Shawna Cox Video from Inside LaVoy's Truck

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

How was the detention illegal? Listen I think he was murdered when he exited the vehicle due to a tense situation and some itchy trigger fingers, but let's not be confused here. The stop was legal and he should have complied when he was stopped. He could fight the legality of the stop in court.

a reply to: raymundoko

I cant say thats completely the case.
When the other male gets out of the truck you can see him drop a pistol on the ground.
Cant recall right now if that was the other Bundy brother or who it was at the moment.

The FBI also claims they found two rifles under the seats in the truck.
Again none of that matters except to people who dont care anyway.
They hear "they found guns" and immediately they assume the government was justified in shooting this man.
If the mere presence of a gun is an indication of murderous intent then the armed agents of the government who shot first were clearly more intent on murder than the people in the truck.
The agents cant have it both ways.
A man has a right to defend himself even from the government if they are intent on killing him.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

He was not shot the moment he left the car...

Yes, he was actually shot as he left the vehicle:

What happened in just seconds after that crash could lead to criminal charges against the FBI agents.

Cox's video showed that one shot hit the truck's left rear passenger window as Finicum stepped out. At the time, Finicum appeared to have his hands at least at shoulder height.

Investigators later established that the bullet entered the truck through the roof before shattering the window and concluded it was fired by an FBI agent. Another bullet from the same FBI agent apparently went wild and missed the truck altogether, the investigation showed.

FBI agents under investigation for possible misconduct in LaVoy Finicum shooting

There is an ATS thread for discussion here.

He was shot at. He was not actually hit at that point, when the situation was - just about - retrievable. Instead he runs off, with his hands down and then moved them towards his gun - whilst shouting 'shoot me'.

Being shot AT is just as bad as being SHOT. They wanted him to bolt to use it as a excuse to gun him down. I dont know anyone will sit still while being shot at do you?

Government assassination squads !
realy need to bring the goverment to heel.
Dictatorship...

If the car did not have some armor.
they would All be dead.

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: Dragoon01

Keep in mind in the video you hear someone ask "where are the guns". Listen to the answer

I don't want to skew someones opinion before they listen to it, but maybe other people hear the same thing as me. It is CLEAR that nobody in the back seat has a weapon, it is clear that the front passenger does not have a weapon.

From what I can hear it appears there are NO weapons and they have an "oh sh*t" moment where they realize they could be in a gun fight without any weapons.

Ryan Bundy: "Where are the guns?"

LaVoy: "The guns "r" [are] stuffed. You can't get around "em.""

I've played that part over and over on loud volume (start at about 4:08 on Shawna's video) and it's very hard to understand LaVoy's response. That's the best I can make of what he says.

Before Ryan Payne exited the truck at the first stop with hands up he yelled to officers he had a gun on his hip. Left or right, I forget.

originally posted by: Discotech
Is it normal practice for Police to shoot at moving oncoming vehicles approaching a roadblock ?

Depends on totality of circumstances. A motor vehicle can be considered a weapon and if the driver shows no signs of stopping then yes.

originally posted by: Discotech
Is it normal practice to shoot at a suspect the moment they exit a vehicle ?

When they are known to be armed, have stated they arent going to jail, fled a traffic stop, engaged in a vehicle pursuit, avoided spike strips, failed to stop for a road block, almost hitting / killing an officer, bounding out of his truck all the while ignoring commands - yes.

originally posted by: Discotech
It is normal practice to offload 3 rounds into a suspect to incapacitate them ?

Police do not shoot to incapacitate we shoot to stop the threat and the number of rounds is dependent on when the threat stops being one.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

The FBI was not the investigating agency, deschutes sheriffs department was.

Wow that is more revealing then anything.

If this happened in Canada, people would be tripping out I bet..

How are Americans not OUTRAGED and pissed off? Police acting like military counter terrorists on CITIZENS.

Welcome to the new America, the old ways of constitution and equality are gone. Get used to it, you can blame passivity amd obedoence of its citizens.

This man who took a bullet for his rights and died, should be seen as a modern hero.

RIP to a brave man, the type of men America needs more of, not less

a reply to: theantediluvian

Am i crazy or did it seem like the shooting started quicker on the girls cell phone video..in the drone video his hands were up then went down and it appeared to be much further away from the car than one may have thought if you just look at the cell phone video..

a reply to: Elementalist

Because the majority of Americans understand Finicum / Bundy's have no legitimate argument and know the actions they were taking were going to result in a confrontation. Even the citizens living in the area this occurred in wanted the militia people gone and the Hammonds stated numerous times they did not speak for / represent them.

Further the people who are outraged are only outraged because they substitute their opinion for the law. As an example some posts in this thread.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Discotech
Is it normal practice for Police to shoot at moving oncoming vehicles approaching a roadblock ?

Depends on totality of circumstances. A motor vehicle can be considered a weapon and if the driver shows no signs of stopping then yes.

originally posted by: Discotech
Is it normal practice to shoot at a suspect the moment they exit a vehicle ?

