Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 12/23/2001 2:16:46 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/23/2001 2:22:35 PM EDT by eje]
[url]www.latimes.com/news/local/la-000101635dec23.story[/url]
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 2:32:27 PM EDT
I think I fixed the link in my first post.
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 2:36:10 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/23/2001 2:31:10 PM EDT by Ulysse_Nardin_1846]
[url]http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-000101635dec23.story[/url] Those dudes are in deep shit. They're gonna be charged with murder because their friend got killed. Which probably means they're gonna be out in five years!
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 2:37:31 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/23/2001 2:32:47 PM EDT by Ulysse_Nardin_1846]
Originally Posted By GWF: [url] http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-000101635dec23.story[/url] All I get is "Cannot find server.", but my connections have been screwy for the last few days.
View Quote
Why does this link above not work but this one does? There's some funny
thing encoded in there? Ok, you have to ditch the "http://" thing because the [url][/url] thing puts one in automatically. [url]http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-000101635dec23.story[/url]
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 2:55:07 PM EDT
You guys got it. That was only the second or third time I have tried to put a url in a post. I'll have to remember to leave the http// stuff out next time. Now to read the story.
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 2:55:14 PM EDT
You know "the media" is going to blame the gunstore for being there and causing the attempted robbery.
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 3:06:30 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 3:28:13 PM EDT
"semiautomatic rifle" There's a term you don't see very often in the news. No "assault rifle" or "machine gun"?
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 4:40:19 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/23/2001 4:32:19 PM EDT by eje]
Here's a story from a different newspaper with more details: [url]www.sgvtribune.com/Stories/0,1002,929%257E291372,00.html[/url]
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 5:03:13 PM EDT
"he was shot by the owner with a high-powered assault rifle" Ahh, that's more like it. I thought something had changed.
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 5:06:29 PM EDT
Well that's good. I knew it was a given that all "assault rifles" are "high powered".[whacko] For a "low powered" "assault rifle" would prove useless.
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 5:07:50 PM EDT
Nater said the suspects were likely after the weapons and ammunition in the store.
View Quote
No shit, I thought they were there for the beanie babies.
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 6:55:20 PM EDT
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. YOu would have to be the stupidest man on earth to rob a gun store. You might as well shoot yourself and save time.
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 6:57:50 PM EDT
So, how long until the Great State of California charges the employee with a crime for shooting the would be robber?
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 7:28:29 PM EDT
This guy has the right opinion
"I think he should have killed all four of those guys," Ravo said. "If someone came in my store and threatened my life, I wouldn't think twice."
View Quote
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 7:30:29 PM EDT
Originally Posted By LongIslandShooter: I've said it before, and I'll say it again. YOu would have to be the stupidest man on earth to rob a gun store. You might as well shoot yourself and save time.
View Quote
No, the stupidest criminals are located in Houston. A few years back one walked into the Mykawa police substation in Houston and shot Officer Vaughn in the head. The suspect was caught after falling down "50 times." Vaughn survived the shooting.
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 7:32:55 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/23/2001 7:25:01 PM EDT by shooter505]
Never forget these two rules. (1) Never play poker with a guy named lucky. (2) Never attempt to rob a gun shop. [spank]
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 8:08:58 PM EDT
They didn't haul the store owner off for murder? Who, LA County is getting softer than it used to be.;;
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 8:14:44 PM EDT
Yikes! I've been in that store several times over the past few years. It is right across the street from my bank.
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 8:18:47 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 8:24:48 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 8:29:21 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Big_Bear: Believe it or not, using lethal force to defend you life is still legal in California. Sometimes the good guys win. The guy who pulled the trigger probably got a "attaboy" from the responding cops.
View Quote
The responding cops dont decide if you go to jail. I dont think these guys are out of it yet. When the DA comes back to work on Wednesday, dont be suprised if they send the sheriffs back to the store to pick up the owner. Just because defending yourself is still on the books in California, dont mean they wont MAKE the poor guy go to court and have to pay a fortune to defend himself.
Link Posted: 12/23/2001 10:32:20 PM EDT
Could it be that Euroarms is DBA Entreprise?
