Escalation in Arizona: Firearms confiscated

Status
Not open for further replies.
Far too many states, counties and citys have people like this in charge, not just AZ or Quartzsite. The saying "power corrupts" holds true from presidency all the way down to dogcatchers. The problems in Quartzsite have been brewing for a long time, but just recently become public.

Just give it a little time and someone will pick up a good lawyer. Heads will roll :-/
 
THE DARK KNIGHT said:
Citing WND as a source is like citing the brown stain on a piece of toilet paper.

Seriously.

How about we reserve judgement for when an actual new outlet covers this?
Click to expand...

I suggest you get your ideology off this site. Same for azmjs.

WND is no less legitimate the the Huffington post or MSNBC. And about as accurate.

Stick to discussing the issues. If you have an opinion or facts about what is being discussed, then give it. Don't engage in ideological attacks against the messenger, just to divert attention from the message.

I am trying to find out what is going on down there. It appears to be a small town pissing contest. Having been involved with such locally, I can state with authority, that they can get very ugly, with rule of law being a frequent casualty. I haven't been personally involved in anything this nasty, but abuse of power by small town personalities is not at all uncommon. Every once in a while they make the National News. I remember a year or two ago when a police officer shot the fire chief in Jericho Arkansas over a traffic ticket.

The situation here appears to be of that type, little consequence for the rest of the nation at large, but of enormous consequence if you are in the middle of it.

Still, such things are not unimportant. We all have a duty as citizens to uphold the Constitution, and our individual rights. A trespass against one, should be seen as a trespass against all.
 
1 gun from 1 guy reality is a buzz kill
Click to expand...
So then you're ok with injustice so long as it's one victim at a time?

Of course I've come across more than one person who feels EXACTLY the same way about the Atlanta PD's murder of Kathryn Johnston. Of course too, they've never backed off of their libel that she was a "drug dealer" who "shot some cops".

The word "schadenfreude" comes to mind...
 
In AZ, if misconduct by a small town law enforcement officer or department, one may be best served by contacting the Department of Public Safety.

BikerRN
 
Last edited:
we are not amused said:
WND is no less legitimate the the Huffington post or MSNBC. And about as accurate.
Click to expand...
I noticed that you didn't object to the analogy made to Alex Jones.

ibid said:
Stick to discussing the issues. If you have an opinion or facts about what is being discussed, then give it. Don't engage in ideological attacks against the messenger, just to divert attention from the message.
Click to expand...
When looking at the message, knowing the messenger does help to put it in context. The story is one where one man is deprived of a gun. On its own, it sounds like any other small town pissing match where one local has a personal grudge against another person and abuses their position. In the context of WND, the motivation is illuminated. This isolated incident is just another block in their fabrication of a victimization narrative. A story intended to reinforce and cement the mindset of no confidence in all government.

ibid said:
Still, such things are not unimportant. We all have a duty as citizens to uphold the Constitution, and our individual rights. A trespass against one, should be seen as a trespass against all.
Click to expand...
See my sig to see the hypocrisy involved for many people. For those, a trespass against one is absolutely not seen as a trespass against all.
 
When looking at the message, knowing the messenger does help to put it in context.
Click to expand...
This is especially true when evaluating the pronouncements made by enablers of police and governmental criminality.

When somebody denies, or worse justifies willful misconduct by public employees, that tells me that power wielded for its own sake is a FAR higher priority for them than justice and the rule of law.

"Arguments" from such people can safely be discarded, except as a negative example.
 
and to think this particular fracus started over the folks in the trailer parks not liking an increase in the water rate
 
Neverwinter said:
I noticed that you didn't object to the analogy made to Alex Jones.

When looking at the message, knowing the messenger does help to put it in context. The story is one where one man is deprived of a gun. On its own, it sounds like any other small town pissing match where one local has a personal grudge against another person and abuses their position. In the context of WND, the motivation is illuminated. This isolated incident is just another block in their fabrication of a victimization narrative. A story intended to reinforce and cement the mindset of no confidence in all government.


