Quantcast

Homeless Man Found With Weapons, List of Names: Do You Fear Copycat Killers?

Daryl 2012/08/03 21:00:00
Related Topics: Copycat Killers
You!
Add Photos & Videos

SANFRANCISCO.CBSLOCAL.COM reports:
San Francisco Police displayed an array of weapons and ammunition Wednesday that were found in a homeless man's car last month in Golden Gate Park.
mans car golden gate park news sports weather traffic sf

Read More: http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2012/08/01/homele...

Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • FPSRules 2012/08/04 07:56:00
    No
    FPSRules
    +6
    Not really. What I do fear somewhat is the 'zombie-like' stupid's who make up the 45% of the population still supporting premier Obama. That scares me!

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • rich Rusty S... 2012/08/04 16:37:21
    rich
    +2
    Might have also had something to do with his intent to harm one of his relatives on the list, and having marijuana in his possession at the time too, you think? Just sayin'!
  • Rusty S... rich 2012/08/04 18:12:10
    Rusty Shackleford
    +2
    Let's pretend that you are a cop and you pull me over for speeding. You see thru the window that I have an AR-15 and two military ammo cans on the back seat. What do you do?
  • rich Rusty S... 2012/08/04 18:46:42
    rich
    Not getting your point. Please just make it. I hate guessing games.
  • Rusty S... rich 2012/08/04 19:35:05
    Rusty Shackleford
    +2
    I'm simply asking what you would do, or what you think a police officer should do once he spots weapons in a car.

    My "point" is that I don't think the officer should do anything more than write me a ticket for speeding, what do you think?
  • rich Rusty S... 2012/08/04 21:44:57
    rich
    Okay, so Mantic and Rusty, you guys did not go watch the news report? Have to watch it, and look at the weapons displayed on the table to get the full understanding. Click on the video, and then come back. He was out to get some relative apparently, and Rusty, if I were a policeperson and saw that group of weapons in a car when I stopped somebody, I'd call for help and he'd have his behind in jail, without doubt. Ain't no hunting kind of situation there, at least not for deer.
  • Rusty S... rich 2012/08/04 22:15:12
    Rusty Shackleford
    +2
    I saw his weapons, my collection is ten times that.

    If you arrested me for having weapons in my car, you would be violating my civil rights, but I'm sure you wouldn't care about that.
  • Mantic Rusty S... 2012/08/04 22:50:15 (edited)
    Mantic
    Do you actually think this guy is going to find a defense of his civil rights?

    He has no money and there's no good publicity in defending gun owners. I think he's screwed.

    Plain truth: the U.S. ideal is not the U.S. reality. If you exercise all your freedoms publicly, expect to be the subject of detainment or worse. Moreso if you are part of the "underclass" of poor and/or non-white citizens.
  • Rusty S... Mantic 2012/08/04 23:01:19
    Rusty Shackleford
    I was tempted to give you a thumbs up, but what you said is too depressing for a thumbs up..
  • Mantic Rusty S... 2012/08/05 02:36:27
    Mantic
    +1
    Oh, and even more depressing: I fully expect that he will be railroaded as 'mentally unstable.'

    Not being able to afford his own attorney, he'll get a hack that works for the system who will convince him to lie down for that in order to avoid prison. Whether he's scared enough to go along or not, he will be villainized, publicly described as a mental case by the authorities, and locked away. And that will be the last we hear of him.

    Until the gun control bill with his name on it comes along, anyway.
  • rich Rusty S... 2012/08/04 23:18:10
    rich
    Would you be making threats against your relatives too, with said weapons in the car? Should we wait till you wipe them out first?
  • Rusty S... rich 2012/08/05 01:28:27
    Rusty Shackleford
    You mean if I had a list of my relatives in the car? Is that the type of threat you're talking about?
  • rich Rusty S... 2012/08/05 01:50:22
    rich
    Are you actually reading any of this?
  • Rusty S... rich 2012/08/05 13:18:05
    Rusty Shackleford
    +1
    To answer your previous question, yes, you should wait until a crime is committed before arresting me or taking my weapons from me.
  • rich Rusty S... 2012/08/05 16:34:19
    rich
    I can agree with that, so that we don't have a Minority Report (film) kind of situation, but then how do you prevent situations like Aurora? Correct me if I'm wrong, but he had no record, and from what you are saying, if the police had stopped him with part of his arsenal in the car, they would have violated his rights completely, had they detained him. So what is the reasonable answer? This guy looks a bit nuts if you ask me, so you can't say that's the criteria, because the Ronald McDonald hair as a marker, from what you are saying, would have made it unfair as well to stop him. So what is the answer?
  • Rusty S... rich 2012/08/05 18:03:39
    Rusty Shackleford
    "but then how do you prevent situations like Aurora?"