Link Posted: 12/24/2001 1:02:40 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/24/2001 6:49:37 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Big_Bear: Truth be told, I read awhile back that there are more justifiable homicides in California than in any other state. I caught some flak for posting that before but I stand by it. Jeez, I really hate to burst your bubble in those "gun friendly" states.
View Quote
I think thats because you have more people ther that need killin.[;D] R35
Link Posted: 12/24/2001 7:16:41 AM EDT
I just sent Andy Samuelson an e-mail, "kindly" asking him to keep his political agenda out of his news stories. He didn't even directly qoute Sgt Nater, so he intentionally used "high powered assualt rifle" just to further HIS political agenda (IMO of course). [smoke]
Link Posted: 12/24/2001 10:03:15 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/24/2001 10:19:19 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Imbroglio: Could it be that Euroarms is DBA Entreprise?
View Quote
Nope, Entreprise is Entreprise, Inc. No DBA here. EuroArms, Inc is also a corporation. The owners know each other but that is the extent of the relationship. I frequent both shops so I know the owners.
Link Posted: 12/24/2001 11:14:37 AM EDT
Wel, Andy e-mailed me back with this mesage
The weapon used by the owner was an AR-15, which I'm told is the civilian version of the M-16. Thanks for the e-mail. Andy Samuelson
View Quote
This was my reply: Wrong. There is NO civilian version of the M-16. The M-16 is a select fire weapon. The AR-15 is semiautomatic. Therefore it is not an "assault weapon". Please get your facts straight before printing them, and there will be less of a problem when you report the News. Thank you for the reply. Was that wrong?? [smoke]
Link Posted: 12/24/2001 11:58:43 AM EDT
Originally Posted By timh70: I just sent Andy Samuelson an e-mail, "kindly" asking him to keep his political agenda out of his news stories. He didn't even directly qoute Sgt Nater, so he intentionally used "high powered assualt rifle" just to further HIS political agenda (IMO of course).
View Quote
The paper changed hands a 5 or 6 years ago, and the previous owner/editor sort of pro-gun because he usually published all of my pro-gun letters-to-the-editor letters, but he drew the line on "assault weapons." Since the change of ownership, this newspaper has turned decidely to the left, and is pretty much in line with the rest of the big-town USA news media.
Link Posted: 12/24/2001 12:10:42 PM EDT
Let me get this straight:
They held up two customers and a clerk, Nater said. When one of the men tried to go down a hallway, he was shot by the owner with a high-powered assault rifle
View Quote
and
Nater said the owner shot the suspect in the torso. He was taken to County-USC Medical Center where he died
View Quote
Now, the dead perp was shot at least once (and we are lead to believe three times) in the torso, and he [i]died [b]later[/b] at USC Medical Center???[/i] Just how "high-powered" are these so-called assault-rifles? Sorry, I just had to.
Link Posted: 12/24/2001 12:16:56 PM EDT
I will be passing by this gun shop on Thursday, and if they're open, I will go in and find out what sort of "high-powered" assault weapon it is. So stay tuned.
Link Posted: 12/24/2001 12:41:36 PM EDT
Just spoke to the owner, he used his pre-ban Colt carbine, 6520, I believe. He keeps it in his office. He heard the commotion, picked up the carbine, as soon as he stepped out he engaged the closest target. There were two customers and a clerk that were held at gun point by 3 others. I'll get more details when I go to the store on Wednesday.
