Skip to comments.
Anatomy of an Incident: Guns seized in Medford(OR)
mailtribune.com ^
| 28 March, 2010
| Anita Burke
Posted on 03/28/2010 12:00:42 PM PDT by marktwain
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-87 next last
A much needed and more detailed followup on the David Pyles "precrime" incident in Medford, Oregon.
1
posted on
03/28/2010 12:00:42 PM PDT
by
marktwain
To: marktwain
From the description of his behavior, if accurate, it sounds as if the authorities’ actions were justified.
And they did release him, and return his guns.
2
posted on
03/28/2010 12:04:23 PM PDT
by
Redbob
To: marktwain
3
posted on
03/28/2010 12:05:12 PM PDT
by
Bad Jack Bauer
(Fat and Bald? I was BORN fat and bald, thank you very much!)
To: marktwain
OK. So no guns for anyone placed on administrative leave. If you get fired or layd off, better turn in your guns.
4
posted on
03/28/2010 12:05:30 PM PDT
by
mamelukesabre
(Si Vis Pacem Para Bellum (If you want peace prepare for war))
To: Salvation
Another for the Oregon ping list...
5
posted on
03/28/2010 12:05:56 PM PDT
by
Twotone
(Marte Et Clypeo)
To: Redbob
His supervisor made very similiar charges against other people.
6
posted on
03/28/2010 12:06:39 PM PDT
by
driftdiver
(I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
To: driftdiver
7
posted on
03/28/2010 12:08:43 PM PDT
by
stormer
To: Redbob
“From the description of his behavior, if accurate, it sounds as if the authorities actions were justified.”
That is the problem, isn’t it. All along it seems that it is a “He said, She said” kind of incident. He says one thing, the supervisor says another.
8
posted on
03/28/2010 12:10:21 PM PDT
by
marktwain
To: stormer
one of the other threads on this incident on FR.
9
posted on
03/28/2010 12:10:46 PM PDT
by
driftdiver
(I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
To: mamelukesabre
It was the fact that he went out and bought 3 guns almost immediately after being placed on leave that sent up red flags. I gather he already owned a number of guns before that as well, but it was timing of the new purchases that looked worrisome.
To: marktwain
What does physical appearance have to do with “mental health”?
11
posted on
03/28/2010 12:12:48 PM PDT
by
mylife
(Opinions...$1 Halfbaked...50c)
To: GovernmentShrinker
Prices are good right now.
12
posted on
03/28/2010 12:14:05 PM PDT
by
mylife
(Opinions...$1 Halfbaked...50c)
To: GovernmentShrinker
It was the fact that he went out and bought 3 guns almost immediately after being placed on leave that sent up red flags.
Twice I have gotten fired and have gone out the next day and bought an assload of ammo to take advantage of the down time to getting in a little shooting. So now the police have a right to take me in for a mental evaluation because of this? We'll just see what the voices in my head have to say about that.
13
posted on
03/28/2010 12:16:06 PM PDT
by
Bad Jack Bauer
(Fat and Bald? I was BORN fat and bald, thank you very much!)
To: Bad Jack Bauer
14
posted on
03/28/2010 12:18:00 PM PDT
by
mylife
(Opinions...$1 Halfbaked...50c)
To: GovernmentShrinker
It seems to me that the police have some problems with their procedures. They don't deal with these kind of situations very often, and could have handled it a lot better. Sometimes it seems that SWAT teams are looking for something to do. Maybe, even earn a little overtime?
I don't see a huge lawsuit here because not a lot of harm was done, but I could easily see improvement in procedures and training, an apology, and a small amount of damages. If the departments involved are smart, they will offer everything they can quickly in order to put this incident behind them and to improve their procedures.
To: mylife
“What does physical appearance have to do with mental health?”
A decrease in appearance and/or personal hygiene can indicate increased stress or depression. The problem is that it is also a good throw away accusation because it is so subjective. The accuser can simply say that it seemed clear to them that his appearance had deteriorated, and how do you disprove that?
To: Redbob
“And they did release him and return his guns.”
Well isn’t that NICE!! The guy was arrested, handcuffed, kept for hours—undoubtedly against his will—his property was CONFISCATED, ALL WITHOUT CHARGE!!!! So now it seems perfectly acceptable that Big Brother can do all of this because he doesn’t like how you look, speak, act...doesn’t like the fact you purchased guns!!! But HEY, it’s really alright. After all, they turned the guy loose and gave his guns back a couple of weeks later!
To: marktwain
It’s a BS charge.
Plenty of folks aren’t GQ, but that doesn’t make them nuts.
Now if he is wearing his underwear on the outside, that’s a different matter.
18
posted on
03/28/2010 12:24:39 PM PDT
by
mylife
(Opinions...$1 Halfbaked...50c)
To: marktwain
BTW. I see some pretty strange dress on folks.
19
posted on
03/28/2010 12:25:24 PM PDT
by
mylife
(Opinions...$1 Halfbaked...50c)
To: Oldpuppymax
Isn’t that amazing?
No wonder people are despairing over the fall of this country. Most have NO IDEA how, uh, “uninformed” they are.
20
posted on
03/28/2010 12:27:23 PM PDT
by
TruthConquers
(Delendae sunt publicae scholae)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-87 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson