RE: “he spun around and achieved a position behind the Deputy” – That is not what the sheriff claims;
- ” A sheriff’s deputy in a New Orleans suburb was just about to search a suspect when the 19-year-old flipped around, pulled out a gun and reaching over the officer, shot him in the back, a Louisiana sheriff said”
- “But Neveaux flipped around, “went chest to chest” with the officer, pulled out a gun and shot him in the back.”
[-7] June 23, 2016 at 2:04pm
1 – what was the crime, under the requirements of Terry vs. Ohio, to make an investigatory detainment of this individual?
2 – Who shots a person in the back while being chest-to-chest with same person? If the round went through and through, you shoot yourself. Doesn’t make sense. Is there video of the actual shooting?
Now, answer me this, all supporters of criminal actions by LEO; Does the infringement of a civil right by an officer allow for the escalation of force by the citizen in self defense of those illegal actions?
1 – what was the crime, under the requirements of Terry vs. Ohio, to make an investigatory detainment of this individual?
This is a legitimate question-- the answer certainly cannot be, "because he looked nervous."
As to the shooting, he spun around and achieved a position behind the Deputy, and then shot him in the back.
RE: "he spun around and achieved a position behind the Deputy" - That is not what the sheriff claims;
- " A sheriff’s deputy in a New Orleans suburb was just about to search a suspect when the 19-year-old flipped around, pulled out a gun and reaching over the officer, shot him in the back, a Louisiana sheriff said"
- "But Neveaux flipped around, “went chest to chest” with the officer, pulled out a gun and shot him in the back."
Didn't even have to go that far...if he was facing the deputy so the deputy could frisk him, this POS could've pulled a gun from his waistband (in the back) reached over and shot the deputy at a downward angle, or perhaps when the deputy was reaching down to check his legs. This deputy should have had him spread out against the vehicle facing away from him. He may have had some interaction with this POS at some other time and didn't exercise due caution. Just a possibility, but would love to see the autopsy report.
 June 21, 2016 at 9:21pm
Re: “US has the most gun deaths per capita in the world” – I do believe this assertion to be in error. Further, if you take the following into consideration, you have further problems with your assertion;
- More people commit suicide with a firearm then homicide with a firearm
- 80% of all homicides with a firearm are committed by felons before pulling the trigger (3 studies – PA, FL, TX) (too young – below the age of 21 for carry/possession of a pistol / prior felony conviction which removes right to possess ANY firearm)
- If you take away felony possession of a firearm, suicide, justified, and police shootings, then you have left 1,500 total homicides with a firearm in the U.S. and territories (less than .00000407%). To give you an idea of the ludicrous numbers, as an example, of all yearly deaths, medical mistakes kill over 400,000 citizens per year (15% of all yearly deaths). So, explain why guns are such a hot issue for you on a subject where more people die falling off ladders than are shot and killed with a firearm?
 June 21, 2016 at 12:38pm
RE: “It also wasn’t written to allow arms in the hands of private citizens, it was written to allow state militia’s to be armed against civilian rebellion.” – Yes, lets look to history from our founders, shall we, to learn what the founders thought of firearms in citizens hands.
- 1774 the lawful government restricted firearm and gunpowder sales to citizens (gun control)
- 1775 Governor Thomas Gage issued a lawful order to destroy MILITARY GRADE firearms that the CITIZENS had amassed and where training with
- April 1775 the government employees attempted to execute those lawful orders and where met in a field in Concord and Lexington by citizens holding those MILITARY GRADE firearms. The “shot heard round the world” initiated the “revolutionary war” and the citizens used those MILITARY GRADE FIREARMS to kill the lawful government employees in the performance of their lawful duties.
- Notice that the Deceleration of Independence was over a year from being signed AFTER the war started.
- Notice that the war started less than one month after Patric Henry’s “Give me Liberty of Give me death” speech (23 March 1775) where he said: “…Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house?…Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs, and hugging the delusive phantom of Hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot?”
 June 21, 2016 at 9:14am
Yes, lets look to history from our founders point of view in order to understand what the 2nd amendment is suppose to be, shall we?
- In 1774 the lawful government restricted arms and powder to the people (gun control).
- In 1775 the lawful Governor Thomas Gage issued a lawful order to destroy the military grade firearms the citizens had amassed and where training with at Concord and Lexington.
- In April 1775, the employees of the lawful government attempted to execute those lawful orders upon the citizens, whereupon said citizens did take up those arms and did meet the government employees on a field. The “shot heard round the world” ensued the revolutionary war and the citizens did kill their lawful government employees in the performance of their lawful duties with military grade firearms.
So, tell us, what do you think the founders thought of citizens possessing MILITARY GRADE firearms?
 June 19, 2016 at 9:05pm
Re: “high capacity magazines” – First, who are you to dictate what I “bear”. What part of “shall not be infringed” do you not understand. Second, if you think that high capacity mags cannot be possessed, then because of our founders, you would have to remove the possession of those same rounds from the government, unless, of course, you hate our founders as I described in an earlier post.
RE: “But, anyone that needs a high capacity magazine to defend themselves needs more training.” – So, what your asserting is that multiple assailants never attack a home/business?
Re: “That AR-15 might as well be a pea shooter against modern military technology” – So, if there’s no problem, then why is it that you are so fearful of millions of citizens owning AR-15, or fully automatic rifles? Why are you so scared? (also noticed that you’ve never been in the military)
Re: “changing amendments” – Again you fail as the Bill of Rights CANNOT BE AMENDED without the entire constitution being destroyed. You still think that congress can amend the constitution, which if you actually took the time to read Article. V you would know that the 2/3 of the states must approve such change.
RE: “inalienable rights” – You are wrong. What you refer to is the Deceleration of Independence. Just do a google search on “inalienable rights bill of rights”
You keep failing, but that’s no surprise from someone who despises our founders.
 June 16, 2016 at 4:57pm
Re: changing the amendments
Although the founders gave a way to alter the constitution by changing the amendments, the Bill of Rights are not part of that change. If you actually read the preamble to the Bill of Rights you will find that without the promise of the inclusion of them, then the constitution itself would not be signed. Therefore, the inalienable rights codified within the Bill of Rights cannot be altered nor rescinded without the entire constitution falling.
Again, if you understood history you would know this. Yet again you reveal your ignorance to law and the supreme law of the land.
Now, if you want to rescind the U.S. Constitution, then fine, say that. Be a man, own it. Stop tap dancing around and say what you want.
Answer this, do you believe that government officials should have firearms that the citizens do not have? If so, why?
 June 16, 2016 at 4:45pm
RE: firearm relevance
It appears to me that you believe that the personal possession of firearms is no longer necessary and therefore should be removed as an inalienable right. If this is correct, then I point you to recent facts;
1 – The supreme court (SCOTUS) has flatly refused the idea, concept, nor understanding that the state, through LEO, are responsible/accountable for your safety. Are you aware that means that no one is accountable for your safety but you. The government has zero accountability nor responsibility to protect you and your family. To more recent account, LEO cannot be held legally accountable for ignoring calls from the public for active shooters.
2 – The firearm, as per the founders, was not only for personal protection but protection against an out of control government. If you think that our government cannot be “out of control” then explain why millions of people have died at the hands of their governments in the last 100 years?
Now, you have eluded that things change, and yes, when it comes to technology, I will agree. However, in 1775 there where murders, rapist, thieves, assaults, and out of control government murders. Tell us, what is different from 1775 and today when it comes to these things? Have we eradicated murder? Have we eradicated rape? Have we eradicated theft? Have we eradicated assaults? Have we eradicated murders committed by government employees?
 June 16, 2016 at 9:47am
Except you forgot about the “sin no more” part.
 June 16, 2016 at 9:45am
You are welcome to try. However, in this country, we have the 1st amendment which allows you to make such stupid statements and allows me to tell you that you should really read the Holy Bible with prayer and supplication.
Go in peace.
 June 16, 2016 at 9:44am
Read the second resolve. If the government doesn’t do their job, then the whole thing is bust.
And ... what do we know about the government doing its job to date?
 June 16, 2016 at 9:40am
Re: “At the end of the day, the Constitution was a piece of paper written by a bunch of old dudes to try and structure life in their time.”
So, you believe that people do not have a right to talk, defend themselves, have a religion that they follow in their daily lives, right to privacy, searches, jury trial, cruel treatment, nor to exist.
So, what kind of government do you want, specifically?
 June 16, 2016 at 8:43am
Maybe you missed your history class or your history class was taught by liars. Take a look at the actual orders of the Governor Thomas Gage. Those orders included the collection and destructions of the military grade firearms that the citizens had collected and trained with. Then, the lawful employees of the lawful government of the day, did attempt to execute those orders whereby the citizens did meet those government employees on the battle field and did fire upon and kill same with the same military grade firearms that the lawful government came to destroy.
 June 16, 2016 at 8:38am
Terrorist control, not gun control.
Maybe they think that outlawing murder stops good people from murdering.
Or outlawing theft stops good people from stealing.
Or outlawing rape stops good people from committing rape.
Or outlawing assault stops good people from assaulting others.
No, this is the globalists push to stop the largest threat to their control – the American people. The same ones that fought against them in April 1775.
Everyone seems to forget that in France, it was illegal for them to have FULLY AUTOMATIC MACHINE GUNS, yet the Islamic criminals got them.
But when Washington took the gig the whole thing was brand new. There is not a politician alive that's worthy of emptying Washingtons chamber pot.
Mike Rowe seems to be a great man, why would he get anywhere near Washington?
RE: "Mike Rowe seems to be a great man, why would he get anywhere near Washington?" - The ultimate dirty job!
You're right, Baltimore is close enough.
The dirtiest job.
Well, being president can be a "Dirty Job" and Mike has done plenty of those!
June 13, 2016 at 9:13am
Very astute and correct. However, I had implied based upon this situation where the same conditions exist (night, recent thefts in the area, noise, etc.). Although I would not come out of a house as in this specific situation, I would still have had the transgressors disarmed and on the ground regardless of what clothes they put on. If the “officers” attempted to issue commands, I would reject them and issued my own LAWFUL commands. If they refused or attempting to point their firearms at/near my direction then I would become in fear of my life and respond accordingly. You do what you have to do in order to protect yourself and your family. Cowering inside your home is never acceptable as your property extends beyond the confines of the home. You don’t wait till a person comes into one of your children’s bedroom window to act.
Be careful in your measured response and do not put yourself into a position where you cannot protect yourself nor your family. Outside speakers are wonderful addition to your home – if you know how to use them…….
 June 10, 2016 at 9:43pm
Verbal commands also don’t count if you are on the wrong property. The homeowner is the rightful authority on his own land, not the officer who is on the wrong property.
be very careful on your own land outside your home, as castle if your state has it only protects your home., stand you ground protects you if your are in a situation and the bad guy comes to you but leaving your home gun drawn can sometimes be grounds that you came to fight. so caution. rushing out gun flailing is dangerous whether it a bad guy or police in the dark.
Very astute and correct. However, I had implied based upon this situation where the same conditions exist (night, recent thefts in the area, noise, etc.). Although I would not come out of a house as in this specific situation, I would still have had the transgressors disarmed and on the ground regardless of what clothes they put on. If the "officers" attempted to issue commands, I would reject them and issued my own LAWFUL commands. If they refused or attempting to point their firearms at/near my direction then I would become in fear of my life and respond accordingly. You do what you have to do in order to protect yourself and your family. Cowering inside your home is never acceptable as your property extends beyond the confines of the home. You don't wait till a person comes into one of your children's bedroom window to act.
Be careful in your measured response and do not put yourself into a position where you cannot protect yourself nor your family. Outside speakers are wonderful addition to your home - if you know how to use them.......
 June 10, 2016 at 9:41pm
No, they are not REPORTING any body cam. Either it was “non-functional” (recently broken), or the video is already in the hands of the investigators.
 June 10, 2016 at 9:40pm
You are correct. So, what will this lead up to? Trigger happy homeowners who become in fear of their life due to officers actions. If I was on the jury, I would let him go (the homeowner who shot an officer who was on the wrong property).
“I was in fear of my life” works for everyone, not just LEO.