Militia standoff going on right now in Oregon!

[Breny414]

http://www.snopes.com/eric-holder-parti ... tc-office/

[parabelum]

http://www.snopes.com/eric-holder-parti ... tc-office/

Yes, that's one example why I'm fuming mad, and so should be every Patriot in this Country.

This isn't about anything other then governmental usurpation of our rights, and the cold blooded murder of political dissidents.
That's why I referred to them as war criminals.

Our Country is slipping into banana republic state, slowly but surely.

And after watching the video many more times, it looks like a cold blooded ambush, these weasels knew he was headed for a meeting in town, a NON-VIOLENT meeting!
He surrendered, mad as heck I imagine as everyone with Patriotic blood would be.
And it sure as heck looks like he was either fired upon first and then attempted to defend himself, or downright executed.

Shameful and cowardly act promoted by the federal fascists.

[Javier730]

When you start saying you know it's obvious what someone was thinking by watching a video where he doesn't even speak you're far into the realm of speculation.

You can tell what a person is more than likely thinking based on their actions. Is it obvious he was thinking about stopping or fleeing? You said yourself even if he could get away where would he go and that he would be caught eventually. So why flee? Why even drive up to the road block? It obvious to me that he did not intend to stop and that he intended to get through.

If they were really that concerned about him speeding up into the road block they could have put up a warning sign and a speed strip to take out his tires well before he was a threat to the road block.

Warning signs at this point would be as effective as "No Guns Allowed" signs are to criminals and spike strips are dangerous. Here is what the FBI says on them.
https://leb.fbi.gov/2012/september/bull ... ike-strips

Based on the same information I come to the opposite conclusion. He was a family man in his 50s with no criminal record.You're assuming either than he didn't know the odds are slim to none or that he was stupid. I assume he was at least as well informed as I am. Since I know there is no percentage in running a road block I wouldn't do it. And for that reason I don't think it likely that is what he was trying to do either.

You dont have to have a criminal record to commit a crime. Before being arrested for committing a crime, first time offenders dont have criminal records. I be willing to bet most mass gunmen did not have criminal records before they committed their crimes.
I am assuming he didnt know the odds were not in favor of getting through. He didnt know the odds of him getting away were slim, yet he still tried. I see no evidence of him being fired on.

http://www.snopes.com/eric-holder-parti ... tc-office/

Beat me to it.

[mojo84]

Enlarged slow motion video. http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-stando ... e_vid.html

[VMI77]

http://www.snopes.com/eric-holder-parti ... tc-office/

Snopes, seriously?

http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/hank/081127

So, maybe true, maybe not.

[VMI77]

Enlarged slow motion video. http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-stando ... e_vid.html

Let's see some video from the ground and photos of the vehicle.

[anygunanywhere]

Don't put all your faith in Snopes. They are a leftist organization and have been caught in untruths and half truths more than the Feebs.

[VMI77]

When you start saying you know it's obvious what someone was thinking by watching a video where he doesn't even speak you're far into the realm of speculation.

You can tell what a person is more than likely thinking based on their actions. Is it obvious he was thinking about stopping or fleeing? You said yourself even if he could get away where would he go and that he would be caught eventually. So why flee? Why even drive up to the road block? It obvious to me that he did not intend to stop and that he intended to get through.

If they were really that concerned about him speeding up into the road block they could have put up a warning sign and a speed strip to take out his tires well before he was a threat to the road block.

Warning signs at this point would be as effective as "No Guns Allowed" signs are to criminals and spike strips are dangerous. Here is what the FBI says on them.
https://leb.fbi.gov/2012/september/bull ... ike-strips

Based on the same information I come to the opposite conclusion. He was a family man in his 50s with no criminal record.You're assuming either than he didn't know the odds are slim to none or that he was stupid. I assume he was at least as well informed as I am. Since I know there is no percentage in running a road block I wouldn't do it. And for that reason I don't think it likely that is what he was trying to do either.

You dont have to have a criminal record to commit a crime. Before being arrested for committing a crime, first time offenders dont have criminal records. I be willing to bet most mass gunmen did not have criminal records before they committed their crimes.
I am assuming he didnt know the odds were not in favor of getting through. He didnt know the odds of him getting away were slim, yet he still tried. I see no evidence of him being fired on.

http://www.snopes.com/eric-holder-parti ... tc-office/

Beat me to it.

Wow, what a bunch of strawmen and red herrings. We're just going to have to disagree, especially if you're going to tell me you "know" what someone is thinking based only on what you see them do. I find that flabbergasting.

Warning signs are like no guns allowed signs? False analogy/strawman. The point of the warning sign in this case would be to give someone a chance to comply before their vehicle is damaged and potentially, before it is necessary to employ lethal force. A no guns sign is to keep out those of us with LTCs under threat of being charged with a Class C misdemeanor if we're caught. There is no immediate consequence to ignoring the sign for anyone.

Your link didn't work so I don't know what the dangerous claim is based on. Spike strips are dangerous? Yet the police use them. You mean more dangerous than shooting someone multiple times? To who? I though you said the objective was to protect the police at the road block? TXDOT manages to put up warning signs when they're doing road work so I can stop before I run over a flagman. Warning: Spike Strips ahead, slow down and be prepared to stop. One mile later: Warning, Spike Strips, Stop Your Vehicle.

