Posted on 12/02/2004 6:56:24 AM PST by PjhCPA
When Chai Soua Vang allegedly opened fire on hunters who confronted him about trespassing near Rice Lake, Wis., another Wisconsin county had a warrant for his arrest for trespassing while hunting in 2002 and failing to pay the fine.
...may have known he stood to be arrested if the hunters who confronted him that day called the sheriff's office.
...In Minnesota's Kanabec County, where Vang bought 40 acres of land last year for hunting, Vang or a member of his hunting party was ordered off a neighbor's land on Nov. 6 this year, opening day of Minnesota's deer hunting season.
"We kicked one guy off three times," said Jamie Owens, 22. "He came over the fence and onto our land, and my dad pointed and he got back over. But he did it three times."
Owens said that neither he nor his father ever spoke with Vang and could not say whether he was the man who was told to leave their property.
He said that more than a dozen Hmong hunters used the Vang land. The property includes a house but is mostly a thicket of oaks, poplars and birch.
Vang bought the 40 acres in October 2003 on a contract for deed for $176,000, with a down payment of $5,000 and payments of $1,260. It is not clear whether others helped with payments.
The Vang property has not been searched, Kanabec County Sheriff Steve Schulz said. Vang has never been cited for trespassing or any other crime in the county, Schulz said.
The writers are at statenews@startribune.com.
(Excerpt) Read more at startribune.com ...
ping
When Chai Soua Vang allegedly opened fire on hunters who confronted him about trespassing near Rice Lake, Wis., another Wisconsin county had a warrant for his arrest for trespassing while hunting in 2002 and failing to pay the fine.
Thanks, PjhCPA.
That sort of arrest is not a big deal and Vang knows that. It's more likely the major factor was domestic problems complicated by delusions that the whole world also failed to bow down to him.
DING DING DING!
We have a winner!
Here's more.....(BARF ALERT)
http://www.twincities.com/mld/pioneerpress/10316604.htm?1c
Those types (yes I mean Asians) poach all the time in the waters of the Gulf with their commercial shrimp, and fishing boats. It is one of the reasons so many of the old time shrimpers had to go bust.
They are also play by no rules when pleasure fishing while they wade. If you catch a fish they swarm your area. If you mention common courtesy rules they just give you that dumb ass blank look. A few years ago I saw a fine upstanding Texas boy whip the s—t out of two of them for being rude.
A contract for deed is also about the dumbest way to buy property. That vehicle is only for people who are bad risks, and can’t get another type of mortgage. Owner financing is one thing, but contract for deed ain’t what they are talking about.
Vang deserves death. A trial is a waste of time and resources, and an insult to the familes. In a better day he would have been strung up to cheers in front of the whole town. One of the relatives ought to simply kill him in the courtroom and end this. He cannot be permitted to live to see a life in prison after his savagery.
The usual freeper apologist suspects have already been noticed on other threads declaring his innocense, and that we don't have enough facts, as if somehow it was OK for him to murder everyone because someone yelled a racial slur. [These are the same morons who believe things like "islam is the religion of peace" and "kerry is a patriot and should be proud.." etc just because their idol said it.]
Sorry, my ranting quotient has increased of late due to a proportional increase in hypocrisy recently.
/"she still don't know it's a toitle"
I agree that he deserves death. However, I can't agree that a trial is a waste of time: We MUST maintain the trial system for the sake of the falsely accused, which one day might be you or me.
That was one of the most reasoned, informed, inciteful responses I've read in a long time. I'm gettin' kinda tired of the "hang the bastard" comments; though I know most of us feel that way.
It is important to clarify your post. Was it a general, run of the mill, common mid-western racial slur?
Blah blah blah blah...#...Blah blah blah blah...%...Blah blah blah blah...@...Blah blah blah blah
Or, was it one of those evil pre-ban/post-ban/fullautorapidfired assault racial slur?
You @#!#@$!@!#$%!#$%#%%&[insert favorite racial slur]@#@$%%^%&**[insert obligatory comment about mother of slur-target]#$!#$%#$%@$%^^&[add favorite comments about extended family members of target]#$@#$%^@#$^@$%^^%%[hint at repeated sexual encounters with the neighbor's poodle]@#$@#$@#$@^ ...etc...etc...etc...Inquireing minds want to know.
These goons probably knew exactly what was going to happen.
athe "old time shrimpers" and fishermen went bust after the US recognized the 2oo mile nautical commercial limit. Suddenly most of the fish and shrimp in the gulf were off limits to American boats because most of the quarry are in now Mexican water. The oceangoing boats then were all fishing off the US gulf coast and in the bays and quickly depleted the stock. The Asian take was never more than a small fraction of the what good ol American boats were taking. Many times I watched the whole Asian fleet unload its catch at the local fish house at the same time that one 60 footer that had been working the same waters unloaded. Ths entire Asian catch was maybe a third of that coming off the one good ol timer boat. And there was often another big boat waiting its turn.
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/fromthefield/110123712571.htm
Excellent post!
The complaint from native fishermen wasn't about Vietnamese fishing the same waters.
It was about, "Hey! If you are going to give boats to the Vietnamese fishermen then where is the boat that you are going to give to me?!"
In other words, it was about preferential, financial treatment of the Vietnamese fishermen.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.