PDA

View Full Version : An opinion from the left of this gun confiscation?



sleek
07-11-2018, 07:50 AM
https://redrightvideos.com/tyranny-begins-in-seattle-as-man-who-broke-no-laws-has-guns-confiscated/?utm_source=RRV newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=subscriber_id:392371&utm_campaign=Tyranny Begins in Seattle As Man Who Broke No Laws Has Guns Confiscated


I dont think there is quite enough info here, but, whats yalls take on this?

Gun issues aside, i believe being punished for doing what the law allows is bs.

oznabrag
07-11-2018, 07:54 AM
fart

sleek
07-11-2018, 07:56 AM
Dont care huh?

Paul Pless
07-11-2018, 07:56 AM
perhaps a less biased source and more information specific to this incident would allow me to express an opinion

- sign me, liberal firearms enthusiast

mmd
07-11-2018, 08:09 AM
Troll...

Joe (SoCal)
07-11-2018, 08:10 AM
I dont think there is quite enough info here, but, whats yalls take on this?

Understatement of the year. :D

redrightvideos.com yea nothing like a Right Wing Nut Conspiracy website to give you the facts.

It has all the Red Meat Gun nuts want

East German Stasi
Miss identifying a Semi auto for a full auto ( gun nuts go rabid if you make any technical error whatsoever )
Calling everyone who's not an ammosexual a "Snowflake"
Open carry
Slippery Slope
Political Correctness
Pansies who cower in the face of a firearm
FEAR

FWIW the dude looks NUTS one less gun I'm happy :D
Neighbors complained that the man stared at people through storefront windows while wearing a holstered firearm
roaming the hallways with a .25 caliber SEMI-automatic

19200

Rum_Pirate
07-11-2018, 08:12 AM
Hmm,

what were the reasons police acted like the East German Stasi in a raid on a citizen’s home who hadn’t broken any laws?

Neighbors complained that the man stared at people through storefront windows while wearing a holstered firearm, even though open-carry was legal in the jurisdiction and he was well within his rights. I don’t know if there are anti-staring laws in that part of Washington state.
Resident snowflakes :d (R_P addition) of the knee-jerk town :rolleyes: (R_P addition) complained that the man openly carrying made them feel uncomfortable and unsafe. I looked for and could not find anything in the open carry statutes that mentions a prohibition of making other people feel uncomfortable and unsafe.
“He was roaming the hallways with a .25 caliber automatic,” Tony Montana recalled, showing his total ignorance of open carry laws and of guns since handguns are not automatic, but semi-automatic. “And it created a lot of fear obviously because I didn’t know if he was coming after me or gonna just start shooting the place up.”
These are the legal standards for police to use the new state law to forcefully violate a man’s Second Amendment rights even though he did nothing wrong and posed no threat to anyone.
It would be one thing if the man brandished (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/brandish) his weapon, but there is no account that he did. He simply open carried his firearm, which is the law in his town.

So apparently he 'open carried' in accordance with the law.

He 'stared through storefront windows' OMG the audacity of him to do so.

I watched the video in the link re apparently similar incident in Florida.

Article author appears to support the Second Amendment.

Would like to know more about the background of both instances before commenting further.

Joe (SoCal)
07-11-2018, 08:13 AM
Nah we got enough guns out there, not every gun is sacred, melt them down as fast as you can. :D

Norman Bernstein
07-11-2018, 08:14 AM
I dont think there is quite enough info here...


THAT is probably the understatement of the century.

$5 will get you $10 that 'Redrightvideos' has conveniently left out a few facts about the case.

Sorry, sleek, but if you're going to base a thread on a source like that, prepare for getting a face full of jet blast in return.

jonboy
07-11-2018, 08:25 AM
The so-called 'sus' laws in UK allow for just such pre-emptive action.. They have been horribly mis-used by the police in arresting and detaining mostly young black men on suspicion of intent to commit a crime often utterly erroneously.
However there is a charge in Britain and I would be surprised if it didn't exist in USA, of intent to commit. possible scenario...melodramatic and hypothetical but any way……
A person is seen walking in the early hours carrying a crowbar and bolt cutters wearing a nask, a stripy jersey and a bag over his shoulder with Swag written on it.
Coming home from a fancy dress party? maybe, but I think it is perfectly ok to at least ask him a few questions.

A man acting in a socially unacceptable way, arguably, and disturbing ordinary citizens by his behaviour whilst openly carrying a firearm. How retarded do you have to be, not to be at least a little concerned.
That dipship author of the linked article has a point in his base argument, but when the argument is based on a mentality of a Dodge City resident in1840 I don't know if he should be pitied or have his open carry forcibly relocated where the sun doesn't shine.
I jest.
What kind of mindset so demonstrably enfeebled allows this to happen. Beyond me.


