CCW holder ambushed and killed after news publishes his name

[Michigander]

Once again:

The problem is not the newspaper.

The problem is that this information is collected in the first place!

Whether or not the published list of CHL holders had any part of this incident does not change the fact that We The People should not be forced to supply this type of information to the State to begin with!

Let's place blame where it belongs: Our government (us)!

 

[buy guns]

Criminals know that a gun is not magic and if you kill before the victim has a chance to defend themselves you get cash and a gun.

exactly. if you know your victim is unarmed you most likely wont have to use your gun because they will most likely cooperate.

if you know your victim is carrying you can assume they will fight back. this means there is a chance of you getting caught and/or killed so if you kill your victim right away they cant fight back and they cant be a witness. this makes this scenario more profitable and less risky then the first one and it doesnt take a mastermind to figure it out.

 

[AZRickD]

http://www.plaindealer.com/contact/index.php

The anti-gun activist's (Toby Hoover)

http://www.ohioceasefire.org/
Phone: (419) 244-7442
Fax: (419) 244-7440
E-mail: [email protected]

 

[madcowburger]

At least Bill went down fighting and actually took one of Plain Squealer Doug Clifton's precious pets with him. A First Class Valkyrie ride straight to Valhalla for Bill.

Here's to him. I'd toast him in mead (preferably from a newspaper editor's hollowed-out skull), but beer in a lit-up Lord of the Rings/Burger King goblet will have to do.

Clifton and all the rest of the dirty rats and fingermen at the Plain Squealer can take a ride in the opposite direction.

MCB

 

[P95Carry]

Any privilege for a few Ohio citizens that affects the entire population should be public record. The gun carriers are not living in isolation. We have a right to know who they are so we can make informed choices.

Leaving aside whether the nasmes were read or not .. and it's a sad case regardless ....... this Toby Hoover is so darned typical .... and keeps his head firmly where the light is real dim.

Notice his use of the word ''privelage'' .. he obviously sees people as having no rights. I wonder whether he considers his rights of importance. And what pray are ''informed choices'' .. sheesh, that's a loaded statement (?threat?). Might an ''informed choice'' actually be .... to shoot a CCW first - ''just in case''. Sorry, facetious comment but - I have to wonder. Maybe it's just finding a way to apply pressure, so as to make sure a guy loses his job - or doesn't get one at all.

Why oh why - do these sorta people not concentrate their energies on the bad guys .. and only the bad guys - they just might do some good for a change.

 

[madcowburger]

Because they *like* bad guys, P95.

It's the good guys -- real, honest, Americans, exercising their rights -- that the Plain Squealers and Quislings and traitors hate and fear and want to see dead.

MCB

 

[treeprof]

Might there be some special gang status attached to having killed a man who you knew ahead of time was armed?

 

[El Rojo]

Gunsmith said,

I was watching Americas Most Wanted a week or so ago and a bank robber had shot a cop just to steal his gun,I think the same thing happened to Bill

Hmmmm, I am glad you think that. Too bad it doesn't appear to be backed up by anything other than speculation. And if they were indeed targeting him for his gun, why didn't they get it?

“As I was outside I had seen a person stumbling,†Perry Roberts said. “He had his pistol in his hand and he was saying ‘somebody help me, somebody help me’ and he fell down on the ground.â€

From his cold dead hands, they didn't get his gun.

Why the sudden shift to liberal, knee jerk, emotional reactions around here? I expect this from the other side and I am disappointed to see it creeping into our ranks.

 

[Coronach]

One of the things that prevents some people from taking the RKBA movement seriously is our tendency to get the cart ahead of the horse.

What we know from the writeups thus far (and all of my usual caveats apply to this) is this:

1. Singleton was gunned down in an armed robbery.

2. Singleton had a CCW, and was included on the Plain Dealer's idiotic list.

3. The robbers showed somewhat unusual aggression in that they fired first, seemingly without preamble or provocation.

Note that #3 is dicey as far as "knowing" goes.

The list of things we don't know is somewhat large. We are perfectly willing to assume that the BGs knew that Singleton was armed, and we conclude that they knew it because of the Plain Dealer's list. Thats fine...but there are several scenarios (Occam's Razor notwithstanding) that would not require knowledge on the Perps' part that Singleton was armed...and even if they did, there are many ways to know it besides reading the newspaper.

Consider this, too. There are two main reasons why someone gets a CCW permit:

1. They believe in preparedness and our RKBA, regardless of their own personal level of risk.

2. They could care less about RKBA in the general sense, but engage in seriously risky endevours (running a cash business in a crappy neighborhood, for instance), and want to have some protection on hand.