See my sig to see the hypocrisy involved for many people. For those, a trespass against one is absolutely not seen as a trespass against all.
Click to expand...

I didn't realize that I had to defend every web site. Sorry for not plugging yours.
I also didn't realize that just because certain web sites "illuminates" a problem, that makes the problem illegitimate.

I am quite troubled by the idea, that someone can go to a Judge, and get a Court Order, disarming someone, simply because the complainant has a mental disorder.

If you would like listen to the "hearing" where the "Justice of the Peace" issued the gun seize order, you might find that Winslow testified that he had PTSD, and that therefore he demanded his political enemy be disarmed. http:///www.youtube.com/watch?v=endiUqx1G6c&feature=youtu.be

You mention the ideology of the source makes the story illegitimate. The story, with corroborating facts can be found from other sources.

You also claim that WND tends to undermine faith in Government. OH MY GOD! THE HORROR OF THE IDEA!
My God! Send in Napolitano and the SWAT Teams to arrest or kill them all!
The Idea that somebody is undermining FAITH IN GOVERNMENT!

Ooops! I forgot! The First Amendment guarantees that right.

You by the way are a perfect example of your own signature. If it undermines your faith in Government, then it is illegitimate to you.

That is why I suggested the other two get their ideologies off this site. I would suggest the same to you.

If you have something to say about the facts in this case, then say it. If not then don't attack the story because you don't like the source. What would you think if I denounced a story you were interested in simply because the DailyKos or Huffington Post linked to it, or mentioned it?

If you have problems with WND and it's reporting, and can find arguments supporting an alternative view, then by all means, bring them forth!

But don't let your political ideology bring you to slinging slurs at people you don't know.

This is supposed to be The High Road, not a hack political insult site.
 
In your opinion, Who has it?

Winslow claimed he had PTSD, and demanded that Roth be disarmed because of it! The Justice of the Peace agreed. No threats by Roth, just a threat by Winslow that he (Winslow) might go out of control and hurt Roth!

As I stated earlier, this looks like a small town pissing contest, without a wider National concern, but we ought to all be concerned when some one's rights are infringed.

The bit about " they came after the Jews, but I wasn't a Jew, Then they came after the businessman, but I wasn't a businessman, Then they came after me, and there was no one left." comes to mind.
I have seen these small town pissing contest in person, they aren't pretty, and the consequences for the loser can be quite severe.
Remember what happened in Jericho, Arkansas in 2009.
For that matter remember what happened in Ruby Ridge, and Waco, Texas, when out of control government agencies decided to flex their muscle.

I think we all have a stake in seeing that the Rule of Law, and the Rights of Individuals, as guaranteed by the Constitution, are observed. And that individuals, or groups, acting under the cover of "Government" don't abuse their power.
 
To everyone thats suspicious of the source.... you can drop it.


Its been going on now for a few months now and has been covered by every major news station out of Phoenix.

Quartzsite is about 100-150 miles from me.
 
Deanimator said:
When somebody denies, or worse justifies willful misconduct by public employees, that tells me that power wielded for its own sake is a FAR higher priority for them than justice and the rule of law.

"Arguments" from such people can safely be discarded, except as a negative example.
Click to expand...
This is a good point, and I thank you for being proactively posting against apologists who would argue that it is a proper course of business for someone to be denied rights with no legal recourse to have their violation redressed.

we are not amused said:
If you have something to say about the facts in this case, then say it. If not then don't attack the story because you don't like the source. What would you think if I denounced a story you were interested in simply because the DailyKos or Huffington Post linked to it, or mentioned it?
Click to expand...
If you read back, my very first post acknowledged occurrence of the event. Your entire post is attacking a position that I never wrote. Again, my post was describing the driving factors of the reporting of this story as the components for invention of the victimization narrative. It is the goal of WorldNetDaily to promote an alarmist ideology, and they feed off of the culture that produces it.

The victimization narrative is not an isolated occurrence. There are multiple sources of it. I see that there is a link to the Oath Keepers site, which is also another organization which employs the same strategy in supporting a sentiment of vigilance toward unlikely hypothetical scenarios that anyone who remembers the history of the Nuremberg trials should already know to avoid.

For your comprehension, I'll explain not only the meaning of the first sig quote and what it means in the context of my post. That line was from the 25 reasons to ban guns thread we had earlier, which illustrates the hypocrisy of opposing organizations that support different civil liberties than the ones you are personally attached to. Whether the government infringes on free speech or RKBA, they're attacking civil liberties. Each of those are instances where faith in government is undermined, and it's nonsensical to claim that I think those are illegitimate.

I'm sorry if I'm discussing the process of analyzing and assessing incoming information for the purposes of determining our response. Maybe my posts might have been better suited to ST&T than General.

ibid said:
As I stated earlier, this looks like a small town pissing contest, without a wider National concern, but we ought to all be concerned when some one's rights are infringed.
Click to expand...
This. When one person's civil liberties are curtailed, that violation needs to be redressed even though we aren't directly affected by it.
 
cassandrasdaddy said:
wnd likes to fudge a lil one guy one gun becomes "residents firearms confiscated! zomg!"
Click to expand...
The event is real, but the alarmist responses like the "need for a citizen militia" are not proportionate to this case. Going higher in the justice system is the proper route, and ignoring those in favor of extrajudicial responses like "reprisals" is irresponsible.
 
Neverwinter said:
This is a good point, and I thank you for being proactively posting against apologists who would argue that it is a proper course of business for someone to be denied rights with no legal recourse to have their violation redressed.


If you read back, my very first post acknowledged occurrence of the event. Your entire post is attacking a position that I never wrote. Again, my post was describing the driving factors of the reporting of this story as the components for invention of the victimization narrative. It is the goal of WorldNetDaily to promote an alarmist ideology, and they feed off of the culture that produces it.

The victimization narrative is not an isolated occurrence. There are multiple sources of it. I see that there is a link to the Oath Keepers site, which is also another organization which employs the same strategy in supporting a sentiment of vigilance toward unlikely hypothetical scenarios that anyone who remembers the history of the Nuremberg trials should already know to avoid.

For your comprehension, I'll explain not only the meaning of the first sig quote and what it means in the context of my post. That line was from the 25 reasons to ban guns thread we had earlier, which illustrates the hypocrisy of opposing organizations that support different civil liberties than the ones you are personally attached to. Whether the government infringes on free speech or RKBA, they're attacking civil liberties. Each of those are instances where faith in government is undermined, and it's nonsensical to claim that I think those are illegitimate.

I'm sorry if I'm discussing the process of analyzing and assessing incoming information for the purposes of determining our response. Maybe my posts might have been better suited to ST&T than General.

This. When one person's civil liberties are curtailed, that violation needs to be redressed even though we aren't directly affected by it.
Click to expand...

Who cares what the "driving factors of the reporting of the story" are? Are the facts accurate? If not, what is wrong with the facts they present, and what are they leaving out?
Your "sig" claims that you acknowledge that people who say they are supporting civil rights may have different views on what they are.
Fine. And you claim that suppression of free speech, whether for "Election Reform" (McCain/Feingold), or "gun control" in the name of "public safety" are both violations of civil liberties guaranteed in the Constitution. Fine, so far we agree. What does that have to do with the situation in Quartzite?

If a story appears in the DailyKos, or Huffington Post, and I dismiss it simply because I have a strong aversion to their political ideology, then what kind of fool am I?

This story is well documented by "Main Stream Media" and for you to claim it is illegitimate because you don't like the political ideology of the source the original poster used, shows an extreme narrow mindedness and political ideology, on your part, and a refusal to rationally discuss it.

Your position has no place on "The High Road" site. It is more appropriate for the ideology based DailyKos or Huffington Post.

If you acknowledge the basic facts of the WND story, then what is your complaint? If you don't, then what is your story, and what are your sources?

Who can have a problem with the Oath Keepers? Who supports a government official who violates his oath of office? You bring up the Nuremberg trials, many people don't seem to remember them. Why Criticize a group who does? Blindly following orders is not moral or legal. The "shoot to kill" orders issued at Ruby Ridge against the Weaver Family are a good argument for the existence of the Oath Keepers.