So to the point, it seems totally reasonable to believe this man might commit a crime as there can be no legal way to use the gun, ergo, it has to be illegal. The fact he has it at all presupposes criminality. The fact he wants to have it and display it in such a fashion demonstrates a mental illness that should surely prevent him from having a gun in the first place.

Let him have a couple of cap guns and some chaps and a ten gallon hat and a dummy and some diapers.
Or round them all up and put them in a room somewhere and let them all wank themselves to death.

Ian McColgin
07-11-2018, 08:29 AM
But there is enough information at many other places, including https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/seattle-police-confiscate-mans-guns-without-warrant/

There is no excuse for reprinting deliberate lies under the disguise of promoting reasoned discussion.

Old Dryfoot
07-11-2018, 08:31 AM
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/seattle-police-confiscate-mans-guns-without-warrant/

*Sigh*


EDIT:Scooped! :D

Rum_Pirate
07-11-2018, 08:42 AM
Nice blanket statement, but there is additional information on the incident from Snopes:


On 2 March 2018, officers seized (https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/handgun-seized-in-belltown-under-extreme-risk-protection-order/) a 31-year-old man’s handgun while serving him with an extreme risk protection order (often shortened to ERPO) requiring him to do so. Police said in a statement (http://spdblotter.seattle.gov/2018/03/02/seattle-pd-crisis-response-squad-serves-extreme-risk-protection-order-seizes-handgun/)that the unidentified man had been the subject of “multiple calls” concerning his behavior.Before seizing his handgun, they said, the suspect had surrendered a shotgun to them in May 2017, after being served with an anti-harassment order. Police said he “acknowledged he was experiencing ‘stress’ and did not want it around.” A spokesperson said:
Due to his numerous contacts with police and escalating behavior, SPD’s Crisis Response Squad filed for an Extreme Risk Protection Order, requiring the man to turn over all firearms. After the man failed to turn over his firearms or appear in court for a hearing on the order, police obtained a warrant and responded to the man’s apartment in the 2200 block of 2nd Avenue just after 1 p.m. on March 1st and took him into custody.


A police spokesperson confirmed to us via email that the unidentified man had been reported for harassing people at a restaurant near his home, saying:
The suspect in this case had been standing outside of the location while wearing a holstered pistol and threatening individuals exiting the premises, which in turn caused some people to be fearful that he might hurt them. This is a violation of law in Washinginton State. The man was taken into custody for his violation which ended in a warrant being issued by the judge for his arrest.and

According (http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.41.270) to state law: It shall be unlawful for any person to carry, exhibit, display, or draw any firearm, dagger, sword, knife or other cutting or stabbing instrument, club, or any other weapon apparently capable of producing bodily harm, in a manner, under circumstances, and at a time and place that either manifests an intent to intimidate another or that warrants alarm for the safety of other persons.

Keith Wilson
07-11-2018, 08:43 AM
All due process, exactly as it is supposed to work. I think that if they hadn't taken his guns away, there was a real chance of a far more unpleasant news story involving corpses and lots of blood. The original story from 'redrightvideos' is complete hogwash, classic wingnuttery. Sleek, why do you use 'news' sources like that? You don't seem to be so ideological that you're completely unconcerned about the facts. (Source (https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/seattle-police-confiscate-mans-guns-without-warrant/))


On 2 March 2018, officers seized a 31-year-old man’s handgun while serving him with an extreme risk protection order (often shortened to ERPO) requiring him to do so. Police said in a statement that the unidentified man had been the subject of “multiple calls” concerning his behavior. Before seizing his handgun, they said, the suspect had surrendered a shotgun to them in May 2017, after being served with an anti-harassment order. Police said he “acknowledged he was experiencing ‘stress’ and did not want it around.” A spokesperson said:

"Due to his numerous contacts with police and escalating behavior, SPD’s Crisis Response Squad filed for an Extreme Risk Protection Order, requiring the man to turn over all firearms. After the man failed to turn over his firearms or appear in court for a hearing on the order, police obtained a warrant and responded to the man’s apartment in the 2200 block of 2nd Avenue just after 1 p.m. on March 1st and took him into custody."

Rum_Pirate
07-11-2018, 08:45 AM
All due process, exactly as it is supposed to work. I think that if they hadn't taken his guns away, there was a real chance of a far more unpleasant news story involving corpses and lots of blood. The original story from 'redrightvideos' is complete hogwash, classic wingnuttery. Sleek, why do you use 'news' sources like that? You don't seem to be so ideological that you're completely unconcerned about the facts. (Source (https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/seattle-police-confiscate-mans-guns-without-warrant/))
Is there an echo in here? :D

Perhaps it need to be repeated. Y>

Keith Wilson
07-11-2018, 08:46 AM
Is there an echo in here? :D8:42 and 8:43. You posted while I was proofreading. Great minds . . . :D

Old Dryfoot
07-11-2018, 08:49 AM
<snip>
Perhaps it need to be repeated. Y>

Yes it does, many, many, many times.

