Police take mans guns out of his home

More on the "journalistic accuracy" in dispute here:

NBC5 reported today that inside the home, police found more than a dozen weapons, including a grenade launcher, assault rifles and handguns, according to Wheeling Police Deputy Chief John Stone.

The weapons were strewn throughout the home, some in plain view, Stone said. Police also found fireworks and fake law enforcement badges, he said. In Banks' vehicle, a S.W.A.T. uniform and other weapons were found, Stone said. Additional charges may be filed against Banks, who is not a law enforcement officer, he said.

NBC5 also reported that ATF agents were attempting to trace the weapons in a national database to determine whether they were obtained illegally, according to ATF Special Agent and spokesman Tom Ahern.

In addition to the 37 mm grenade launcher, police found four assault rifles, five semi-automatic handguns, and dozens of rounds of ammunition in Banks' home, Ahern told NBC5.

Several hunting knifes, night-vision goggles, a gas mask, disabling chemical spray, body armor and handcuffs also were found, he said.
Click to expand...

First they say "more than a dozen weapons". Then they itemize "four assault rifles, five semi-automatic handguns". That's not "over a dozen": that's nine. Now, are they counting the hunting knives as being among the "weapons," and treating them as the equivalent of the "assault rifles"?

And SCCop, you alleged that he attacked with an assault rifle. Where does the article specify that the rifle he was actually alleged to be using was an "assault rifle"? Yes, it said that the "cache" of weapons INCLUDED assault rifles. But "included" does not limit the statement of what was there in toto. There is nothing to say that OTHER weapons found in the house were not bolt-action hunting rifles. But you subtly sneaked in the assertion that he fired an "assault weapon" at the cop. My question is, why?

-blackmind
 
I'm not defending the media, why would I.

But know that if this guy wouldn't have shot, they were not able to write about it.

If you want the media to be objective, well, keep on dreaming!
 
Alfa One wrote:
I'm not defending the media, why would I.

But know that if this guy wouldn't have shot, they were not able to write about it.

If you want the media to be objective, well, keep on dreaming!
Click to expand...


Why sound so resigned?

"The media are not now objective, so they never will be and can never be made to be" ??? That's defeatist.

Why not say, "You want Illinois and New York to have 'shall issue concealed carry,' well, keep on dreaming!" and stop fighting for it?

The guy may have shot. So you're saying that because he did, that gave the media license to put all manner of sensationalist insinuation into their story about it??!

-blackmind
 
I'm not giving the media any clearance to write whatevere they want. But what are you going to do about it? Ignore them? Pretend they do not excist?

I do not live in the United States. Where I live it is even harder to own guns. And we also have a media that is very anti. I hold my breath while reading the morning paper, hoping there wasn't a nutcase that used a firearm.

But that's how it is. You, nor me, nor anyone else can control the media. They have a lot of power. Too many people form there opinion on what they hear or read.

If you feel you have the power to go against it, well, give it your best shot. I, myself will live by the rules and will do my very best to keep my guns.
 
If I were you, living in a land of gun bans, I would hope FOR a nutcase to have used a gun, to prove yet again that gun bans don't prevent such things from happening.

And when that is proved, there is nothing logical to say to oppose letting good people be armed.

-blackmind
 
The guy made a mistake; he shouldn't have fired his gun.
Now the media get to sensationalize the event, and the ATF can bully him as long as they want. Maybe call in Janet Reno as a guest interrogator.
That really blows.

I feel sorry for the poor schmuck, and just thank God it wasn't me.
 
blackmind, I didn't begin calling it an assault rifle. Several of the quoted articles called it an assault rifle and specifically an AK-47. I own an AK and I consider it an assault rifle even though it's not select-fire. I don't make this stuff up. If you will note I used quotation marks around "arsenal", because that is also the word that had been previously used. Arsenal on its own is not a bad term. At times I refer to my own collection as my arsenal. Maybe you are the one giving in to media terminology. A word has no connotation but what you attach to it. Threatening the use of a gun during a domestic with a supposed loved one and firing at an officer is not a "mistake". Maybe some of you would like to live next-door to this guy. I personally wouldn't enjoy a stray 7.62 through the wall while he's trying to blow his girlfriend away.
 
I do not live in a country with a gun ban. But everytime a nutcase does something wrong, we &re moving closer to it.

That a gun ban not a solution is, you don't have to convince me. But that is completly beside the point.

If no nutcase would have a gun, not too many things would happen, no media would have something to write about and no public opinion would be formed by them.

You can be for or against media. It just doesn't matter. The good will always suffer by the bad.

Deal with it or grow up to be a grumpy old man.
 