    We don't unless we want to live in an oppressive police state where the government has total control over every action we can take. Does that type of society temp you?
  • rich Rusty S... 2012/08/05 18:40:03
    rich
    +1
    I think there is a middle ground between no guns, and 15 guns that I carry around at a time, with 3000 rounds of ammunition. I think it is dangerous to speak as if it is the same too, like you seem to be saying. See the main problem in this is that it was his home. However, for someone who isn't homeless, do you think that if they are stopped, with that kind of arsenal WITH THEM , that it makes sense to just let them go? I just don't see that. If your purpose is to protect your HOME, keep it at home! That becomes something really off.
  • Rusty S... rich 2012/08/05 18:45:46
    Rusty Shackleford
    So you think it's OK to keep the arms, but not bear them?
  • rich Rusty S... 2012/08/05 18:46:31
    rich
    Bear means . . . ? In this case?
  • Rusty S... rich 2012/08/05 18:55:41
    Rusty Shackleford
    In this case?

    Are my rights conditional?
  • rich Rusty S... 2012/08/05 23:37:29
    rich
    +1
    Yes, if you endanger others, they are. If you are acting in such a way that it appears that that is possible then yes. If there is no reason for you to carry around an arsenal, then yes, you need to explain it. Absolutely and without doubt. Your rights do not operate above the safety and the rights of others. So the more reasonable thing to do is to figure out how to not make your rights over and above anyone else's, if we are all to survive peacefully.
  • Rusty S... rich 2012/08/06 00:03:16
    Rusty Shackleford
    " If there is no reason for you to carry around an arsenal, then yes, you need to explain it."

    Not to you I don't. I do not need your permission, nor anyone else's permission to carry my weapons.

    My rights are inalienable.
  • rich Rusty S... 2012/08/06 00:40:54
    rich
    +1
    Then that is your point of view, clearly. And that is why today, we had yet another mass killing. It won't stop until it becomes important to the right people, I suppose. So enjoy while you can. But I have confidence that people will get smarter eventually.
  • Rusty S... rich 2012/08/06 02:00:20
    Rusty Shackleford
    You blame my point of view for someone else committing murder?

    You are a demented individual.
  • rich Rusty S... 2012/08/06 11:30:48
    rich
    Okay.
  • jere.ch... rich 2012/08/05 22:05:00
    jere.chievres
    You are saying stupid thing's do yourself a favor give it a rest.
  • rich jere.ch... 2012/08/05 23:33:58
    rich
    +1
    Why don't you try and discuss it rather than being an ass? Say something smart, because right now, you are batting zero!
  • jere.ch... rich 2012/08/06 00:08:15
    jere.chievres
    Kilo mike Alpha You are just talking Libtard nonsense
  • rich jere.ch... 2012/08/06 00:41:52
    rich
    +1
    Please don't talk. You just sound silly. Enough.
  • Mantic rich 2012/08/04 22:41:03 (edited)
    Mantic
    I don't know if it's worth my bandwidth to watch a video. Do they show explicit statement of intent, or just scary (to you) images of "the weapons displayed on the table" and/or his arrest mugshot?

    As I stated, his carrying all his guns and such in the car makes sense when he is identified as homeless. He has no other place. If he could afford a storage building, he would probably be trying to live in it.

    Does he own the arms legally? My guess is he does, and probably has since before he lost his residence.

    The only actual crime I can see is the marijuana. I expect all weapons charges are vague technicalities about them being in the car or hidden/concealed.

    What you seem to favour is the arrest of citizens on suspicion of crimes that have not happened (speculated on the basis of irrational fear stirred up by unrelated events), as well as unwarranted search and seizure.
  • rich Mantic 2012/08/04 23:19:36 (edited)
    rich
    +1
    I'll go back and listen for you and write it down word for word. Be right back.

    Some is paraphrased, but tried to stay true to what was said:

    Written Part:

    When police found a cache of guns, knives, a shotgun, 5,800 rounds of ammunition and camouflage gear in Robert Johns’ car on July 21st it was thought they may have diverted some kind of planned attack. (also newscaster says: he had in addition, a rifle, two handguns and an assortment of knives and is charged with possession of a short barrel shot gun)
    Also in that vehicle was a list of names of political leaders, reportedly including President Barack Obama.

    Police says:

    We don’t have a specific threat, except that he intended to harm a family member.

    Newscaster:

    First run in with the law was 3 weeks ago, and they took 2 guns off of him. They admit that they should have done a more thorough search . . . and at another point, “He had harassed people on the street.”

    Neighborhood persons:

    They are afraid of his friends and don’t want to be identified. They never made eye contact with him, and he stood out. "There are so many volatile people out there, and he was one of them." They remember he had a fight with another homeless person, and (I think) kicked him out from the car. They are glad he is off the street. He had harassed people on the street.
  • Mantic rich 2012/08/05 02:18:20 (edited)
    Mantic
    Thank you for transcribing that.

    My impression: still not much evidence of anything, nor justification for the arrest and search. I wonder about the police confiscating weapons previously -- did they have legal grounds for doing so?

    "We don’t have a specific threat, except that he intended to harm a family member."

    Vague. Certainly no verification that he had the weapons for that purpose. And the officer was not required to specify what harm was intended to a relative, how such was determined, or what might have motivated the supposed "threat."