David G
07-11-2018, 08:55 AM
But there is enough information at many other places, including https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/seattle-police-confiscate-mans-guns-without-warrant/

There is no excuse for reprinting deliberate lies under the disguise of promoting reasoned discussion.

Precisely.

Sleek - please do better. My ignore list is already sufficiently crowded.

Ian McColgin
07-11-2018, 08:58 AM
What needs to be repeated is that the OP is part of the spread of hysterical, hateful, partisan falsehoods.

There is no excuse for following Trump's immoral lame excuse along the "people have said" line.

No excuse for uncritically repeating a lie.

And even less excuse for not at least apologizing to the forum for (one hopes inadvertantly) floating the lies.

Art Haberland
07-11-2018, 08:59 AM
just more proof that you need to get your news from more than one source there, Sleek. As written in your original post, a LOT was left out. I will say this though, as in Spiderman, "with great power comes great responsibility". I will go out on a limb and say that 90% of all gun owners act very responsible with their guns and if they decide to wear them out in public, take great pains not to antagonize the public. All it takes is that 10% (or less) to make the public wary and of that, 0.5% to actually make them worry for their safety. Those people ruin it for everyone else. In the case of this article, in many ways.

Not only is the public now worried about somebody standing outside a restaurant while carrying and screaming to have somebody shot, but now the gun owners are worried that the public is coming for their guns. Great way to ruin EVERYTHING!

sleek
07-11-2018, 09:18 AM
This was in my email, i read it. Wanted yalls thoughts. Cant label me a troll for that. I took the wheat from the chaff when i read it.

So, as i originally posted, the gun issue aside, the law seems like bs.

Old Dryfoot
07-11-2018, 09:25 AM
This was in my email, i read it. Wanted yalls thoughts. Cant label me a troll for that. I took the wheat from the chaff when i read it.

So, as i originally posted, the gun issue aside, the law seems like bs.

No, it is not BS. It is preemptive action which has a very high probability of stopping a murder, or multiple murders. Sane people that behave in a rational manner are not the people loosing their guns.

https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/apxoregon-law-seizes-guns-from-those-who-may-do-harm/

Details of the cases of people who lost their gun rights paint a disquieting portrait:


A Portland man who posed for photos with a semi-automatic rifle and had spoken openly about planning a school shooting.
A Beaverton veteran who threatened to gun down people at his church.
A Vale man who fired his .357 Magnum into the ceiling of his home, believing he was shooting at people in his attic who were poisoning him.
A man in Pendleton stopped by his sister from returning to work to shoot the boss who’d just fired him.

Dan McCosh
07-11-2018, 09:39 AM
Threatening with a gun is analogous to threatening speech--both are limited by law, if not illegal. Both are subject to subjective interpretation--the judgement of those who enforce the laws.

sleek
07-11-2018, 09:41 AM
No, it is not BS. It is preemptive action which has a very high probability of stopping a murder, or multiple murders. Sane people that behave in a rational manner are not the people loosing their guns.

https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/apxoregon-law-seizes-guns-from-those-who-may-do-harm/

Then investigate and issue warrents etc, maybe detain the man on the spot. What they did was an outright violation of constitution and authority. You cant act and rule on fear.

SKIP KILPATRICK
07-11-2018, 09:42 AM
When do we get back all the guns Obama grabbed from us?

oznabrag
07-11-2018, 09:46 AM
The thing that gets me about these rightwing freaks (meaning the producers of that vid) is they scream that somebody's precious 2ndA Rights are being violated, but when the next massacre happens, they scream that the perp had been on the FBI's radar, and they did nothing.

People who 'think' in those terms should not be allowed to vote.

Or breed.

oznabrag
07-11-2018, 09:48 AM
This was in my email, i read it. Wanted yalls thoughts. Cant label me a troll for that. I took the wheat from the chaff when i read it.

So, as i originally posted, the gun issue aside, the law seems like bs.

Yet, it is the law.

sleek
07-11-2018, 09:50 AM
Yet, it is the law.

But, is the law.... lawful?

sleek
07-11-2018, 09:51 AM
The thing that gets me about these rightwing freaks (meaning the producers of that vid) is they scream that somebody's precious 2ndA Rights are being violated, but when the next massacre happens, they scream that the perp had been on the FBI's radar, and they did nothing.

People who 'think' in those terms should not be allowed to vote.

Or breed.

Fallacy in logic here. Not doing anything and doing the wrong thing are both very wrong.

AlanMc
07-11-2018, 09:51 AM
looks like some common sense was applied and took care of this nut job before he was a major problem.

sleek
07-11-2018, 09:53 AM
Yet, it is the law.

I mean, there is a law that litteraly says, even if you obey the law, you are still screwed.

sleek
07-11-2018, 09:54 AM
looks like some common sense was applied and took care of this nut job before he was a major problem.

Ok, i really dont know here, so actual question....

Why is he a nut job?

Durnik
07-11-2018, 09:56 AM
You cant act and rule on fear.

Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha..

[DEEEEP breath..]

Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha..


Stop it! You're Killing me!

ron ll
07-11-2018, 09:56 AM
I got as far as this opening sentence to the second paragraph:

"Resident snowflakes of the knee-jerk town..."

isla
07-11-2018, 09:58 AM
Ok, i really dont know here, so actual question....

Why is he a nut job?

Sound to me like he needs help..


The suspect in this case had been standing outside of the location while wearing a holstered pistol and threatening individuals exiting the premises, which in turn caused some people to be fearful that he might hurt them. This is a violation of law in Washinginton State. The man was taken into custody for his violation which ended in a warrant being issued by the judge for his arrest.

According to the department spokesperson, the suspect — who lives directly above the restaurant — stood on a sidewalk in front of the business “yelling obscenities and accusing them of ‘talking to him through the floor.'” He later called officers back to the scene, saying that he could hear “taunting and voices” emanating from the restaurant. While meeting with police, they said, he said that he wanted a restaurant employee “arrested or shot.” He was detained and later taken to receive medical services.

AlanMc
07-11-2018, 09:58 AM
Ok, i really dont know here, so actual question....

Why is he a nut job?


from some of the other sources he was telling the cops he was tired of people talking to him through the floor. if you think the people in the restaurant you live above are talking to YOU through the floor, you might just be nuts. add to it, he was stalking around the restaurant yelling obscenities at people. not normal behavior.

sleek
07-11-2018, 09:58 AM
I got as far as this opening sentence to the second paragraph:

"Resident snowflakes of the knee-jerk town..."

I didnt post for the value of his "journalism", and think he was very over the top. But it was the story he was covering that has my interest.

Keith Wilson
07-11-2018, 10:00 AM
So, as i originally posted, the gun issue aside, the law seems like bs.So you agree that this was done lawfully, according to due process as the law is currently written. Good, that's a start. You think it's a bad law.

So, a question for you: what behavior, other than actually shooting at somebody, do you think should lead the authorities to take away somebody's guns? Note that unless one is a subsistence hunter, not having a gun is in almost every case a minor inconvenience at best. Why did this guy's actions not justify taking his guns? What would?

sleek
07-11-2018, 10:00 AM
Sound to me like he needs help..


The suspect in this case had been standing outside of the location while wearing a holstered pistol and threatening individuals exiting the premises, which in turn caused some people to be fearful that he might hurt them. This is a violation of law in Washinginton State. The man was taken into custody for his violation which ended in a warrant being issued by the judge for his arrest.

According to the department spokesperson, the suspect — who lives directly above the restaurant — stood on a sidewalk in front of the business “yelling obscenities and accusing them of ‘talking to him through the floor.'” He later called officers back to the scene, saying that he could hear “taunting and voices” emanating from the restaurant. While meeting with police, they said, he said that he wanted a restaurant employee “arrested or shot.” He was detained and later taken to receive medical services.


Wow, sounds like the right thing was done. Good. Hate it when media spins crap.

sleek
07-11-2018, 10:01 AM
from some of the other sources he was telling the cops he was tired of people talking to him through the floor. if you think the people in the restaurant you live above are talking to YOU through the floor, you might just be nuts. add to it, he was stalking around the restaurant yelling obscenities at people. not normal behavior.

Agreed

David G
07-11-2018, 10:01 AM
Rum Pirate has been using this innocent "it was in my email" excuse for 11 years. You need something more original.:D

Just so.

Sleek - YOU are responsible for what you post here. If you post something lame, untrue, stupid, or misleading... hey, it happens. We all make mistakes. Might be a good idea, though, as a responsible adult, to apologize and clarify.

I agree that such a law contains within it the seeds of abuse. At the same time, if used well, it is also a tool for nipping problems in the bud.

sleek
07-11-2018, 10:01 AM
So you agree that this was done lawfully, according to due process. Good, that's a start.

So, a question for you: What behavior, other than actually shooting at somebody, do you think should lead the authorities to take away somebody's guns? Note that unless one is a subsistence hunter, not having a gun is in almost every case a minor inconvenience at best. Why did this guy's actions not justify taking his guns? What would?

Im just gonna side with you guys on this one. No arguments from me.

Domesticated_Mr. Know It All
07-11-2018, 10:03 AM
If we take guns away from crazy people, we should take their cars too.

AlanMc
07-11-2018, 10:04 AM
yea, it all depends on who is writing the story here. i was mad about the confiscation from the OP article, then mad at the OP article once i got the rest of the story. the guy was a raging loon. he needs some time in a padded cell somewhere.

oznabrag
07-11-2018, 10:04 AM
Then investigate and issue warrents etc, maybe detain the man on the spot. What they did was an outright violation of constitution and authority. You cant act and rule on fear.

