm.

The wise decision would have been to allow him to proceed to his destination and then arrest him on the appropriate charges.

This was very badly handled. The police exacerbated the situation instead of trying to mitigate it as they are meant to do.

I blame the police, and I am generally one of their staunchest supporters.

a reply to: SoulSurfer

Are you going to provide a citation as to where in The Constitution you think it says that?
I know you won't because, The Constitution doesn't say what you want it to.

a reply to: Flatcoat

Tarpman never had his hands in the air to surrender though. You're repeating an easily debunked lie. How many different video angles do you need before you'l admit the obvious truth; Tarpman committed suicide by cop?

a reply to: Mririshman

The man in question, Tarpman if you will, was trying to draw a handgun that he intended to use to kill law enforcement. Should the OSP have waited until 2 or 3 of their own had been gunned down before they stopped Tarpman?

a reply to: kyleplatinum

So how would you have handled this and turned it into a kumbaya moment. This final confrontation was just one small part of the entire situation. These people performed criminal acts over and over at the same time informing those charged with enforcing the laws that we don’t recognize your law. What’s the police supposed to do, just say well never mind then. We don’t really give a damn about law and order anyway.

Had these law breakers had a legitimate grievance they could have showed up without weapons and protested peacefully. Chained themselves to the doors, and laid out a coherent argument for others to understand and make a legitimate effort to change minds. But no, their gun fetish took control of their senses and made them into idiots.

They came for war and they got it. What’s the problem?

a reply to: Fraiser

They've all been indicted for a litany of crimes. "Trying to wake people up" wasn't listed among the charges.
Here's an updated list if you want to know what they've been charged with and why:
Bundy indictments