Law Airport executive shot in firefight with federal agents at his home in Arkansas

[Sweater of AV]

Put surveillance on him, pull him over as soon as he goes to work with a marked vehicle?

You said so yourself, it's not a courtesy call. They could've easily executed the warrant while he was at work.

Lower risk of violence than kick in door and and yell "ATF Search Warrant" and hope dude hears it clearly and not think his home is being invaded.

I'll be happy to say I was wrong, just my initial thoughts.

As I said, most people want to be home when the search warrant is executed. It's early but not unreasonable.

Again, no one has provided any actual information on what happened. All we know is a guy with a "collection of guns" opened fire (for whatever reason) and agents responded.

I have no stake in this, I'm just amused at how people have jumped to conclusions.

 

[ColemanwastheGOAT]

Surprised to see people saying Ruby Ridge was handled well.

Why was there a settlement then?

U.S. to Pay $3.1 Million for '92 Idaho Shootout : Court: Settlement in Weaver case reflects loss of mother, son in Ruby Ridge incident. But wrongdoing is denied.

The Justice Department agreed Tuesday to pay $3.1 million to white separatist Randy Weaver and his three surviving children for the loss of his wife and 14-year-old son, who were killed by federal agents in a 1992 shootout at Ruby Ridge, Ida.

www.latimes.com

 

[Thrawn33]

As I said, most people want to be home when the search warrant is executed. It's early but not unreasonable.

Again, no one has provided any actual information on what happened. All we know is a guy with a "collection of guns" opened fire (for whatever reason) and agents responded.

I have no stake in this, I'm just amused at how people have jumped to conclusions.

I'm not jumping to a conclusion. I'm just a dude on a karate forum posting early opinions on what is presented.

Facts come out otherwise, then hey I'm wrong, righteous shoot, fuck that guy. No skin off my back either.

 

[spamking]

Am i missing something on that Ruby Ridge thingie? they were trying to arrest a fugitive in the middle of the woods that was armed, sounds like a high risk thingie no matter how you look at it.

Much different than Waco, which could have been avoided by catching the guy as he made a trip to the town.

In the successful defense, Weaver's attorney Gerry Spence accused the agencies that were involved of criminal wrongdoing, in particular the FBI, the USMS, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF), and the United States Attorney's Office (USAO) for Idaho. Harris and Weaver were acquitted of all the siege-related charges, and Weaver was only found guilty of violating his bail terms and of failing to appear for a court hearing, both related to the original federal firearms charges. The Weaver family and Harris both filed civil suits against the federal government in response to the firefight and the siege. In August 1995, the Weavers won a combined out-of-court settlement of $3.1 million; Harris was awarded a $380,000 settlement in September 2000. In 1997, a Boundary County prosecutor indicted Horiuchi for the manslaughter of Vicki, but the county's new prosecutor controversially closed the case, judging that he would be unlikely to secure a conviction.

 

[Scerpi]

Am i missing something on that Ruby Ridge thingie? they were trying to arrest a fugitive in the middle of the woods that was armed, sounds like a high risk thingie no matter how you look at it.

Much different than Waco, which could have been avoided by catching the guy as he made a trip to the town.

lol... Way to butcher the story.

When Weaver did not appear in court on February 20, Ryan issued a bench warrant for failure to appear in court.[26][17]: 2  On February 26, Ken Keller, a reporter for the Kootenai Valley Times, telephoned the U.S. Probation Office and asked whether Weaver did not show in court on February 20 because the letter Richins sent him had an incorrect date. Upon finding a copy of the letter, the Chief Probation Officer, Terrence Hummel, contacted Ryan's clerk and informed them of the incorrect date in the letter. Hummel also contacted the U.S. Marshals Service (USMS) and Weaver's attorney, informing them both of the error. Judge Ryan, however, refused to withdraw the bench warrant

They lied about the charges against him, then refused to correct their mistakes.

Weaver was deemed not-guilty to all charges ... and he was awarded a settlement.