Link Posted: 12/24/2001 12:55:31 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/24/2001 10:54:43 PM EDT
Here is my letter to dickweed and his reply to me. Robber killed in holdup attempt "he was shot by the owner with a high-powered assault rifle" Are you a reporter or just another left leaning commie liberal anti-gunner? I ask because a true reporter would have reported the truth about what kind of a firearm was used to defend the owner, workers and customers of the Gun Store. You on the other hand took a line right out of the Handgun Control "how to distort and twist the truth when describing firearms". Lets break it down: What is "high-powered"? Is it anything that has a caliber larger than say a .22 rimfire? Is it a single shot .50 BMG caliber rifle? In truth "high-powered" could be considered ANY LEGAL firearm. Now lets take "assault rifle". Had you bothered to do your research you would have found that a defined "assault rifle" is in fact a SELECT FIRE (meaning machine gun to the unknowing) firearm. In the state of Calistan or Kalifornication (take your pick) the ruling Caliban has decreed that these types of firearms are illegal to own. So I doubt that anyone in a Gun Store in Calistan is going to be using an illegal "assault rifle" machine gun to protect themselves or their property. The proper term for an AR15 or AK47 legal type weapon is "assault weapon". These are legal to own in the FREE STATES as the ruling Caliban has also decreed these to be illegal in Kalifornication. Unless they have been "registered" with the Caliban. So once again I say I doubt that anyone in a Gun Store in Calistan is going to be using an illegal "assault rifle" to protect themselves or their property. It's people like you who call themselves "reporters" who are keeping the gunowners in the occupied state of Calistan in bondage and denying them of OUR Constitutional Right to Bear Arms. Dickweeds reply: The weapon used was an AR-15, I'm sorry you felt offended by the term high-powered rifle. The average reader doesn't know the difference between an assault weapon or a high-powered rifle and I don't think one can infer that the weapon used was illegal. Also, are you a just moron or a right-wing militia freak hiding in some commune preparing to take over the country because you disagree with the way people are using their Constitutional rights of free speech? I'm just asking because you seem hyper-sensitive about the phrasing of a weapon. Thanks for the e-mail My conclusions: This guy is a moron. He thinks his readers are stupid. He is anti-gun. He is clueless about the Constitution. Next is a letter to his editor to let him know that dickweed is calling the papers readers (meaning the buying public) "morons". And so it goes.
Link Posted: 12/24/2001 11:17:40 PM EDT
I know how you feel UNSJoe. I tried to point out the same 'flaw' in his reporting!! [smoke]
Link Posted: 12/24/2001 11:34:07 PM EDT
My e-mail to Mr. Samuelson
First, anyone who tries to rob a gun store is an idiot. Second, a question. In your article you used the worn out, Clintonista phrase "high powered assault rifle". Do you know what an "assault rifle" is? An assault rifle, by defintion, must be capable of firing more than one shot per trigger pull, ie a burst capability or full auto. The press wears out the term "assault rifle" when referring to many semiautomatic (one round fired per trigger pull) rifles such as AR15's, along with other rifles. Clinton and his cronies succeeded in causing many people to fear certain rifles based on looks alone. For instance, a Mini14 by Ruger fires the exact same ammo as the AR15, has a gas operating system for the semiautomatic firing mechanism as does the AR15, but because it has a wooden stock it has not been demonized. I am just curious as to what type of rifle the store owner used. I mean BRAND AND MODEL, not some BS generalization that many gun control groups and Clintonistas are famous for.
View Quote
Link Posted: 12/24/2001 11:42:29 PM EDT
Originally Posted By USNJoe: The proper term for an AR15 or AK47 legal type weapon is "assault weapon".
View Quote
The proper term for an AR15 or legal AK47 is a semiautomatic rifle or sport utility rifle. The term "assault" is not used when defining an AR except by the antis. Anything you can get your hands on can be an assault "weapon".
Link Posted: 12/25/2001 12:05:46 AM EDT
Hey! Alhambra...That's my old stomping grounds. I've been in that shop a few times, all the employees carry sidearms. I am surprised that they didn't start blasting sooner. It's a pretty good store and not associated with Enterprise in Irwindale. With all of the bans, their accessory and firearm inventory ain't what it used to be. I wish he would of used one of his many shelfed M1A1's and put all of them into the ground where they belong.
Link Posted: 12/25/2001 12:08:52 AM EDT
I think he was referring to the Federal definition of 'assault weapon' which does include semi-auto AR's. Although I agree the term is stupid. If I picked up my spoon at dinner and gouged my friend's eye out with it, it would be an 'assault spoon'.
Link Posted: 12/25/2001 12:15:06 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/25/2001 12:08:14 AM EDT by LARRYG]
Originally Posted By Admiral_Crunch: I think he was referring to the Federal definition of 'assault weapon' which does include semi-auto AR's. Although I agree the term is stupid. If I picked up my spoon at dinner and gouged my friend's eye out with it, it would be an 'assault spoon'.
View Quote
The Federal definition as outlined by Clinton, Feinstein, et al,is null and void because they are IDIOTS and draft dodgers who know nothing about guns or weapons and, as I pointed out in my earlier post, the term "assault" is only used in reference to these rifles by antis, all of whom the aforementioned assholes are.
