diablo982

What government agent is going to be interested in tracking my travels, cell phone calls, computer usage, etc? There is NOTHING to see with me, move along folks! Also, where is the manpower going to come from to conduct surveillance on every US citizen? Will there be one government agent for every three citizens, five citizens? We would need to create a new government agency (bureau of snooping affairs?) just to watch everyone and staff it with 60,000,000 employees. I think some people need to loosen the tin foil hats.

I can't register my frying pans. The IRS took them all until I settle up on my unpaid taxes.

I took the time to read Section 40304 of Transportation bill S. 1813, which is referenced in the news links as being the IRS gun seizure bill. I was wondering what wording the bill would use to justify violating the 2nd Amendment, or at a minimum suspend due process. It turns out, there is nothing in the bill which even mentions firearms. The only thing it says is a person deemed past due $50,000 in taxes can be reported to the Department of State to have your passport suspended. Kind of like having you tags suspended for unpaid parking tickets. Maybe there is an argument for lack of due process, however your passport can be restored for humanitarian reasons or if you are regularly making payments to settle the tax debt. I'm not sure what the link is between firearms and passports. I got my first passport 2 years ago and have owned guns for 24, so I don't see the connection. If someone sees something I overlooked, feel free to correct me.

Exactly. This a non-local news story about how cops suck. It was posted because everyone ( myself included) loves dogs, so we can all get super pissed off at the officer. Then a lot will read this and post comments like "nothing will happen cause he's a cop" , "Its turning into a police state" "I'd shoot the LEO if he tried that with me." My point is, these threads pop up all the time, and as far as I can tell they are for the sole purpose to get people fired up against cops. We have a subfourm for politics, which is definitely far right wing. If that's your cup of tea, hangout and post there. If your are independent or to the left, don't. I am just suggesting that a lot of our members like to crap on cops, so why not give them there own subfourm? If you want to read it, click on it. If not, pass.

Here's a story from last week about a neighbor shooting a retired LEO's dog. http://www.fox16.com/news/local/story/Neighbor-shoots-and-kills-family-dog/baQOrxtL_EO1K9aECr-5UQ.cspx People shooting dogs unfortunately happens all the time.

TGO should consider starting a sub-forum called "cop-bashing." Just to make it easier to consolidate all these threads. I'm serious.

When I was 11, I went to my friends house to hang out. We were bored and before I knew it, we were in his parents bedroom so he could show off dad's Ruger .44 single action. The gun was in a clear bag taped at the end. My friend proceeded to show me how you can cock the hammer and pull the trigger without opening the bag, so his dad wouldn't find out. He had no idea if the gun was loaded or not, just that he was playing with something forbidden so it must be fun. Luckily the gun was not loaded, or at least not the first two chambers before I told him to stop. At my house, my kids were taught at a very early age that guns are to be respected, however I've taken a slightly different approach. I told them anytime they want to see my guns, just ask. My son had brief interest, so I broke out the guns maybe 3 or 4 times total. My daughter never expressed any interest in seeing them. Right now, the kids are about as excited at seeing my guns as playing with the house keys. My cell phone is far more interesting to them than my 1911. My kids will shoot with me, but the forbidden fruit which always seems to attract kids is gone. When they have friends over, the guns are locked up and out of sight.

I picked up my gun about ten days after my original posting. They had it for roughly eight weeks total. The gun came out great and they were really good to work with. I would definitely recommend them.

I have Rock Island Armory 1911 and love it. I beliveve the Metro Arms is very comparable with a different finish and hammer design. Belshire Hardware is local and sells budget 1911's at some of the best prices in the country. (I believe they sell on gunbroker.) D and T also has good prices / selection and are very helpful. They don't try to upsell if your budget doesn't allow it.

This is a perfect example of when you should give the responding officers a broad overview. "These guys broke into my house and I defended myself." Make no further statements until you have a day or two to collect your thoughts and get legal representation. His story about the pickup truck guy could be problematic. Rest and an attorney could have helped him articulate better.

You are on point with "the facts of the case", but that is exactly what this comes down to. There is no smoke and mirrors with helping a jury decide who is credible and who is not. Barring independent witnesses, it's a convicted felon's word against a non-convicted felon's word. If I'm on a jury, I'm sorry but I am giving no weight to any felon's testimony unless it can be backed up by someone else. (If an LEO has previously lied or provided false information under oath or in a report, I'm giving no weight to their testimony either.) There's another active post on this forum where the OP had cars approach him from the front and back and "pin him in." Two guys with "hoodies" jumped out and quickly approach his car. He brandished a gun and they went back to their cars and raced off. What if the occupants complained on the poster and he was arrested for aggravated assault? If you were on the jury, do you think it would be relevant to know that one of the "hoodies" served time for armed robbery and the other guy had a felony weapons conviction? For that matter, if you were the District Attorney and you knew about the victim's past record, would you even let this case go before a grand jury?

Larry- Its a good thing you were not an off-duty police officer. Half the board would be calling for your arrest on aggravated assault charges! Seriously though, glad everything worked out.

I heard something from a person I consider to be a reliable source. I debated posting it on the internet because it's short on details and hasn't been verified by anyone else, so take it for what it's worth: 1. The "victim" in this case is a parolee from Texas with multiple felony convictions 2. He is described physically as a "big guy." 3. Witnesses are not supporting his version of events Here's my take on the three things I was told. If it's true about the victim and his lengthy criminal history, he will be a nightmare witness for the prosecution. If the defense attorney can get his criminal record into evidence, it looks awful to the jury and shows he might be biased against cops. I don't know what is considered a "big guy", but if he is much larger, taller, muscular than the officer he had a confrontation with, the officer would have a reasonable defense that he felt threatened by the alleged victim. Finally, I don't know if the lack of witness support means they couldn't find witnesses, or if the witnesses said Estep started the confrontation, got out of his car first, etc. If Estep started the confrontation, this case is going nowhere. If there are no independent witnesses, then it's a convict's word against a veteran police officer's word. I didn't post this sooner because I wanted to see if the officer was indicted first. Since so much time has passed with no action, I'm starting to believe what I heard. This case should have gone before the grand jury by this point if it was going to happen at all. It will be interesting to see if someone will make an official announcement about the findings.

Yes, and Pat Tillman was mistakenly shot and killed by his fellow Army Rangers. Would you like to make the same comment about them too? Its very easy to monday morning QB when we weren't there.

That code spells it out (except if they are undercover police officers, then they are exempt.) So go ahead and get their personnel files. I'm interested to hear what you find, good or bad. Of course that might be hard to do without their names. Is there a code section which says the police chief has to give you names of the files you wish to review? I think it's up to you to figure that out. If you can quote that section I'm all onboard with you. If I'm the chief, I'll be glad to make a statement and release information if wrongdoing is uncovered. If my officers did nothing wrong, I'd protect them from the cop-bashers of the world.

I guess we will have to disagree on giving up ones privacy just because you work for the government. I know there is no law or agreement which gives these guys less rights to privacy than the rest of us. My main issue is the investigation isn't over. How about I go to the media and accuse you of sending me child porn via email? Without any investigation/confirmation, I think your full name and employer should be posted for all to see. Honestly, does that seem fair to you?

These officers pay taxes too and cancel out your opinion. It seems the same faction who doesn't want the government violating their privacy has no problem violating these officer's privacy. If they are charged, post their names, if not, leave them alone.

Estep's name is being "dragged though the dirt" because he went to the media and got this story published. Kind of reminds me of idiot politicians who run for public office, then get exposed nationally for their extramarital affairs. If you don't want people to know your business, don't draw attention to yourself. The information about his criminal history is public record because he was charged. If the officers are charged, their names will be released to the public. If not, it's nobody's business.

I contacted the reporter who broke the original story. He started working on it Friday afternoon, and as I thought, the only person he spoke with was Mr. Estep. (The Knoxville PD references from his story are from a police report Estep made.) He doesn't know who exited the vehicle first, what the 911 caller observed, if the officers contacted anyone, etc. He also said he didn't get a response from Oak Ridge PD before printing the story. He did say he has been off work, assigned to other stories, etc, but another reporter would be following up. I told him there was a lot of interest in this story and hoped he would print any updates if they became available. The bottom line is you have Estep's account of what happened, nothing more, nothing less. Question it or accept it as gospel (or somewhere in-between.) I'll be keeping a close eye on the media to see if we can get any updates.

DaveTN- That's good food for thought. I think you and I both know the answer to this one: It depends. I know several posters have indicated that as a HCP they would be locked up on the spot. I think one poster indicated if you display your weapon, you need to shoot??? otherwise is stays holstered. If you can reasonably articulate a threat of serious bodily harm, drawing your weapon in self-defense is not illegal. The cops will not necessarily lock you up on the spot if your gun is pointed at someone. But as a HCP, you better be prepared to explain your actions. There is no hard and fast rule to say when you crossed the line; it falls back on common sense. Unfortunately not everyone has common sense.

