Cops Confiscate Lakewood Lady’s Arsenal; Motive Pending

[TPaine7]

POSTED BY KYLE SWENSON ON TUE, AUG 30, 2011 AT 10:00 AM

Francesca Rice no longer serves in her country’s armed forces, but she brought a piece of the action back home with her.

It seems the Lakewood vet had stockpiled her Edgewater Towers condo with a home arsenal including handguns, shotguns, a sniper rifle — plus a Thompson sub-machine gun, just in case the pizza guy got fresh.

Her cache somehow caught the attention of Lakewood Police, who paid a visit last September. When they found Rice wasn’t home, they asked an obliging employee of the complex to open up the apartment without her consent. Once inside, they raided the gun rack, making off with 13 firearms worth around $15,000. The only problem: They had no apparent reason to.

When Rice kindly asked to have her toys returned, the cops acknowledged that the weapons were legally owned. But they refused to return them without a court order. And so Rice has filed suit in Lakewood Municipal Court.

Source: http://www.clevescene.com/scene-and-heard/archives/2011/08/30/cops-confiscate-lakewood-ladys-arsenal-motive-pending

The technical term for taking lawfully owned property without due process of law or just compensation is theft.

These police apparently see themselves as the rulers of the people, not their servants. If true, they need to be put in their place.

Violating the Bill of Rights under color of law--and then saying "sue me" as you continue the violation--should be a serious felony. If these charges are true, the cops who did this should face serious time, along with their political bosses.

I took the exact same position concerning Bush's "free speech zones." A thug with a badge--ordinary cop or Secret Service member--is still a thug.

[virgogal]

1. Police departments should be eliminated-----we can take care of ourselves.

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[petronius]

2. Unrec for blog flogging and dupe

:P

(Kidding, but I would like to see a seriously written news account of this. The only thing my quick google turns up is this poorly written blog post/op-ed/whatever it is...)

[geckosfeet]

4. The only thing that they can say, if the firearms were legally owned,

is that they were store improperly.

But, no search warrant, and yes this does appear to be a simple case of theft.

[We_Have_A_Problem]

6. I don't believe

Ohio has a silly-assed "safe storage" requirement.

[Starboard Tack]

32. You could probably move into Ms Rice's building.

I'm sure there are lots of vacancies. Just because things may be legal, doesn't mean they make sense. Why would anyone want 13 guns in their apartment? Especially an apartment that doesn't appear to be very secure.

[PavePusher]

41. Why is there a difference in qualification for gun ownership...

between people living in an apartment and people who live is single-family dwellings?

What's wrong with owning 13 guns? I have 15, is that too many also?

What level of "security" do you wish to impose on gun owners, that you would not advocate for other potentially dangerous objects?

[Starboard Tack]

43. How many do you need for so called security?

You must feel pretty threatened to need 15 guns. I wouldn't be imposing anything on you. In fact I wouldn't want to be anywhere near you. Sorry, no offense meant. Just a survival instinct thing I can't seem to shake.

[oneshooter]

45. "Need" doesn't matter to thr law. How many sails do you "need"one will move you. n/t

[Starboard Tack]

50. 4 sails for different kinds of weather. Main, Genoa, Yankee, Staysail, Storm Jib

It was Pave Pusher who brought up "security" needs. I was just curious.

"What's wrong with owning 13 guns? I have 15, is that too many also?

What level of "security" do you wish to impose on gun owners"

So, how many do you need to feel secure?

[We_Have_A_Problem]

58. Different kinds of guns

for different purposes.

A .38special is a shitty gun for hunting, a shotgun sucks for concealed carry. .22lr is nice and cheap for practice.

[Starboard Tack]

63. That's 3, not 15, and I see no need for the handguns, or concealed carry.

[friendly_iconoclast]

64. *Do* let us know when the Senate confirms you as Secretary of Needs.

In the meantime, you are perfectly free to not own a handgun.

[We_Have_A_Problem]

68. They were examples

It was hardly intended to be an exhaustive list.

The primary reason someone may choose to own 15 firearms is the only reason necessary - because they want to.

