It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bodyguard for Michael Moore Arrested on Gun Charges

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hellmutt
. I think beeing a bodyguard should give you the right to carry a gun. Opening a bank-account should not.


Nor does it. You can not own a gun if you have a criminal record regardless what BS MM spreads. Its against the law NOW how would restricting honest gun owners make it better?

So the only people that have a right to armed protection are those rich enough to hire it?

Poor people arent allowed the right?




posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 05:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk
So the only people that have a right to armed protection are those rich enough to hire it?

Poor people arent allowed the right?


Nothing is free, so I guess: yes. But when less people carry guns, maybe they didn`t need so much protection as they do today. I don`t know the demands or gunlaws in US. But is it really necessary for everyone to have a gun?

I heard this story about this bank in US. When you opened an account in this bank, they would give you a gun for free. I thought that sounded crazy. I hope it`s not true.

Did Moore say that bodyguards should not carry guns?

[edit on 2005/1/21 by Hellmutt]



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 06:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hellmutt

Originally posted by Amuk
So the only people that have a right to armed protection are those rich enough to hire it?

Poor people arent allowed the right?


Nothing is free, so I guess: yes. But when less people carry guns, maybe they didn`t need so much protection as they do today. I don`t know the demands or gunlaws in US. But is it really necessary for everyone to have a gun?

I heard this story about this bank in US. When you opened an account in this bank, they would give you a gun for free. I thought that sounded crazy. I hope it`s not true.

Did Moore say that bodyguards should not carry guns?

[edit on 2005/1/21 by Hellmutt]


Interesting statistic starting to show up here in the U.S.

It turns out that crime is dropping faster in the states that allow concealed weapons to be carried than in states that don't.

Perhaps the reason is because criminals are more afraid to victimize people when they know they might be armed, than when they're sure they're defenseless. I believe they're "discovering" this same principle in Britain (where they're now holding neighborhood classes on how to treat gunshot wounds) and Australia as their attempts to ban legal gun ownership head towards total failure.


[edit on 1/21/2005 by centurion1211]



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 07:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by sensfan
OH NO!!!! Not another Edsinger!!!!


Where is Ed Singer these days?

Must be hard for him, being a FreeReublic plant and all.



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 08:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hellmutt
But is it really necessary for everyone to have a gun?


is it really necessary for everyone to own a car? TV? Computer? No but our Founding Fathers thought this right so important the put it in the Bill of Rights.




I heard this story about this bank in US. When you opened an account in this bank, they would give you a gun for free. I thought that sounded crazy. I hope it`s not true.


This is the problem with his half truths and BS. You CAN NOT LEGALLY OBTAIN A GUN IN AMERICA WITHOUT A BACKGROUND CHECK (Unless its a private transaction and even then its illegal to own one if you have a criminal record). They do not hand them out to every kid opening a 100$ savings account.




Did Moore say that bodyguards should not carry guns?

[edit on 2005/1/21 by Hellmutt]


Again are you saying that only those rich enough to hire a bodyguard should be allowed protection?

[edit on 21-1-2005 by Amuk]



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 08:50 PM
link   
As the man steps into the 'hypocritical' crap...


“Michael Moore is a world-class hypocrite for campaigning against the gun rights of law-abiding citizens, while having an armed bodyguard,” Gottlieb observed. “Unfortunately for Mr. Burke, who is reportedly licensed to carry a firearm in Florida and California, he has been tripped up by the same anti-gun mentality espoused by his elitist employer. Sadly, if criminal charges are pursued, it will be Mr. Burke, not his boss, who takes the fall, possibly losing his gun rights in the process, because possession of an unlicensed gun in New York is a felony.

“Like so many other arrogant Hollywood anti-gunners, Michael Moore obviously considers his life more important than the lives of all the people he would disarm,” Gottlieb stated. “His malevolence toward the rights of gun owners only adds to the hypocrisy of this case.

‘BODYGUARD BUST’ PROVES MICHAEL MOORE IS LESS THAN HONEST ABOUT GUN LAWS

Isn't it ironic that Mr. Moore has of yet to respond? Hey, maybe he can make another one of those fabled and truthful documentary's?




seekerof



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 09:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Isn't it ironic that Mr. Moore has of yet to respond? Hey, maybe he can make another one of those fabled and truthful documentary's?

seekerof


I'm no fan of Michael Moore, he's about as valid to me as Ann Coulter, just without the skeletal legs. However, far be from me to pass up an opportunity to point an inconstancy in your arguement.

First, your link. What am I supposed to do with that? An Op/Ed from the literal, I swear to Jeebus, Second Amendment Foundation. Proving nothing to me, beyond the shadow of a doubt, other than Alan M. Gottlieb's terrible web design work.

To the point, because I know that's what you're interested in, Patrick Burk isn't Michael Moore's bodyguard. He works for the Gavin De Becker firm, which has sent Fox News a letter about libelous accusations and a possible lawsuit against them as result. Patrick Burk is a former marine, and has been the bodyguard of many different people on many different occasions, including President Clinton.

Patrick Burk voluntarily turned his unloaded, locked firearm in to United Airways for shipment. It in his luggage, and he informed the clerk at the ticket counter, following regulations and guidlines put into place by the federal government. The United Airways ticket officer alerted the Port Authority Officer, as per airport guidelines. This Port Authority officer then arrested him for not carrying the proper license required in New York City.

He was not in the charge of Michael Moore at airport. He was not in the presence of Michael moore during the trip. The firearm was registered in Patrick Burk's name. The firearm was unloaded. The firearm was packed in luggage. The firearm was locked. The airport was clearly alerted and notified of the presence of said firearm.

Far be it from to rain down on your little parade with such clever things as logic and reason. Whatever Michael Moore fetish you have, as a moderator, you should be more careful when brandishing your opinion without the aid of actual facts. It makes you look like a sloppy fool, where as you are probably not. That's called moderation.

As a member, I shouldn't have to point that out to you.

[edit on 21-1-2005 by brimstone735]



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 09:52 PM
link   
brimstone735,


First, your link. What am I supposed to do with that? An Op/Ed from the literal, I swear to Jeebus, Second Amendment Foundation. Proving nothing to me, beyond the shadow of a doubt, other than Alan M. Gottlieb's terrible web design work.

Your point(s) are irrelevant. How so? This whole thread is an op/ed piece. Your problem with the source is between you and the source.
As a member, I shouldn't have to point that out to you.



To the point, because I know that's what you're interested in, Patrick Burk isn't Michael Moore's bodyguard. He works for the Gavin De Becker firm, which has sent Fox News a letter about libelous accusations and a possible lawsuit against them as result.

Apparently he is. Your source saying otherwise is....where, exactly? Furthermore, that letter to FoxNews is available where, since you seemingly have indication that one was sent? Also, Mr. Moore will be apparently paying the Gavin De Becker Firm for Mr. Burk's services and subsequent legal fees?
As a member, I shouldn't have to point that out to you.



Patrick Burk voluntarily turned his unloaded, locked firearm in to United Airways for shipment. It in his luggage, and he informed the clerk at the ticket counter, following regulations and guidlines put into place by the federal government. The United Airways ticket officer alerted the Port Authority Officer, as per airport guidelines. This Port Authority officer then arrested him for not carrying the proper license required in New York City.


Irrelevant don't you think? The point is and was that he was arrested for possession of an unlicensed hand gun in New York, which as stated in the link presented, is a felony offense. Btw, brimstone735, since Mr. Burk is an ex-Marine, per you, and is also working for the Gavin De Becker Firm, would one or the other not also be aware that having said gun, despite it not being on person, but being still listed as in the possession of Mr. Burk, was a violation when in New York? Strange that he was not aware of this ruling or law, huh?
As a member, I shouldn't have to point that out to you.




Far be it from to rain down on your little parade with such clever things as logic and reason. Whatever Michael Moore fetish you have, as a moderator, you should be more careful when brandishing your opinion without the aid of actual facts. It makes you look like a sloppy fool, where as you are probably not. That's called moderation.

Thank you for your constructive and collective advice, but my opinion is just as warrented and relevant as any other member within the ATS community. Your feelings that moderators should simply moderate has been discussed within ATS before. Link provided for in my signature. Please feel free to contribute your opinion to that thread, k?
And again, As a member, I shouldn't have to point that out to you.





seekerof



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 10:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
As a member, I shouldn't have to point that out to you.
seekerof



Well, you're actually a moderator, unless there isn't a clear distinction between member and moderator, and I can suddenly run about the place, banning at will. Because you're a moderator, you're held to a higher standard than regular members. You should be fighting against bias, not embracing it. If you don't like it, then you probably shouldn't be a moderator.

Burk obviously broke the law. Burk will obviously pay the price. But, you jumped the gun, because you saw an easy way to score points on a guy who's already a slob. You did it to push a political opinion that you happen to agree with, regardless of the facts involved. I can't take you, or your role as an board authority figure seriously when you make mistakes like that.

The right course of action might have been to stop, think about things logically, realize that maybe the story was actually a little good to be true, and maybe not be so haste next time, because it weakens your overall position. Instead, you got angry and decided to bully your point across.
And that's certainly a legitmate way to do it, but it doesn't make me believe you, nor actually want to understand you.

EDIT: Having just read the thread in your tag, I apologize for calling you an authority figure, and I understand your concern. You have every right to voice any position that you want. My concern is that you jumped to conclusions entirely too quickly. Mea Culpa.

[edit on 21-1-2005 by brimstone735]



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 10:53 PM
link   
brimstone735,


Well, you're actually a moderator, unless there isn't a clear distinction between member and moderator, and I can suddenly run about the place, banning at will. Because you're a moderator, you're held to a higher standard than regular members. You should be fighting against bias, not embracing it. If you don't like it, then you probably shouldn't be a moderator.

Again, noted. Also please note what I mentioned before, you have several avenues to vent your opinion that moderators should only moderate:
You can file a complaint/suggestion (near the top of the page, third from the left, inbetween kill cookies and members, or you can post your comments and opinions within this previously discussed ATS thread on the matter:
Moderators Are People Too. (and they have opinions)



But, you jumped the gun, because you saw an easy way to score points on a guy who's already a slob. You did it to push a political opinion that you happen to agree with, regardless of the facts involved. I can't take you, or your role as an board authority figure seriously when you make mistakes like that.

Your specific reference to me is likewise irrelevant. You fail to address those others within this thread who have likewise pushed a political opinion. The facts speak for themselves. Mr. Burk is a body guard for Mr. Moore, despite Mr. Moore not being present. Mr. Burk, who is an experienced body guard, as per you, should have known better and should have been quite familiar with the law, regulation, or statute in New York. I mean gee, he is licensed to carry and possess a hand gun in a couple of other states, eh? His mistake is exactly that, his mistake. As to the other factual contestation you have, you have yet to produce anything to contradict the original FoxNews reporting on this and the article I presented.



The right course of action might have been to stop, think about things logically, realize that maybe the story was actually a little good to be true, and maybe not be so haste next time, because it weakens your overall position. Instead, you got angry and decided to bully your point across.
And that's certainly a legitmate way to do it, but it doesn't make me believe you, nor actually want to understand you.

What is 'right' is relative. I have an opinion and have the right to express it as any other member, moderator or not. The story still stands till you or something more legit is produced to counter otherwise. My "position" is quite based on fact, whereas, yours is based on your word and unconfirmed hearsay. Provide to the contrary. If anyones position is weakened, it is yours. One, you have been asked to provide some factual sourcing to what you assert. that has failed to be produced, as of yet. Second, my argument is set and based on reported fact. yours depends on your word and allegations to counter otherwise. Hence, as you have so stated, allow me to likewise state it: "but it doesn't make me believe you, nor actually want to understand you."




seekerof

[edit on 21-1-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 11:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
"but it doesn't make me believe you, nor actually want to understand you."

seekerof

[edit on 21-1-2005 by Seekerof]


Well, I suppose. www.moorewatch.com...

Front page. The letter from Gavin De Becker and associates.

Also, the apology that I made. You know exactly where you can shove that, and kindly feel free to deduct 250 points from me for what I'm thinking right now.



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 11:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by brimstone735
Also, the apology that I made. You know exactly where you can shove that, and kindly feel free to deduct 250 points from me for what I'm thinking right now.


I beat him to it. Everybody chill out a bit



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 11:19 PM
link   

as posted by brimstone735
Also, the apology that I made. You know exactly where you can shove that, and kindly feel free to deduct 250 points from me for what I'm thinking right now.


Been a long day.
As such, will you be using KY or Vaseline?



seekerof



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 11:42 PM
link   
Mike Moore is just a fat slob who flies around on a time warner owned private jet and gets paid 35000 bucks an hour...

All his movies are a suck...especially fahr911...he didn't ask the most important questions such as who actually ordered NORAD fighters to stand down on 911? fahr911 is just another bait and switch like 911 comission report...



posted on Jan, 22 2005 @ 01:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by cryptorsa1001
Moore is an $sshole and deserves to get reamed over this. Maybe he will drop out of site over this and we will never have to hear about him again.


Drop outta sight? My God, the man is as big as house!



posted on Jan, 22 2005 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk
our Founding Fathers thought this right so important the put it in the Bill of Rights.

I got the picture. "Freedom for all to have a gun", that`s what you`re saying... Actually, I like guns. But I just don`t think everybody should have one. So many cannot handle it. As for what demands there should be to be allowed to have a gun is another question. In Scandinavia most people don`t have a gun. Different culture, yes. But also less crime and less people die from getting shot. If this has anything to do with the fact that there are less guns around, I don`t know. I find it strange that it`s generally accepted that anyone could get a gun in US (you say it isn`t so, but that`s the idea we get in Europe), but smoking weed is so strict. I thought your Founding Fathers were positive on the idea of "growing weed everywhere". This must have gone "missing in translation" somewhere. Maybe they didn`t put it in the Bill of Rights, but Washington and Jefferson at least were positive to it. And it wasn`t illegal back then. Now smoking weed almost equals to having sex with Satan. It`s supposed to be "bad". I don`t get it. But I guess that`s another story and off topic here...





