Sniper downs helicopter

[bustr]

Raider,

Do you make it onto many juries? It's part of life for the police to pre judge a person because being human, and participants in the event, they can't help but be biased by what they see and hear. Thats why the actual prosicution is taken away from them and decided by a jury.

This man may be guilty. All the circumstantial evidence points to it. But again you have made yourself judge and jury at the top of your lungs. It's been rather obvious from other posts that you have an energetic need to warn all of us of the dangers to society by lurking gun weilding nutcases.

I can make the same shot he did with my M14 unsilenced, and iron sights. I thought Capt. Ahab was a fictional character in a book.

[Chairboy]

Originally posted by Raider179
Telling the cops "how he could make that shot"

Was he bragging?  Or was he trying to be helpful?  Eg, 'guys, that shot could have come from anywhere.  I could probably make it from here, but the closer inwards you search, the better odds you'll have'.  We don't know, because the statement is pretty unclear.

Originally posted by Raider179
and lying about his actions on that evening upon arriving at the crash scene.

What was the lie?

Originally posted by Raider179
He had opportunity

Why, because he was there?  How many thousands of other people were within firing range?  They all had the opportunity too.

Originally posted by Raider179
he claims to have witnessed it but can't pinpoint where the shot originated from

He's surrounded by houses.  Do you know how hard it is to track the origin of a single, sharp noise when there are that many flat walls reflecting sound around?

Originally posted by Raider179
Then running from the cops.

The police were in an unmarked car.  Do you understand what that means?  For all we know, he was just speeding or trying to get away from what he thought might be some road rage person.

Originally posted by Raider179
It all adds up to me as someone who is quite in touch with reality and it will shock me none when it turns out this kid has some mental illness.

So essentially, you've convicted him in your mind already.  Where's the presumption of innocence until proven guilty?  Thank goodness the court of public opinion does not control sentencing.

Originally posted by Raider179
Speeding and Racing are illegal on city streets, they are not "legal behavior".

...and tens of thousands of people do it every day in this country.  He got speeding tickets when he was a teenager, not exactly uncommon.

Wait until there's more evidence before making up your mind.  This is how lynch-mob mentality works, and it is the enemy of justice.  If he did it, then sit back and let the courts take their course.

[GtoRA2]

Originally posted by Furball
maybe it was a hummingbird called 'Pedro'?

Maybe it was pedro giving a hummer?

[Hawklore]

Originally posted by GtoRA2
I dont see any hard evidence listed that the guy did it.


Then again they make the guys sound a bit weird.



I hope they have more evidence then this "The search indicated Kerns owns several weapons, including an assault rifle and a silencer, according to the complaint. Kerns' father and neighbors told deputies they did not hear any gunshots, according to the complaint. "

And this: "The SWAT team found multiple Marine Corps manuals and empty ammo cans scattered about the Kerns home. ."

If the later is all is any indication, then I could have done it too.

Same here...

[lazs2]

See Rule #5

[GtoRA2]

See Rule #5

[Raider179]

Originally posted by GtoRA2
Wait so he isnt inocent tell proven guilty?

Did I miss a memo?

I am not a court of law. I am allowed to pre-judge, make assumptions and draw conclusions based on what I have heard.

[Raider179]

Originally posted by Hangtime
"ex-marine corps marksmanship instructor" don't mean diddly if the shot was outside the capability of the weapon and ammo.

factor in conditions..

seems mighty iffy. again, would like to see the weapon in question. An 'Assault Rifle' ain't much of a precison distance weapon.

Its also possible he used a different gun other than the assault rifle. I doubt a ex marine corp marksmanship instructor only owns 1 assault rifle and nothing else. That would be odd to me.\

[Raider179]

Originally posted by bustr
Raider,

Do you make it onto many juries? It's part of life for the police to pre judge a person because being human, and participants in the event, they can't help but be biased by what they see and hear. Thats why the actual prosicution is taken away from them and decided by a jury.

This man may be guilty. All the circumstantial evidence points to it. But again you have made yourself judge and jury at the top of your lungs. It's been rather obvious from other posts that you have an energetic need to warn all of us of the dangers to society by lurking gun weilding nutcases.

I can make the same shot he did with my M14 unsilenced, and iron sights. I thought Capt. Ahab was a fictional character in a book.

I am not on a jury. This a BBS.

