National Park rangers shot and killed a camper involved a domestic dispute at Crater Lake, Oregon on Weds. night. Read the account and decide for yourself if they really needed to shoot him to death at nearly point blank range. They could've run.http://www.gazettetimes.com/articles/2005/07/29/news/oregon/fri06.txt
Switching to the Big Apple-----a tour bus was raided by police in riot gear on Sunday because a group of passengers were reported to be brown skinned with bulging backpacks. The resulting incident left all involved terrified and in shock at what police power is doing to our country.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/akers/akers10.html
The occupation has begun and they'll be taking no prisoners, so ya'll had better get used to it, whether you reside in Fallujah or Cedar City.
The shootout is about to git started boys. Are yer guns loaded?
6 comments:
Ranger incident: If things went down as the story says, I can side with the Rangers on this one. It's been shown that someone with knife, up to 21' away, can advance on an officer with a gun and get to him before getting his weapon out of his holster. So, if a guy with a club is only 10' away he can do some serious damage if he wants.
NYC: Our Brave New World.
Where is the option of just backing off ever mentioned?
You could if he was by himself in a remote campsite, but seems like he posed a threat to whomever was in the trailer/tent as well as surrounding campers.
The article describes a fantastic yarn being spun by the Park Service. It sounds like an uncontrollable man-beast emerged from Crater Lake to wreak havoc upon the park. Rob Zombie couldn't have scripted it better.
I find the following quote to be curious:
"Shootings in national parks are rare, occurring about every 10 years, said David Barna, chief of public affairs for the National Park Service headquarters in Washington, D.C.
They usually involve a fugitive fleeing inside a park and being shot by police."
It sounds like the only people shooting up the park are the law enforcement officers themselves. Why are Park Rangers even carrying guns if incidents that rise to a level requiring the use of deadly force are so rare and are usually handled by the police? Is it to protect themselves from other law enforcement officers? It seems that they would have given a rogue bear better treatment.
DD,
In your "21' scenario", Bruce Lee would have subdued the aggressor--without the use of deadly force--and would have been back in his cabin bangin' some girl-beamis.
js,
You're right about Bruce Lee. Not only that, he probably would've met the guy at 10 1/2' just to get it over with quicker. Fist of fury are useful anywhere.
I had the same thought about the NPS law boys giving a wandering wild animal way more respect and deference.
Post a Comment