Private Militia Takes Over Federal Wildlife Sanctuary in Oregon

[TickTockMan]

I thought America didn’t tolerate terrorists. Why have these guys been allowed to remain free?

 

[T-Rexx]

^ They're white.

If they were 12 y.o. black kids with toy guns, they'd all be dead by now.

 

[Kulindahr]

I thought America didn’t tolerate terrorists. Why have these guys been allowed to remain free?

???

What "terrorists"?

- - - Updated - - -

^ They're white.

If they were 12 y.o. black kids with toy guns, they'd all be dead by now.

Nah, that's only inside city limits.

 

[T-Rexx]

I thought America didn’t tolerate terrorists. Why have these guys been allowed to remain free?

???

What "terrorists"?

He means those religious crazy people who talk to God and get rewarded in the afterlife for killing people. The ones who like to attract attention to themselves by destroying property. The ones who nobly sacrifice themselves in a blaze of violence (while yet taking out enough surrounding innocent victims) in the misguided belief that that will force you to adopt their ideas. The ones who post videos to the internet to attract believers to their cause.

Those terrorists.

 

[TickTockMan]

He means those religious crazy people who talk to God and get rewarded in the afterlife for killing people. The ones who like to attract attention to themselves by destroying property. The ones who nobly sacrifice themselves in a blaze of violence (while yet taking out enough surrounding innocent victims) in the misguided belief that that will force you to adopt their ideas. The ones who post videos to the internet to attract believers to their cause.

Those terrorists.

Thank you. I don’t get why he is being obtuse.

 

[Kulindahr]

He means those religious crazy people who talk to God and get rewarded in the afterlife for killing people. The ones who like to attract attention to themselves by destroying property. The ones who nobly sacrifice themselves in a blaze of violence (while yet taking out enough surrounding innocent victims) in the misguided belief that that will force you to adopt their ideas. The ones who post videos to the internet to attract believers to their cause.

Those terrorists.

But there aren't any of those involved here: no one has killed anyone, no one has blown anything up.

Your description is exactly why I asked the question: there aren't any terrorists involved in the matter of discussion in this thread.

 

[TX-Beau]

Well, just because they are bad terrorists doesn't mean their intention wasn't a bloody standoff with the man.

 

[T-Rexx]

One of the militiamen, Neil Sigurd Wampler, is a convicted murderer. He served 4 years for killing his father in 1977, a crime to which he pleaded "not guilty by reason of insanity."

http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-standoff/2016/01/oregon_standoff_among_the_prot.html

He claims to be "armed," but he won't say what weapon he possesses. As a convicted felon, it would be illegal for him to possess a gun (a fact which Wampler claims is not true). He has been an outspoken advocate of gun rights, and once identified himself collectively as "we gun owners" in a letter to The San Luis Obispo Tribune.

 

[Kulindahr]

One of the militiamen, Neil Sigurd Wampler, is a convicted murderer. He served 4 years for killing his father in 1977, a crime to which he pleaded "not guilty by reason of insanity."

http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-standoff/2016/01/oregon_standoff_among_the_prot.html

He claims to be "armed," but he won't say what weapon he possesses. As a convicted felon, it would be illegal for him to possess a gun (a fact which Wampler claims is not true). He has been an outspoken advocate of gun rights, and once identified himself collectively as "we gun owners" in a letter to The San Luis Obispo Tribune.

Since the crime was in 1977 it's theoretically possible he has been what they call "rehabilitated", i.e. had the exercise of his natural right to keep and bear arms restored, but that's both rare and expensive. IIRC it requires action by one's local sheriff, though, so if he's resided in the same place all this time then the local sheriff would know -- so since the sheriff has said the guy isn't supposed to have guns, that ought to settle the matter.

There used to be, and I suppose it still may be the case, a process that under certain circumstances a felon can be allowed firearms on his own property if need is established, but unless the guy has a farm or ranch where wild animals are a problem, or he has had credible death threats, that doesn't even apply. And even if it did, he wouldn't be allowed to keep them off his property, so if he's packing at the refuge he's in violation.


BTW, as an individual who came on his own and isn't part of any organized group, he doesn't count as a militiaman -- for that matter, unless the protesters are members of such a group, they're not militiamen anyway, except in the broadest sense in which we are all militia.

 

[opinterph]

One of the militiamen, Neil Sigurd Wampler, is a convicted murderer. He served 4 years for killing his father in 1977, a crime to which he pleaded "not guilty by reason of insanity."

… As a convicted felon, it would be illegal for him to possess a gun (a fact which Wampler claims is not true).

It appears that Oregon law grants an exception to its unlawful possession of firearms statute for persons convicted of a felony by reason of insanity. (See Section 166.250)

I’m not sure if it matters, but Wampler is a resident of California.

 

[T-Rexx]

It appears that Oregon law grants an exception to its unlawful possession of firearms statute for persons convicted of a felony by reason of insanity. (See Section 166.250)

You're only allowed to carry a gun if you're insane!

 

[TickTockMan]

You're only allowed to carry a gun if you're insane!

That makes me feel safe.

 

[rareboy]

What could possibly go wrong?

 

[MakeDigitalLove]

It appears that Oregon law grants an exception to its unlawful possession of firearms statute for persons convicted of a felony by reason of insanity. (See Section 166.250)

I’m not sure if it matters, but Wampler is a resident of California.

This is.. I can't even.

 

[Kulindahr]

It appears that Oregon law grants an exception to its unlawful possession of firearms statute for persons convicted of a felony by reason of insanity. (See Section 166.250)

I’m not sure if it matters, but Wampler is a resident of California.

You're only allowed to carry a gun if you're insane!

I think the reasoning is that if you didn't do it on purpose, but it was a "crime of passion" such that you were not in control of your own actions, and thus "insane" under the meaning of the law, then so long as you aren't permanently "insane" then having a gun is okay -- as opposed to choosing to commit a felony while "rational" (under the meaning of the law).

 

[TX-Beau]

I think the reasoning is that if you didn't do it on purpose, but it was a "crime of passion" such that you were not in control of your own actions, and thus "insane" under the meaning of the law, then so long as you aren't permanently "insane" then having a gun is okay -- as opposed to choosing to commit a felony while "rational" (under the meaning of the law).

Don't parse, people who are guilty of a "crime of passion" are not people who are not guilty because they lacked the sanity to form the requisite intent or aid in their own defense. They are fundamentally different things, both realistically and legally.


Did anyone hear that Bundy guy on NPR? Evidently he wandered up to the GUBMINT STORMTROOPERS there to kill him, and demanded to speak to a negotiator.

He's a fucking idiot - Bundy, not the negotiator.

 

[rareboy]

^ Is Bundy getting bored?

 

[jbrown329]

^ Is Bundy getting bored?

Maybe they ran out of lube.

 

[TX-Beau]

The negotiator guy told him the FBI hoped they could come to a mutually satisfactory resolution and Bundy's response was something like "..the only resolution is the CONSTITUTION!!!..."

Idiot.

I'm sure the idiots disappointed with the way things turned out. Personally I'd be pissed if my anti-GUBMINT apocalyptic standoff just resulted in snacks and lube.

 

[Kulindahr]

Don't parse, people who are guilty of a "crime of passion" are not people who are not guilty because they lacked the sanity to form the requisite intent or aid in their own defense. They are fundamentally different things, both realistically and legally.

A "crime of passion" is the category the "temporary insanity" claim falls under. The point is that there is logic to the law. And if I'm reading the material correctly, he wasn't found not guilty, he was found guilty but insane. If he'd been convicted in Oregon, that would mean instead of going to prison he would serve the same sentence, but at the state mental hospital.