Posted on 01/31/2016 9:23:41 AM PST by Sioux-san
Agreed.
I watched the enhanced video and listened to the woman’s narrative.
She talks about the one guy who took a shot and then walked away...and then says Lavoy felt the impact.
Well, the impact would have been immediate. The guy would have had no time to turn and take a step after shooting before Lavoy felt it. Sheez...these people apparently do not understand basic ballistics, muzzle velocity and hw fast a bullet travels 20-30 feet.
Second, Lavoy’s reaction to being shot would have been much more pronounced than so many of these people are saying.
We see him actually get shot towards the end, right before he falls down and you can see him react, it stops him, and he falls over immediately.
My guess is that during the second or two after that shot and as he hits the ground, all of the shots taken at Lavoy were fired.
A person can pull the trigger on a semi three or four times in that space of time, particularly a well trained individual...let alone two or more who undoubtedly shot once the firing started.
So...I am standing by what I have said in my own analysis here:
http://www.jeffhead.com/lavoy.htm
These officers were amped up. They were told the subjects would be armed and dangerous. Regardless of what e think and know of Lavoy, one of the LEOs had almost been hit as Lavoy tried to go around the road block. Thay giys was follwoin SOP and trying to make sure the suspect went completely off the pavement and into the snow before getting around. He succeeded, but Lavoy came very near to hitting him.
All of the LEO’s there would have viewed that right there as intent and deadly threat.
Lavoy got out and ran around, apparently shouting his demand to see the sheriff. It was simply too late for that type of discussion in those circumstances.
Lavoy does reach to his side...I cannot say why...but when you are known to be armed and when LEOs are pointing guns at you and hollering for you to get down...that is fatal.
I feel bad for him. He was a good man. I feel bad for his family. I know American lost a patriot. But he just did not realize the deadly danger he jumped out into when he left that truck, and he acted completely wrong.
He should never have driven away from the 1st stop.
He should never have tried to go around the road block.
he should never have jumped out of that truck.
And he should never have kept running around when officers were telling him to get down.
Anyhow...I now have people (most of them relative newbies) here on FR calling me a government shill, sympathizer and apologist now if you can believe that. Why?
Because I am being objective and analytical...which is running counter to their preconceived notions.
Anyhow, thanks for your post. God’s speed.
You stay safe down there and God’s best o you and ours.
Jeff
50 pounds of words to say 6 ounces of nothing
See my post number 33.
What does "basic ballistics" have to do with getting Tased?
It would more accurately be characterized as "every man for himself," which is hypocritical because the so-called anarchists insist on their "right" to tear down the social structure and still be protected by it. With the true implementation of anarchy, I could cave in their skulls on a whim and there'd be nothing they could do about it. Unless they organized ...
I saw the video on you tube; think it was BPEarth video.
What I saw on that was a man with both arms spread and
raised walking away from the vehicle his friends were in
that had already been shot up. - Looked to me like he was
shot in the side and one arm went down to that area; then
he immediately fell.
I read somewhere that Hillary (the Clintons) had their
fingers stuck in these land deals. IS THAT TRUE?? May not
be; but the curious want to know. - Follow the $$$$$$$$$$$
and see where it will lead.
That bears re-reading and digesting folks.
You are witness to despotic tyranny - and most are arguing over whether or not someone actually standing up against the Beast in D.C. deserved to be executed or not.
Meanwhile Michael Brown is celebrated as a hero, towns are burned down and the leaders of the Black Panthers, Black Lives Matters and Occupy Wall Street get invites and pow wows with Obama in the White House.
Here we argue over whether Finicum’s killing was justified.
Which is why all the false bravado I read about how America is going to rise up and throw off tyrants should they push too hard, is laughable.
Both of the women witnesses said he was gettiing shot at at the first stop.
If he'd stayed and gotten killed, would that have been "felony evasion by bleeding out"?
Would they have arraigned the dead body?
The evidence will be in the body and in the car, similar to Ferguson.
But if the Feds seize the car for evidence, and control the autopsy, they can do anything.
Kiry, what doe your question have to do with anything I said?
The lady in the video said the person I was talking about shot Lavoy...not tased him.
Look, you are free to whatever opinion you have, which we have discussed at length.
But please try and have your comments and questions to me at least relate to what I was talking to Bob and P-Marlow about...not seeking to somehow couch it into what your impressions are.
Thanks.
Is this the question you want me to answer:
Do they ever provide any historical support for this claim?
Here is my response if I am understanding you correctly:
Historical support for what claim? Labels? Spectrum of Governing? Whether Mad Max tribalism is an end product of no more civilized govt.? No, TCH didn’t address those issues with historical examples. Can’t figure out why you would want them to do so as that didn’t seem to be the point Sundance was making. I think he was implying that we need governance, no matter how bad (the Bible tells us so). Infiltrators came to Oregon and muddied the waters as govt. moles - and crazy anarchists were there as well - the agenda expanded out of control, original intent with it.
Tyranny should be abhorrent to We the People, but it’s creeping in faster and faster. The Oregon story was given context by Sundance/TCH in past posts. What happened next, no one had much control over except the Govt. Two men are in prison for no good reason, and that makes me very very angry. One man was shot down in the snow in a ‘show ‘em who’s boss.’ That makes me very very angry, too.
What do you have in the end when there is no longer legal recourse based on Rule of Law and a fair hearing? What do you do when your elected officials in this Constitutional Republic ignore us and do the opposite of what is lawful and right?
You cry out when he is shot! He must have had his hands up. He was executed.
Then his cohorts explain the he or out, did not follow instructions, and was shot while making aggressive movements two reds the LEOs. And the cry out is for video.
Then you are show video that corroborates the story. And you cry out the video was bad.
