Quantcast

Oregon Cops confiscate man's guns: he wants them back!

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by harmonic, Mar 12, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. cassandrasdaddy

    cassandrasdaddy Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,203
    depends on what he did or said to get "fingered" don't get too excited yet. in the other thread where the "poor guy" accidentally shot the baby in the head he went from hero/victim to scumbag dope dealer when reality reared its head
     
  2. Zoidberg523

    Zoidberg523 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2009
    Messages:
    230
    Location:
    Michigan
    Well said. :D
     
  3. NinjaFeint

    NinjaFeint Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2009
    Messages:
    649
    Location:
    CT
    Now that we have more information...that sucks.
     
  4. cassandrasdaddy

    cassandrasdaddy Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,203
    what new info? other than him getting his guns back?
     
  5. MarineOne

    MarineOne Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2009
    Messages:
    361
    This guy NEEDS to speak with an attorney, NOW!

    Whomever made the call to the police should be charged with slander, and if they made a written statement also libel, because not only has he been embarrassed in his own community ..... he's going to be hard pressed to find work now. A simple Google search will pull a ton of news articles about him, and forum posts like this one. If it was someone from his work (think about it, folks ... someone from his job had to have done this to him) then quite possibly he has a case against his former employer/supervisor as well.

    Do I think he needs to sue the local PD? No because they were doing their job, although they were acting on a false tip.

    Could they have handled it better? Definately!

    Do I think a settlement by the local PD could happen? I can't see why he wouldn't be getting a six figure check from the city for his "troubles" to avoid a lawsuit, and if they didn't come up with some kind of "apology" then they need to be taken to court.
     
  6. cassandrasdaddy

    cassandrasdaddy Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,203
    is there some news source i'm missing? he may well have been wronged but so far that comes under the heading facts not in evidence
     
  7. Jefferson Herb

    Jefferson Herb Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2008
    Messages:
    391
    Location:
    south west state of Jefferson
    volunteer

    Volunteer: You call them,Confiscation:They ask you ,refusing the answer no.
    WE HAVE OUR FIRST RESIDENTS FOR THE JEFFERSON STATE PRISON!!!
     
  8. ATBackPackin

    ATBackPackin Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2009
    Messages:
    1,125
    Location:
    Valley Forge, PA.
    Voluntary


    With armed swat that doesn't seem to voluntarily to me.
     
  9. cassandrasdaddy

    cassandrasdaddy Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,203
    as opposed to unarmed swat? what exactly did happen at his house did they go in and jack him up? or call him on the phone and ask him to come out. seems either there is info i can't find or artistic license being used
     
  10. Shadow 7D

    Shadow 7D Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2008
    Messages:
    7,005
    Location:
    Frozen North
    Yep, and now "Big Brother" will pay the armed citizen for the "harm" inflicted on him in violating his liberties because this is the US of A and not some banana republic....
     
  11. danez71

    danez71 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    4,574
    Location:
    CAAZ;TX?
    fact vs media

    It seems most people are focusing on what the reporter said vs what the police said.

    And I quote:
    Reporter says in the 1st sentence.... "The Medford man whose firearms were seized by police Monday when he was taken into protective custody has asked for their return and police say they will comply with the request."

    And I quote again:
    The police said.... "All the firearms were seized for "safekeeping" and the man was taken to Rogue Valley Medical Center for a mental-health evaluation, police said. He was released several hours later."


    There is a difference between the two statements.

    Since my tin hat is out for polishing..... I'll take the police's statement as being accurate over the reporters.
     
  12. wishin

    wishin Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2009
    Messages:
    2,430
    Location:
    Georgia
    LOL. I'm surprised he didn't voluntarily confess to some wrongdoing!
     
  13. Officers'Wife

    Officers'Wife Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Messages:
    3,452
    Location:
    A long way from heaven and too close to Chicago
    The sad part of it is, should the guy sue them (his only recourse) this will not bother the actual offenders. He will not be awarded the officers money, or for that matter the department's money. The money will come out of the pockets of his friends and neighbors in the state of Oregon and if that department is receiving 'stimulus' funds out of the pocket of every taxpaying citizen of the United States.

    If the state follows the example of the fed the principles involved would receive commendations a few months after the litigation. At worst the offenders will receive a paid vacation (suspended with pay) while being 'investigated' by the minions that ordered the travesty.
     
  14. Officers'Wife

    Officers'Wife Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Messages:
    3,452
    Location:
    A long way from heaven and too close to Chicago
    Your option, I have to ask myself which of the two is in CYA mode. In today's climate, journalist that criticize the actions of the gov tend to have their ducks in a row. Police statements... the term 'reasonable deception echoes like a 45-70 shot in a steel grain bin.
     
  15. ants

    ants Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2007
    Messages:
    3,710
    Overview of the new information

    cassandra's daddy - Hi, buddy. How's it going? I enjoy your willingness to question things. I always have.


