Posted on 01/30/2016 12:33:54 AM PST by EternalVigilance
“IIRC, he was left handed. Reaching to his left side with his right hand would not have produced a weapon.”
According to the picture below he was right handed.
According to that picture, he would not have been reaching for his left shoulder to produce a weapon.
Maybe he is different, but I’m right handed. If I am referring to notes, I have them in my left hand (old habit so I can make additional notes with my right). He is holding the tablet in his right hand.
I really didn’t want to say this, but the FBI people at that ambush were trained by Lon Horuchi (sp). May he pay for his sins. Amen.
5.56mm
Except for Moslem mass-murderers. He doesn't like to kill them. Gets all pouty and hard-to-find, you have to drag him in off the golf course or get the White House staff to wake him up.
You know, when the phone rings at 3 a.m. ...... </off cliche'>
“According to that picture, he would not have been reaching for his left shoulder to produce a weapon”.
So if he was a lefty he couldn’t have been reaching for a weapon and if he’s right handed he couldn’t have been reaching for a weapon. That’s pretty funny. For all we know he could have been wearing a shoulder holster on the left side.
Is that his rig, or a loaner used for the press conference?
If he was wanting a fight to his death, or “death by cop”, WHY would he have walked 20-30 feet with his arms and hands CLEARLY extended?
I believe the first shot was when his arms were extended, then he reacted and grabbed his side as anybody would, then the other cops used that as a pretense to shoot. Or, maybe it was not even a pretense, “maybe” the cops WERE scared and then shot?
In any event, if the first shot was in fact when his arms were extended, then it clearly was not “legal” and thus Lavoy was murdered.
I think the only impartial investigative force available here would be The Texas Rangers. The FBI and Oregon State Troopers sure cannot be impartial. The Texas Rangers are very experienced in investigating officer involved shootings.
“Is that his rig, or a loaner used for the press conference?”
Your arguments are ridiculous. I’ve never heard of a lefty wearing a holster like that on the right side. It makes no sense, unless you are trying to invent reasons that he couldn’t have been reaching for a weapon.
There are plenty of shooters out there who could have intentionally hit him there and counted on that reflex in a no-audio video to appear like he was reaching for a weapon to justify killing him.
This was a set-up from the git-go, from lies about safe passage to a peaceful meeting, to the road block with drone overhead.
Someone was going to get killed over this to intimidate the masses.
It’s called a ‘prop’. One still image cannot convey habits of motion, and we’re trying to read something into this that may not be able to be interpreted from it. Are you trying to justify shooting him?
That is the main point, right there.
You need to shorten that verbiage with a snappy acronym. We're talking, aren't we, about Conservative Retards Against Communist Killer Egomaniacs and Revolutionary Scum.
You know -- those people.
Still, that does not justify shooting someone with their hands up, if in fact he was shot before reaching to his left.
[Gkhtc]He was hoping they would not kill the women by him drawing the attention.
Quite possibly. Also because hot rounds were coming through the windshield right in front of him? ME should find powdered glass in his face if so, which would have to have sprayed him before he got out.
Further, by getting out and running from the truck, he may have spoiled a setup in which the feds could simply start pouring rounds into the truck and kill everyone in it, in one nice, clean massacre, policing up the "problem people" and then making up whatever stories they wanted afterward. Betcha fifty cents there'll be no dashboard video available this month, or next, or next month after that ..... aww, it was all spoiled in an electrical storm.
“There are plenty of shooters out there who could have intentionally hit him there and counted on that reflex in a no-audio video to appear like he was reaching for a weapon to justify killing him.”
I dont know if he was armed at the time or not or if there was a safe passage agreement. He was known to go armed and was a member of a group of armed individuals that occupied a govt station. It is reasonable that the police assumed he was armed. After trying to run a roadblock any movement that looked like he was reaching for a weapon will likely get you shot. No conspiracy necessary.
I dont know what happened at the roadblock, who shot first, who was carrying a gun or anything else, and neither does anyone else from looking at that crappy video. Those that claim they do are reading their own bias into it.
Much as the cowards who ventilated the truck of the two newspaper delivering women in California.
No charges were brought against those bastards either.
“It’s called a ‘prop’. One still image cannot convey habits of motion, and we’re trying to read something into this that may not be able to be interpreted from it. Are you trying to justify shooting him?”
You keep pulling arguments out of your hind end. Do you think the man didnt have any weapons and needed a prop? If so would he have worn one for the wrong side? Does he seem like prop kind of guy to you? If you are so intent on proving him a lefty find some photo evidence. I’m not trying to justify shooting him I am trying to debunk the nonsense people are claiming from the lousy video.
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.
