Utah's famous "Super Dell" up on weapon charges

Status
Not open for further replies.
Interesting situation. I've never thought much more of guy than that he is a clown - and that only because of the content and demeanor of his commercials. (I think they're hilarious!) I don't know him at all...

From what I've seen reported so far, it seems that he may have acted appropriately and the trio overstepped. (with the rock brandishing for one thing) Dell may very well have had not other choice - he was backed into a corner and forced to be defensive...

So assault charges may very well be dropped. However, it is possible to prosecute a wreckless driving charge based on witnesses statements - speed is not the only factor or even a neccessity. The trio should have followed, called police, and pointed out the suspect. Then made good statements 'cause it'll be up to them to prove the case. They should have done nothing more.

Not enough information to know what'll happen yet, but I'll be waiting to see...
 
First of all, Dell is an A$$. He is an elitest scumbag who thinks because he has a chain of successful businesses that he is better than the rest of us normal scum. He is abusive to his employees and cutomers. Though not an employee or customer (and never will be) have seen him in action. Very un-impressive.

When the facts do come out in court, both parties may (and based on the actions of the three idiots who chased him down as they appear now) and should be charged. Neither of them acted in such a way to help diffuse the situation and in looking at Dells attitude here (not to mention elsewhere) he thinks his own superiority will get him thru.

If nothing else they will probably yank Dells CCW, and probably probation because he used a gun. To top it off he then made very stupid comments about the cops and the city. Draper does not take kindly to people calling their supremacy and authority into question and seem to have no problems using their position to put the smack down on people they dont like. But that is another issue entirely. I wonder how probation will affect his being licensed to sell guns..... :evil:

Dell is also known around the LEO circles and Security companies to be a loose cannon. He has responded to alarms at his businesses several times, and tried to clear the building with the security guards and Cops. In speaking to one officer about him (before this event) he was on a call where Dell tried to bring "HIS Constitutional rights to protect his business from criminals" into play and clear the building with the cops. They relieved him of his firearms and made him wait outside. I have also spoken with others who made the comment that Dell "is just itching to shoot someone". Take IFWIW, but I am not so sure him loosing his CCW is such a bad idea.

Now his previous criminal record is out. In addition to his numerous speeding violations he has these firearms charges:

1992-carring a concealed weapon without a permit. Dismissed after probation.

1993- threatening a person with a firearm. Guilty but dismissed after probation.

1994-Carrying a concealed firearm. Guilty, 30 days in jail.

1995-Making a pipe bomb. Guilty, jail suspended.

Since his story has aired the local TV stations have received "numerous" calls from citizens and LEOs telling tales of other run ins with Dell and firearms. Since the power of money can buy a plea bargin, none of his charges were felonies and he was able to get his CCW.

But the local rumor mill says Dell does not own his gun store because of his past. He could not get licensed by the ATF. He could be facing more felony charges if he or someone in his company filled out the forms to get licensed by the ATF with false info. I will keep everyone updated as the story developes.
 
I hate to say anyone needs to have their CCW yanked, but this guy sounds like an accident waiting to happen. I say accident, but I mean a well thought out, ignorant decision waiting to happen. I know I am treading on thin ice here, I don't know the guy or what he is or isn't capable of. So I won't pass judgement. Hopefully the court will find all the facts and co-ordinate their decision appropriately.

I hope he is not as irresponsible and hot-headed as they make him sound. (Or he makes himself sound, for that matter.)
 
Let us take it as a given that freak-boy Dell was driving 50-100MPH through the neighborhood. Just how fast did the three stooges drive to catch up & block him in? Dell was driving a Jag, a vehicle known to be designed for fast driving. did they catch up to him in their matching Plymouth Volares?

Even if Dell is a jerk, jerks have a right to defend themselves & thier family.
 
It's getting tougher and tougher to defend the goober but the fact is the above post is correct. Jerks do have rights, too. I'll also admit that i don't have a big problem with the three clowns who caught him, assuming their initial part of the tale is true. A little vigilantism is a good thing. OTOH, don't whine after the fact considering they had to be guilty of at least similar levels of stupidity.

Lastly, we used to build pipe bombs all the time. And lots of other things that went BOOM. Blew the windows out of a friend's house once. Blew a Farmall tractor over, too. We had a..umm...blast...doing it. :) So I'll have to take the "pipebomb" thing with a grain of salt.
 
Sounds like business as usual. They'll let him skate again and again when he should be learning valuable lessons about the costs of criminal behavior; then, just when they've got him convinced he can do no wrong, they'll snap back the leash on what amounts to a pretense.
Yeah, sounds about right.
 
I'm thinking if he got the ticket thrown out, then the other dudes would legally have had no reason to corner him with his daughter, therefore they would have been committing assault in most states, which would exonerate him from any bogus "brandishing" charges. IANAL.


Edit: OK, now I somehow missed several posts prior to this one...if he has a record of being "stupid with a gun" then I may retract my previous statement.
 
Several people who were not involved but witnessed the incident have come forward and said Dell have several opotunities to with draw but did not. Instead he acted like he did in the clip and in his commercials. He was an arrogant and beligerant A$$. Maybe thats why the cops did not charge the others involved.

If you drive up thru the neighborhood in question you would see that it would not take the residents much at all to catch up with him. There is pretty much only one way in and out, and the road is not that long.

But like he said, witnesses lie and I am sure this is a big conspiracy to get him thrown in jail.

I am glad you were able to make pipe bombs when you were a kid. That does not change the fact that it is not only not very bright to do it is also a crime. One he was charged with.

I dont know why some people feel like they have to defend this guy. He has a proven track record of behaving badly with a firearm, and by all accounts is a menace to society. Especially behind the wheel. Just because he has made substancial political contributions and has spoken out in favor of the 2A does not mean that he is someone who could or should be trusted with a gun. His actions show just the opposite....
 
What I was thinking...

Lastly, we used to build pipe bombs all the time. And lots of other things that went BOOM

I agree with the jist of what you are saying. But as I was just thinking and reading in your post, we all were doing the same with one caveat - we were on farms out in the middle of nowhere. Not in or around a populated place like a trailer park. :scrutiny:

Just food for thought. ;)
 
Also...

I am glad you were able to make pipe bombs when you were a kid. That does not change the fact that it is not only not very bright to do it is also a crime. One he was charged with.
-pvtpyle

Whether it is bright or not, is certainly a matter of opinion. I hear people say that simply owning a firearm is not to bright either. It is not something that is good or bad. Building pipe bombs, shooting guns, driving down the road, speeding, eating fried food, etc., has risks. In this case, it seems, by stating whether you think any one of those actions is "not very bright" you are simply making a value judgement of a particular person who took that action. And it comes off like a personal attack. Don't get me wrong, I am not personally attacking you. I just wanted to point out that the strong points of your thread are diluted and it takes away from the credibility of those points.


I dont know why some people feel like they have to defend this guy. He has a proven track record of behaving badly with a firearm, and by all accounts is a menace to society. Especially behind the wheel. Just because he has made substancial political contributions and has spoken out in favor of the 2A does not mean that he is someone who could or should be trusted with a gun. His actions show just the opposite....

I don't think most people are defending him. They, as well as I, (are/am) attempting to defend his right to carry a firearm until proven that he has broken the law and/or acted in a way that would grant the state to retract his right to carry concealed weapons lawfully. That is all.

Now with that said, I'll make my value judgement - the guy sounds like a real jerk. I wouldn't want to listen to his bs more than I did in the news interview. I'll bet you are right. He probably did act like a moron and that had a lot to do with why he got charged. So I am not in disagreement with you there :D
 
Whether it is bright or not, is certainly a matter of opinion. I hear people say that simply owning a firearm is not to bright either. It is not something that is good or bad. Building pipe bombs, shooting guns, driving down the road, speeding, eating fried food, etc., has risks. In this case, it seems, by stating whether you think any one of those actions is "not very bright" you are simply making a value judgement of a particular person who took that action

I see what you are saying. That said I have seen a lot of people who thought they knew what they were doing with explosives blow themselves and others up. The biggest one was a guy trying to crack open a piece of ordnance that was near a wedding party. When it went up it left a crater 4 feet deep and 11 feet across. It also killed several members of the wedding party. As it would turn out later, the bomb was a big ol cluster bomb that did not seperate. When one went, they all went. Another genius was making pipe bombs out of raod flares and UXO. It blew up a sizeable portion of an apartment complex outside the main gate. We lost several people (7 in one blast and 3 in another KIA 5 more WIA) attached to us because of other people who thought they knew who to handle and act around UXO. In talking with some EOD guys and hearing their stories (even worse) I stand by the statement that ANYONE who plays with explosive material without the proper training is doing something not very bright. I have done it myself (though mine was in another country and outside the jurisdiction of the ATF) in demilling hand grenades and RPG warheads. I did it under the supervision of Czech EOD guys. I am not sure if THAT was smart either..... :eek: But stating you did so here in the US, near others..... :banghead:

But back on topic we will see how the Super Dork thing plays out in court. He will probably buy his way out of it.
 
3 guys come at you in a threatening manner, they have you blocked in, they have no legal right to detain you, you have an 8 year old child with you.