The #2 group is at a pretty high risk for serious physical harm from armed attack. Members of this group are at risk regardless of the Plain Dealer's decision to print the list (though, that act can certainly raise this risk). So...we have a list of people, many of whom are at an elevated risk of robbery or assault. Now when someone from this list of at-risk people is assaulted/robbed, it is because the list was published?

We're seeing what we want to see.

That said, this certainly could be a direct result of the newspaper printing the list. Absolutely it could. I just need to see something more than an OH CCWer being assaulted as 'proof.'

Goalie said it best:

I agree that it is unwise to jump to conclusions, however, I can say with 100% certainty that the publishing of this man's name in the paper contributed nothing to society while possibly contributing to his death.

Exactly. If they hadn't published that list, we would not be having this discussion...and maybe Singleton would still be alive.

Mike

 

[Coronach]

Why the sudden shift to liberal, knee jerk, emotional reactions around here? I expect this from the other side and I am disappointed to see it creeping into our ranks.

Creeping into our ranks? Did you just get here or something?

Mike

 

[gunsmith]

with all due respect

Too bad it doesn't appear to be backed up by anything other than speculation.

backed up by experience .

I Talked to Doug Cliftons secretary today.
She told me that Bill had been Robbed a few weeks ago and it was REPORTED IN THE NEWSPAPER!!
So you guys postulate that the guys who robbed Bill a few weeks ago would not be interested in looking at an article about their exploits???

Most reasonable streetwise people would say that of course they read the article about the attempted robbery that they committed.

If they read the article they knew his name and it's not a far stretch to them finding out about his CCW due to the list in the same paper they read a few weeks ago.

I have lived in Brooklyn,I have a bridge you can buy-cheap-!!

 

[madcowburger]

I don't know about liberal or knee-jerk, but emotional, yeah, I'll cop to that. When I first found out about this I was so angry I actually shook like I was cold.

I for one believe the worst about Plain Squealer Doug Clifton and all his little pals.

I think things like what happened to Bill Singleton are *exactly* what they *hoped* would happen, and counted on happening, when they ratted out Bill and every other CCW permit holder in Ohio.

They set Bill up for a preemptive ambush, and they're hoping much the same or worse will happen to every permit holder and the families of every permit holder. Clifton and the rest of the Plain Squealers are no better than mob fingermen.

Like I said before, these people *hate* us and want to see us dead. If they can't arrange to get us knocked off by regular criminals, they'll settle for getting us killed by armed agents of one or another level of government, or sentenced to the government's rape-factory gulags for the rest of our hopefully-short lives.

MCB

 

[sendec]

//Like I said before, these people *hate* us and want to see us dead. If they can't arrange to get us knocked off by regular criminals, they'll settle for getting us killed by armed agents of one or another level of government, or sentenced to the government's rape-factory gulags for the rest of our hopefully-short lives//

Wow. Just, wow.

 

[sevenpoint62mm]

 

[goalie]

Sendec,

While what madcowburger said may seem over the top at first, what other explanation is there for an educated editor of a newspaper to publish those names? I cannot believe that it is just ignorance or stupidity, because too many other states have CCW laws and have had no problems with the law-abiding population that accquires such a license, and it is the editor's job to know that. Whether or not the paper actually wanted to get someone killed is a moot point, since the evidence would lead me to believe that the paper definately wanted to make life difficult for those who obtained a permit through the publishing of their names in the paper. When a lesser degree of ill-intent leads to a great degree of ill, the responsibility is the same as if the ill intent was great all along. Just because you only wanted to rob someone with some buddies does not mean you are any less guilty of murder when one of those buddies decides to off the witness to the robbery.

 

[Coronach]

Intimidation.

"You wanna carry a gun? I'm gonna publish your name. See if you like your neighbors knowing that you pack heat. And all the other parents at Little League. And church. And at work."

Personally, I think it is merely a play on the average person's aversion to having their name up in lights. I doubt highly that he is happy that someone may have been shot over it...especially since it could make him and his paper the defendants in a lawsuit. Probably he never believed (and/or currently does not believe) that such a thing is even possible.

Not that I like the guy, or anything. I think he's an idiot. And evil, in the sense that he wants to trample on the rights of others, seemingly like a spoiled child who didn't get his way. I just don't think he's evil in the sense that he's gleefully chuckling about an innocent man being murdered. Though who knows. He might eat puppies for hors d'oerves, too.

Hyperbole doesn't get us anywhere.

JMO,
Mike

 

[Wildalaska]

While what madcowburger said may seem over the top at first, what other explanation is there for an educated editor of a newspaper to publish those names?