    When I read the initial report that he was thought to be a dangerous man with guns, I refused to draw a conclusion because we hardly had any information (go see my post in the other thread). We didn't know if the man was mentally stable, or unstable. We didn't know if this was an unwarranted search and seizure, or if he walked out of the house scratching his head and told them that they could take the weapons for a day of safekeeping. We knew almost nothing about him, nor the incident itself.

    The current report states that he was released from the Medical Center in three hours. That information tells us that under Oregon law he was not in bad mental condition (however Oregon law defines it). Futhermore, police are willing to give his guns back immediately; that probably wouldn't be prudent unless their investigation cleared him of any wrong doing.


    So what is this "New Info" we have? In my mind, the new information is that the initial report was false. At least in the opinion of the Rogue Valley Medical Center, and the Medford Police Department.
     
  16. cassandrasdaddy

    cassandrasdaddy Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,203
    thanks i'm glad hes out. and hope i stay that way. and i'm glad he gets his property back subject to the same caveat. what i would love to know is what he said or what it was claimed he said that got him checked out. i've gotten a few folks committed and it was never rubber stamped. in my cases i was subject to almost as much evaluation as the folks i got into treatment. and rightly so. if this guy got loud and proud and made some kinda threat in anger he owns what happened as a result. seen it many times over the years. guy tells the guy firing him "i'm gonna kill you!" they are usually all mouth but nowadays it pays to find out and i believe in holding folks accountable for running their mouth. and then again i remember seeing a scene like this at a hotel i worked at guy came back walked by the security desk and when they tackled him he dropped his uzi. or the 90 pound salad girl who when the chef fired her went out to her car came back pounded on the back door and when the chef hollers "what?" at her through the door she put a bunch of .32 into the steel door. the tin foil folks would do well to get a lil more info before they jump. when they jump and then facts that don't serve the cause/delusion surface they damage le cause and their general credibility. if needed i can go dig up a rouges gallery of overreaction and out and out lunacy just from this site. if i want the hat trick let me go put on boots and a rain coat and wander over to infowars. i hate it when i find info wars "quality " here. rtkba arms doesn't need anymore poster children for better regulated meds
     
  17. Mad Chemist

    Mad Chemist Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2005
    Messages:
    1,197
    Location:
    OR
    I think this sheds a little more light on the subject.

    From the Medford Mail Tribune:

    Man, guns held by police spur controversy
    Law enforcement officials say he could have been a 'danger to others' and his surrender was voluntary

    March 12, 2010
    Anita Burke
    By Anita Burke
    Mail Tribune

    MEDFORD — A phone call from a police negotiator that jolted David J. Pyles awake in the predawn hours of Monday continues to jangle the nerves of observers monitoring the way authorities took the Medford man into protective custody and seized his firearms.

    Pyles came forward Thursday to reclaim his legally purchased weapons, publicly identifying himself in an e-mail sent to Medford police and forwarded to state legislators and selected media outlets.
    Related Stories

    He also said he has contacted the Oregon Firearms Federation for possible legal assistance. Pyles directed questions to that group and said he would make only limited statements until he had consulted with an attorney.

    Kevin Starrett, director of the Canby-based lobbying organization — which also has a foundation for protecting gun rights through court cases — had been monitoring the incident that landed Pyles in the hospital for a mental health evaluation and resulted in five of his guns being held by police for "safekeeping."

    "It's chilling," he said.

    "I don't know if this is just a gun case," Starrett said. "It's about whether your freedom can be taken away without a criminal case or charges against you."

    Starrett recounted the details of the case that Pyles shared with him. The federation had agreed not to identify him, so Starrett didn't use Pyles' name, but in the wake of Pyles' own public statements, the Mail Tribune is naming him.

    Pyles told Starrett that he had a conflict with a superior at work, but was working to resolve it through union processes.

    The Oregon Department of Transportation confirmed that Pyles has worked there as a planner since February 2004. ODOT Communications Director Patrick Cooney said the department couldn't discuss personnel or security matters.

    Pyles told Starrett he initially thought the early morning call must be a prank, but looked out to see his yard surrounded by police.

    "They asked him to come out and said they wouldn't handcuff him, arrest him or take him off the property," Starrett recounted.

    However, Pyles said, he then was handcuffed and taken to Rogue Valley Medical Center for evaluation.

    "Because we had information that he could be a danger to others, we wanted a medical professional to evaluate him," Medford police chief Randy Schoen said.

    Police have maintained that Pyles' surrender was voluntary, but Starrett noted that an intimidating presence of officers with rifles and SWAT gear can force people to agree to things they wouldn't normally do.

    "The thing that is really troubling to us is that this was not an arrest," he said. "People in protective custody don't even have the rights a person who has been arrested does."

