# Oregon Standoff Ends In Death



## Vol (Jul 5, 2009)

Several arrested and one killed.

Regards, Mike

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/01/27/1-killed-1-injured-during-arrest-ammon-bundy-leader-oregon-standoff.html


----------



## barnrope (Mar 22, 2010)

Sounds like the cops murdered him.


----------



## slowzuki (Mar 8, 2011)

Hard to say, neither group is going to report objectively about what happened.


----------



## Vol (Jul 5, 2009)

I cannot help but wonder if there is video of the arrest....there should have been with the State Police involved....but that does not mean there is video. You never know for sure about the "hands in the air" claim either....that is why a video is so important. The folks from Oregon did not want these protestors there....if the protestors would have moved on, this could have been avoided. As far as the reply that "some things are worth dying for" that was made by the deceased earlier....I am conflicted as I agree in some instances that some things(family) are worth dying for...but in other instances I cannot help but reflect on Ecclesiastes 9:4 that basically says " anyone who is among the living has hope--it is better off to be a live dog than a dead lion".

Regards, Mike


----------



## deadmoose (Oct 30, 2011)

Was it really the local cops? Time will tell. As far as video footage I would think the same. If there was not there should have been video footage in this particular case. Officers knew what they were encountering.


----------



## deadmoose (Oct 30, 2011)

Standoff is not over yet...
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/01/27/arrests-death-brings-new-leadership-for-militia-group-in-oregon-standoff.html


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

I bet if this was a pretty well known "Black lives matter" protester, cities would be burning and Al Sharpton would be out with the bullhorn.

But since hes a white male conservative or liberitarian, nobody cares and its just a back page story.

Sickening


----------



## urednecku (Oct 18, 2010)

Another incident where the AMERICAN public will never know the TRUTH.


----------



## PaMike (Dec 7, 2013)

This whole standoff is kind of a joke. They really thought they could leave the compound to go to a meeting and they wouldn't be picked up by the cops/FBI/ATF? Come on now...


----------



## slowzuki (Mar 8, 2011)

Re: JD3430, its front page news here and was on the national public radio talk show on the drive home. The host spoke with one of the remaining fellows and he sounded young, scared and dumb enough to not realize he is out of moves.

Hopefully they pickup the phone and negotiate a surrender, both sides are gonna make more mistakes if the pressure keeps ratcheting up.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

slowzuki said:


> Re: JD3430, its front page news here and was on the national public radio talk show on the drive home. The host spoke with one of the remaining fellows and he sounded young, scared and dumb enough to not realize he is out of moves. Hopefully they pickup the phone and negotiate a surrender, both sides are gonna make more mistakes if the pressure keeps ratcheting up.


Slow,

We've had cities practically burned to the ground after Michael Brown or Freddie Graves were accidentally killed and they were low level street thugs. A few mainstream media outlets doing 24hr coverage on the story for weeks!

This guy is shot, allegedly with his hands up and I dont see any city riots or 24hr MSNBC coverage. I heard/saw maybe 5-10 minutes total!


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

urednecku said:


> Another incident where the AMERICAN public will never know the TRUTH.


You have to wonder if theres video forthcoming.


----------



## Hank- in or (Feb 12, 2009)

This link doesn't pertain to the Bundy's but to the Hammonds. I believe there is a bit of conflict of interest in this state along with personal agendas.

http://koin.com/2016/01/18/anti-militia-group-started-by-sons-of-federal-judge/


----------



## slowzuki (Mar 8, 2011)

I watched one of the occupiers videos today, sounds like it wasn't quite a shot while kneeling with hands up type of affair.

Jd3430 - the two situations are quite different.


----------



## discbinedr (Mar 4, 2013)

PaMike said:


> This whole standoff is kind of a joke. They really thought they could leave the compound to go to a meeting and they wouldn't be picked up by the cops/FBI/ATF? Come on now...


Maybe it was supposed to be a way to surrender without losing face.


----------



## somedevildawg (Jun 20, 2011)

discbinedr said:


> Maybe it was supposed to be a way to surrender without losing face.


I agree, something went terribly wrong during the "exchange".....


----------



## Vol (Jul 5, 2009)

I remember seeing somewhere where they were allowed to leave and go to town before(meeting) and they were not bothered....I thought that was strange then....this last time was a different story.

Regards, Mike


----------



## urednecku (Oct 18, 2010)

As for video, there might be, but wouldn't surprise if there is not "for some reason" or they just won't admit or release it.

Now they run the non-truth reporting media off so there won't be any of the final outcome either.