I see you have no other point other than to say I am anti-gun, which I am not, I just think the laws aren't strict enough.

The evidence I have so far, points to this guy having some involvement. That is what I am saying, its not anti-gun. You guys are building an argument that I am not making. I already stated it was because of his statements/behavior that makes him suspect. NOT HIS GUN! Deal with it Ahab.

[Raider179]

Originally posted by Chairboy
Was he bragging?  Or was he trying to be helpful?  Eg, 'guys, that shot could have come from anywhere.  I could probably make it from here, but the closer inwards you search, the better odds you'll have'.  We don't know, because the statement is pretty unclear.

What was the lie?

Why, because he was there?  How many thousands of other people were within firing range?  They all had the opportunity too.

He's surrounded by houses.  Do you know how hard it is to track the origin of a single, sharp noise when there are that many flat walls reflecting sound around?

The police were in an unmarked car.  Do you understand what that means?  For all we know, he was just speeding or trying to get away from what he thought might be some road rage person.

So essentially, you've convicted him in your mind already.  Where's the presumption of innocence until proven guilty?  Thank goodness the court of public opinion does not control sentencing.

...and tens of thousands of people do it every day in this country.  He got speeding tickets when he was a teenager, not exactly uncommon.

Wait until there's more evidence before making up your mind.  This is how lynch-mob mentality works, and it is the enemy of justice.  If he did it, then sit back and let the courts take their course.

I will just answer this list of statements with one quote.

http://www.thenewmexicochannel.com/news/4856945/detail.html

"According to court documents, the turning point in the case came when deputies found a spent shell casing in Kerns' trash that allegedly match a rifle found in his home and bullet fragments removed from the chopper and the pilot's leg."

[Raider179]

Originally posted by lazs2
raider... I am not jumping to the guys defense for the crime... for all I know he is guilty as hell... if so he deserves to be arrested and tried.

What I am getting the creeps about is you so called liberal human rights types going apopleptic about a guy owning a few guns and getting a few tickets and having a maybe working maybe not silencer (they are legal in a lot of countries and legal here with a permit)

His tickets and drag racing?  I bet you guys break the law in much more serious ways all the time... smoke a little pot?  that is much worse a crime than speeding 10 mph over the limit right?

That would mean that any crime you were accused of you probly did right?

It must be difficult to pick and choose what rights you support eh?

lazs

lazs for real, Show me the quote where I did that? You are making a straw man argument. I never 1 time mentioned his tickets except in response 1 time to YOU bringing it up. I dont even think you read my posts lasz. You just read what you think I say.

You get tired of lots of things, I get tired of you creating an argument about guns that I am not making.

[bustr]

Raider,

I guess it's only a coincidence, but your loudest and most vigorous monologs are about or against gun weilding nutjobs and lax gun laws. That would seem to cloak itself in a white whale skin for observers of this board over time.

I have no attachment to protecting that guy from prosicution if he fired the shot. Your approach to the matter made it hard not to be concerned about your zeal, because of your personal hot button issue.

Your zeal gives me the impression that you would not be an impartial jurer, prosicutor, or judge in the face of a case where the accused had issues involving a firearm.

Also the impression if you could, with the stroke of a pen, you would rather a part of the constitution be tossed out and those disagreeing with that "tuff tittied". After which federal agents would be free to lawfully arrest about 80 million previously lawabiding but soundly "tuff tittied" citizens.

What happens if tomorrow, they find out his father fired the round becuase he's suffering blackouts from post vietnam tramatic syndrom, and the son was only trying to cover for him? So you then just tell the judge to line both of them up on the wall and shoot them for being gun weilding nutjobs who scare you?

To solve your personal fear of nutjobs with guns, we would have to ban all guns in the hands of all private citizens. Then there would be decades of criminals with their guns having a feild day with the now disarmed law abiding population while in parallel policing forces would have to violate additional portions of the constitution to ensure total compliance against a rather large protion of We the People.

No one in this thread is disagreeing with prosicuting this man for his deed. But dude, you ever consider tossing a few brews before weighing in on gun issues....................... ....

[Habu]

This is the third instance I know of where an aircraft has been shot by some nut job who objected the noise.

I think you guys that are defending this guy must not be pilots. It is not hard to draw a 500 yd circle around the place where the chopper was hit and see who in that relatively small area owns a weapon and has the skill capable of doing this.