    When undergoing a mental health screening, a person doesn't have a guaranteed right to an attorney, for example, he said.

    The evaluation took several hours and Pyles was released before noon on Monday.

    Starrett expressed concern that police hadn't offered a clear explanation of what prompted their action.

    David Fidanque, executive director of the Oregon chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, said his organization wasn't likely to get involved in an incident of this type, but said Pyles could have a case against police if he were taken into custody improperly.

    He noted that police can't take people into custody based only on a concern, but said he understood their worries that someone could be hurt.

    Reach reporter Anita Burke at 541-776-4485, or e-mail [email protected].

    Link to the original article
    http://www.mailtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100312/NEWS/3120325



    It seems that this was a result of a feud with his coworker. Since they both work for a state agency, it seems Mr. Pyle will be enjoying a very lucrative settlement once all the litigation is settled.
     
  18. cassandrasdaddy

    cassandrasdaddy Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,203
    it still all depends on what was said
    i'm sure mr pyles felt he was reasonable. i had a friend who worked for the postal service, at his third location (he had issues at the previous 2 all the other folks fault of course). in this third and final episode before he stomped out he told his boss he was gonna kill him but first kill all those nasty lil children of his. thats a quote from my friend. he got a visit from a couple postal inspectors and retired on mental disability.his union defended him to the end and we pay for his disability. mt pyles might just be angling for a settlement or to force them to take him back or give him a deal through his union. i don't know but there is a much better chance to find out if this moves into court. if his lawyers try to keep it quiet i will assume he showed his butt in some way. if he was truly blameless they will try to push as much info out as they can to pressure management. management and the docs are bound by law and procedure to keep their mouth shut.


    oh yea my friend and his union said it was all the other guys fault. in over a dozen incidents with almost 2 dozen people at 3 different locations. a funny twist is that i 6 of the incidents the union also represented the folks he had issues with and they were in the right too according to the union
     
  19. ants

    ants Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2007
    Messages:
    3,710
    Let's be careful about criticizing other people who jump to an uninformed conclusion. A lawyer who tries to keep a matter quiet may have a hundred different valid reasons, including respect for client confidentiality. That doesn't mean the client 'showed his butt.'
     
  20. SharpsDressedMan

    SharpsDressedMan member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2007
    Messages:
    5,957
    Location:
    NE Ohio
    Officers'wife, regarding the awards of money over wrongdoings by the officers, it may not come out of the officer's salary, but other things will result from an award to the victim/plaintiff. ANY money that is awarded to the victim will come from the government or their insurers. This will get attention from the governing parties (councilmen, trustees, commissioners, etc), the ones who appropriate money and oversee the department heads. They WILL evaluate whether agency heads had their brains in use, and might push for disciplinary action towards the abusive officer(s), suspension, or dismissal, especially if it costs them a lot of money. That WILL directly affect the pay of the officers in question. While they might be somewhat protected from the civil process initiated by the complainant, they will still be subject to action from their employer, civil service commission, etc. Personally, if they ever do something like that to me, they would have to wonder if they are now making my "short list". Did they stop a potential armed conflict, or push someone over the edge for the next one?
     
  21. SharpsDressedMan

    SharpsDressedMan member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2007
    Messages:
    5,957
    Location:
    NE Ohio
    Question here. What would the Medford police have done if he had yawned and said he was just going to go back to sleep when they first called him?
     
  22. cassandrasdaddy

    cassandrasdaddy Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,203
    client confidentiality will be out the door during discovery. a good land sharks job is to win at some level for his client. a win means a check. if they get it as a settlement so much the better. and they will let be known that which will help them achieve that end and try to suppress that which will harm. i hope there is a case made so we get a chance to get past the hippa laws and the confidential personnel matters shield. then MAYBE we learn the truth
     
  23. Guns and more

    Guns and more member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    Messages:
    1,929
    Can someone tell me how the police knew this?
    I thought the gun store kept the form in their bound book, and the NCIS check was not public information.
    So..............does this mean your police department knows when you buy a gun and what you bought?
    Guess what, they can lock you up. It's called "Baker Act" and they can lock you in a mental ward for 72 hours against your will.
     
  24. SharpsDressedMan

    SharpsDressedMan member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2007
    Messages:
    5,957
    Location:
    NE Ohio
    That 72 hours crap is at the will of the mental facility. Apparently, he was "sane" enough to be released in 3-4 hours. I believe the police still need a reasonable "casue" to do that, not just grab anyone and lockemup.
     
  25. Officers'Wife

    Officers'Wife Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Messages:
    3,452
    Location:
    A long way from heaven and too close to Chicago
    Myself, I wonder strongly about what is considered probable cause for such a hold. I've often commented that my brother is going to kill himself with his old car. If such an offhand comment could result in a psych hold Oregon is in trouble plenty.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice