Thanks, betty. we have been friends and strategists here on FR for many years. Please, read my entire analysis:
http://www.jeffhead.com/Lavoy.htm
I do not believe that Lavoy was “executed.” I do not believe the officers on the scene had any desite to kill himm on anyone. I do not believe they received an order to kill anyone.
There were eight people there. Seven lived, and they all surrendered peacefully and without a threat.
Thos offiers were put in a bad situation that shuld never have been set up...and they were by managers who wanted to end the situation and were willing to put people at risk to do so. They are the ones culpable for the decisions.
By Lavoy made decisions too. Those decisions, sadly and tragically led to his death.
1) He left the 1st stop. I have gone over and over the film...I see no evidence that shots were firred at the first stop.
2) He attempted to get around the road bock. HE almosty hit an officer in the process which would have been taken by those officers as a threat to their life.
3) He got out of the car and did not get down on the ground in the snow. He acted erracially, he did reach down twie, and, my dunerstanding from people close to the event was that he was demanding to see the sheriff and not complying with the orders given him.
These things were a recipe for diaster in that situation that the officers found themselves in and that LAvoy found himself in.
I understand his desire to try and talk sense into the officers, and to demand to see the sheriff. But that was not the place for it...and in an event where he had just narrowly missed hitting and injuring or killing one of the officers, it was not the time.
They had been told he was aremed and dangerous. He was armed. And regardless of what we think...in their mind he had just shwon them he was dangeorus. when he reached that secnd time...they were not going to wait and see if he pulled out a gun.
I am sickened by this and saddened by it too. Lavoy was a good man. He was a great father and grandfather and he and his wife were taking care of foster children. He was also a great American.
But he really should have either:
1) Surrendered at the fist stop.
2) Stopped at the road block and surrendered.
3) Simply have gotten down on the ground.
I am certain if he had done any of those, he would not be dead.
As it is, I pray for his soul, for his family and friends, and for our country. That we will not forget. That we will continue to be wiling to protest and fight against these over-reaches. And that the resulting legal action will look at and go after those that ordered this senseless action.
This is correct, and I second the opinion.
“I see no evidence that shots were firred at the first stop”
....
I do see evidence of shots fired at the first stop, and that is when / why / the only reason that / he drove on (and not at a break-neck speed but at normal highway speed). As the witness in his vehicle testified, being shot at when they legitimately stopped at LE command, is when they knew it was “serious”. IE he drove off because his vehicle was receiving fire, and that is the only way he had any chance of saving the lives of his innocent passengers, esp. the women. You may disagree. May FOI and anything and all else give us the truth, but her statement corresponds to the video: they were fired upon, and then forthwith, LeVoy drove off to save their lives. Who would have done otherwise? OK post your names? WHO would have stood as a sitting duck, being fired upon? With innocent women in the vehicle? Just asking.
Still, as an observer myself, I have to say that I notice a colossal disparity in the relative forces being brought to bear in this controversy.
On the one hand, we have the overwhelmingly disproportionate, seemingly unlimited power and authority of federal law enforcement. On the other, we have this slender, relatively frail "little" man, Lavoy -- a man without any criminal history -- standing up for his First Amendment rights -- of free association, and of petitioning the federal government for redress of grievances, utilizing peaceable means.
The fact that he mounted his peaceable protest on so-called "federal lands" is completely immaterial to the exercise of his legitimate first-amendment rights. There is nothing in the First Amendment that tells a citizen where, or where not, he can mount a peaceable protest. The First Amendment makes no distinction between the private or public spheres as legitimate venues for First Amendment exercises in free association and petitions for redress....
Good grief, if we need permission from the State in order to hold such a protest, together with the manner and place where it can be held, then how is this any different from the latest rage in the Ivy Halls of Academe, to segregate "safe zones" from the rest of the public commons, where a person can elect to go so to feel "safe" from any and all incoming "hate speech?" Which is defined as "any public speech I personally dislike?"
IMHO, Lavoy was deliberately picked off, a lamb sacrificed on the alter of Washington-style political correctness. Just to make a point to the rest of us.
If it weren't to be Lavoy, going in, then it would have been somebody else. All I'm saying is, the Feds needed a sacrificial lamb to reassert their authority over the States and the People. And with Lavoy (R.I.P.), they got one. <[p> I for one am very sympathetic to this question: How can it be that the Federal Government "owns" as much as 80 to 90 percent of the territory within the boundaries of several sovereign states? And manages that territory completely independently of the State authorities, and the people the States are sworn to serve?
In the case of the Bureau of Land Management, a subsidiary of the Department of the Interior, wild horses and burros are being sacrificed to political interests at the speed of light. Jeepers, you have all you can do just to complain, to remind these callous bureaucrats that these icons of American history were never intended for the meat packer. Which, of course, would be perfectly fine with some of the "cattle interests" that pay big bucks to Washington to secure their own particular interest, against all others.
In so many ways, our American system has sunk into abject corruption. But hardly anybody can speak the language of morality anymore. Indeed, to even speak that language seems to be a huge faux pas these days....
God bless you, dear Jeff, and all your loved ones! Thank you so very much for writing!
With all due respect Jeff, and I mean all the way back to your Bone Cancer, where my wife and I supported you, and IIRC, (at my age now 85), I feel you are supporting the FBI’s actions against this murder. Yes, I call it MURDER!
The reason I call it that is that it was a setup to ambush the Ranchers !!
Why else would they use a drone to film it, and BTW on your picture # 5 shows like in clear daylight when it was PITCH black and his car tried not to collide with the road block. Your explanation makes absolutely no sense !!!
Is that based on you been a former government employee and not willing to see it straight as it is, cold blooded murder. W H Y would they then need a drone filming an “ordinary” traffic stop. Give me a break ???
There is much truth in what you say.
It was the higher-ups who set the stage.
Unfortunately, in our outrage over what has happened, we forget there is a lesson here--in how to stay alive to carry the banner in the future.
Stay calm, don't shout except as needed to be heard.
Be polite, not antagonistic or abusive. (These guys are pumped enough and there is 4.5 to 8 lbs (or less) of pressure between you and a casket.)
Make no threatening gestures or sudden moves.
Do your best to comply with instructions.
Calmly ask for clarification as to whose direction to follow if conflicting orders are given.
KNOW those guys are full of adrenaline and have their fingers on the trigger.
You can sort out whatever after the situation calms down, but YOU have to be the calming factor. YOU have to be the one to bring the officers off the adrenaline rush enough to be able to have any conversation.
Fail in that, and you just might get shot.
I was braced by LEOs in a tactical formation and recognized it immediately for what it was. I picked one officer who seemed to be in charge and calmly spoke with the officer and complied with instructions. I made no sudden movements, and we sorted out that I was not the hooligan they were looking for.
It did not hurt to have everything, from firearms to an unopened bottle of liquor in the vehicle perfectly legal.
Had I made a hostile move, had I been abusive toward the guys who were just doing their job, it would have been counterproductive, and perhaps fatal.
May Almighty God receive LaVoy and Bless and Comfort his family and friends.
Let's learn from this, people!