[Starboard Tack]

69. Hey, it takes all kinds.

[PavePusher]

73. I see no need for sails.

You can do just fine with oars... if we issue you a permit for them. Give us a check for $400, all your vital stats and a blood sample. We'll call you in 4-6 months. Maybe. Don't go to a lawyer or you go back to the bottom of the pile with a lot of red ink....


O.K., satire aside, let me attempt to pull this back on-topic. By "security", I meant the physical security of the firearms themselves, as in "how are they stored". Which is in part what the O.P./article was about.

[Starboard Tack]

74. OK I got it.

[PavePusher]

46. Perhaps you can quote where anyone claimed she had them for "security" alone, or even in part.

Since there are many reasons to own guns, I assume, lacking other evidence, that she had a multitude of reasons, none of which are yours, or anyone's, business unless she demonstrates ill intent.

[Starboard Tack]

48. I wasn't referring to her, but to your post about "security"

"What's wrong with owning 13 guns? I have 15, is that too many also?

What level of "security" do you wish to impose on gun owners"

[PavePusher]

51. I was refering to the physical security of the firearms themselves...

not the security methods of/for the person.

Sorry for the confusion.

[Starboard Tack]

54. OK

[We_Have_A_Problem]

57. Survival instict?

Your survival instinct causes you to NOT use effective tools or to limit the availability?

Interesting....

[Iktomiwicasa]

94. I own 17...

...firearms, including a couple of very nice semi-autos that fire that scary 5.56x45 NATO round.

[oneshooter]

95. That is ok, we know you are still working on your collection. n/t

[one-eyed fat man]

76. Apartment security?

From the article it would appear it was a either the landlord or the landlord's employee/agent that opened the apartment at the behest of the police.

If you’re a tenant, your landlord is not entitled to let the police enter your home without a warrant.

http://www.lawcollective.org/article.php?id=104

What's more, any cop who didn't completely sleep through the classes on search and seizure also knows it. There were no exigent circumstances that would could remotely been construed as obviating the need for a search warrant. There was nothing but a couple of thugs with badges who bullied or tricked a landlord into doing a bag job for them. Any police department or city attorney who would countenance the police using extra-judicial "searches" should be impeached.

While the court battle to return the guns continues, the landlord and his agents also should be sued for their incompetence and abetting an illegal search and seizure. The guns were secure but for the perfidious actions of the police and their possibly unwitting accomplice.

[iverglas]

78. speaking of guns in apartments

you probably never saw this tale, one of my faves:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=119761&mesg_id=119761

Sadly, the poster in that thread who claimed to know the individual in question never returned with his scoop.

[burf]

90. How do you judge the apartment is not very secure

because someone with a key (the apartment manager) got in?

[rl6214]

9. this isn't canada

There are no storage laws.

[geckosfeet]

12. Yes. There are storage laws. Maybe not where you are, but there are laws where I live.

[We_Have_A_Problem]

13. Sorry to hear that....

Where are you, so I can make sure I never even visit that town, let alone consider moving there?

[peace13]

5. Imagine what they could have been used for while out of her control!

Who knows!

[rl6214]

10. Imagine what they could have done on their own

while she was out???

[spin]

7. In this case, the cops were definitely "gun-grabbers" ...

More and more often the police in this nation are acting like this is a police state.

That could be the result of our failed War on Drugs and our new War on Terror and the "Patriot Act".

USA PATRIOT Act

The USA PATRIOT Act (commonly known as the "Patriot Act") is an Act of the U.S. Congress that was signed into law by President George W. Bush on October 26, 2001. The title of the act is a ten letter acronym (USA PATRIOT) that stands for:

Uniting (and) Strengthening America (by) Providing Appropriate Tools Required (to) Intercept (and) Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001.<1>

The act, a response to the terrorist attacks of September 11th, dramatically reduced restrictions on law enforcement agencies' ability to search telephone, e-mail communications, medical, financial, and other records; eased restrictions on foreign intelligence gathering within the United States; expanded the Secretary of the Treasury’s authority to regulate financial transactions, particularly those involving foreign individuals and entities; and broadened the discretion of law enforcement and immigration authorities in detaining and deporting immigrants suspected of terrorism-related acts. The act also expanded the definition of terrorism to include domestic terrorism, thus enlarging the number of activities to which the USA PATRIOT Act’s expanded law enforcement powers can be applied.

