Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Dramatic footage shows moment Iraq war vet was shot 70 times in home
UK Daily Mail ^ | 5/27/11 | Daily Mail Reporter

Posted on 05/27/2011 11:44:07 AM PDT by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 321-336 next last
To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears
Many here have made reference to the "siren" going off. IMHO, the siren is the car alarm going off. The swat team would have wanted silence, IMHO. If you look at the film, they are shaking the SUV trying to open the door or something.

Now if you take this into consideration, The homeowner hears someone trying to break into his car, tell his family to get into the closet and then grabs his gun. He identified the break in as the cops and left his gun on safety. The deputies, being conditioned to believe we don't have the right to own guns and protect our property, assumed he was a perp and watched for any flinch or twitch to open fire. Now the wagons are circled and the fact that he owned a gun and body armor makes him the worst of the worst. 6 rounds or 60 rounds, at least we are all safe from a veteran who owned a gun. I shudder to think what would be written about me if they broke into my house. He may have even had FreeRepublic in his bookmarks tool bar.

81 posted on 05/27/2011 12:57:19 PM PDT by chuckles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dangus

Keep defending the murderers, eventually you will get whats coming to you.


82 posted on 05/27/2011 12:57:40 PM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Longdriver

Thankfully that was only a state court and not applicable to any other state. Under the Indiana ruling, police could ILLEGALLY force their way into your home with no suspicion, proof of wrongdoing, or warrant and then kill you if you choose to try to defend your family from their jack booted tactics.


83 posted on 05/27/2011 12:58:37 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (Islam is the religion of Satan and Mohammed was his minion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ArrogantBustard
The fact that this fellow once wore a United States military uniform is completely irrelevant to this case.

I disagree, it's very relevant. The media can't say he was some hayseed militia type, he was a combat Marine, and if had chose to fire the keystone cops would have been calling in for ambulances for what was left of their "SWAT" team.

84 posted on 05/27/2011 12:59:20 PM PDT by ScreamingFist (Quiet the Idiot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

I told the Statist idiot I was done with him. He didn’t get the message.


85 posted on 05/27/2011 1:00:12 PM PDT by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears (Dear Lord, Please judge Barack Hussein Obama for betraying Israel, and not the whole nation. Amen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants

Thankfully that was only a state court and not applicable to any other state. Under the Indiana ruling, police could ILLEGALLY force their way into your home with no suspicion, proof of wrongdoing, or warrant and then kill you if you choose to try to defend your family from their jack booted tactics.

**************

Change “could” to “CAN NOW”. As a result of this ruling, Jack-booted Thuggery will increase in America.

Moonman claims the IN ruling “puts ‘em in line with a majority of other states” but hasn’t yet provided data to support that. I hope he’s wrong.


86 posted on 05/27/2011 1:00:49 PM PDT by Longdriver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: ArrogantBustard
The fact that this fellow once wore a United States military uniform is completely irrelevant to this case.

Considering that Big Sis Napolitano and the rest of the gubment thugocracy consideration prior service to be a security threat, I think it is very relavent.

87 posted on 05/27/2011 1:01:27 PM PDT by Drill Thrawl (How much longer can the charade last?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears

Sickening.


88 posted on 05/27/2011 1:02:34 PM PDT by EternalVigilance ('We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Echo4C
“It isn’t, however officers do have a right to defend themselves.”

So do citizens.

Yes they do, however they don't have a right to point a weapon at officers serving a valid warrant.

89 posted on 05/27/2011 1:02:53 PM PDT by Moonman62 (The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62
“Provided they had a no knock warrant issued by a judge it was legal....”

Some of my family...long ago..centuries..were forced to choose to fight because the King's men assumed their prerogatives of no knock warrants.

You know little of the ignorance of which you speak.

90 posted on 05/27/2011 1:04:28 PM PDT by mo ("If you understand, no explanation is needed; if you do not, no explanation is possible")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears

>> Keep defending this homicide. Clearly these guys were ITCHING for violence. It’s what they live for. They shot an innocent man, and you defend it. He had a right to defend himself against the thugs. <<

Did the SWAT team know he was innocent? No, they had a warrant; they announced themselves; they even ran the siren upon arrival. If there was a problem with the issuance of the warrant, they had no way of knowing that.

He had a right to defend himself? Really? Does this apply to everyone? If you’re a SWAT team member and the person you’ve come to arrest isn’t actually guilty, he gets to kill you?

>> If they were acting on a “hunch” (which they obviously were) <<

Pretty hard getting a warrant for a SWAT team based on a hunch.