----------



## PaMike (Dec 7, 2013)

discbinedr said:


> Maybe it was supposed to be a way to surrender without losing face.


Yeah, I thought the same thing today when thinking about it some more.

The other thing that is really stupid is if you are trying to further some sort of "cause" you need to get your message out.

They should have been calling into every radio, TV,talk show, etc etc in the nation to get their message out...

The whole thing is just odd, and poorly executed..


----------



## Hank- in or (Feb 12, 2009)

Here is the video of the traffic stop and shooting. You can make up your own mind on what happened.


----------



## somedevildawg (Jun 20, 2011)

Hard to tell with the video, and we certainly don't have any info other than the vid and it is what it is, but the guy appears to have been shot in the back.....maybe turning around from a verbal command? Idk....


----------



## glasswrongsize (Sep 15, 2015)

somedevildawg said:


> Hard to tell with the video, and we certainly don't have any info other than the vid and it is what it is, but the guy appears to have been shot in the back.....maybe turning around from a verbal command? Idk....


Yeah, the video was pretty poor for us spectators. There was surely more video from the OSP patrol vehicle and/or that black van and/or body cams etc...?

Just before he was shot (apparently in the back), it appeared that he reached to his midsection and returned with a sidearm in his left hand. Tactically, it is not too smart pull out your pistol when surrounded by other people who also have guns.

I am not passing judgement on either side...just saying that I thought I saw him draw his weapon. That's a game changer in any tense situation.

73, Mark

Edit, It was the Right Hand and it appeared as though he was turning to engage the person who had taken a position in the trees/brush. Hard to tell with his back to me, but maybe (from seeing how his right shoulder twisted, he may have been pointing the a firearm to his left across his abdomen with his right hand?


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

What a senseless loss of life.

I think the federal law used poor judgement. They should have just let them do their protest whether justified or not and go home. If they broke the law, arrest them later when they weren't expecting it. I didnt see them harm others or destroy property unlike the ghetto protests where people are being hurt, property being destroyed.


----------



## Hank- in or (Feb 12, 2009)

In the press confrence they said that he reached into his coat and when they searched his body he had a 9mm pistol in his coat. I cannot really tell from the video which is less than good quality.


----------



## luke strawwalker (Jul 31, 2014)

Okay, so they had him stopped... then he decides to run and takes off... didn't look to be driving excessively crazy (of course in snow or ice that's kinda pointless anyway).

Thing is, if you look at 9:17, when he tries to run the road block, you see what looks like an officer running out in front of his vehicle as it's plowing through the snow trying to blow around the road block... Can't tell if they hit the guy, but it sure looks like it from the video... Now it's ADW (assault with a deadly weapon-- and yeah a vehicle is considered a deadly weapon in this situation). Yeah, IMHO it's pretty stupid of a cop to run out in front of a truck blowing around a road block in three feet of snow, but still, poor judgment aside, the truck driver's hitting the officer or "attempting to hit" the officer while fleeing and evading is considered assault with a deadly weapon, even if the officer "instigated the situation" by putting himself in harm's way... In the eyes of the law, if the guy wasn't illegally fleeing, he wouldn't have been in a position to hit or "attempt to hit" the officer with his vehicle, IOW, the law judges the fleeing person as guilty, not the officer who jumps in front of his truck.

SO, the guy bails out the door. Okay, nobody is running anywhere fast in deep snow. He apparently has his hands up, moves away from the truck, and then starts making furtive movements with his hands, reaching into his coat or pockets-- see where his hands are now down around his waist... then apparently draws a weapon or reaches out as if taking aim... at that point, he is shot.

Legally, I'd say this shooting was totally justified from a law enforcement perspective. I know when I was in the academy, we were trained that "if it comes down to me going home or you going to the morgue, you can guess which one *I'm* choosing..." IOW, if you don't want to die, OBEY THE POLICE. When they tell you to get down on the ground, put your hands up and keep them up, DO IT. Simple fact is, if you do something that makes the cop THINK you might be about to kill him or take a shot at him, HE IS JUSTIFIED IN SHOOTING (more or less). Like the [email protected] kid that pointed a BB gun at the cops that were called about someone acting crazy and waving a gun around, that got killed... From the cops perspective, they don't know beans about who's in the park, what they're armed with (if anything) let alone whether it's a .45 ACP, a 9mm, or a stupid BB gun... and you don't have time to figure it out when it's pointed at you... by the time you figure it out, you'll likely have a projectile perforating your brain pan at 1400 feet per second... So it basically comes down to "him or me" and if that's the choice, I'll choose "him" every time, as will every other law enforcement officer or thinking individual out there for that matter...

A popular comedian says, "you can't fix stupid"... that's true... there's no "do overs" for this kind of stupidity. In short, if you come at the cops with a weapon, YOU WILL BE MET BY LETHAL FORCE. Just that simple.

The fact that he tried to run the roadblock and hit or nearly hit an officer in the process of running said roadblock has now escalated the situation to ADW, which makes this now a felony stop situation, meaning one is going to face drawn guns and potentially lethal force once they ARE stopped and approached to be apprehended. Looks to me like the guy decided to either 1) go out fighting or 2) suicide by cop. Either way, when faced with a handful of armed police officers with guns drawn and a bead drawn on you from several directions, deciding to dig in your coat when you're already known or highly suspected of being armed, and having committed felonies via fleeing and evading and ADW, is just asking to get killed.

I'm with JD on this one... I think it's poor planning on the gubmint's part... but then again, if you stand up to the gubmint and present a threat to them like you're trying to overthrow it or something, they don't tolerate it... they'll land on you with both feet and pretty much figure that SOMEONE is gonna die. Look at Waco and Ruby Ridge... just how the gubmint operates... about like the same thinking as the Gestapo in Nazi Germany or the KGB in the Soviet Union... same difference. The ATF thought the Waco Davidians would be a pushover, and they'd seize a bunch of prohibited unlicensed weapons and get their pictures in the paper, make a bunch of money selling seized stuff, and be the "office heroes" back at HQ. They didn't figure on them fighting back. Once they did, their fates were sealed. The gubmint won't tolerate that sort of thing... not from white religious extremists and isolationists... (notice they WILL tolerate it from hordes of black mongrels burning a city or town to the ground, because if they sent in 100 FBI agents in riot gear and the National Guard, they'd have the black ferals rioting in 50 cities tomorrow... so they explain it away and blow it off, excuse it, so they don't have to do anything about it... that's the difference).

We were eating supper in a popular restaurant that most of the cops and DPS troopers frequent a couple days before they burned the Davidians out in Waco... The troopers at the next table were laughing and joking with the owner, who would wander from table to table making small talk with everyone as he went, and was well known by the officers... they were discussing Waco and they were all laughing and giggling that "oh, that'll be over soon" and "they have a surprise in store for them" and that sort of thing... then they waited until the windiest day across Central and SE Texas in the last 30 years to start their "raid" on the compound, and it "accidentally" catches fire as soon as they move in?? I don't buy it... they PLANNED for that compound to burn to the ground... the wind was howling at 45-50 mph that day-- I know because I had to drive to Shiner to get some parts for the hay mower, and I drove the back way through the rice fields and I could barely keep the pickup on the highway the crosswinds were SO bad... and the dust being raised by the guys disking rice fields was visible from MILES away, and when you got there, it was like driving through fog so thick you could barely see the road in front of you-- like driving into a wall... Never seen anything like it in my lifetime, and I've lived here all 44 years of my life... I stopped in Hallettsville for lunch at the Bel-Air cafe and it was on the Houston news on the TV, showing the compound burning, the wind was howling so bad the flames were shooting probably 75 feet in the air and blowing sideways like a jet engine was blasting them... they couldn't have picked a better day to burn them out if they'd have tried...

At any rate, short lesson is, don't play kicks with a mule...

Later! OL J R


----------



## swmnhay (Jun 13, 2008)

Shortened up and blown up version


----------



## somedevildawg (Jun 20, 2011)

I agree, I prolly woulda shot that fella......I like the guy with the automatic weapon taking tactical cover behind the vehicle.....your covering the guy with automatic weapons and you're taking cover from a guy with his hands in the air? Seems kinda strange to turn and take cover at that point in the altercation....


----------



## Vol (Jul 5, 2009)

Finicum had a death wish...go back and look at the statements he made about "some things are worth dying for" and his emboldened behaviour of taking a sleeping bag and sitting with a rifle out in front of the refuge defiantly by himself....that was so stupid. If they(Feds) wanted him dead then it would have been nothing to it.....a 12 year old with a scoped rifle could have picked him off and he would have never known it. Now this man has left a very large family to suffer a lifetime of indignity and forever be associated with this cowboy protest that had no hope of producing a change. It is sad.

