terrorist attack in Oregon!

[smaneck]

Of course you do. If the feds choose to go in and these rebels start shooting at them, as they've said they will do, the police or special forces or whoever will be justified in returning fire. That's the main reason why they aren't going in: they don't want to have to kill these guys. It's not like they have hostages, so it doesn't seem worth it.

They don't need another Waco or Ruby Ridge, but why are they letting these guys gets supplies in and out? Cut off the utilities and block access to the facility, for gosh sakes! No more interviews, no more food.

 

[Cearbhall]

They don't need another Waco or Ruby Ridge, but why are they letting these guys gets supplies in and out? Cut off the utilities and block access to the facility, for gosh sakes! No more interviews, no more food.

Oh, are they? I haven't been keeping up with it. Sheesh. Why would they do that? I was picturing a rural building with one road that's been blocked off by police, and a bunch of guys with guns living off vending machine food.

 

[jenny1972]

Of course you do. If the feds choose to go in and these rebels start shooting at them, as they've said they will do, the police or special forces or whoever will be justified in returning fire. That's the main reason why they aren't going in: they don't want to have to kill these guys. It's not like they have hostages, so it doesn't seem worth it.

well they said they will not fire the first shot and will not shoot unless they are shot at so they are taking the defensive position . If the police or military opens fire they will return fire if not they will not shoot there are non lethal ways to get them out of there but self defense is not a crime .

 

[smaneck]

Oh, are they? I haven't been keeping up with it. Sheesh. Why would they do that? I was picturing a rural building with one road that's been blocked off by police, and a bunch of guys with guns living off vending machine food.

Some of these guys are sneaking out and going to local restaurants.

 

[smaneck]

well they said they will not fire the first shot and will not shoot unless they are shot at so they are taking the defensive position . If the police or military opens fire they will return fire if not they will not shoot there are non lethal ways to get them out of there but self defense is not a crime .

According to the law if someone gets killed while in commission of a crime then everyone involved in that crime is guilty of murder. Seizing a federal building is a crime.

 

[Cearbhall]

If the police or military opens fire they will return fire if not they will not shoot

If that were the case, they would have already left. It's not like they're unaware that law enforcement wants them out. Do you really think they would just get up and leave if law enforcement walked in there and asked them nicely?

 

[smaneck]

If that were the case, they would have already left. It's not like they're unaware that law enforcement wants them out.

Apparently Jenny thinks that if someone shoots at you while you are stealing something it is okay to shoot back.
These people are stealing federal property. That means they are robbing you and me.

 

[jenny1972]

According to the law if someone gets killed while in commission of a crime then everyone involved in that crime is guilty of murder. Seizing a federal building is a crime.

Apparently Jenny thinks that if someone shoots at you while you are stealing something it is okay to shoot back.
These people are stealing federal property. That means they are robbing you and me.

i think using deadly force should be the absolute last resort when dealing with people who are committing crime . why not drop tear gas in the area , cut off water and electric , exc. and arrest them instead of just starting an attack that will result in loss of who knows how many peoples lives . Unless lives are in danger deadly force shouldnt be used noone life is in danger even though they are committing a crime there are non lethal ways to solve it .

 

[smaneck]

i think using deadly force should be the absolute last resort when dealing with people who are committing crime .

I would agree with that. I would not agree that a criminal has the right to shoot back at officers if they shoot at him while he is in the commission of a crime.

why not drop tear gas in the area ,

Uh, you realize that is how those people in Waco burned to death? The tear gas caught fire.

cut off water and electric

That we should do.

 

[JGG]

Don't be silly. These are conservative Mormons. D&D is of the devil. They are playing Uno.

Oh sweet Scarlet Johansson, how tedious.

 

[JGG]

Some of these guys are sneaking out and going to local restaurants.

Well, to be fair, an armed protest in a federal building is just incomplete without Arby's.

 

[smaneck]

Don't be silly. These are conservative Mormons. D&D is of the devil. They are playing Uno.

Apparently not all of them are. One of these guys took off with their donations and used it to buy booze. Another guy ended up in the hospital last night with a black eye. Sounds like not all is well at the OK Corral.

 

[smaneck]

Well, to be fair, an armed protest in a federal building is just incomplete without Arby's.

What would Jon Stewart have to say?

I miss him so much.

 

[stamperben]

i think using deadly force should be the absolute last resort when dealing with people who are committing crime . why not drop tear gas in the area , cut off water and electric , exc. and arrest them instead of just starting an attack that will result in loss of who knows how many peoples lives . Unless lives are in danger deadly force shouldnt be used noone life is in danger even though they are committing a crime there are non lethal ways to solve it .

Where did you say this in the Tamir Rice thread?

 

[JGG]

Where did you say this in the Tamir Rice thread?

Well, there are exceptions to that ideology, obviously.

 

[JGG]

Apparently not all of them are. One of these guys took off with their donations and used it to buy booze.

Arby's and Bud Light.

 

[jenny1972]

Where did you say this in the Tamir Rice thread?

i didnt comment on any tamir rice thread but it doesnt matter what race a person is deadly force should be the last resort dont you agree?

 

[stamperben]

i didnt comment on any tamir rice thread but it doesnt matter what race a person is deadly force should be the last resort dont you agree?

Is like to see you go there and make a blind past repeating what you just said here. I'd be untested in what the responses would be.

And yes, deadly force is an ending and that life lost is gone forever. Never an action to be taken lightly.

 

[Hank77]

It is a felony to even bring a weapon inside a federal building.

(g) As used in this section:
(1)
The term “Federal facility” means a building or part thereof owned or leased by the Federal Government, where Federal employees are regularly present for the purpose of performing their official duties.

Not sure this particular building would qualify under that description. But maybe.

(d) Subsection (a) shall not apply to—
(3)
the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful purposes.

Not that the above exception applies to the guys in Oregon.

To knowingly or possess that weapon during the commission of a crime within a federal prison carries a penalty of five years.

(b)
Whoever, with intent that a firearm or other dangerous weapon be used in the commission of a crime, knowingly possesses or causes to be present such firearm or dangerous weapon in a Federal facility, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.

I think a stand off with law enforcement would be considered a crime and at least a couple of them have stated their intent to use those weapons if confronted.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/930

 

[Hank77]

...but as noted before, the "any building owned by the government" is not an accurate assessment in respect to facilities within parks and wildlife refuges as per the law. In the case of parks, the responsibility is on the government to post signs on the buildings that are applicable. It's not like schools & courthouses where it's 100% banned whether there are signs or not.

Again, it's very possible that there were signs, and these jokers just ignored them and strolled right in...in which case, they could/should be charged with the crime.

Is it possible that this particular facility has not been designated a gun free zone because there is hunting allowed on the refuge?