If you have "alternative" facts about this incident, then produce them and your sources. I am quite willing to consider that WND might have got the story wrong, even the other Main Stream Media sources, of whom I am often a strong critic.

I already stated that I did not consider this anything but a local small town pissing contest.
That does not mean that I consider it to be unimportant. "For evil to triumph, is for good men to do nothing" is not an unimportant point. We should be concerned when Government officials violate the rights of individuals.

You already have pointed out that you oppose groups that discredit the government. Is that your only complaint about this story?
 
Neverwinter said:
If you read back, my very first post acknowledged occurrence of the event. Your entire post is attacking a position that I never wrote. Again, my post was describing the driving factors of the reporting of this story as the components for invention of the victimization narrative.
Click to expand...

Actually. your first post was an attack on WND, your second was an attack on me. I had not responded to your post, but to those of two others.

That is alright, I have always regarded the quality of one's opponents, (or the lack thereof) as important as the quality of one's friends.:neener:
 
Unfortunately, the Moderator will soon come back from the holiday and close this thread. With good reason too.:(

Too bad! I would be interested in hearing a defense of the Justice of the Peace, Police Chief and the City Council.
Not saying I would agree with it, but I would be interested in hearing it.:scrutiny: Who knows? They might have some persuasive argument that isn't being aired.

Too bad the Hate Mongers and Flamers are determined to shut this thread down.:banghead:
 
we are not amused said:
Your "sig" claims that you acknowledge that people who say they are supporting civil rights may have different views on what they are. Fine. And you claim that suppression of free speech, whether for "Election Reform" (McCain/Feingold), or "gun control" in the name of "public safety" are both violations of civil liberties guaranteed in the Constitution. Fine, so far we agree. What does that have to do with the situation in Quartzite?
Click to expand...
No, as was specifically stated in my previous post, I acknowledge that people don't like to support the civil liberties that they don't perceive as relevant to them. A violation of one civil liberty of one person is a violation of our civil liberties.

If a story appears in the DailyKos, or Huffington Post, and I dismiss it simply because I have a strong aversion to their political ideology, then what kind of fool am I?

This story is well documented by "Main Stream Media" and for you to claim it is illegitimate because you don't like the political ideology of the source the original poster used, shows an extreme narrow mindedness and political ideology, on your part, and a refusal to rationally discuss it.
Click to expand...
I am done quoting my own posts to refute the perpetually misguided claim that I had written anything which denies the existence of the event by showing that I had written posts acknowledging the events.

Who can have a problem with the Oath Keepers?
Click to expand...
The role that they play in the victimization narrative due to their fostering of a hyper-vigilance over unlikely and hypothetical threats was rather obvious.

The continued determination of anyone who questions the position of moral panic as someone unilaterally supporting the government serves to further illustrate the pervasive nature of the victimization narrative. The refusal to address its existence is also telling.
 
Last edited:
I'm a simple man, but here's what I know:
An American's God-given, Constitutional rights were revoked by a lowly elected official!
An American, who according to his Constitution, was created equal to everyone else.

This is wrong, and it is a threat to my civil liberties, your civil liberties, and the Constitutional rights of all Americans.

The disarmament of Americans will start somewhere. Is it here?

On a side note, how many would hold fast to their T-shirts, bumper stickers and signature lines "Μολόν Λαβή" if put in his situation?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

I
  • Locked
72 Killed Resisting Gun Confiscation in Boston
2 3 4 5
Replies
112
Views
8K
Steel Horse Rider
S
A
  • Locked
Arizona: study on confiscated guns
Replies
1
Views
832
jnojr
jnojr
T
  • Locked
Kansas Gun Confiscations
2 3
Replies
60
Views
5K
Gary Frost
G
H
  • Locked
Mexican Cartel Gun-Runner Arrested in AZ
Replies
10
Views
2K
Destructo6
D
U
  • Locked
NY resident wrongly has gun license Revoked - HIPPA loophole
Replies
4
Views
439
rondog
R
Back
Top