Link Posted: 12/25/2001 4:13:19 AM EDT
I used the term "assault weapon" since that is what it is "classified" in both Caliban and Federal law statutes. I myself think that the proper description of an AR15 should be "legal firearm" and that's it.
Originally Posted By LARRYG: The Federal definition as outlined by Clinton, Feinstein, et al,is null and void because they are IDIOTS and draft dodgers who know nothing about guns or weapons and, as I pointed out in my earlier post, the term "assault" is only used in reference to these rifles by antis, all of whom the aforementioned assholes are.
View Quote
Link Posted: 12/25/2001 4:59:50 AM EDT
Not to offend USN but you have to be smooth with these motherfuckers... To tell you the truth you looked like a complete ass to this guy and all his punk ass anti-gunner friends. Unfortunately you displayed the typical type of attitude that most god-fearing gun owners allow the media to feed off of. I do commend you for writing in... I have a long list of emails sent to papers such as the NY Post, the Chicago Tribune and tons of other "publications" that have written stories decidedly far-left agenda's. I can't stand stupid people dramatizing events and nomenclature of weapons for their own "recognition" in the story. Anyway flame these pussy mofo's away! A few nice 2-megaton Airbursts over a few select Kalifornia Cities would solve a lot. Shit I think I will post some of my emails I got back from the VP of the VPC (Violence Policy Center) ehehehehh
Link Posted: 12/25/2001 7:22:13 AM EDT
lonewolf, you ACTUALLY GOT A REPLY FROM VPC????? Damn.. I've e-mailed HCI,VPC,MMM,ect... and NEVER recieveda reply. What's your secrete ingrediant??? [smoke] p.s. Can you give me the e-mail adress for the VP at VPC ?? Hell just post it here for all to see!!!
Link Posted: 12/25/2001 8:01:54 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Ponyboy: So, how long until the Great State of California charges the employee with a crime for shooting the would be robber?
View Quote
Actually that is unlikely. Despite the Caliban's ridiculous gun control laws, the right to self-defense is recognized, in fact ENSHRINED in the state constitution. Read the second sentence of Article 1: [url]http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_1[/url]
Link Posted: 12/26/2001 9:39:31 PM EDT
Originally Posted By California_Kid:
Originally Posted By Ponyboy: So, how long until the Great State of California charges the employee with a crime for shooting the would be robber?
View Quote
Actually that is unlikely. Despite the Caliban's ridiculous gun control laws, the right to self-defense is recognized, in fact ENSHRINED in the state constitution. Read the second sentence of Article 1: [url]http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_1[/url]
View Quote
Oh yeah? The last year I lived in Santa Barbara County, the DA there charged a man in Santa Maria with murder for shooting to death a billegerant drunk who entered his home and tried to assault him. The altercation began when the man was comeing home from work, he found the drunk already in his front yard. The drunk demanded that the man let him into his house like he thought he belonged there, the homeowner told the drunk that he had the wrong place and to get off of his property. The drunk then began to assault the homeowner. The homeowner forced himslef past the drunk to get to his door, then while being beaten about the head and back by the drunk managed to get his door unlocked. As soon as he got in to his residence the homowner ran strait for his hall closet and pulled out his loaded 12ga pump shotgun. He turned to face the drunk and found the man had entered his house and was attempting to continue to beat him. So he shot him once in the chest. The DA clamed that the shooting was unjustified on two counts: A. The homeowner made no attempt to close the door of the house on the drunk who was beating him, but instead went strait for his gun. B. The homowner made no attempt to call the police before going for his gun. Yes these were the EXACT reasons for the SB County DA proffering charges against the homeowner, who was encarcerated on 1 million dollars bail (which he was unable to raise) pending trial. He was acquitted, the jury taking a embarassingly short 30 min to find him not guilty. But he lost his job, and his home and when I left for Riverside he was still suing the county. So all that crap about the right of self defense being enshrined in the State Constitution isnt worth the paper its written on. I have seen what the District Attorneys of California and the Attorny General of said state have done to gun owners who exercised their right to self defense in the past..
Link Posted: 12/26/2001 10:07:37 PM EDT
Top Top