Where in the story does it say the officers didn't report it? How do you detain someone when you are off-duty, outside your jurisdiction and probably don't have handcuffs? Keep pointing your gun at them and try to prone them out? What if they don't prone out and come at you, then what? If I'm off-duty, I'm only using my weapon to protect myself or my family. I'm either shooting someone or brandishing it to get the threat away from me. Just like a HCP holder. In this case, they got the threat away from them. NOBODY was shot and the incident de-esclated without anybody getting hurt. If it were me, I'd head to the nearest police station if I knew where it was and make a report. Maybe the Oak Ridge officers did that. Again, there is nothing in the story which says they didn't report it.

I wasn't there but know how it could've happened where the officers weren't necessarily wrong. What if Estep is the one acting aggresively, giving the finger, following the officers to the stop light, etc. He (Estep) gets out of the car first and starts to approach the officer's car. The officers have cars in front of them at the stop light so driving away is not an option. If this guy has been acting aggressively, jumps out of his car and approaches in a pissed-off demeanor could they be in fear of bodily harm? Anybody know how big Estep is? How about the size of the officers? Police are trained to get out of their cars if danger is approaching (don't let your car be your coffin.) so if they couldn't drive away, they were absolutely tactically right to get out of their car. And depending on Estep's size, demeanor, location of his hands, etc. they could have every reason to fear for their safety. Since they are off-duty, they probably didn't have a baton, pepper spray, tazer to fall back on. It was either a fist-fight or repel the attack by displaying a gun. Also, where in the story does it say the officers didn't report the incident to law enforcement? They didn't stick around, but chose to diffuse the situation by driving away once they got Estep back in his car. They could have driven down the road (apparently with Estep in hot pursit after knowing they were armed) and called Knoxville PD later. Maybe that's how Knoxville PD confirmed they were Oak Ridge officers. More over, since they are being accused of a crime, the officers would be well advised to make no statement until they have lawyers. (See the previous thread about talking to the cops after a SD shooting.) These officers could be absolutely wrong, made an unprovoked attack on an innocent person, and deserve to lose their jobs, prosecuted, etc. But until I know all the facts, I will reserve judgement. Based on what I've seen of Estep's account, I'm not giving too much weight to his side of the story.

"They were pulling out of the Waffle House," Estep said. "I didn't let them cut me off." "I've been sucker-punched before," Estep said. "When I got out of the car, the passenger pointed a gun at my face. The driver told me they were police officers." Don't read too much into this story. This guy called the media and gave HIS account as to what transpired. I can't speak to the officers temperament because they haven't given their story to the media (and probably never will.) I can say that Mr. Estep sounds like a hothead who finds his way towards trouble. I would wait and see if the officers are charged with anything before I gave any credence to this guy's story.

I dropped off a 1911 there the first week of November for refinishing and a new front sight installation. I'm hoping it will be ready by the last week in December because I will be in the Greeneville area again and don't want to pay shipping costs. I sent them an e-mail on Friday after business hours checking on the status. Hopefully I will hear something soon, but from what I've read on other forms e-mail is not supposed to be very responsive. Everything I have heard is their final product is top-notch.

With all due respect as a former homicide detective, I can tell you making NO STATEMENT at all COULD lead to you being arrested for assault/murder charges. Let's say an officer shows up to your house for a shooting. You put the gun on the table, put your hands up and say, "I'm not speaking with you until I talk to my attorney." The officer is then on his/her own to figure out what happened. If the gun belongs to you, you are the only person in the house, etc. that could be enough probable cause to arrest you. For all the police know, you and your roommate got into a fight and you shot him without reason. They are generally reluctant to let shooting suspects go with a promise of "...I'll get back to you tomorrow." Once you are arrested you will be booked, given a bond, etc. If you decide to make bond, the bail bondsmen are not going to give you a refund if the charges are dropped. (They charge 10 percent of the bond amount, i.e. $50,000 bond = $5,000 to bond company.) The next day your attorney will show up to the jail and schedule an interview with the police. You will be shackled, led to an interview room, and given a chance to explain yourself. You can then tell the detective the intruder broke into your house and your were defending yourself. Based on your initial interaction with the police they will not take your statement as fact, but will follow up on leads and determine how plausible it is. Assuming your story is true, they will confer with the District Attorney and the charges will be dropped. Of course you could be sitting in jail for some time before that happens, but you probably won't be indicted and it will be over. Maybe it's just me, but I think making it clear to the responding officers that the bad guy broke into my house would be worth avoiding all the hassle. You don't need to give a detailed statement, but at least point them in the right direction so you don't take a ride to jail. Give the detailed statement with your lawyer.