On May 26, 2011, President Barack Obama signed a four-year extension of three key provisions in the USA PATRIOT Act: <2> roving wiretaps, searches of business records (the "library records provision"), and conducting surveillance of "lone wolves" — individuals suspected of terrorist-related activities not linked to terrorist groups.<3>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_PATRIOT_Act

Why do the names "Homeland Security" and "Patriot Act" remind me, to a degree, of a certain country in WWII ruled by a little guy with a Toothbrush moustache?

[friendly_iconoclast]

14. Not only that, the Lakewood PD violated Federal law. Per the FBI:

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/civilrights/federal-statutes#section242

Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242
Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law

This statute makes it a crime for any person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom to willfully deprive or cause to be deprived from any person those rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution and laws of the U.S.

This law further prohibits a person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation or custom to willfully subject or cause to be subjected any person to different punishments, pains, or penalties, than those prescribed for punishment of citizens on account of such person being an alien or by reason of his/her color or race.

Acts under "color of any law" include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the bounds or limits of their lawful authority, but also acts done without and beyond the bounds of their lawful authority; provided that, in order for unlawful acts of any official to be done under "color of any law," the unlawful acts must be done while such official is purporting or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. This definition includes, in addition to law enforcement officials, individuals such as Mayors, Council persons, Judges, Nursing Home Proprietors, Security Guards, etc., persons who are bound by laws, statutes ordinances, or customs.

Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to one year, or both, and if bodily injury results or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire shall be fined or imprisoned up to ten years or both, and if death results, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

The taxpayers of Lakewood will soon be finding out how much their local cop shop's stupidity will be costing them

[slackmaster]

8. The story is written in a trite tone that minimizes the obvious trampling of Ms. Rice's civil rights

What a stupid rag!

Unrec for inappropriate style by the authors and editors of the source article. No asparagus on the DUer who posted it.

[Common Sense Party]

11. "just in case the pizza guy got fresh"

What condescension?

[-..__...]

18. I'm appalled and sickened...

by the included graphic of some gun toting tart being exploited and objectified to promote a "sick hobby"!

:sarcasm:

[TPaine7]

20. Sex and violence--it's all those @$%&## Americans care about.

Why can't they be enlightened like Canadians and Europeans?

:sarcasm:

[Starboard Tack]

31. Right. We should all have at least one sub-machine gun in our arsenal

[TPaine7]

33. See post 17 n/t

[oneshooter]

34. Being able to understand what you read is a needed when you comment on it.

Both the Thompson 45 and the Valkyrie 45 are semi-auto only weapons.
No full autos involved.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[rl6214]

35. I'd go for that

all I have is semi-autos

[PavePusher]

42. Somewhat like Switzerland?

O.K......

[Starboard Tack]

44. Have you ever been to Switzerland? Somehow I doubt it.

Remember, it isn't guns that kill, it's people. The Swiss are not known for their violence, drug gangs, high crime rates, muggings or gun toting mentality. No, I don't think you've even visited, or you'd realize it is a very different world to the good ole USA.

[PavePusher]

47. BZZZZZZZTTTT! Thank you for failing our game....

Yes, been to Switzerland... and all over Europe.

What was your point in relation to the topic?

[Starboard Tack]

53. What game? Your and Oneshooter's geo quiz?

You were the one who brought up Switzerland. I doubt you've spent time there, unless you slept on the train as it passed through.

[PavePusher]

55. I'd post my passport stamps....

But almost all my trips around mainland Europe, during my 8 years posted in England, were made on my USAF ID card. Got a few Heathrow/Gatwick/Dover stamps...

[oneshooter]

49. Been there. Ever been to Mogadishu? How about Addis Ababa.

Been to both.

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[PavePusher]

56. Wow. As if that was the only reason to be there.

Jebus fucking Crispness on a rubber fucking pogo stick....

[iverglas]

79. ah, yes, Switzerland

Where the things in question are issued to members of the militia by the state, therefore fully registered, and they are required to account for the ammunition they use.

Yes, just exactly like Switzerland, eh?

[gejohnston]

83. when you leave the militia,

pay the unit about ten bucks, and it is yours to keep and no longer government property. That is not counting privately purchased guns.

[iverglas]

84. and they have no record of it at all!