Did Moore say that bodyguards should not carry guns?


Again are you saying that only those rich enough to hire a bodyguard should be allowed protection?

No, actually I simply asked if Moore have said it since this topic gets so "hot". I`m in Europe and don`t pick up all the things Moore say. If he said it, you would know better than me. It doesn`t make the headlines here. It simply looked like "just another reason to drag MM down in the dirt one way or another". Maybe he deserve it, again you should know better than me. But then I think you should get "live" ammo and not "dummies".
Of course, if you want a bodyguard it will cost you something. Like cars, nothing comes for free. In Denmark and Norway only rich people can afford a car (they are way too expensive). I respect your views, but I guess we disagree on this point. I would rather fight for the right to smoke weed than everybody having guns. Guns kills but weed doesn`t kill. Norway has the strictest law against weed in Europe but has the highest rate of heroin OD`s. Holland have the least strict laws against weed and have the lowest rate of heroin OD`s in Europe. Again off topic it could seem, but there actually is a point to what I try to say. I value freedom very much...



posted on Jan, 22 2005 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hellmutt
I find it strange that it`s generally accepted that anyone could get a gun in US (you say it isn`t so, but that`s the idea we get in Europe), but smoking weed is so strict.


I am for legalizing weed too, all drugs for that matter. I am a Libertarian, we want you high AND armed


I think drug laws are Unconstitutional.



posted on Jan, 22 2005 @ 03:11 PM
link   
LISTEN!!!!!!!!!! The guy wasn't even WORKING FOR MOORE when he was arressted, he wasn't carrying an illegal gun, it wasn't licensed in that state. It was however in two others. Moore does NOT say guns are bad, he says not everyone should have one or that UZIs or AK-47s are needed to be owend Damn, Seekerof, you are a mod, I would expect you to know what you are talking about. Moore never says ban guns, guns are evil, or that anyone can buy a gun. He says that some people, like nutcases, don't need to own a gun, or that you don't need a AK-47 with armor piercing bullets. WATCH THE DAMN MOVIE Don't go to www.MMMustDie.com to learn about his movies, watch them! I shouldn't have to get mad like this aboput something so easy to prove. You sit down and watch a 1.5 hour movie, thats all you have to do. No research, no fact finding, just sit down and watch a movie. Shouldn't have a heart attack over people who decide, hey, I'll listen to AC and learn all the "facts" from her instead of sitting and watching a movie.

As said, how the hell is Moore responsible? He NEVER says on;y rich people should have guns. NEVER! He just says that nutcases or anyone doesn't need a damn missle launcher or a .50 caliber anti tank gun. He is fine, and OWNS shotguns, hunting rifles, so forth. He just thinks a gang member doesn't need a tech 9 or Mac 10. He is not like some democrats where all guns are bad, all guns are evil, all guns should be destroyed. He, like me, thinks that no one needs a freaking .50 caliber or MP5 or anything like that. Damn, sorry for this rant, but damn, people need to take the blinders off and watch a movie. How hard is that? And for anyone who posts after this post going onn how MM is a hypocrit, I will, well, can't really do anything, but just know this, I don't know. How is MM a hypocrit again? The guy WASN'T working for MM when he was arressted. It is like blaming Mr. Jones cause 3 years ago he hired Ted Bundy to paint his house for Ted Bundy's actions/what Ted Bundy did. Or a McDonalds should be blamed cause they once had Jeffery Lionel Dahmer. It doesn't make MM a hypocrit when someone carrying a legal gun, obtained legally, not a assault gun or anything, is arressted cause it is licensed in 2 states, but not that one state. It isn't, he NEVER says that guns should be banned, NEVER! He is a freaking NRA member for crying out loud. Gonna go lie down now, wait for the vein in my neck to go back down.



posted on Jan, 22 2005 @ 04:38 PM
link   
Well said James...well said. Applause for you



posted on Jan, 22 2005 @ 05:53 PM
link   
Damn, James set down and take a breath there buddy


I was merely pointing out that a kid cant walk into Wal Mart and buy a Gun. I didnt even say MM said it someone else did.

As for him belonging to the NRA I think they have sold the American People out. The Second Admendment is NOT so you can hunt. It is in place so you can have a fighting chance protecting yourself against the GOVERNMENT.

This is totally off topic though so how about I start another thread and we carry it there?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join