The People Had Overwhelming Force at the Bundy Ranch, and They Showed Restraint... But When...

originally posted by: Theprimevoyager
Still not one shred of proof he was shot before he reached. Too much speculation as well as assumptions going around this thread.

There is evindence of the FBI shooting in the video. You can se the front sight on the hand gun move up and Down. THat is a very good indication that shots are being fired.

Focus un the gun the FBI agent who move to the left in fron of the subject use. You can see that the front sight on his hand gun is puping up and Down. That only happeneds when a gun is being fired.

originally posted by: spy66

If a FBI agent at training/selections cant tell if a subject is surredering or reaching for his weapon... and still kills the subject. The FBI agent would moste likely not be selected for these types of tasks/missions within the FBI.

The FBI (if it was the FBI that shot him...) could tell he was reaching for his weapon, which is why he was shot!

We actually Train on when it is time to shoot and when you should not shoot. We are drilled very well in this.

So are the people who shot him, which is why he was shot when reaching for his gun!

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: spy66

If a FBI agent at training/selections cant tell if a subject is surredering or reaching for his weapon... and still kills the subject. The FBI agent would moste likely not be selected for these types of tasks/missions within the FBI.

The FBI (if it was the FBI that shot him...) could tell he was reaching for his weapon, which is why he was shot!

We actually Train on when it is time to shoot and when you should not shoot. We are drilled very well in this.

So are the people who shot him, which is why he was shot when reaching for his gun!

Even if he was reaching for his weapon. It is not a imminent reason for the FBI to use Deadly force.

As long as he is only reaching for the weapon there is no immidiate danger. It becomes a danger only when he pulls the gun out from the holster. Do you understand the difference here?

A holstered weapon is safe. So when he reaches for the gun there is no immidate danger. Because the gun is in the holster.

A gun that is pulled out of its holster is a more serious danger than when he was actually reaching for the gun. This is when you put more pressure on the trigger and must begin to evaluate if you need to pull the trigger all the way.

It is not easy to explain this to People who have no training in hadling situations like this. But the FBI are very well trained to handle these situations and Train regulary at this, and should have known when their life is in immidiate danger.

The only person who was in immidate danger was the person who was shot. He was never given a chance after he walked out of the car With his hands over his head. The FBI moved in With the intent to use Deadly force. And they did. There was no effort at all to try and apprihend him peacefully after he walked out of the car With his hands over his head. They just moved in and killed him.

originally posted by: spy66
But the FBI are very well trained to handle these situations and Train regulary at this, and should have known when their life is in immidiate danger.

They did, which is why they shot the nutter!

The only person who was in immidate danger was the person who was shot.

Garbage, He is the one decided to try and draw his gun, he is the one responsible for his own death.

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: spy66
But the FBI are very well trained to handle these situations and Train regulary at this, and should have known when their life is in immidiate danger.

They did, which is why they shot the nutter!

The only person who was in immidate danger was the person who was shot.

Garbage, He is the one decided to try and draw his gun, he is the one responsible for his own death.

Yeah... that is what a commoner would say. But you have no idea about how the FBI Train to apprihend civilans in situations like this. So Your opinion is really not Worth anything.

originally posted by: spy66
But you have no idea about how the FBI Train to apprihend civilans in situations like this. So Your opinion is really not Worth anything.

Your opinion is just as worthless, but the people who were there acted correctly,.

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: spy66
But you have no idea about how the FBI Train to apprihend civilans in situations like this. So Your opinion is really not Worth anything.

Your opinion is just as worthless, but the people who were there acted correctly,.

Not according to their training and protocal to apprihend civilians peacefully. Killing a person you only think is reaching for a weapon is unprofessional when it comes to the Level the FBI are at.

For you and ordinary cops, this is probably just fine and dandy. But than you are amatures when it comes to dealing With this properly and professionally. You have no training or Insight in how to deal With this.

This is probably why the FBI can do this and get away With it. Because the Public is clueless. And the cops do it all the time.