May seem over the top? May? Your kidding, right?

Thats what kills me about the pro gun movement, with right on our side, we still manage to sound as foolish as the MoveOn crowd..

Dudes, here is a chance to illustrate the reasonableness of our postion and the unreasonableness of theirs...bet its all getting spoiled with nasty letters and tinfoil hat allegations..

WildandtroublewithcausationinanylawsuitAlaska

 

[madcowburger]

Well, now that I've calmed down a little bit, I wonder if maybe I did kind of overstate my case a little. Sometimes I do get a little carried away and go a little too far when something like this happens and really p!$$es me off.

But even if Clifton & Friends didn't actually want, and plan for, Bill Singleton and others like him to get chopped this way, they displayed a clear and depraved indiffference to that very real and very predictable possibility.

But, like I said before, at least Bill went down fighting, and took one of the Plain Squealers' precious little pets with him. That counts for something. I re-nominate Bill for a First Class Valkyrie ride straight to Valhalla. I re-nominate Doug Clifton and the rest of the Plain Squealers for a ride in the opposite direction, the soulless b@$+@rds.

MCB

 

[stealthmode]

oh man thats awful, why does the media think it has absoute right to do anything they want.

 

[hammer4nc]

Concluding a cause-effect relationship between the plain dealer story, and the murder of this guy;

is a whole lot less tenuous than:

concluding that open-carry (where legal) should not be practiced because it scares the sheeple.

Logic consistency check is in order for some members...playing the tinfoil card on everything you disagree with --> anemic, weak argument.

 

[BeLikeTrey]

hmmm

reasons for putting out names.

1) Attention, doesn't matter if it is bad attention it is still attention for the paper
2) Makes for one hell of an anti-gun statement.
3) they hope it deters others from getting a CCW based on possible "outting" (by the way, technically, none of these guys named are "conealed" now eh?)
4) They have a high probability for generating future "News" by doing this. such as "see CCW doesn't help you" or "gunfighting in the streets" it's a win-win for the paper. More news and more than likely putting us in the "Wyatt Eaarp" gunslinger category that seems to be so popular.

reasoning I think the Dealer is responsible
1) they guy was robbed before and his name was in the paper BOTH times for the robbery and CCW
2)He wasn't attacked by just one. They came in numbers to overcome his CCW advantage. I think they had a high probability of knowing he was armed.
3) (if correct) they shot him immediately? hmmm sounds like they knew
... It ain't 100% certain but I'd say the scale is tipped toward the fact that they knew he was armed.

 

[feedthehogs]

Why the sudden shift to liberal, knee jerk, emotional reactions around here? I expect this from the other side and I am disappointed to see it creeping into our ranks.

The very reason the rest of us have to work harder to present gun owners as decent people.

Get rid of the politicians who write the laws that allow the newspaper to do what it did.

********************************

It was just reported that the crimminals in my area formed a book of the week club and chess matches in between the drive by's.

They felt their ivy league educations were going to waste and the stock clubs just weren't cutting it anymore.

 

[Missouri Mule]

This is gonna get real messy!!!!!!!!!!

As it should!

 

[hillbilly]

I have read the thread, and still say Civil Lawsuit, huge Civil Lawsuit.

Criminally, there is nothing here.

You cannot prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the thugs used the newspaper's release of info to premeditate and plan the murder.

Unless, you can get the thugs to testify to such....and you aren't going to get that to happen.

I mean, who would plea bargain a couple of murderers down to go after a newspaper?

However, in Civil court, you don't have to prove "beyond a shadow of a doubt" only a preponderance of the evidence.

You can show a preponderance to a certain amount of culpability.

This is exactly the thing made for Civil Lawsuit.

And the pocketbook is where to hit a newspaper, any way. Get all their money, get the editor's job.

hillbilly

 

[Double Naught Spy]

I find it amazing that so many of y'all have assumed this guy was shot and killed because his name was in the newspaper. As noted, he wasn't exactly in a good neighborhood and has been robbed/attemptedly robbed on more than one occasion in the past.

You don't know that the robber was aware of the list
You don't know of the robber read the list
You don't know if the robber read the list if he then acted on the information on the list.

And yet you have decided the list is somehow responsible for the guy's death. Nobody has come up with any information to show cause and effect or even a remote connection between the robber and the guy's name being published. Amazing.

Yes, the robber was aggressive. As noted, this sometimes happens. Some robbers like to shoot first and then make demands. Some shoot first by accident because they are not trained to handle guns and have their friggin' finger on the trigger and end up with an ND. I have seen some funny videos of robbers shooting themselves and their cohorts because of this.