Anybody that can't see justified use of deadly force has "Shiffer" brains

Sorry couldn't resisit
 
You'll have to aim that head-banging thing at an awful lot of people. Rural kids have been making things go boom by whatever methods they could dream up since, probably, man figured out how to make things go boom. Kids still do it with everything from chemistry sets to dad's black powder, "legality" not even being a thought.

I can't say I hope my son does it, I'd really prefer he doesn't, but OTOH I hope he's bright enough and curious enough to want to figure out and do "not very bright" things. That really goes along with something else my wife and I were talking about earlier tonite which I may start a thread on...
 
I stand by the statement that ANYONE who plays with explosive material without the proper training is doing something not very bright.

If I am taking your definition of "explosive material" correctly, I work with them, as well as a good part of the population of the world, everyday. First of all, I carry a gun with bullets (propellent that is contained), drive a car with gas - obviously (fuel that is contained), and use a cutting torch weekly (oxygen -for heaven sakes- and acetelyne, both flammable and contained). Quite frankly, they are all very explosive materials and they all could make very effective IEDs if implemented accordingly. Which I am sure you are aware of given your training and experience with the military.

I don't know what does or doesn't fall under your category or "proper training", but I do have common sense and a very good grasp of the energy that is required to set off the chemical reaction that would cause a flammable material to expand inside a closed container (or not, as the case may be) to cause an explosion.

Now I wasn't trained by the military to handle flammable/explosive materials, nor did I pay someone to train me. I also didn't receive "proper training" on how to drive a vehicle, use an acetylene torch, or shoot a gun. Furthermore I couldn't use all the proper jargon when describing how to use or operate all of the latter machinery or materials. But that doesn't mean that I don't know how to drive a car safely, use an acetylene torch safely and properly, or shoot a gun safely and properly. It also doesn't mean that I couldn't show someone else how to do so safely and properly.

That said I have seen a lot of people who thought they knew what they were doing with explosives blow themselves and others up. The biggest one was a guy trying to crack open a piece of ordnance that was near a wedding party. When it went up it left a crater 4 feet deep and 11 feet across. It also killed several members of the wedding party. As it would turn out later, the bomb was a big ol cluster bomb that did not seperate. When one went, they all went. Another genius was making pipe bombs out of raod flares and UXO. It blew up a sizeable portion of an apartment complex outside the main gate. We lost several people (7 in one blast and 3 in another KIA 5 more WIA) attached to us because of other people who thought they knew who to handle and act around UXO. In talking with some EOD guys and hearing their stories (even worse

You cannot make an equal comparison of handling UXO (unexploded ordinance) that has been armed and deployed to a pipe bomb that you have personally built in your presence in a controlled enviroment.

But stating you did so here in the US, near others

So you are saying that you never have broken the law here in the U.S.? Around other people?
Given it was provable, I would put a good amount of money that you have done the very same on virtually a daily basis while endangering the lives of other people to some degree by doing so. Laws are made so that you will not infringe on the rights of others. When you drive your car in excess of the speed limit you are breaking the law. In this case you are endangering the lives of others. Technically, the law is on the books for the same reasons. But most people get away with breaking both laws most of the time because A. They aren't actually hurting someone when they do it. B. They don't get caught. However, if you do hurt someone - you most likely will get prosecuted for breaking the law, and the consequences will be very severe.

I can appreciate what you are saying. Trust me, I will never, ever, knowingly approach a UXO!! You have my word on that. And for the record, I didn't say that I set off pipe bombs in anyone else's presence. I wouldn't endanger other people's lives or well-being in such a manner, but I have the right to take any liberty I would like with my own ;)

BTW - Thanks for your service in the military! One of my friends was EOD? in the Navy. He always had a lot of good stories.
 
3 guys come at you in a threatening manner, they have you blocked in, they have no legal right to detain you, you have an 8 year old child with you.

Your ignoring one VERY important aspect of this case. The guy was performing actions that made three strangers feel the need to aggresively approach him, not to mention the fact that the presence of a child made their intervention all the more logical.

Jerk risking his own life = no intervention

Jerk risking life of a child = big time intervention, aggressive if necessary.

It is REALLY difficult to get the average American off the couch to do anything involving helping another person or protecting their neighborhood. The fact that this guy was behaving in a manner that was so outrageously stupid that three guys felt the need to intervene does not speak well for his common sense.
 
The guy was performing actions that made three strangers feel the need to aggresively approach him,
The starngers had no legal right or authority to detain. The should have followed taken the plate number and called those that do.
Driving too fast in a car puts a child in no where near the danger that putting her in the middle of a rumble does or putting her a situation that she is in a car that you are about to throw rocks at does

Feeling the need to act aggressive does not give you the legal right to, or deny me the right to respond in kind
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top