That's what happened.

He was staring at people while wearing a sidearm, and threatening them. He had a prior history where the police had relieved him of a shotgun.

sleek
07-11-2018, 10:05 AM
Just so.

Sleek - YOU are responsible for what you post here. If you post something lame, untrue, stupid, or misleading... hey, it happens. We all make mistakes. Might be a good idea, though, as a responsible adult, to apologize and clarify.

I agree that such a law contains within it the seeds of abuse. At the same time, if used well, it is also a tool for nipping problems in the bud.

I posted to get the left side of view. I dont see the problem? I know it wasnt recieved that way, but, eh, to be expected.

oznabrag
07-11-2018, 10:05 AM
Just so.

Sleek - YOU are responsible for what you post here. If you post something lame, untrue, stupid, or misleading... hey, it happens. We all make mistakes. Might be a good idea, though, as a responsible adult, to apologize and clarify.

I agree that such a law contains within it the seeds of abuse. At the same time, if used well, it is also a tool for nipping problems in the bud.

Practically EVERY law contains within it the seeds of abuse.

oznabrag
07-11-2018, 10:06 AM
I posted to get the left side of view. I dont see the problem? I know it wasnt recieved that way, but, eh, to be expected.

What was YOUR view, when you posted it?

What is YOUR view now?

sleek
07-11-2018, 10:08 AM
What was YOUR view, when you posted it?

What is YOUR view now?

When posted, i figured i wasnt getting the entire story, and said as much, but was still upset anout the confiscation with no warrent or arrest.

Now, im glad it happened, and hope an arrest is made.

oznabrag
07-11-2018, 10:15 AM
Thanks!

Keith Wilson
07-11-2018, 10:16 AM
Now, I'm glad it happened, and hope an arrest is made.OK, good; we agree. Y>

Two points - first, I congratulate you on actually looking at the facts and not merely holding to dogma. This seems unfortunately all too rare among others on the right who post here.

Second, in the future you might want to reconsider the news sources you use - or at least check them. 'Redrightvideos.com' dosn't on the face of it seem like the place one would get the complete objective truth

Old Dryfoot
07-11-2018, 10:21 AM
Superfluous. . .

Flying Orca
07-11-2018, 10:22 AM
Why is he a nut job?

Dude. He was hearing voices coming from the restaurant downstairs from his place, and threatening people with firearms based on what appear to have been auditory hallucinations. That's almost certainly psychotic, and quite possibly full-blown schizophrenic. Because of the work I do, I'm not a huge fan of pejorative language like "nut job" when it comes to people who are actually mentally ill (I prefer to reserve it for knobs like SCROTUS), but the shoe fits.

sleek
07-11-2018, 10:23 AM
He surrended a gun prior to this due to self admitted street.

This guy needs help and his name needs flagged on NICS

Old Dryfoot
07-11-2018, 10:30 AM
This guy needs help and his name needs flagged on NICS

Flagged, how many murders have been flagged?

Answer: Lots!

sleek
07-11-2018, 10:34 AM
Flagged, how many murders have been flagged?

Answer: Lots!

So, he shouldnt be flagged?

Old Dryfoot
07-11-2018, 10:40 AM
So, he shouldnt be flagged?

You miss the point. Flag him, and take the guns.

sleek
07-11-2018, 10:45 AM
You miss the point. Flag him, and take the guns.

Im of the opinion, he should be flagged, guns taken AND COMPENSATED FOR, and tried for whatever his crimes are. Of course he will plead insanity, and thats just fine. Maybe then he can get help.

jonboy
07-11-2018, 10:55 AM
Take his guns, give them back to his dad for safe keeping………. er, Haven't I heard something like this recently?

Jimmy W
07-11-2018, 10:56 AM
Ok, i really dont know here, so actual question....

Why is he a nut job?

Because he was standing outside of a restaurant threatening people who he thought were talking to him through the floor.
If that isn't a nut job what is?


According to the department spokesperson, the suspect — who lives directly above the restaurant — stood on a sidewalk in front of the business “yelling obscenities and accusing them of ‘talking to him through the floor.'” He later called officers back to the scene, saying that he could hear “taunting and voices” emanating from the restaurant. While meeting with police, they said, he said that he wanted a restaurant employee “arrested or shot.” He was detained and later taken to receive medical services.


The suspect in this case had been standing outside of the location while wearing a holstered pistol and threatening individuals exiting the premises, which in turn caused some people to be fearful that he might hurt them. This is a violation of law in Washinginton State. The man was taken into custody for his violation which ended in a warrant being issued by the judge for his arrest.