You don't have to be a criminal to commit a crime. That's exactly what the left says about us concealed carriers who've had a background check. So should I assume you're a potential criminal based on the concept that literally anyone might at some time commit a crime no matter what they've done in the past? That's a strawman. My reference to his lack of a criminal record was in support of him not being stupid. I equated him to ME, and I'm not stupid enough to run a road block so I give him the benefit of the doubt. Your assumption is that he is stupid, based on nothing more than a conclusion you've drawn based on an inconclusive video.

[Javier730]

Warning signs are like no guns allowed signs? False analogy/strawman. The point of the warning sign in this case would be to give someone a chance to comply before their vehicle is damaged and potentially, before it is necessary to employ lethal force. A no guns sign is to keep out those of us with LTCs under threat of being charged with a Class C misdemeanor if we're caught. There is no immediate consequence to ignoring the sign for anyone.

The "No Guns Allowed" signs I was talking about are the gunbuster signs, not the 30.06 and/or 30.07 signs. Criminals dont care about a gunbuster sign. He ignored the police sirens and you think he would stop for a warning sign? If the SUV with flashing police lights and several LEOs pointing the weapons at him didnt let him know their vehicle was going to be damaged and that lethal force was going to be used, no darn sign would.

Your link didn't work so I don't know what the dangerous claim is based on. Spike strips are dangerous? Yet the police use them. You mean more dangerous than shooting someone multiple times? To who? I though you said the objective was to protect the police at the road block? TXDOT manages to put up warning signs when they're doing road work so I can stop before I run over a flagman. Warning: Spike Strips ahead, slow down and be prepared to stop. One mile later: Warning, Spike Strips, Stop Your Vehicle.

Here it is again: https://leb.fbi.gov/2012/september/bull ... ike-strips

Im sure those "Warning, Spike Strips, Stop Your Vehicle" signs is just what this guy needed to see to get him to stop.

You don't have to be a criminal to commit a crime. That's exactly what the left says about us concealed carriers who've had a background check. So should I assume you're a potential criminal based on the concept that literally anyone might at some time commit a crime no matter what they've done in the past? That's a strawman. My reference to his lack of a criminal record was in support of him not being stupid. I equated him to ME, and I'm not stupid enough to run a road block so I give him the benefit of the doubt. Your assumption is that he is stupid, based on nothing more than a conclusion you've drawn based on an inconclusive video.

I see his vehicle stopped by police. I see the police not firing their weapons for about 7 minutes. I say they arent firing based on the fact that he is not fleeing from gunfire for those 7 minutes. 7 minutes is enough time for the police to give the order for him to get out and surrender, enough time for him to comply and enough time for him to be taken into custody for whatever he is being detained or arrested for. To take off for any reason other than being fired at, which of course there is no evidence to support that, would be a very stupid decision.

[Javier730]

http://blog.odmp.org/2010/09/officers-k ... spike.html

[mojo84]

Finicum was an armed fugitive at the time he was shot.

I am look forward to seeing his bullet riddled vehicle. We have people that were involved saying there were over a hundred shots fired at them. We have an uninvolved eyewitness at the scene saying there were 5 or 6 shots fired. The cops already indicated they had shot the car with OC pellets and flashbang grenades.

I too want to see just how shot up the vehicle was. If there were over a 100 bullet holes in the vehicle I would be money there would be more casualties in the truck than one person shot in the arm.

In this case based on the supporting video, I tend to believe the proven liars called the FBI and the Oregon state police rather than the armed fugitives that have a vested interest in spinning the story to their favor.

If factual evidence comes out to the contrary, I'll reconsider my opinion.

[LSUTiger]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016 ... /79490322/

and



and long versions

http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2016/01/ ... mon-bundy/

[Breny414]

Regarding the blind-curve-ambush-theory... as a transportation engineer myself, I can tell you that roadway curvature is designed with speed and stopping sight-distance in mind. The geometry is designed such that the average driver can recognize the hazard and then make the decision to stop and then come to a stop. If the curve does not meet the criteria for the posted speed, then an advisory speed (yellow plaque) is posted. Therefore, in my professional opinion - looking at this roadway - the curve radius is sufficiently large and the tree line was cleared well back enough that the driver of the truck had a sight-line and ample time to perceive the roadblock and to make a decision to stop safely. it appears he accelerated and tried to pass via the ditch.

[mojo84]

There are a lot of errors in the video with the guy with the whiny. There were three guns in the truck and Finicum did have a gun in his pocket. The guy said they were not armed. I quit listening at that point due to a lack of credibility and his whiny voice.

[LSUTiger]

There are a lot of errors in the video with the guy with the whiny. There were three guns in the truck and Finicum did have a gun in his pocket. The guy said they were not armed. I quit listening at that point due to a lack of credibility and his whiny voice.

Despite the ill advised actions of these protesters and the whiny guy was wrong on a few points, I think the fact that police could have waited these guys out but didn't and also Oregon governor was pushing for action to be taken and it was (they forced the issue, creating this scenario instead of a little more patience), points to the fact it could have been handled differently. Just a little more psyops for a little longer and they would have given up. The protesters were not very organized and the whole protest was not very well thought out. The police always had the advantage but I guess the po po's operating budget/politicians patience is more important than a human life.

Kinda of like pushing a suicidal jumper off the roof instead of trying to talk him down.