Not every tragedy is a murder.


91 posted on 05/27/2011 1:06:47 PM PDT by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: dangus
Uh, down? Don’t give me any nonsense about him not knowing they were the cops. When you hear a siren, a knock, then a fifteen second wait, THEN your door gets broken into, I suppose there’s a slight chance someone is doing a VERY thorough job of impersonating the police, but your best bet is yes, that’s the police.

How do you know his weapon wasn't pointed down....dufus. It was still safe after they pumped him, and the neighborhood full of lead. I can't believe a FReeper of you age and stature can defend what you just saw in those videos. I'm sorry, go argue with someone else....I'll just get mean, ugly and mad if you reply to me again.

92 posted on 05/27/2011 1:07:52 PM PDT by ScreamingFist (Quiet the Idiot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: mo
You know little of the ignorance of which you speak.

No knock warrants have been ruled constitutional by our Supreme Court because of their establishment in Common Law. Now what were you saying about ignorance?

93 posted on 05/27/2011 1:09:04 PM PDT by Moonman62 (The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Longdriver
In the Indiana case the cops were on the premises at the request of the wife. She'd call 911 earlier and they arrived.

You don't need a warrant to answer a citizen's request for help.

Now, don't you feel ashamed, or are you some big john type Arab macho guy who thinks the rights of women don't count ~ BTW, the wife had every right to shoot the man who attacked the cops ~ under the Indiana Castle Doctrine Law, but she didn't. The cops merely tasered him and hauled him, but he attacked them.

94 posted on 05/27/2011 1:09:34 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62

They absolutely do. When you mature you’ll learn the difference between what’s legal and what’s ethical. Breaking into someone’s house when there are superior alternatives is just plain stupid.


95 posted on 05/27/2011 1:10:10 PM PDT by Echo4C (We have it in our power to begin the world over again. --Thomas Paine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62
Yes they do, however they don't have a right to point a weapon at officers serving a valid warrant.

The cops were wrong about the shots fired, they were probably wrong (OR LYING) about the weapon being pointed at them as well.

Immediately after the incident the wife was locked in a room with police investigators, and she said the SWAT members dropped a gun near her husband after he was killed.

96 posted on 05/27/2011 1:11:28 PM PDT by Fido969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: chuckles
Exactly.

The bigger picture is this.

We have "The State" demanding more control over our lives, even to the point of deciding whether who lives and who dies (healthcare).

We have "The State" telling us what we can eat and can't eat.

We have "The State" telling our children what words they can't say, in the name of "anti-bullying" without reprisal from the Government, (which is a model for what they intend for the grownups: elimination of free speech).

We have "Police State" invading our homes at gunpoint on a suspicion, and shooting us into a bloody pulp if we try to defend ourselves. And according to the Police State, this is "legal" and "proper" so long as a higher-up in the Police State gives it the rubber stamp.

AND WE HAVE FLAMING BRAINLESS IDIOTS DEFENDING THE LAST THING!!!!

97 posted on 05/27/2011 1:12:03 PM PDT by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears (Dear Lord, Please judge Barack Hussein Obama for betraying Israel, and not the whole nation. Amen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Echo4C
Breaking into someone’s house when there are superior alternatives is just plain stupid.

I agree, but as to whether this warrant was ethical will be determined by whether the suspect was involved in a criminal enterprise and what role he played.

98 posted on 05/27/2011 1:14:58 PM PDT by Moonman62 (The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: Fido969
The cops were wrong about the shots fired, they were probably wrong (OR LYING) about the weapon being pointed at them as well.

Supposedly, the weapon was hit by bullets from the officers. As to whether it was present and pointed at them may be determined by forensics.

99 posted on 05/27/2011 1:17:07 PM PDT by Moonman62 (The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: daniel boob
I agree but the court case will hinge on the AR-15 - not if it was safteyed or fired - but that it was "pointed" at the SWAT team.

And whose to say - the police? They thought they were being fired on. There observations are worse than useless.

The victim didn't seem like a big gun collector guy, a .38 revolver, an AR-15 - but the police officer at the scene said there was an AR-15 in the victims bedroom. The wife said she didn't know about any rifle, how could he have 2 rifles she didn't know about? She said she cleaned every inch of the house, and I don't think she wouldn't be aware he had 2 rifles, especially when one was right near his bed.

The police lies just keep piling up.

100 posted on 05/27/2011 1:17:32 PM PDT by Fido969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 321-336 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson