Shawna Cox Video from Inside LaVoy's Truck

a reply to: Fraiser

You don’t get one very important point here. There is nothing wrong with challenging authority. It’s just in how you do it.

They weren’t challenging authority, they were denying authority. They were insisting on the removal of the authority based upon their own selfish desires, with an arrogance and insistence that their truth is the only truth. And they brought plenty of firepower to impress this truth on everyone.

This man appears to have had grandiose delusions of becoming a martyr. Guess what. Now he’s just dead.

I’m reading all these posts and and there are all these arguments about where the guy’s hand was at the time he was killed. Who cares? The man engineered his own death.

“The tree of liberty got a dose of fertilized to day.” Really?

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: kyleplatinum

You should learn what an Ambush is:

a surprise attack by people lying in wait in a concealed position.

The road block was on a blind turn even though they had several straightaways they could have used. All the officers were in a concealed potion on the sides of the road. By definition it was an ambush.

I am fully aware of the definition of Ambush, which is why you are still wrong. The road block (vehicles) were in plain sight along with officers standing in the road behind their truck, not in a concealed position. Blind turn... No.

Being completely unaware of a surprise attack, for instance... walking down an empty alley at night and all of the sudden 8 men jump out of the shadows and behind doors to attack you. That is an AMBUSH.

I get it, calling it an Ambush is exciting, but it is incorrect.

The United States of America is now exponentially more tyrannical than it ever was in the FF's day.

They started and won a revolution.

What are WE going to do about it?

I don't believe we have a snowball's chance in hell. We are outgunned and apathy really thins the ranks.

Instead of fighting for what's been taken from us, legions are in Mom's basement playing stupid wannabe video games.

a reply to: yuppa

Quite a few states allow th e shootin g of police if justified Or you feel like your life is in danger. a Cop is not above the law. That includes stand your ground or the castle doctrine. A car can be argued to be a castle an da place to feel safe at as well.

Apparently including Oregon, at least according to Ammon Bundy's attorney:

ARNOLD LAW'S COMMENTS ON FBI COVER-UP

The public deserved to have the video, with audio and sound, released immediately after the shooting. Now we know why it wasn’t released: the public would have heard the shots that the government didn’t want it to hear.

[snip]

Now we know why the Government is seeking a protective order trying to gag Ammon Bundy from talking about discovery.

In State v. Oliphant, this Oregon case discusses a person’s right to use physical force against a police officer in self-defense during an arrest. In Oregon, a person’s right to use force in self-defense depends on a person’s own reasonable belief in the necessity for such action, not whether the force used or about to be used on him actually was unlawful. The key here is the defendant’s reasonable belief. If a reasonable person in Finicum’s position would have believed that the use or imminent use of force against him exceeded the force reasonably necessary to affect the arrest, then he was entitled to defend himself from that use of force, i.e., by grabbing for a weapon.

The mere voicing of frustration with the government coupled with an assertion of the lawful authority to defend oneself against attack, is not a threat. But shooting at a stopped vehicle is. Finnicum wouldn’t have known that it was a less-than-lethal round. They just perceived gunshots and fled.

Source

Finicum had every reason to believe his life was in danger after being fired upon by law enforcement without provocation... and every right to protect and defend his life... and the ONLY reason law enforcement had to fear for their lives is because THEY ENDANGERED HIS LIFE FIRST.

originally posted by: okyouwin
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?

There is no problem, I agree, their actions led to the result for sure. Which would have all been extremely and easily avoidable. Maybe you replied to the wrong person?

Am I reading this right? Finicum and the Bundys are/were sovereign citizens?

Mea culpa. I just started reading about all this early this morning after seeing the Cox video posted in a now closed thread.

a reply to: NotTooHappy

Tarpman never had his hands in the air to surrender though

Don't who Tarpman is.....but if you're referring to Finnicum, he got out of the truck with his hands up and two shots were fired.....do you think he was reaching for the derringer he had hidden under his stetson?

a reply to: Xcathdra

Is it ever legal to shoot cops? A growing number of states are passing laws that say that yes, in fact, sometimes it is well within a citizen’s rights to shoot a police officer.

Other states have already ruled in favor of citizens shooting police officers in self-defense, (even hip-hop legend Tupac walked after shooting two cops in self-defense)


(i) A person is justified in using reasonable force against a public servant if the person reasonably believes the force is necessary to:
(1) protect the person or a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force;
(2) prevent or terminate the public servant’s unlawful entry of or attack on the person’s dwelling, curtilage, or occupied motor vehicle; or
(3) prevent or terminate the public servant’s unlawful trespass on or criminal interference with property lawfully in the person’s possession, lawfully in possession of a member of the person’s immediate family, or belonging to a person whose property the person has authority to protect

TExas allows it. Indiana allows it. Arizona too if i read correctly.

Your constitutional right to resist illegal arrest by police

SO Cops dont get a free pass on being shot Sorry it just isnt the case.

originally posted by: John_Rodger_Cornman

originally posted by: kyleplatinum
a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

I do understand that this thread is about the shooting portion of the event, but FACT is it was completely avoidable!

*To all the folks screaming "ambush" ... If it was an ambush ALL of the officers, agents and vehicles would have been hidden, and if they were all hidden there would have been NO road block. The complete road block was in plain sight (not an ambush).

When do police open fire on a vehicle with people inside that have not fired upon them?

That alone is attempted murder.

Again, could have been completely avoidable. Yes, about those people in the truck, who all had an option to get out but decided to stay in the truck.... It's all about your actions folks and they all chose theirs.

originally posted by: okyouwin
a reply to: Fraiser

You don’t get one very important point here. There is nothing wrong with challenging authority. It’s just in how you do it.
I agree. There are more effective ways to do this without playing to their advantage. Education and information is THE MOST effective means of controlling tyranny. After that is the right to bare arms. That right prevented a Japanese invasion in WWII
They weren’t challenging authority, they were denying authority. They were insisting on the removal of the authority based upon their own selfish desires, with an arrogance and insistence that their truth is the only truth. And they brought plenty of firepower to impress this truth on everyone.

Do you know any of them? How can you have such a solid assessment of them and you never met them.

This man appears to have had grandiose delusions of becoming a martyr. Guess what. Now he’s just dead.

He was the one that was killed. None of the activist harmed anyone. You should look up the NAP
I’m reading all these posts and and there are all these arguments about where the guy’s hand was at the time he was killed. Who cares? The man engineered his own death.
Why did the police fire on a vehicle with people inside? Why did police fire on a person when they show their hands to them in surrender? Why fire that many rounds into the vehicle?
“The tree of liberty got a dose of fertilized to day.” Really?

Did the Bundy activists kill anyone?
Did the Bundy activists harm anyone?
Did the Bundy activists destroy property?

Yet they are the side with a dead body and gun shot wounds.

originally posted by: kyleplatinum

originally posted by: John_Rodger_Cornman

originally posted by: kyleplatinum
a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

I do understand that this thread is about the shooting portion of the event, but FACT is it was completely avoidable!

*To all the folks screaming "ambush" ... If it was an ambush ALL of the officers, agents and vehicles would have been hidden, and if they were all hidden there would have been NO road block. The complete road block was in plain sight (not an ambush).

When do police open fire on a vehicle with people inside that have not fired upon them?

That alone is attempted murder.

Again, could have been completely avoidable. Yes, about those people in the truck, who all had an option to get out but decided to stay in the truck.... It's all about your actions folks and they all chose theirs.

I think it's pretty clear that the passengers, including Finicum, did not expect that anyone would really be shot.

And I am CERTAIN they never expected to be shot at in the vehicle after Finicum went down and they posed absolutely no threat of death or great bodily harm.

There was absolutely NO EXCUSE for shooting at the truck after Finicum got out of it.

THAT WAS JUST PLAIN WRONG.

The police were trigger-happy.

a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

There was some physical damage to property, but nothing worth taking someone's life.

originally posted by: Restricted

originally posted by: kyleplatinum

originally posted by: John_Rodger_Cornman

originally posted by: kyleplatinum
a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

I do understand that this thread is about the shooting portion of the event, but FACT is it was completely avoidable!

*To all the folks screaming "ambush" ... If it was an ambush ALL of the officers, agents and vehicles would have been hidden, and if they were all hidden there would have been NO road block. The complete road block was in plain sight (not an ambush).

When do police open fire on a vehicle with people inside that have not fired upon them?

That alone is attempted murder.

Again, could have been completely avoidable. Yes, about those people in the truck, who all had an option to get out but decided to stay in the truck.... It's all about your actions folks and they all chose theirs.

I think it's pretty clear that the passengers, including Finicum, did not expect that anyone would really be shot.

And I am CERTAIN they never expected to be shot at in the vehicle after Finicum went down and they posed absolutely no threat of death or great bodily harm.

There was absolutely NO EXCUSE for shooting at the truck after Finicum got out of it.

THAT WAS JUST PLAIN WRONG.

The police were trigger-happy.

I am told that in law enforcement and prosecuting circles this is called a “Deadman’s blockade,” and is designed to allow a “kill stop” which is illegal. Its made to influence the target or targets to fight back and justify the shooting of them. Police know how to influence people. its why most crooks turn left. they know how a brain under stress works.

a reply to: yuppa

Yuppa,

Yes, I know. Many police officers I know get off on agitating someone into doing something stupid or illegal.

I hate to say it, but I know it's true.

I'm sitting here shaking my head and saying out loud, "I know. I've seen it."

originally posted by: Restricted

originally posted by: kyleplatinum

originally posted by: John_Rodger_Cornman

originally posted by: kyleplatinum
a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

I do understand that this thread is about the shooting portion of the event, but FACT is it was completely avoidable!