:eyes:

When will you people admit that Switzerland is not a free-fire zone anymore?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Switzerland#Buying_guns

Changes due to the Schengen treaty

The rules laid out above were changed on 1 December 2008 as Switzerland joined the Schengen treaty; and all member countries must adapt some of their laws to a common standard. Following the draft of the Swiss government for the new Waffengesetz (weapons law), these points will change:

Unlawful possession of guns will be punished.

Gun trade among individuals will require a valid weapon acquisition permit: this is, from a Swiss point of view, a radical restriction that is assumed will undercut private gun trade dramatically.

Every gun must be marked with a registered serial number.

Airsoft guns and imitations of real guns will also be governed by the new law.

Only one weapon may be purchased per weapon acquisition permit: Presumably, this will dry out the market for relatively cheap used guns, including popular collector's items such as Swiss army revolvers from the late 19th/early 20th century.

Weapons acquired from an individual in the last ten years (which did not require a weapon acquisition permit) have to be registered. As a central weapons register was politically unfeasible, the authorities hope to get an overview of the market through this registration requirement.

While the above mentioned "free arms" remain exempt from the weapon acquisition permit, the vendor is required to notify the local arms bureau of the sale.


Buying ammunition

<picture> Ready ammunition of the Swiss Army. Every soldier equipped with the Sig 550 assault rifle used to be issued 50 rounds of ammunition in a sealed box, to be opened only upon alert. The ammunition was to be loaded into the rifle magazine for use by the militiaman should any need arise while he was en route to join his unit. Any use other than this, or even unsealing, was strictly forbidden. This practice was stopped in 2007 due to safety concerns.

The government subsidizes the production of military ammunition and then sells the ammunition at cost. Swiss military ammo must be registered if bought at a private store, but need not be registered if bought at a range. Registration consists of entering your name in a log at the time of sale. No serial numbers are present on the individual cartridges of ammunition. Ammunition bought at the range must be used at the range. Ammunition for long gun hunting is not subsidized by the government and is not subject to any sales control. Non-military non-hunting ammunition more powerful than .22 LR (such as custom handgun ammunition) is registered at the time of sale.

I'll bet you would all be happy as Larry if the US were just like Switzerland.

[AtheistCrusader]

60. It's a semi-auto-only, so no, you fail again.

In order to be a sub-machine-gun, it must fire in burst or full auto. Para-Ordinance makes a semi-auto in the same physical configuration. That is all.

If you dug any futher than this sexist, hyperbolic bullshit news article, you would know that.

[friendly_iconoclast]

65. Willful ignorance is embraced amongst certain prohibitionists here.

For example: If I were to write a post claiming that the new car I just bought had a carburator, gearheads would rightfully laugh their asses off at my display of ignorance. Yet one poster here spoke of "dumbed out" bullets and stoutly defended their use
of the term when called on it....

[friendly_iconoclast]

66. Another one claims that a background check is required to buy a car:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x458193#458209

[AtheistCrusader]

75. Clearly this person has never purchased an automobile.

Because lawl

[iverglas]

80. no respect for the truth at all, have you?

Nope.

[TPaine7]

81. So it's not just your words that you can't understand, eh?

We're talking about background checks and licensing and registration. Those are not considered tyrannical when applied to cars, so if you'll forgive the comparison, how could they be for guns?

That is what the linked post says. Those words say, at least in the English language as understood on Earth, that background checks are applied to cars. The word "those" has a clear and unambiguous antecedent. I guess if you can't understand what you say, how can you be expected to follow the thoughts of others?

[iverglas]

85. so it's not just my words you misrepresent with no compunction, eh?

Glad to hear it.

[friendly_iconoclast]

87. No misrepresentation was made. No background checks are required to buy a car.

And all your pettifoggery will not change that fact one bit.

[one-eyed fat man]

15. In case you missed it

Here are the court documents:

http://www.lovelakewood.com/pdf/law/110817_guns.pdf

You will note the Bailiff was ordered to notify the Chief of Police to return the guns or post bond and contest the order. The judge already granted the plaintiff's motion on 15 August 2011. That the cops seem to have blown off the court order is reprehensible beyond belief.

If you’re a tenant, your landlord is not entitled to let the police enter your home without a warrant.

http://www.lawcollective.org/article.php?id=104

[-..__...]