I'm grumpy and I'm not even old yet.

I don't know what else to be. This world is a rotten place, if you have your eyes and ears open. :(


-blackmind
 
Well, I choose not to live that way and try to make the best out of it.

To get back on the gun ban laws. When a goverment thinks that weapons are too dangerous, you can not make them think otherwise (unless voting for others the next time). Nutcases shooting around do not help our case. They make it even harder. Remember the idiots that wanted to ban large kitchen knives in England?

There are a couple of European countries whom have fantastic ways of dealing with weapons (the Swiss, some scandinavian, ...) and we have others (especially G.B.). Anti-weapon goverments only will look to the bad ones even though the Swiss and the scandinavian countries have great records in terms of crime.

What to do about it? I don't know, but voting for the right guys (if there are any). Or move to those countries.
 
If I were you, living in a land of gun bans, I would hope FOR a nutcase to have used a gun, to prove yet again that gun bans don't prevent such things from happening.
Click to expand...

Uh, no. Let's not be blood dancers.
 
Yup we had a recent article in our local paper where a meth lab was busted. They said assullt style weapons were found...lol

which looked to me like some maverick 88s with the pistol grip. and some 38 snubbies. Got a good chuckle at that.
 
Here is your $99 rifle with "Grenade Launcher"

M59-66A1%20WEB.JPG
 
sell those papers boys........

The media needs to make a 2 paragraph story take up a half page..... We all know that right? ;) Dozens of rounds ......... well that could be maybe what 24 or maybe 36? Wow, he had lots of ammo.... ;)

As far as the fool that likes to scare his lady with a rifle and then decides to shoot at police?????????? Seems like a special place at the state pen might be a good spot for him to think about wrong and right for about 7-10. Well, sure he will be out for being a good convict in 2-3 but a little time away might be a real good thing for society and this jerk.........
 
dozens of rounds
Click to expand...

what would happen if they came to my house for whatever reason before i left on a praire dog shooting trip? i have about 500 rounds per rifle i am going to bring. or what about a reloader's house. they probably have "dozens or rounds" on hand. the swat uniforms are a little bit different i have to say, if they really are uniforms, not just t-shirts.
 
Alfa One has inspired hope in me. Every time a post like this appears, people rush in to pick apart meaningless details about ammo/gun type/nomenclature/spelling, etc. Below says it best.

"The idea that this guy simply had a negligent discharge is unbelievable. A willingness to defend this idiot simply because your own ideology demands it is lunacy. Fact #1 the suspect acknowledged that he was trying to scare his girlfriend with a loaded AK. Fact #2 the suspect, after seeing police arrive on scene entered his home with the loaded AK. Fact #3 the suspect fired a round from said AK and the round landed a few feet from the responding police. These facts can lead to only one conclusion (at least for sane individuals) and that conclusion is that the AK was discharged intentionally. Any other conclusion is only a fantasy dreamed up by a defense attorney-like individual who has no regard for reality.

Final point; it’s idiots like this guy that give antis ammunition to use against law abiding gun owners. And defending him gives them further ammunition. The antis know he is crazy (and so do we). Thus, defending him just proves that all gun owners are crazy. I won’t defend this guy and if you believe in the second amendment and what it stands for I ask that you not defend him either."

It's time we talk about ACTIONS and BEHAVIOR, not US/THEM lumping. Many accuse the Law Enforcement community of "Circling The Wagons" after an incident. How is this any different from what occurs in these threads? No condemnation for the actions of a violent criminal, just attacks on semantics. For cripes sakes, we even have people who "Feel sorry poor schmuck"! We really don't do ourselves any favors with this. I've seen countless posts on multiple boards show the same thing again & again.
It matters not that a firearm was used, the conduct is the important part. By "defending" the gun(s) and not condemning the behavior we shoot ourselves in the foot.

It worries me that even after Alfa's accurate and concise post, that people still continue on posting in the same manner.

It gladdens me that more than one person gets it.

All the best

TBO
 
I agree that this guy deserves public condemnation. I condemn him myself.

However, the article presented seems to condemn the guns as much as the idiot.

The media calls this an accidental shooting and associates this with the number of "assault rifles" and "semi-automatic handguns". Don't forget the dozens of rounds of ammunition.

Arsenal, cache of weapons, big deal. A handful of pistols and semi-automatic rifles did not make this guy an idiot.

I'm grumpy and I'm not even old yet.

I don't know what else to be. This world is a rotten place, if you have your eyes and ears open.
Click to expand...

I hate to quote cartoon characters, but that reminds me of Grandpa Simpson.

"If you're not scared, then you're not paying attention!"

Unfortunately, I have to agree to some extent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top