When they are known to be armed, have stated they arent going to jail, fled a traffic stop, engaged in a vehicle pursuit, avoided spike strips, failed to stop for a road block, almost hitting / killing an officer, bounding out of his truck all the while ignoring commands - yes.

originally posted by: Discotech
It is normal practice to offload 3 rounds into a suspect to incapacitate them ?

Police do not shoot to incapacitate we shoot to stop the threat and the number of rounds is dependent on when the threat stops being one.

Im sorry but didnt they develop spike strips to AVOID guning down possible hostages or innocents in such a situation? They should be held for attempted murder of th e rest of th e occupants. bu tof course its law enforcement..they surely cant had done anything wrong eh?

a reply to: chrismarco

Videos can be deceptive, given angle and distance from the situation. There is plenty of dash cam footage that shows incidents from different angles that change the entire view of what happened.

originally posted by: Elementalist
Wow that is more revealing then anything.

If this happened in Canada, people would be tripping out I bet..

How are Americans not OUTRAGED and pissed off? Police acting like military counter terrorists on CITIZENS.

Welcome to the new America, the old ways of constitution and equality are gone. Get used to it, you can blame passivity amd obedoence of its citizens.

This man who took a bullet for his rights and died, should be seen as a modern hero.

RIP to a brave man, the type of men America needs more of, not less

WHy? Becaus emost americans are damn stupid and believe anything they are told from the Television.

a reply to: raymundoko

In this particular circumstance, the detention may have been legal.

I was wanting to know if X thought that there might ever be a situation wherein immediate resistance to illegal detention/action by LEO was justifiable.

X keeps on going on about 'totality of circumstances' but leaving out the even larger set of circumstances which led Finicum to be in Oregon in the first place; the two ranchers being re-incarcerated due charges for which time had already been served.

Yes, that's a whole other can of worms, however it is fully relevant.

I don't agree with the form of resistance they displayed and think that they might have been better served going about their protest in a different manner altogether, but the fact is they have helped more people become a bit more aware of the creeping overreach of the federal government into more and more areas.

They were on their way to a meeting of locals from the area who were interested in what they had to say. Probably some who were against them as much as for them, who knows?

At some point, unless something happens to stop it, the federal government will overtake any and all to do with at it pleases.

When that happens, no one be left to speak for anyone because we will all be relegated to our tiny box from which there will be no escape save one's final breath.

a reply to: yuppa

You and others fail to understand this was a 2 way road. Finicum had several opportunities to end this peacefully and chose not to. Since you ignored the part where Finicum avoided the spike strips I will assume you are still only seeing what you want while ignoring the parts that dont fit your narrative opinion.

Ideally Finicum should never have taken the dumb ass actions he did.

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

No I addressed the ranchers in the other 15 plus threads on this topic. The Hammonds appealed their case to SCOTUS, who declined to hear, leaving the 9th circuits ruling in place. It sent the case back to the senior judge for re sentencing only. They were given the minimum - 5 years and got credit for time already served.

What you are intentionally ignoring is the Hammond's stating the militia did not speak for / represent them in any fashion. The militia hijacked the Hammond issue for their own agenda.

Above all their actions were in no way lawful, regardless of their opinion.

Saying they are on their way to meet someone is not a valid excuse to flee a traffic stop.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: yuppa

You and others fail to understand this was a 2 way road. Finicum had several opportunities to end this peacefully and chose not to. Since you ignored the part where Finicum avoided the spike strips I will assume you are still only seeing what you want while ignoring the parts that dont fit your narrative opinion.

Ideally Finicum should never have taken the dumb ass actions he did.

Ideally they could had just followed behind in unmarked cars and arrested him without incident when he arrived in town. But they would had had many witnesses then.

a reply to: yuppa

I doubt that given his actions during the stop and afterwards. Doing this in town would present undue danger to civilians in the area. Doing this in the middle of no where was the safest option.

All Finicum had to do was comply.

Had Finicum / Bundy not hijacked the Hammonds issue for their own agenda this never would have occurred at all. Given the Bundy's dont recognize the federal government / authority, and that finicum was doing the same thing the bundys were, I dont think there was a peaceful resolution available.

Witnesses are irrelevant except in your conspiracy driven denial on this instance. The incident was recorded by the police and by shawna cox from inside the vehicle. If the police were intent on gunning everyone down the people would be dead and no video would have been taken.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Oh you're a LEO ?

Can you maybe explain some reasoning for them shooting at Finicum the moment he steps out of the vehicle with his hands held up ?

Yes he was yelling "shoot me" but his hands are held high as can be seen in the FBI footage however literally 2 seconds after getting out of the vehicle it can be seen in Shawna's footage that they shoot at him although miss and shatter the rear passenger window.

Do you think it was a warning shot ? Is it common to fire a warning shot ? Or was it just some trigger happy rookie with lousy aim ?

a reply to: Discotech

Maybe take the time to read the response I gave the first time you asked the question.

Response here


Police are not allowed to give warning shots. Discharging a firearm is in response to a deadly force situation.

As I have stated numerous times now you have totality of circumstances, which takes into account everything before the shooting as those facts factor into the shooting itself.