17. This is typical...

From the article...

"a Thompson sub-machine gun"...

From the court documents...

Thompson M1928 .45ACP semi-auto

:eyes:

FWIW to anyone, had it been an actual Thompson SMG, the $$$ value of that alone would be far more than the estimated value of $15,000 for the other 12 firearms combined.

[Atypical Liberal]

19. Thanks for that.

I had red flags going as soon as I read that.

Almost certainly this is one of Auto Ordnance's semi-auto replicas of the fully-auto Thompsons.

http://www.auto-ordnance.com/

[MicaelS]

16. The real question is "How did the police find out"?

Did someone in apartment complex inform on her? Was it the apartment manager or another employee? If I missed this sorry.

If it was apartment management or employees, I would end up owning that place, and would personally sue whatever apartment employees that called the police, or let them into the apartment to the the limit of the court system. If they couldn't pay, then I'd get a judgement against them that would reflect on their credit as long as possible.

[RSillsbee]

21. What would they be 'informing" on?

She didn't do anything illegal.

[MicaelS]

23. Of course she didn't..

How did the police know she had all these guns in her apartment? Someone had to tell them. Who? And why did they feel the need to do so?

[guardian]

70. You are right

According to the article an "obliging employee of the complex" granted access apparently without a court order. Your rights under a leasehold estate aren't that much different than fee simple estate. Without a court order, or indication that something was wrong requiring access by the landlord (such as death, dangerous situation like natural gas leak, or broken water pipes, etc.) the landlord has no right to enter the premises without permission. And certainly no right to grant a 3rd party access.

By the time she is through suing the police department and the landlord she'll make back we'll over the $15,000 she lost in firearms.

[RSillsbee]

22. I am absolutely certain this comment is going to be deleted but..

Keep fucking w/ people's civil liberties like this and sooner or later somebody is going to start shooting back.

[Hoyt]

26. Yea, I think that is what Timmy McVeigh said too.

[SteveM]

28. I thought he used a home-rigged fertilizer bomb. nt

[Hoyt]

30. Timmy was a gun nut, racist, anti-government, loser.

[SteveM]

37. Aware of all that. Yet he used a home-rigged bomb. nt

[guardian]

71. To all the anti's out there

It is this sort of illegal, over the top, anti-gun behavior that makes gun proponents resist any and all restrictions on ownership and resist gun registration efforts. The antis are more than willing to steamroll over people and the law be damned.

Quite simply. We don't trust the antis. We think the antis lie. We think all efforts by the antis are just part of your efforts for total elimination of all guns for any purpose.

[guardian]

72. Sorry

meant to reply to the OP and not #22

[Ready4Change]

24. Any other links?

Is this reported anywhere else? Google search is just turning up the same sources.

[one-eyed fat man]

25. all I could find

http://www.lovelakewood.com/blog/

[SteveM]

27. Despite the "power" associated with guns, the Second Amendment is a fragile thing...

Police Chief Compass of New Orleans reminds us of that.

[NOMOREDRUGWAR]

29. Gun forfeiture and asset forfeiture go together like peanut butter and jelly

Anyone who supports gun wars but not drug wars, or vice versa, should have their head examined. They're both inherently flawed.

[Katya Mullethov]

36. I have been studying it a very long time

And things are finally coming full circle . Not the decades long and widespread instances of screwing people over individually , but large scale attempts to get everybody involved , specifically the Iron River of Guns Fueling Border violence® that bore such bitter gunwalking fruit .

We filthy hippies have been trying to warn them for nearly 40 years . But do they listen ? Oh noooooo . Many still cannot make the connection between this latest spinoff and the old war because they are not "those people" . And they are quite convinced they do not like "those people" . I do find minor consolation knowing that ultimately , they will indeed burn in the camps , later, thinking: What would things have been like if .....

[gejohnston]

39. your Youtube video?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKEZoY-TMG4&list=FLGjp21lBK0TiXCoaaHdkeSw&index=62&feature=plpp

[Katya Mullethov]

40. More like

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ul71nccGU6s

[SteveM]

67. Where did you get that "R" with the circle around it? I need one.

:smoke:

[MicaelS]

88. While holding down left [ALT], type: "0174". Release [ALT].

List of all special ALT characters

http://www.tedmontgomery.com/tutorial/altchrc.html

[SteveM]

38. Prohibitionism is an ornate priest, eyes cast righteously to the heavens...

...dragging a corrupt butt-stink after him.