When it is a black kid getting shot by a white cop, there were people on FR telling me I was naive because the black kid was a thug—long before any eyewitness reports were being heard.
But, make it an old white guy—like us—and all of a sudden the rabble turns into an Alex Jones/Art Bell hive of conspiracy.
Folks, you cannot have it both ways.
If you are going to parade around with a firearm strapped to your leg, telling anyone who will listen that you are willing to die....you should expect to get shot when your hand makes the slightest move towards said gun.
And, you should practice getting it out to shoot LEOs.
+1
There are four left - here are two of them in their own words on their live massacre cam or whatever they are calling it:
I don’t know the man, but this is not exactly a flattering representation of Mr. Anderson - the main speaker in previous video:
This article is correct about one thing - the scale between government and freedom and order and anarchy. There are many people on this site that express blind support for the individuals in this video, but more people should listen to them and try to figure out what they are about. They have called the government illegal, said they don’t recognize the government, and they claim to have the right to do what they want (i.e. - camp on public land while armed). That by it’s very nature is anarchy. Little wonder that other anti-government groups have largely distanced themselves from this from the beginning. I have listened to what they are saying and everyone - including the “leader” of this stand-off has asked them to leave. Watch the video and ask yourself if these are people you want to associate with. The blind support given to these men who conduct an armed takeover (a wildlife refuge of all things?) of property that is not theirs in a state where they don’t reside is not representative of conservatism in my opinion.
You said above:
“”Mad Max social tribes are not anarchy, they are an establishment of some kind of order (feudal, dictator, empaneled) in the wake of societal collapse/rejection (anarchy).””
I believe you are correct about this, so you must ask yourself what is the “new order” you would like to live in. Is it a commune full of men like this who are largely rejected by others who also claim to be “anti-government patriots??
You claim that all anarchist are Socialist. I would respectfully disagree. While “anarchist” are often socialist here in the U.S. and Europe there are plenty of “far right” anarchists and I believe the video above depicts two of them. The claims and stated desires of this group have been muddled from the beginning if you have listened to what they said. The rush to support person(s) who are anti-government must take into consideration the alternative that they offer as well as the popular support for such alternative within a community. That never existed in this situation beyond their original claim that the sentence of the Hammonds was too harsh (I think most likely agree).
Most of the same posters here on FR calling people who question the means and methods of this group “bootlickers” have repeatedly refused to comment on the video I posted above or research the “holdouts” who still remain. If one is going to ignore numerous laws that have existed for a century or longer shouldn’t one be able to articulate why?
The “demands” of this group were never clear - some said they wanted the land turned over to ranchers - some said they wanted the land turned over to the state (as if the state of Oregon would turn a migratory bird sanctuary into a pasture for the benefit of a few ranchers) - some said the governments land claims were illegal.
There is nothing black and white about these claims historically, legally, or in the court of popular opinion.
My personal opinion is that I would like to see much of the land owned (yes owned - they purchased it for the nation) by the government in the West turned over to local management, but BLM will just be replaced by the Oregon Department of Ecology or some other entity of government and it is unlikely much would change - they will not make everyone happy. The States could also sell some of the land to finance state government, but the “states” that purchased the land long ago are on the East Coast so one could argue endlessly about who receives the money. I don’t see how that benefits the ranchers in this occupation because they can’t afford the land - it would be the big agri-corporations that would purchase it or foreign investors.
This is a convoluted mess and I don’t think anything the Bundy’s did in this situation advanced their cause or garnered public support for their views. They inspired contempt among most of the public if you read the comments to these articles on other sites. They also set back public opinion of “militia” groups and the longer the hold-outs remain the more damage will be done. The last 4 say they will come out if they won’t be arrested. Good luck with that.
I watched a close-up by a woman who was crying as she explained it. Sorry no link as memory of location down as just woke up. Anyway it shows LaVoy getting out with hands up then being shot from the right after several steps by an officer that quickly turned and retreated. LaVoy appeared to point toward who shot him saying “he shot me” and then reached to where he was shot (rt Hip). he was then tased from behind and shot while down. The woman reported the taser wires were retrieved. She has a narrative of LaVoys comments but don’t know how. It is clear to me they wanted him dead regardless of narrative.
True democracy does not lead to anarchy ! Because citizens feel empowered
What claim? The claim I quoted from the article. You are not being an honest debater. His claim is false.
You are not alone. See post 54.
I have been puzzled by many of the posts here on FR about this and frankly, the posts about the death of Lavoy have almost everything in common with many of the beliefs within the Black Lives Matter community.
Few, if any, of the posters who seem to support this action have articulated why they believe these men were correct in their actions. I have tried to objectively and rationally study the “demands” of this group and I am still confused because they said so many different things. You can’t end an argument or discussion with “gov’t bad - self proclaimed patriots good”, but that is what many seem to hang their hat on.
In fact, if you go back to the original coverage of this “armed takeover” they invoked the sovereign citizen belief in the authority of the Sheriff and said they would leave if the Sheriff asked them to. The Sheriff immediately asked them to and they never talked about that again. Then they started a dialogue with a Sheriff in another county (who also wanted them to leave) whom they believed was more sympathetic to their views. That is just one example of their failure to abide by their own statements.
In this sense, he was murdered. The OST has already fired at his vehicle before it hit the embankment, before he even got out of the truck!
Right. She was able to calmly and coolly tell the difference between nearly simultaneous shots 25 feet apart.
So, why does the guy in the trees reach for his right-hand handgun holster, when he's using a weapon in his left hand?
Is he one of those "stud" cross-body draw guys? :)
And why is he pulling on something a couple of times, like he's pulling on wires attached to something?
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.