It is a well know fact in Police investigations that criminals often come back to the scene of the crime to see what happens when the police arrive. Arsonists are quite often the guys watching the fire dept put out the blaze.

This guy fits the profile in almost all ways. I would strongly suspect he did it.

[Raider179]

Originally posted by bustr
Raider,

I guess it's only a coincidence, but your loudest and most vigorous monologs are about or against gun weilding nutjobs and lax gun laws. That would seem to cloak itself in a white whale skin for observers of this board over time.

I have no attachment to protecting that guy from prosicution if he fired the shot. Your approach to the matter made it hard not to be concerned about your zeal, because of your personal hot button issue.

Your zeal gives me the impression that you would not be an impartial jurer, prosicutor, or judge in the face of a case where the accused had issues involving a firearm.

Also the impression if you could, with the stroke of a pen, you would rather a part of the constitution be tossed out and those disagreeing with that "tuff tittied". After which federal agents would be free to lawfully arrest about 80 million previously lawabiding but soundly "tuff tittied" citizens.

What happens if tomorrow, they find out his father fired the round becuase he's suffering blackouts from post vietnam tramatic syndrom, and the son was only trying to cover for him? So you then just tell the judge to line both of them up on the wall and shoot them for being gun weilding nutjobs who scare you?

To solve your personal fear of nutjobs with guns, we would have to ban all guns in the hands of all private citizens. Then there would be decades of criminals with their guns having a feild day with the now disarmed law abiding population while in parallel policing forces would have to violate additional portions of the constitution to ensure total compliance against a rather large protion of We the People.

No one in this thread is disagreeing with prosicuting this man for his deed. But dude, you ever consider tossing a few brews before weighing in on gun issues....................... ....

LOL my loudest and most vigorous? Are you serious? I get way more involved in Bush/Rove/Iraq than any gun thread. Maybe it just seems that way because you guys are so paranoid that the government is gonna take away your guns, you take anyone who says anything about guns as being some anti-gun radical nutjob. Not the case here.

Still I have seen no one point out to me anything other than their view on my opinion. I see you used no quotes in your accusations about my view, perhaps because my quotes don't fit your argument.

Did any of you even read this when I posted it?

This is not a matter of tickets vs guns. It's a matter of this kid lying and bragging about an incident in which a state chopper was shot down. That is why he looks guilty and he can only blame himself. If he didnt have a fire-arm I would still expect him to be investigated based solely on his behavior/statements. The fire-arm and silencer only prove he has a gun and a way to shoot it without anyone hearing shots. Nothing more, nothing less despite you wanting to make it out that they are after him because he is a gun owner.

If anything I say the opposite of what you are accusing me of saying. So Please show me where  I am anti-gun in this thread.

What I did do is read the evidence and make a judgement. To me, It was EASY to see the kid was involved. Which according to the bullet fragments I linked to above is proven correct. I was right on about the kid so you have no leg to stand on.

Once I hear evidence guess what? I am no longer impartial, I make judgements. Sheesh what is wrong with some of you. I didnt just see the topic heading and say oh he did it he owns a gun. I read the link, looked it up on some other news sites and then posted. Like I said it was OBVIOUS he was involved but you guys are so paranoid about losing your guns that you cant see the forest through the trees.


The rest of your post is babble.

[lazs2]

Raider quoted....."Three days later, undercover deputies attempted to trail Kerns after the search, but Kerns led them on a high-speed chase, further prompting a search of his home, according to the complaint.

The search indicated Kerns owns several weapons, including an assault rifle and a silencer, according to the complaint."

Why would you even quote that if you didn't think it was relevant?

I don't think you are fooling anyone here... you think owning guns is an indication of guilt and should not be tolerated.  

And... you accuse me of giving the guy the benifiet of the doubt and accusing the police of harrasment... I didn't say anthing of the sort...  I don't feel the cops are harrassing the guy... I think they are dointg there job... what I am disgusted with is the media and the liberal tools here that make him into a bad guy for tickets and gun ownership...  a bad person..

There is a good chance he did it but that is not the point...

It is the same thing as a home becoming a "compound" and a gun collection an "arsenal"  or a few tickets becoming "a history of clashes with the establishment and police"   a restraining order becomeing " a history of spousal abuse"

So long as we let the media demonize people and exagerate and lie... we are part of the problem.

lazs