[one-eyed fat man]

62. Point well taken

This still pretty much is how it is....

[ileus]

59. Shouldn't this read: cops STEAL citizens gun collection

[AtheistCrusader]

61. No.

"Cops STEAL citizen's gun collection."

[iverglas]

77. I'll be watching for updates

Sure know I wouldn't be leaping to conclusions without knowing the facts, myself.

[one-eyed fat man]

82. Complaint,, in replevin already filed.

http://www.lovelakewood.com/pdf/law/110817_guns.pdf


Replevin motion already granted and the bailiff ordered to serve to Chief of Police.

There certainly is a 1983 cause of action here. Entering a residence without a warrant, and probably without probable cause (a report that someone owns guns, where they can be owned legally, hardly gives probable cause)Not to mention seizing property, refusing to give a prompt hearing on its return, and indeed putting the burden on the owner to sue for its return.

A suit under Sec. 1983 would pierce any immunity the officers claimed because under color of state law they deprived her of her property and her rights. One might even claim that they conspired to do so.

As for why they haven't been returned, if this were New Orleans, there's a good chance the cops don't HAVE all of them now, that some of them were taken home by some of the cops. The cops in question don't care if they are sued. It takes years to work its way through the courts and its not their money.

[iverglas]

86. oh, wow, somebody has sued!

As I said: I will be waiting for updates. Not your "probably"s blah blah.

[Name removed]

89. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TPaine7]

91. Spare us the sanctimony, iverglas

People who have been here for a while know you will jump to conclusions when it suits you (for example, here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x196856#196940 ).

Hesitation suits your agenda in this instance. Don't try to pretend that it has anything to do with principles or integrity.

[iverglas]

92. so I just cannot figure out

why it is that when I post things like facts in reply to something, my posts disappear.

The post in question here linked to two instances, off the top of my head, in which some people leapt to some rapid conclusions and ended up looking like morons. (Clarification in case it was needed in the first place and could easily have been obtained: I refer to tombstoned users of this site, so I am allowed to call them morons. Anybody who joined them in their leap can check their shoes.)


(Update) Witness says Boca man shot teen as he was running away

The first was the incident in Boca Raton, when Caspar Milquetoast the paranoid accountant answered his door on Hallowe'en with a gun in his hand -- a handgun he had a permit to carry. (Shall we look for him in the statistics?) He found two young teenagers playing doorbell. He shot one of them in the back as he ran away.

In the initial reports, no charges were laid. There was a great hewing and crying at DU about how the shoot was justified: Mr Accountant thought they were burglars ringing his doorbell! ... and then running away. I was rather astounded, myself, that shooting a 16-yr-old neighbour in the back during a mild Hallowe'en prank would be seen by anyone, let alone police, as justified. And hey nonny and guess what, the shooter eventually pleaded guilty to a charge of manslaughter, thus dodging a bullet, I would say.


Man shoots would-be robber; is arrested on gun charges

The second was an incident someplace else where a householder claimed to have shot an intruder as the intruder held a gun to the householder's spouse on a staircase. Righteous shoot! righteous shoot! came the voices of the Guns forum. I read the news reports. There were odd things: the intruder somehow knew the householder's name when he asked a mutual acquaintance for the keys to the householder's house; the intruder's pocket had things like a glass tube and other oddments in it. And once again, as I recall, the intruder was shot in the back and not while holding anyone hostage anywhere. Can anyone say drug rip-off / score settling?

So no, my young and old friends, I am not the to-conclusion-leaper around here. I prefer not to have made myself look like a moron in public when it turns out that things just weren't as I wanted them to seem.


html fixed

[TPaine7]

93. Do you really think we're that stupid?!

So no, my young and old friends, I am not the to-conclusion-leaper around here. I prefer not to have made myself look like a moron in public when it turns out that things just weren't as I wanted them to seem.

Assuming for the sake of argument that your threads demonstrate others jumping to conclusions, what has that to do with your jumping when it suits you? Does proving others guilty demonstrate your innocence?

Really?

That's insulting.