Mike


----------



## glasswrongsize (Sep 15, 2015)

I thought taking cover and concealment was still very proper as there were still more (I don't know if it was known or unknown to the police at that time) armed people in the truck. If their hands are up-less of a threat but still a deadly threat. If one would have had a gun, hand-grenade, frozen poptart, or whatever in the lap, it would have been brought into deadly play. The concealment MAY have stopped the others' willingness to fight in that IF one of the others were armed and had an easy target, they might have tried it... That is one more possibility that can be diminished with tactical planning to remove "tempting" targets from the other passengers in the truck.
Looked like a bullet hole in the windshield of the truck in front of the driver, too. I never could tell when it arrived or whether from the inside or outside. I thought I might have also seen something on the passenger side window.

If one ever finds one's self in a "fair fight", it's because one's tactics suck.

I can see both sides of this vehicle stop/capture/shooting. Both sides believe they are right and have deep convictions to stand up for what each of them thought were right and just.

73, Mark


----------



## slowzuki (Mar 8, 2011)

Despite the stupidity of trying to run a roadblock, it sure looks like if he would have simply left his hands on his head and not acted so erratically he would be alive right now. He's lucky he didn't get everyone in the truck killed.


----------



## Vol (Jul 5, 2009)

Very true about the truck occupants....some less capable law enforcement may have "opened up" on the truck occupants once the crap had hit the fan....

It could have been someone in Oregon law enforcement like this knucklehead...

Regards, Mike

http://www.autoblog.com/2016/01/28/motorcyclist-awarded-180-000-after-encounter-with-police/


----------



## Hank- in or (Feb 12, 2009)

Take a look at the video right before Finicum drives away and tell me what the 2 flashes are. Could it be that he was shot at and missed as was being reported and then drove off?


----------



## glasswrongsize (Sep 15, 2015)

I'm not sure that they ARE flashes. The two flashes look like darkening and a couple of seconds later lightening back up of the video. Watch the road; at the first "flash" the road darkens; shortly later at the second "flash" the road lightens and remains lightened. It looks like they switched modes or something on the video...if talking at or about the 8:08 min mark. Hard to tell to my untrained eye, all the zooming in and out and panning away at some of the most inopportune times. Would be nice if the video wasn't shot with someone with A.D.D.

Makes me wonder if the poor video was intentional. Military/LE stuff is usually better than that from the air. But then again, I don't trust anyone.

73, Mark


----------



## urednecku (Oct 18, 2010)

I still don't think we will ever hear the REAL TRUTH, from both sides.

I can't help but wonder how long they would have sat in that building IF the gooberment had just left them alone----ignored them? I've understood the place was closed for the winter, & was not scheduled to re-open for some months?


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

urednecku said:


> I still don't think we will ever hear the REAL TRUTH, from both sides.
> 
> I can't help but wonder how long they would have sat in that building IF the gooberment had just left them alone----ignored them? I've understood the place was closed for the winter, & was not scheduled to re-open for some months?


Right. Let them protest, if its peaceful, they'll eventually get tired of it and go home.

If it gets out of hand, that's a different story.

I believe that's how city democrats are treated. They march "peacefully", block traffic, yell peaceful phrases like "pigs in a blanket, fry em like bacon" and they're left to do so with not much more than a watchful eye.

Why aren't rural conservatives treated same way?

Is it because rural conservatives are mostly anti-government??

I think so.


----------



## slowzuki (Mar 8, 2011)

I'm not sure about that, they arrested everyone that tried to occupy buildings pretty darned quick during that movement. They were pretty anti-government too though.


----------



## glasswrongsize (Sep 15, 2015)

Slow, I (and maybe only me) had a severely different take on the occupy people. While they MAY have arrested attempting to occupy a building or two , the ones occupying public places such as streets, sidewalks, parks, private property, etc...- purposely impeding citizens and authorities with their presence. They were outwardly as obtrusive and intrusive as possible.

I did not see them as anti gummint as much as I saw them to be anti-capitalism, anti-authority,anti-work, anti-bathe, anti-responsibility, etc...but wanted the gummint to procure their piece of the pie for them.

...but that's just my take.

73, Mark


----------



## deadmoose (Oct 30, 2011)

glasswrongsize said:


> Slow, I (and maybe only me) had a severely different take on the occupy people. While they MAY have arrested attempting to occupy a building or two , the ones occupying public places such as streets, sidewalks, parks, private property, etc...- purposely impeding citizens and authorities with their presence. They were outwardly as obtrusive and intrusive as possible.
> 
> I did not see them as anti gummint as much as I saw them to be anti-capitalism, anti-authority,anti-work, anti-bathe, anti-responsibility, etc...but wanted the gummint to procure their piece of the pie for them.
> ...but that's just my take.
> ...


That is a fact, jack! VERY pro gov low life's.


----------



## Tim/South (Dec 12, 2011)

I can see all the different points of view.

The lingering question in my mind is: If he had reached for a gun, why didn't the officer in front pull the trigger?

He was shot in the back by someone in the worst position to see what was happening&#8230;. while his hands were in the air.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

slowzuki said:


> I'm not sure about that, they arrested everyone that tried to occupy buildings pretty darned quick during that movement. They were pretty anti-government too though.


Occupying a building versus occupying a public street are 2 *VERY* different things.

And our city democrat friends weren't anti-gov't, they were *anti-law & order*.


----------



## slowzuki (Mar 8, 2011)

I disagree that they are democrats, that's the problem everyone had with them, they didn't fit well into a group, they didn't have one cohesive message, they had different objectives. They were a shade on the anarchist side of things, a bit on the tea party side of things, a bit on the libertarian side of things but of everything but mainly angry they couldn't get a stable job and earn a living like their parents.

In the occupy camps around here they got squeezed Into the parks where the homeless people lived anyways. Once they started annoying the businesses nearby the police tore down the camps.

I can't get angry at them when a huge portion of our local taxes are to pay for huge hockey arenas that only a few kids and parents get to enjoy. We have 5 multi million dollar rinks in our local city and 5 more multi hundred thousand dollar ones on the outskirts. 10 rinks support about 2000 people to play hockey out of 100,000 people in the area? I can't get worked up about people camping in town.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Slowzuki says the demonstrators were .....*"A bit on the tea party side" *

That's funny right there!!!!

I could just picture Slowzuki walking into the bad-ass part of St Louis and asking the residents "OK, who belongs to the Tea Party?"


----------



## deadmoose (Oct 30, 2011)

Glad you feel for em slow. Everyone I know was too busy @ work to protest. Then again, I don't know any one who looks down at someone because of their wealth. All the people I hang around say how do I get there.

TEA=Taxed Enough Already. No legitimate Tea party supporter thinks because someone is so wealthy they should pay more and more until they are no longer wealthy.

REALLY! Tea party supporter and occupier at the same time? I guess it could happen. That is one STUPID person who doesn't know their head from their rear end.


----------



## somedevildawg (Jun 20, 2011)

slowzuki said:


> I disagree that they are democrats, that's the problem everyone had with them, they didn't fit well into a group, they didn't have one cohesive message, they had different objectives. They were a shade on the anarchist side of things, a bit on the tea party side of things, a bit on the libertarian side of things but of everything but mainly angry they couldn't get a stable job and earn a living like their parents.


Wow.....


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

slowzuki said:


> I disagree that they are democrats, that's the problem everyone had with them, they didn't fit well into a group, they didn't have one cohesive message, they had different objectives. They were a shade on the anarchist side of things, a bit on the tea party side of things, a bit on the libertarian side of things but of everything but mainly angry they couldn't get a stable job and earn a living like their parents.


Another gaping hole in your point is that most of these people* dont WANT a "stable job"!!*

Their parents couldn't "earn a living". They didn't want a job, either!!


----------



## glasswrongsize (Sep 15, 2015)

slowzuki said:


> They were a shade on the anarchist side of things, a bit on the tea party side of things, a bit on the libertarian side of things but of everything but mainly angry they couldn't get a stable job and earn a living like their parents.


So... the Tea party, libertarian, etc"side of things" , and NOT the progressive, liberal, entitled, I-don't-wanna-work-and-you-can't-make-me side of things? Hmmmm?.... very interesting. 

Pssssssssst, shhhh!!! h34r: Don't let the cat out of the bag to the liberal progressive media that the "occupy" scheme was really just a secret meeting for conservatives. 

73, Mark


----------



## swmnhay (Jun 13, 2008)

Interview and more footage of the shooting


----------



## somedevildawg (Jun 20, 2011)

Paints a different picture.......


----------



## swmnhay (Jun 13, 2008)

And a second account.

http://www.freecapitalist.com/2016/01/31/second-eyewitness-chronicling-the-tragic-ambush-and-murder-of-lavoy-finicum-video/


----------



## CDennyRun (Nov 26, 2015)

glasswrongsize said:


> Slow, I (and maybe only me) had a severely different take on the occupy people. While they MAY have arrested attempting to occupy a building or two , the ones occupying public places such as streets, sidewalks, parks, private property, etc...- purposely impeding citizens and authorities with their presence. They were outwardly as obtrusive and intrusive as possible.
> 
> I did not see them as anti gummint as much as I saw them to be anti-capitalism, anti-authority,anti-work, anti-bathe, anti-responsibility, etc...but wanted the gummint to procure their piece of the pie for them.
> 
> ...


Perfectly stated. I have zero respect for those who participated in the occupy "movement". Get a dang job and earn you keep! We all have the opportunity to rise as high as we want. Sleeping and urinating on a sidewalk in front of a business franchise won't get you there.

Chris


----------



## CDennyRun (Nov 26, 2015)

That's a game changer. Now I see a lot of the rounds hitting the truck. Bad deal there.. Prayers sent

Chris


----------



## slowzuki (Mar 8, 2011)

There were a lot of different occupiers of course but most of them were there because they were unemployed or barely employeed. It wasn't all homeless drug addicts although they showed up too. I know one of them that held out to the end. I only know because he was friends with my wife in high school. He's a reasonably smart guy, has worked hard, very passionate. Also happened to be completely delusional about what amount of change that could be effected by camping like a hobo.

I didn't say they were embracing the tea parties key ideas, however they felt they were being treated unfairly by the system and needed to speak out and try to change it by being loud about it.


----------



## slowzuki (Mar 8, 2011)

Who told you the occupiers didn't want to work? Rush?

The occupiers I know of are as equally hostile to democrats/liberals as to conservatives / republicans. They would describe both parties as neo-conservatives broadly speaking.



glasswrongsize said:


> So... the Tea party, libertarian, etc"side of things" , and NOT the progressive, liberal, entitled, I-don't-wanna-work-and-you-can't-make-me side of things? Hmmmm?.... very interesting.
> 
> Pssssssssst, shhhh!!! h34r: Don't let the cat out of the bag to the liberal progressive media that the "occupy" scheme was really just a secret meeting for conservatives.
> 
> 73, Mark


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Just to be clear. I wasn't talking about the "Wall Street" type occupiers. I was talking about the Baltimore & Ferguson types. These type are professional rabble rousers. They travel from town to town with their grievances and link up with the local democrats.


----------



## luke strawwalker (Jul 31, 2014)

glasswrongsize said:


> So... the Tea party, libertarian, etc"side of things" , and NOT the progressive, liberal, entitled, I-don't-wanna-work-and-you-can't-make-me side of things? Hmmmm?.... very interesting.
> 
> Pssssssssst, shhhh!!! h34r: Don't let the cat out of the bag to the liberal progressive media that the "occupy" scheme was really just a secret meeting for conservatives.
> 
> 73, Mark


Yeah, exactly....

These "occupy" morons were just more of the same type that have the mindset that "you have something I don't, and I want it and am entitled to it as much as you are, so what if you WORKED for it, I deserve it just as much and I should be able to TAKE yours... and if I can't have it, YOU shouldn't be ALLOWED to have it EITHER!"

Sorry, but that's communism, and we're up to our EARS in it in this country nowdays...

Wish we could ship all these "worker's utopians" to North Korea... I'm sure they'd fit right in and be very happy...

Later! OL J R


----------



## luke strawwalker (Jul 31, 2014)

Ya know, having watched the video with the woman's testimony above, it IS possible that he was shot in the gut and moved his hands down to his belly area and was then subsequently gunned down by several officers from several different directions. I CAN attest that I've seen officers "open up" on someone without really knowing who or why they're firing... if one cop "opens up" then the other generally, as a rule, start shooting as well, figuring "their lives are in danger" or something to that effect... "well, if HE's shooting, I better shoot too" kind of attitude. SO, sometimes it only takes one "chickensh!t" to really cause a situation to go south in a hurry...

Not saying that was the case here, but cannot say that it was NOT, either... just alternative explanations supported by the video... It's possible he lowered his hands and started digging in his coat or waistband, and they opened up on him legitimately because they were 'in fear of their lives'. The other possibility is that he was gutshot or something, lowered his hands in response to being shot, and then was "opened up on" by the rest of the cops...

Face it people, we live in a police state... oppose the gubmint or the cops at the risk of your life...

Later! OL J R


----------



## glasswrongsize (Sep 15, 2015)

slowzuki said:


> Who told you the occupiers didn't want to work? Rush?


Never listened to Rush in my life...don't know if I have same view as he does or not. Did he say they didn't wanna work? Surely, he wouldn't waste TOO much of his time attempting to explain the obvious.

You contend that they DO want to work?...or do they just want to step into a high-paying entry-level low-erg position with a nice healthy wage like their parents have for worked years to obtain? There's a huge difference. If they were actually wanting work, their time would have better been spent seeking employment vs camping like a hobo .. hoping to be noticed for their ambition by a prospective employer. Their time might have been better spend making themselves MORE marketable to the evil business owners.

Communication is 10% verbal and 90% everything else (actions, non-verbal cues). Their 90% doesn't agree with their 10% if they are SAYING they want to work.



slowzuki said:


> The occupiers I know of are as equally hostile to democrats/liberals as to conservatives / republicans. They would describe both parties as neo-conservatives broadly speaking.


"Neo conservative"? It is one of those buzz words that I LOVE to hear come out of a liberal's mouth. It is usually used improperly and merely goes to further illustrate a lack of knowledge and a willingness to blindly regurgitate.
"NEO" means "NEW" and a couple of other words that one would find in a thesaurus under the word "new".
If your friends were to classify the "democrats/liberals" such as Clinton, Sanders, Nazi Polousy, Harry Reed, etc as neo-conservatives, it would indicate to me they are left of communism and/or stubbornly-ignorant

While I truly enjoy having a round-table or one-on-one discussion with liberals, atheists, economists, and the list goes on and on (because discussions with like-minded people will rarely give you something to ponder or make you question and answer your own "truths")... a discussions with the willing-ignorant are a waste of time.

They remind me of the black knight scene in the Monte Python movie...unwilling to verbally concede to a blatant reality.

'-,-'-,-'-,-'-,-'-,-'-,-'-,-'-,-'-,-'-,

73, Mark


----------



## IHCman (Aug 27, 2011)

This reminds me of the Gordon Kahl shoot out that happened in ND in the early 80s. Gordon Kahl was anti government and refused to pay taxes. When the feds decided to arrest him, they did so out in the country away from town with a road block similar to this one. Some say they could have arrested him without bloodshed in town as he left a meeting that day. Many people feel they did this out in the country away from everyone because they were going to kill him to make an example of him. Whether that was the case or the feds didn't arrest him in town fearing a gunfight in a populated area I don't know. Two fed agents were killed in that shoot out, Kahls son and another young man ended turning themselves in or were arrested at a hospital, and Kahl ended up hiding out down in Arkansas where he and a sherriff were killed after another shoot out.

I wonder how many times they could have arrested these protestors instead of doing what they did. If what is said in the interviews with the amount of rounds fired into the vehicle after the intial shots were fired, it almost seems as if the feds didn't want anyone in that vehicle to survive.


----------



## luke strawwalker (Jul 31, 2014)

IHCman said:


> This reminds me of the Gordon Kahl shoot out that happened in ND in the early 80s. Gordon Kahl was anti government and refused to pay taxes. When the feds decided to arrest him, they did so out in the country away from town with a road block similar to this one. Some say they could have arrested him without bloodshed in town as he left a meeting that day. Many people feel they did this out in the country away from everyone because they were going to kill him to make an example of him. Whether that was the case or the feds didn't arrest him in town fearing a gunfight in a populated area I don't know. Two fed agents were killed in that shoot out, Kahls son and another young man ended turning themselves in or were arrested at a hospital, and Kahl ended up hiding out down in Arkansas where he and a sherriff were killed after another shoot out.
> 
> I wonder how many times they could have arrested these protestors instead of doing what they did. If what is said in the interviews with the amount of rounds fired into the vehicle after the intial shots were fired, it almost seems as if the feds didn't want anyone in that vehicle to survive.


That's it, exactly... make an example out of 'em...

Waco was the same way... they acted like it would have taken half the Army to get to Koresh, that was utter bull... the guy went into Bellmeade (just east of Waco) to a local bar there regularly on his weekly or every few days trips into town to get supplies for "the compound"... He was a well-known patron there and went there basically every time he went to town to "blow off steam" from the hard life of a cult leader... LOL The local cops (or FBI or ATF) could have picked him up there practically at any time with an ounce of investigative and stake-out work, and had him cold with no trouble-- He generally didn't allow anybody else to go into town with him... (to maintain control over the cult, you gotta keep 'em "on the reservation" so to speak...)

Bout like Ruby Ridge and probably a hunded other such setups, most of which almost nobody knows anything about...

Later! OL J R


----------



## panhandle9400 (Jan 17, 2010)

You can bet your ass if those were feral blacks doing that , NOTHING would of been done . They are allowed to steal,loot and burn because there black .