Just for the record, folks and resident experts, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI in Oregon, Greg Bretzing, stated in the public release with the video it was the Oregon State Police who killed Lavoy Finicum.

While it is very interesting reading some of the analysis in these threads, I also find it to be very frustrating because arguments are being made without having all of the pertinent background information and even if it is discounted for whatever reason, it needs to be taken into consideration.

Even if "hysterical women's" testimony is dissed as being unreliable at ATS, even though they were in LaVoy's vehicle and no one here was and a lot of their testimony matches, Shawna Cox has stated she was pretty sure LaVoy had his bullet-proof vest on. Also, for anyone who was around LaVoy, they knew he always carried his revolver in a right hip holster. There are close-up photos of this on the Internet, pictures taken while he was staying at the refuge. There are also images of him wearing a shoulder holster but I don't know what gun was being carried there or if he had that gun on him when he was killed. Yes, law enforcement stated a loaded 9mm whatever was found on his body. It's probably true.

According to the FBI release, a lot of non-lethal ammunition was used. According to both "hysterical women" the truck was being shot at starting at the first stop and continued until after LaVoy was killed.

Ryan Bundy's testimony has yet to be heard, he was the other person still in the truck when LaVoy was killed.

Meh. I'm perfectly, 100% happy with what happened to the protesters in Oregon.

originally posted by: antar
a reply to: Sublimecraft
Question, what is ASIO?

Australian Security Intelligence Organization

originally posted by: tweetie
Just for the record, folks and resident experts, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI in Oregon, Greg Bretzing, stated in the public release with the video it was the Oregon State Police who killed Lavoy Finicum.

This would explain why he was killed for indicating that he was reaching for a holstered weapon. Specially trained Counter terrorist operators from the FBI would not have used leathal force this fast. But a ordinary cop would as they have proved many times before.

For a well trained individual in Counter terrorism, they are thought that reaching for a gun is not leathal or a imminent threat. But pulling the gun out from the hulster is "reaching" that leathal moment... That is when a decision have to be made to used leathal force or not. But that individial must be pulling the weapon out for the leathal force to be used. It is a last reasort when you try to de-escalate a tense situation. But you have to see the weapon being pulled out.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
A man committing suicide by cop is anything but a hero. The occupants of the truck he launched himself out of would not have been in any danger had this man not resisted arrest, fled police, and assaulted law enforcement with said truck, etc.

This country has indeed run short of heroes if Lavoy Finicum is the best example we've got.

I don't think he assaulted law enforcement with his truck though it can be said he resisted arrest and fled police which, from what I understand, are misdemeanors. If anything, he was trying to avoid contact with the road block and, perhaps, go around which wasn't about to happen because of the snow bank. He began braking as soon as he came around the curve and saw the roadblock which can be seen in the video. The officer who jumped out, for whatever reason, such as to cause LaVoy to swerve or he was afraid LaVoy was going to plow into the vehicle he was hiding behind, was not hurt as far as I know. I don't see any intent on LaVoy's part to use his truck in an assault.

According to Shawna Cox, she, Victoria and Ryan Bundy were given the opportunity to exit the truck at the first stop by LaVoy but they didn't. Victoria was too afraid to get out because of the ammunition being fired at the truck, Shawna didn't want to leave her because she felt protective of her and I don't know why Ryan decided to stay in the truck. Perhaps, being a man, he didn't want to desert them if they were staying in the truck with LaVoy. Regardless, I don't think any of them were being detained by LaVoy. They could have gotten out at the first stop so it's not like he was endangering them.

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: tweetie
Just for the record, folks and resident experts, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI in Oregon, Greg Bretzing, stated in the public release with the video it was the Oregon State Police who killed Lavoy Finicum.

This would explain why he was killed for indicating that he was reaching for a holstered weapon. Specially trained Counter terrorist operators from the FBI would not have used leathal force this fast. But a ordinary cop would as they have proved many times before.

For a well trained individual in Counter terrorism, they are thought that reaching for a gun is not leathal or a imminent threat. But pulling the gun out from the hulster is "reaching" that leathal moment... That is when a decision have to be made to used leathal force or not. But that individial must be pulling the weapon out for the leathal force to be used. It is a last reasort when you try to de-escalate a tense situation. But you have to see the weapon being pulled out.

I certainly prefer the Counter-terrorism training you have aptly described because it would reduce the number of lethal shots being taken at suspects. The officer has a longer window before feeling compelled to shoot.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Meh. I'm perfectly, 100% happy with what happened to the protesters in Oregon.

You didn't specifically state, and I am not putting this on you specifically, but I am not happy that LaVoy was killed.

I'm going to further state, and I'm not putting this on you specifically but I feel this is a good place to make it known that...

I have been absolutely horrified and freaked out at the number of people at ATS on various related threads who have been metaphorically dancing around LaVoy's dead body with glee. Good grief! I would much rather have LaVoy as a friend than anyone who has done that.

a reply to: tweetie

I'm not excited about him being killed, but I'm certainly not upset or mad about it. It was a consequence of his actions. He was breaking the law and had to know the way he was acting could end as it did. It's unfortunate that he didn't survive to stand trial and then go to jail, but c'est la vie. Frankly, it could have been worse. One guy being killed out of all those lawbreakers isn't too bad really. Especially since they were all ready to give their lives for the cause originally.

a reply to: tweetie

I certainly prefer the Counter-terrorism training you have aptly described because it would reduce the number of lethal shots being taken at suspects. The officer has a longer window before feeling compelled to shoot.

Correct...When you have Your weapon aimed and ready on the suspect, you have time to obsever and evaluate what the suspect is doing. Even if he is reachin for or just bringing his armes Down for some other odd reason, there is still time to wait before being forced to use leathal action.

If this was a training exercise i bet the suspect would have been apprihended alive because that is always the main goal. If they did shoot at the suspect in training and killed him based on " I thought he was...going for a holstered weapon". I think there would have been raised serious questions at the devalutaion summery after. Becasue we are always evaluated, judged and corrected depending on Our thoughts and action.

originally posted by: spy66
a reply to: tweetie

I certainly prefer the Counter-terrorism training you have aptly described because it would reduce the number of lethal shots being taken at suspects. The officer has a longer window before feeling compelled to shoot.

Correct...When you have Your weapon aimed and ready on the suspect, you have time to obsever and evaluate what the suspect is doing. Even if he is reachin for or just bringing his armes Down for some other odd reason, there is still time to wait before being forced to use leathal action.

If this was a training exercise i bet the suspect would have been apprihended alive because that is always the main goal. If they did shoot at the suspect in training and killed him based on " I thought he was...going for a holstered weapon". I think there would have been raised serious questions at the devalutaion summery after. Becasue we are always evaluated, judged and corrected depending on Our thoughts and action.

Thank you, I'm glad you stated this -- "Because we are always evaluated, judged and corrected depending on Our thoughts and action."

Special Agent Bretzing stated in the release:

FBI agents and Oregon State Police troopers were involved in this operation. During this operation, OSP troopers utilized deadly force due to their proximity to LaVoy Finicum as the situation unfolded. Because of this, the Deschutes County Major Incident Team is conducting the outside review of the shooting per Oregon State law and established protocols. Because of that on-going investigation, I will not be able to answer every question you have... but hopefully we will give the public some clarity as to what occurred.

FBI statement

I would like to know the result of the investigation when it's complete. I'm sure everyone would.

a reply to: 4N0M4LY

I'm sorry, but I don't see what is wrong with what the feds did here. When presented with overwhelming force, do what they ask you to do. If someone tells me to stop and put my hands up, I do it. I don't drive off at excessive speed, then try to break through a roadblock. As soon as I do that, COMMON SENSE tells me I am taking my life into my own hands. Why law enforcement has to answer to this type of BS is beyond me. This wasn't a guy walking down the street getting shot in the back. This was a guy that was pulled over, told to stop. He decided not too. Tried to run a road block. Almost hit a law officer with his car. He was then put down. Why is this hard for people to understand?