According to state law:

It shall be unlawful for any person to carry, exhibit, display, or draw any firearm, dagger, sword, knife or other cutting or stabbing instrument, club, or any other weapon apparently capable of producing bodily harm, in a manner, under circumstances, and at a time and place that either manifests an intent to intimidate another or that warrants alarm for the safety of other persons.

sleek
07-11-2018, 10:57 AM
Dad should be charged for reckless endangerment

leikec
07-11-2018, 11:00 AM
Im of the opinion, he should be flagged, guns taken AND COMPENSATED FOR, and tried for whatever his crimes are. Of course he will plead insanity, and thats just fine. Maybe then he can get help.

Why should there be compensation?

Jeff C

Jimmy W
07-11-2018, 11:08 AM
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of a nut job to keep and bear Arms and threaten people, shall not be infringed.

sleek
07-11-2018, 11:09 AM
Because the government shouldnt confiscate without reimbursement for the actual value. Otherwise, thats just theft, and a government with a liscence to steal is ungood.

sleek
07-11-2018, 11:10 AM
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of a nut job to keep and bear Arms and threaten people, shall not be infringed.

A bit extreme dont you think?

Daniel Noyes
07-11-2018, 11:10 AM
When do we get back all the guns Obama grabbed from us?


Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha..

[DEEEEP breath..]

Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha..


Never!

oznabrag
07-11-2018, 11:11 AM
Because the government shouldnt confiscate without reimbursement for the actual value. Otherwise, thats just theft, and a government with a liscence to steal is ungood.

Yeah.

When I was a teenager, the danged cops made me pour a case of beer out on the ground.

I'll sue!

Daniel Noyes
07-11-2018, 11:12 AM
A bit extreme dont you think?

thing is they call anyone who does not support Hillary Clinton for President a "Nut Job" the term has lost all meaning in the mouth of a Left winger.

Jimmy W
07-11-2018, 11:12 AM
Civil forfeiture in the United States, also called civil asset forfeiture or civil judicial forfeiture or occasionally civil seizure, is a legal process in which law enforcement officers take assets from persons suspected of involvement with crime or illegal activity without necessarily charging the owners with wrongdoing.

sleek
07-11-2018, 11:14 AM
Yeah.

When I was a teenager, the danged cops made me pour a case of beer out on the ground.

I'll sue!

Alcohol abuse!

Jimmy W
07-11-2018, 11:14 AM
A bit extreme dont you think?

Not according to your OP.

AlanMc
07-11-2018, 11:17 AM
Civil forfeiture in the United States, also called civil asset forfeiture or civil judicial forfeiture or occasionally civil seizure, is a legal process in which law enforcement officers take assets from persons suspected of involvement with crime or illegal activity without necessarily charging the owners with wrongdoing.


which is something i'm VERY against. if you haven't been convicted of a crime, you should not be robbed by the government so they can buy more toys to kill you with.

sleek
07-11-2018, 11:18 AM
which is something i'm VERY against. if you haven't been convicted of a crime, you should not be robbed by the government so they can buy more toys to kill you with.

Compensation should take away the financial incentive of the government to take property.

Keith Wilson
07-11-2018, 11:24 AM
Compensation should take away the financial incentive of the government to take property.In this particular case, I'm as sure as I can be that the financial incentive had nothing to do with it. In other cases, mostly involving other kinds of property, it may be different. I'd be interested in your opinion of 'civil forfeiture' laws. Or does this only apply to guns?

amish rob
07-11-2018, 11:24 AM
Civil forfeiture in the United States, also called civil asset forfeiture or civil judicial forfeiture or occasionally civil seizure, is a legal process in which law enforcement officers take assets from persons suspected of involvement with crime or illegal activity without necessarily charging the owners with wrongdoing.
Not in California. No more takey without convicty. One of many fairly recent bipartisan bills to pass.

Weird to hear, eh? Bipartisan. Pass.

Us crazy Californians...

Peace,
Robert

Keith Wilson
07-11-2018, 11:27 AM
Not in California. No more takey without convicty. One of many fairly recent bipartisan bills to pass. Weird to hear, eh? Bipartisan. Pass. Us crazy Californians...Excellent news! Y> That was a while ago; I hadn't heard about it. Well done!

Jimmy W
07-11-2018, 11:31 AM
Does California still have a "Red Flag" law?


Right now, only five states—Connecticut, Washington, Indiana, California, and Oregon—have red flag laws, most of them put into place after tragedy struck even though law enforcement and family members knew the individual was a threat.

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/03/what-you-need-to-know-about-red-flag-gun-laws/

AlanMc
07-11-2018, 11:32 AM
california un-effed something up? kudos to them

amish rob
07-11-2018, 11:36 AM
california un-effed something up? kudos to them
Un effed?

The fifth largest economy in the world un effed? Budget surplus un effed? Universal health coverage pending un effed? High speed rail un effed? Driverless cars uneffed? Stringent pollution laws uneffed?

Perfect? No. Effed? Hardly.

Peace,
Robert

Canoeyawl
07-11-2018, 11:59 AM
Not only is California Un effed, you can do this in December...


http://forum.woodenboat.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=18865&d=1530733822

S.V. Airlie
07-11-2018, 12:02 PM
Not only is California Un effed, you can do this in December...


http://forum.woodenboat.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=18865&d=1530733822I doubt he's a sailor Canoeyawl. I don't think he's here because of boats even.

AlanMc
07-11-2018, 12:04 PM
Un effed?

The fifth largest economy in the world un effed? Budget surplus un effed? Universal health coverage pending un effed? High speed rail un effed? Driverless cars uneffed? Stringent pollution laws uneffed?

Perfect? No. Effed? Hardly.

Peace,
Robert


the point was, they had effed it up, then they un-effed it up. most people eff it up and leave it that way forever.

but on other notes

you can keep your driverless coffins... er, cars

i can't give credit for anything that's "pending". but if it does get done, these numbers will get way worse.

http://www.latimes.com/resizer/PB51T-jJS9n4D1fXnSxg6EWhlX4=/1400x0/arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-tronc.s3.amazonaws.com/public/QPCFZ32A6FCPDPJPQTFQIXNP5I.png

AlanMc
07-11-2018, 12:05 PM
I doubt he's a sailor Canoeyawl. I don't think he's here because of boats even.


man, you're really on top of your bad assumptions today sv.

amish rob
07-11-2018, 12:09 PM
I will leave you all to slam my home and each other.

I have better things to do than denigrate others.

Peace,
Robert

birlinn
07-11-2018, 12:15 PM
I seem to remember Trump said it was unconstitutional to deny gun ownership to people with a history of mental problems.
Good job not everybody agrees with the Stable Genius.

Chip-skiff
07-11-2018, 12:18 PM
To be clear, is there anyone among us who believes that a person who is publicly behaving in a hostile manner that indicates paranoid delusions as well as menacing the customers of a business while carrying a lethal weapon is exercising his Second Amendment right?

Just say it, so I can laugh.

sleek
07-11-2018, 12:21 PM
I seem to remember Trump said it was unconstitutional to deny gun ownership to people with a history of mental problems.
Good job not everybody agrees with the Stable Genius.

Id have to say it does depend on the mental illness and the definition used.

leikec
07-11-2018, 01:00 PM
Here's where I stand--if you do something stupid with a firearm to endanger people you forfeit the firearm, along with any others you own. No compensation.

Jeff C

birlinn
07-11-2018, 01:07 PM
But... But...
The Second Amendment doesn't mention stupid!

Flying Orca
07-11-2018, 01:09 PM
But... But...
The Second Amendment doesn't mention stupid!

It's true.

Which strikes me as kind of stupid.

leikec
07-11-2018, 01:15 PM
http://www.latimes.com/resizer/PB51T-jJS9n4D1fXnSxg6EWhlX4=/1400x0/arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-tronc.s3.amazonaws.com/public/QPCFZ32A6FCPDPJPQTFQIXNP5I.png

I don't believe this graph is accurate at this point in time. Seems that there is still a hefty surplus.

Jeff C

Art Haberland
07-11-2018, 01:42 PM
When posted, i figured i wasnt getting the entire story, and said as much, but was still upset anout the confiscation with no warrent or arrest.

Now, im glad it happened, and hope an arrest is made.

Ok, so if they had gotten a warrant to remove the guns from the guy, that would have been ok? Honestly, it's not a bad idea. A paper trail is always a good way to cover your ass. The police could have detained the man while they went to the judge to get a warrant. They can do it for almost anything else, why not that?

sleek
07-11-2018, 01:47 PM
Ok, so if they had gotten a warrant to remove the guns from the guy, that would have been ok? Honestly, it's not a bad idea. A paper trail is always a good way to cover your ass. The police could have detained the man while they went to the judge to get a warrant. They can do it for almost anything else, why not that?

That would have been much better.

Jimmy W
07-11-2018, 01:51 PM
Ok, so if they had gotten a warrant to remove the guns from the guy, that would have been ok? Honestly, it's not a bad idea. A paper trail is always a good way to cover your ass. The police could have detained the man while they went to the judge to get a warrant. They can do it for almost anything else, why not that?

From the link in post 12.


Due to his numerous contacts with police and escalating behavior, SPD’s Crisis Response Squad filed for an Extreme Risk Protection Order, requiring the man to turn over all firearms. After the man failed to turn over his firearms or appear in court for a hearing on the order, police obtained a warrant and responded to the man’s apartment in the 2200 block of 2nd Avenue just after 1 p.m. on March 1st and took him into custody.

sleek
07-11-2018, 01:59 PM
From the link in post 12.

And everything was done right then. This thread is a good representation of why i post seemingly bs threads. I enjoy them bein anylized.

Flying Orca
07-11-2018, 02:00 PM
And everything was done right then. This thread is a good representation of why i post seemingly bs threads. I enjoy them bein anylized.

I like that you're open to that. I'll like it even more when you start doing it yourself. ;)

Tom Montgomery
07-11-2018, 02:16 PM
Then investigate and issue warrents etc, maybe detain the man on the spot. What they did was an outright violation of constitution and authority. You cant act and rule on fear.
A warrant WAS issued. The man WAS arrested. From snopes.com:


Due to his numerous contacts with police and escalating behavior, SPD’s Crisis Response Squad filed for an Extreme Risk Protection Order, requiring the man to turn over all firearms. After the man failed to turn over his firearms or appear in court for a hearing on the order, police obtained a warrant and responded to the man’s apartment in the 2200 block of 2nd Avenue just after 1 p.m. on March 1st and took him into custody.

I rate this troll: FAIL. Count this as a response from the left.

Art Haberland
07-11-2018, 03:26 PM
ok then. Case solved. NEXT!

Keith Wilson
07-11-2018, 04:03 PM
And everything was done right then. This thread is a good representation of why I post seemingly bs threads. I enjoy them being analyzed.This is refreshing, although one hopes you'll eventually get a better idea of which news sources are reliable. The contrast with mdh is notable.

In my best moments, I can recognize that someone who demonstrates that I'm wrong is doing me a favor.

David G
07-11-2018, 04:07 PM
I like that you're open to that. I'll like it even more when you start doing it yourself. ;)

Yes, it's a bit... what? Presumptuous? Self-centered? Lazy? Rude? Something! To bring cowflop to the table, that is, which then others have to help you disinfect. I'll like it even more when you do your own vetting before
bringing it here.

oznabrag
07-11-2018, 04:09 PM
Yes, it's a bit... what? Presumptuous? Self-centered? Lazy? Rude? Something! To bring cowflop to the table which then others have to help you disinfect. I'll like it even more when you do your own vetting before
bringing it here.

How wonderfully supercilious of you.

David G
07-11-2018, 04:10 PM
How wonderfully supercilious of you.

You're welcome.

johnw
07-11-2018, 04:38 PM
I mean, there is a law that litteraly says, even if you obey the law, you are still screwed.

He broke the law. Read the Snopes link.

The law was passed by ballot initiative after the Cafe Racer massacre. In that case, the man's family had tried to get his guns taken away and him institutionalized before he shot anyone. The law at that time did not permit this.

Now, why did the police think this fellow you're asking about was a nutter who was a danger?

Read the Snopes link. From it:


According to the department spokesperson, the suspect — who lives directly above the restaurant — stood on a sidewalk in front of the business “yelling obscenities and accusing them of ‘talking to him through the floor.'” He later called officers back to the scene, saying that he could hear “taunting and voices” emanating from the restaurant. While meeting with police, they said, he said that he wanted a restaurant employee “arrested or shot.” He was detained and later taken to receive medical services.

Now, perhaps you think someone who wants the police to shoot someone for him is in his right mind. I do not.

Jimmy W
07-11-2018, 05:59 PM
perhaps a less biased source and more information specific to this incident would allow me to express an opinion

- sign me, liberal firearms enthusiast

Next time, take Paul's advice in post #4.

David G
07-11-2018, 06:52 PM
Next time, take Paul's advice in post #4.

Well... yes. That's precisely correct. Just not supercilious enough.

CPF
07-11-2018, 09:41 PM
This was in my email,

There's yer problem. If it comes by email, that by itself should set off all your liar alarms.

Chris249
07-11-2018, 10:54 PM
Then investigate and issue warrents etc, maybe detain the man on the spot. What they did was an outright violation of constitution and authority. You cant act and rule on fear.

Would you make the same claim if a person of Arabic appearance, wearing a T shirt saying "all Christians must die" and yelling that the USA should be under sharia law walked onto a plane wearing a belt full of explosives and an AK47? One would think not.

So, where do you draw the line?

Chris249
07-11-2018, 10:57 PM
which is something i'm VERY against. if you haven't been convicted of a crime, you should not be robbed by the government so they can buy more toys to kill you with.

So do you support the right of fanatical but law abiding Muslims etc to wander around with anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles and heavy machine guns on planes or near airports?

What about people who may just happen to walk into a bank heavily armed, with ski masks on? I mean, maybe they are just skiers who want to be good guys with a gun?

Flying Orca
07-12-2018, 07:13 AM
What about people who may just happen to walk into a bank heavily armed, with ski masks on? I mean, maybe they are just skiers who want to be good guys with a gun?

Well, obviously it depends - are we talking open-carry? I mean, if their weapons aren't concealed, they're just fine upstanding citizens, amirite? :D