----------



## panhandle9400 (Jan 17, 2010)

slowzuki said:


> Despite the stupidity of trying to run a roadblock, it sure looks like if he would have simply left his hands on his head and not acted so erratically he would be alive right now. He's lucky he didn't get everyone in the truck killed.


 They were shot at and he was already hit in the leg or the side before he ever got out of the pickup at the 1st road block . The reason he dropped his hands was he was going to hold his wound , which makes sense . They started shooting at the pickup before it ever came to a stop , so yes I would try to run it too. The video that the fbi come out with is bogus at best. 1 thing for sure I would not want you at my side if things went bad . btw they didnt even have ANY weapons with them at the time , they left them behind . The feds planted the 9mm on him after they killed him , which is pretty common with corrupt law enforcement .


----------



## swmnhay (Jun 13, 2008)

I can't believe there is no audio with the video,well I can I guess.But that would tell a lot more.How many shots were fired.


----------



## CDennyRun (Nov 26, 2015)

I saw a post on Bing news (I think.. might have been Yahoo) about the gal giving the testimony in this video accusing the feds of covering this up, but it was such a joke the way the played it out. They made it look like she had no leg to stand on, and was VERY brief.

Now the whole thing is almost swept under the rug, and no one is talking about it anymore. I really can't believe something like this is so easy for people to forget about, and just say "stupid ********, that's what you get". I know we've all said it, but if these were "black lives matter" people, this would cause the largest uproar of the century.

The people of this country get 2% more stupid everyday. Eventually they reach maturity (maximum stupid), and then procreate, thus perpetuating the cycle. I'm scared to see what the next 20 years will bring.

Chris


----------



## urednecku (Oct 18, 2010)

> I'm scared to see what the next 20 years will bring.


Me too. I really hate it for my kids & loved ones.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

urednecku said:


> Me too. I really hate it for my kids & loved ones.


I hear that. Sometimes I want to take everything, cash it in and buy an isolated ranch somewhere.

Wait.....my neighbor already did that......hmmmm


----------



## luke strawwalker (Jul 31, 2014)

JD3430 said:


> I hear that. Sometimes I want to take everything, cash it in and buy an isolated ranch somewhere.
> 
> Wait.....my neighbor already did that......hmmmm


Yeah, South America looks better and better all the time...

Later! OL J R


----------



## urednecku (Oct 18, 2010)

luke strawwalker said:


> Yeah, South America looks better and better all the time...
> 
> Later! OL J R


I been thinkin' 'bout Panama.


----------



## luke strawwalker (Jul 31, 2014)

urednecku said:


> I been thinkin' 'bout Panama.


Like Argentina or Chile myself...

later! OL J R


----------



## panhandle9400 (Jan 17, 2010)

We the people need to man up , it is not like we couldnt. Have we gone so far down the crapper there is no other way out ? I am happy where I live coz it can be inhospitable to most, so we dont have to put up with certain type of people here. Thank GOD ..................if I ever move out it will be to the Philippines , my wife already has a small farm over there.I tell her I will sell ice cream on the beach beside my womens swim suit shop .


----------



## IHCman (Aug 27, 2011)

If you like hunting and shooting, you'd better check out the gun laws in those countries. Also check into how friendly the government of those countries is to farmers/ranchers. In the past Argentina was always meddling with ag in their country. I believe the recently elected leadership in Argentina is more ag friendly as he is allowing more of their soybeans to be exported.

Some days it doesn't seem like it but America allows us more freedoms than most other countries.


----------



## luke strawwalker (Jul 31, 2014)

panhandle9400 said:


> We the people need to man up , it is not like we couldnt. Have we gone so far down the crapper there is no other way out ? I am happy where I live coz it can be inhospitable to most, so we dont have to put up with certain type of people here. Thank GOD ..................if I ever move out it will be to the Philippines , my wife already has a small farm over there.I tell her I will sell ice cream on the beach beside my womens swim suit shop .


The problem is the morons outnumber us about 1,000 to 1, at least...

Some battles just aren't worth the effort... like I've heard it said about "picking your battles" (specifically in marriage) you have to ask yourself "is this the hill I want to die on?"

Sometimes you just cut your losses and move on to fairer pastures... I've lived long enough to know that these sorts of battles against stupidity and incompetence are hopeless battles...

Best thing you can do sometimes instead of working yourself to death trying to hold things together with spit and baling wire is to "let the barn burn" and then rebuild on the ashes...

Later! OL J R


----------



## Northcountryboy (May 5, 2015)

Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy arrested

http://usat.ly/1TdW4ZG


----------