*To all the folks screaming "ambush" ... If it was an ambush ALL of the officers, agents and vehicles would have been hidden, and if they were all hidden there would have been NO road block. The complete road block was in plain sight (not an ambush).

When do police open fire on a vehicle with people inside that have not fired upon them?

That alone is attempted murder.

Again, could have been completely avoidable. Yes, about those people in the truck, who all had an option to get out but decided to stay in the truck.... It's all about your actions folks and they all chose theirs.

I think it's pretty clear that the passengers, including Finicum, did not expect that anyone would really be shot.

And I am CERTAIN they never expected to be shot at in the vehicle after Finicum went down and they posed absolutely no threat of death or great bodily harm.

There was absolutely NO EXCUSE for shooting at the truck after Finicum got out of it.

THAT WAS JUST PLAIN WRONG.

The police were trigger-happy.

Reality is, they all were asked if they wanted out of the truck before he started to flee, evade, run away, begin a chase, while he was screaming shoot me in the head. It doesn't matter what they thought was going to happen or not going to happen. Face it people, an unfortunate event went down and death sucks, but to fuel the fire all the way to the end is a choice he made. No Murder. Justified.

a reply to: Vector99

well that's a problem. Police should not be authorized to shoot someone because they are REACHING for some UNKNOWN object...

The fact that we have degenerated to the point that LEOs can MURDER someone, because they PERCEIVE a threat that they can't even see, shows that we are fully engulfed in a police state and that people need to wake up.

LEOs are PAID to protect the populace and to safeguard the constitution. Not to murder someone because they THINK they might be in personal danger.

Jaden

originally posted by: kyleplatinum

originally posted by: Restricted

originally posted by: kyleplatinum

originally posted by: John_Rodger_Cornman

originally posted by: kyleplatinum
a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

I do understand that this thread is about the shooting portion of the event, but FACT is it was completely avoidable!

*To all the folks screaming "ambush" ... If it was an ambush ALL of the officers, agents and vehicles would have been hidden, and if they were all hidden there would have been NO road block. The complete road block was in plain sight (not an ambush).

When do police open fire on a vehicle with people inside that have not fired upon them?

That alone is attempted murder.

Again, could have been completely avoidable. Yes, about those people in the truck, who all had an option to get out but decided to stay in the truck.... It's all about your actions folks and they all chose theirs.

I think it's pretty clear that the passengers, including Finicum, did not expect that anyone would really be shot.

And I am CERTAIN they never expected to be shot at in the vehicle after Finicum went down and they posed absolutely no threat of death or great bodily harm.

There was absolutely NO EXCUSE for shooting at the truck after Finicum got out of it.

THAT WAS JUST PLAIN WRONG.

The police were trigger-happy.

Reality is, they all were asked if they wanted out of the truck before he started to flee, evade, run away, begin a chase, while he was screaming shoot me in the head. It doesn't matter what they thought was going to happen or not going to happen. Face it people, an unfortunate event went down and death sucks, but to fuel the fire all the way to the end is a choice he made. No Murder. Justified.

The use of the Deadmans blockade was illegal. No a t most id say murder but a t least manslaughter. Also setting up on a blind curve knowing that he was going th espeed limit was a road hazard in itself in those conditions. You cant break that quick on a icy road.Leaving him no choice but to try ad go around to avoid hitting the officers.

I guess it's really nuts. But on the other hand, there's a problem. He kept telling the cops to shoot him, and acting nuts and ran away and tried to dodge a road block. And if he'd just stayed in the car he might have been ok. But the reality is he was doing all the things that would add up to being shot. People get shot for a whole lot less. The only reason he didn't get shot sooner was he was a white old man. If he was black he would have been shot immediately. There's a lot more I'd like to say but I'll leave it at that. He shouldn't have been shot though. They could have tried to deescalate the situation. And not just use the guys anger as a reason to kill him. They always over react like that. I feel sorry for you guys. I'd be scared to leave my house. Like seriously, how do you leave your house???

a reply to: Xcathdra

ARE you friggin kidding me? And you know that why? He fled because they started shooting at him. He was trying to protect his and his family's lives...

You are pathetic... This is illegal for so many reasons and leos need to be held accountable.

Jaden

originally posted by: Masterjaden
a reply to: Vector99

well that's a problem. Police should not be authorized to shoot someone because they are REACHING for some UNKNOWN object...

The fact that we have degenerated to the point that LEOs can MURDER someone, because they PERCEIVE a threat that they can't even see, shows that we are fully engulfed in a police state and that people need to wake up.

LEOs are PAID to protect the populace and to safeguard the constitution. Not to murder someone because they THINK they might be in personal danger.

Jaden

Early in my career I did some "Shoot, Don't Shoot" films.

One scenario was a young man coming at us across railroad tracks at dusk. He reached and we drew, ordering him to stop and put his hands in the air. He continued to advance, ignoring all our orders.

Ultimately, I was the only one who shot him.

He was deaf and was reaching for credentials that explained his disability.

I have never forgotten that. It is practically a PTSD memory for me.