Many of the locals, even those not exactly enamored of the Weavers' odd-ball views, were thoroughly unimpressed by the penny-ante justification for the resulting siege. That was a siege that involved multiple federal agencies and led to deaths of Deputy U.S. Marshal William Degan, Samuel Weaver, Vicki Weaver and a dog, and the wounding of Kevin Harris and Randy Weaver. During that siege, the FBI operated under Rules of Engagement that many local agents quietly rejected as too severe, and which a Senate subcommittee report later labeled, "virtual shoot on sight orders."

In his book on the incident, Ambush at Ruby Ridge, Alan W. Bock, one-time editorial page editor for the Orange County Register and an occasional Reason contributor, wrote of how, during the siege, many of the federal agents rented rooms at the Deep Creek Inn, owned by a Swiss immigrant named Lorenz Caduff. Caduff took their money and gave them polite service, But the agents couldn't have failed to notice that he made his business equipment and facilities available, free of charge, to those who were not sympathetic to the federal presence.

At the conclusion of the trial of Randy Weaver and Kevin Harris, the jury acquitted Kevin Harris of all charges, and found Weaver guilty only of failure to appear on the original weapons charge, and violating the terms of his bail, The weapons charge itself, along with other serious charges, like murder and conspiracy, were tossed.

Some of the jurors then participated in the sentencing hearing, describing the treatment of the Weavers as an "injustice," sparring with the prosecutor and calling for short prison time for Randy Weaver.

In 1995, facing a lawsuit by the surviving members of the Weaver family, the federal government settled for $3.1 million. The New York Times reported, "lawyers involved in the negotiations said the size of the settlement was a tacit acknowledgment that officials feared a substantially larger verdict if the case had gone to a jury in Idaho."

To add insult to injury, the Boundary County prosecutor actually indicted FBI sniper Lon Horiuchi, who had killed Vicki Weaver, for manslaughter

Good fucking lord, when did the Left decide to embrace Authoritarian policies by the Federal Government.

 

[spamking]

As I said, most people want to be home when the search warrant is executed. It's early but not unreasonable.

Again, no one has provided any actual information on what happened. All we know is a guy with a "collection of guns" opened fire (for whatever reason) and agents responded.

I have no stake in this, I'm just amused at how people have jumped to conclusions.

You don't understand where what you're calling jumping to a conclusion might be seen as providing an educated opinion on this situation based on previous actions by the ATF?

If the ATF was there early enough to serve warrant at 6am for someone seeming to be a non-violent person with no known criminal history (I'm not saying the dude wasn't a criminal at all, but if he were some serious capture the ATF would've said as much by now), they could've continued to stake out the house and wait for him to come outside away from his "collection of guns". But instead, they instigated a dangerous situation that didn't need to happen.

 

[High Test With da Best]

Dunno man, people tend to be less supportive of people who shoot at the Feds over nothing.

If this was no-knock, then i would agree with you, but with no video its hard.

I wonder if there's any requirement for body cameras when a team is doing a home entry? Would be a good idea IMO

 

[CantCucktheTuck]

You don't understand where what you're calling jumping to a conclusion might be seen as providing an educated opinion on this situation based on previous actions by the ATF?

If the ATF was there early enough to serve warrant at 6am for someone seeming to be a non-violent person with no known criminal history (I'm not saying the dude wasn't a criminal at all, but if he were some serious capture the ATF would've said as much by now), they could've continued to stake out the house and wait for him to come outside away from his "collection of guns". But instead, they instigated a dangerous situation that didn't need to happen.

The ATF is basically where the most incompetent members of federal law enforcment go.

 

[Poon Goon]

They'll just censor (my pointing out that this is shady and perhaps indicative of a child trafficking operation at the airport) and protect the Clintons (and other Epstein associates), and you droids will cheer it on, even though children are at stake.

I've never been one to bitch about the mods here, but them constantly protecting the Clintons and/or human trafficking is pretty annoying.

 

[ineverpost]

“When someone makes that much money, there’s no incentive to do anything wrong,” the brother said.

I am completely convinced now. No one who makes $250,000 a year would ever break the law.

 

[Sweater of AV]

You don't understand where what you're calling jumping to a conclusion might be seen as providing an educated opinion on this situation based on previous actions by the ATF?

If the ATF was there early enough to serve warrant at 6am for someone seeming to be a non-violent person with no known criminal history (I'm not saying the dude wasn't a criminal at all, but if he were some serious capture the ATF would've said as much by now), they could've continued to stake out the house and wait for him to come outside away from his "collection of guns". But instead, they instigated a dangerous situation that didn't need to happen.

There's a clear difference between providing an educated opinion and jumping to conclusions. People have obviously jumped to conclusions.

If he's "seeming to be a non-violent person" then why would they go through all of the extra precautions for a seemingly harmless case?

Once again, we don't know anything about the situation. Wait until you know all of the details and then decide whether things should have been handled differently. At this point, you're basically saying anyone with a weapon should never be served a search warrant at their home. Nonsense.

 

[BearGrounds]

I've never been one to bitch about the mods here, but them constantly protecting the Clintons and/or human trafficking is pretty annoying.

It's pretty fucking suspect.

What would motivate a mod to prohibit discussion of such an angle? Just let it play out, and if it's really a stupid theory, let it be shown via discussion.

To censor it completely (especially by using a nonsense excuse) just wreaks of shadiness. You wouldn't have to do that, if the theory were so outlandish. Silencing it only lends credibility to it being a valid inquiry, and someone not wanting that to be shown.

 

[degoj99]

Sorry sir, you don't seem to be taking into account that this gentleman also had a large collection of coins.

This is fucking hilarious! Needed more that a thumbs up.

 

[nixkid]

You know this for a fact?

No, you don't. You're part of the problem.

You've gone off the rails. Honestly, when you're this deep, I think there is any coming back.

 

[spamking]

I am completely convinced now. No one who makes $250,000 a year would ever break the law.

 

[spamking]

There's a clear difference between providing an educated opinion and jumping to conclusions. People have obviously jumped to conclusions.

We're all speculating. You included.

And whether you like it or not, there is an educated opinion part to this based on previous actions of the ATF.

If he's "seeming to be a non-violent person" then why would they go through all of the extra precautions for a seemingly harmless case?

Correct. That's what we're all asking about and discussing here in the thread. Again, until the ATF provides more context we can only speculate why they acted like they did for someone that doesn't appear to be a super villain.

Once again, we don't know anything about the situation. Wait until you know all of the details and then decide whether things should have been handled differently. At this point, you're basically saying anyone with a weapon should never be served a search warrant at their home. Nonsense.

No I'm not basically saying that . . . . that's more of that speculation you seem to be complaining about.

 

[nixkid]

The ATF need to be disbanded.

Defund the police...amirite?

 

[BearGrounds]

You've gone off the rails. Honestly, when you're this deep, I think there is any coming back.

You thinking such a theory is an indication of being "off the rails", when I can supply just reasoning for it, just means you've been completely programmed beyond any ability to break free of it.

What you think, isn't even up to you.

 

[Sweater of AV]

We're all speculating. You included.

Really? What have I speculated on?

And whether you like it or not, there is an educated opinion part to this based on previous actions of the ATF.

You're not forming an educated opinion. You're making an assumption.

Correct. That's what we're all asking about and discussing here in the thread. Again, until the ATF provides more context we can only speculate why they acted like they did for someone that doesn't appear to be a super villain.

You keep saying things like "acted like they did." Can you provide explicit details on how they acted?

No I'm not basically saying that . . . . that's more of that speculation you seem to be complaining about.

Well, it's what you said. That's not "speculation." People with weapons still need to be served search warrants.

 

[spamking]

Defund the police...amirite?

Yess. Specifically the ATF . . .