    Ever watched "Cops" on television? How common -- stupid, but common -- is it that someone being arrested starts bellowing threats about the person they believe called the police to arrest them? Is that a crime, or evidence of an intended crime?

    As for claims of people on the street: people always talk crap when someone is arrested or gets in trouble. Anything they observed suddenly gets warped into an ominous sign. It means nothing. Rarely would such people repeat most of it in court (even if it's worthless there, being hearsay), but they all rush to the news cameras to run their yap for that moment of excitement.
  • rich Mantic 2012/08/05 11:19:21 (edited)
    rich
    No no, the people's faces were hidden and they refused to be on camera because they feared retaliation. Forgot to say that.

    This your opinion, but the most dangerous, meaning murderous group (without defined root causes) according to the Justice Department, is older white men 45 to 75. (younger male executed murders seem to be related to gangs and drugs) And though he is younger, 37 I believe, you sure would not know it from looking at him, and he seems to carry a bitterness about him consistent with "anger action" from what the people said. Additionally, it is too easy to avoid the police, and if you can't do that twice within a three week period, then that is an indicator that something is going on. I would take him quite seriously, especially given the extra "nerve" provided to emotionally unstable people by a recent happening like the Colorado thing.

    I think it is very, very dangerous to let a propensity toward his right to bear arms, make us unaware and lax for what would otherwise be alarms and alarming behavior. Had he acted like any of this, minus the guns, he would just be another wierd homeless person. With the guns, he is something else. An unstable homeless person with a list of people he wants to hurt, and one he admits out loud that he intends to hurt. Th...

    No no, the people's faces were hidden and they refused to be on camera because they feared retaliation. Forgot to say that.

    This your opinion, but the most dangerous, meaning murderous group (without defined root causes) according to the Justice Department, is older white men 45 to 75. (younger male executed murders seem to be related to gangs and drugs) And though he is younger, 37 I believe, you sure would not know it from looking at him, and he seems to carry a bitterness about him consistent with "anger action" from what the people said. Additionally, it is too easy to avoid the police, and if you can't do that twice within a three week period, then that is an indicator that something is going on. I would take him quite seriously, especially given the extra "nerve" provided to emotionally unstable people by a recent happening like the Colorado thing.

    I think it is very, very dangerous to let a propensity toward his right to bear arms, make us unaware and lax for what would otherwise be alarms and alarming behavior. Had he acted like any of this, minus the guns, he would just be another wierd homeless person. With the guns, he is something else. An unstable homeless person with a list of people he wants to hurt, and one he admits out loud that he intends to hurt. That is a whole different thing. And if gun proponents don't see that, they are worst than anti gun people who think they all ought to be taken away. There must be balance.

    So I ask you this. If he were black, with the same situation exactly, would your opinion be the same? Please be honest, and don't take it as an attack. I've made no assumptions, but am trying to understand your full point of view. I've been looking at some of the posts on here, and there is a pattern when discussing gun control, that I'm trying to figure out. You appear to be a very reasonable person, so I'm asking you. There are others I would not ask because it requires the ability to execute honest self evaluation.
    (more)
  • Mantic rich 2012/08/05 14:51:06 (edited)
    Mantic
    Nope. No different, given the same story about a homeless guy. Maybe you're fishing for a "no, there haven't been any black guys going on shooting sprees?" I can see that. It's more of a conscious choice not to assume the worst about someone in that situation.

    What maybe you should know is that I have been there (destitute/homeless). So I am inclined to empathize, and it's got nothing to do with skin color.
  • rich Mantic 2012/08/05 16:30:35
    rich
    Wasn't fishing, truly wanted to know. Hadn't thought about the black guys on killing sprees angled frankly. But you answer is fair. And I could see that about you from your responses. But is it fair to say also, that it is unusual it is for a homeless person to hold on to car and guns? Since you have some firsthand experience?
  • Mantic rich 2012/08/06 17:06:01 (edited)
    Mantic
    +1
    Folks live in cars.

    Mostly single women with kids will do whatever they have to in order maintain a car above all else, because it gives them some protection. A lot of newly homeless will also stay in a car or van, as a way of storing and protecting whatever belongings they still have. More than self-protection, I would think that the guns were something he held on to because they could be hocked to buy fresh clothes, toiletries, food, or other perishable necessities if his situation didn't get better. They're compact relative to value.

    Unfortunately, having things can make you a target. There are usually a few looking for an easy mark to rob or molest; typically hard drug users needing their fix. The shelters can be nice, providing meals and blankets and access to a phone line, but that's also where predators hang out.
  • rich Mantic 2012/08/06 17:56:07 (edited)
    rich
    What city and state were you in, when you experienced this? And what kind of climate? Curious.
  • Mantic rich 2012/08/06 19:45:36 (edited)
    Mantic
    Kansas City and Oklahoma City, winter/spring and hot summer respectively.

    I managed to get an old lawnmower in OKC and used that to earn money in the summer. I was on foot, and had to use a shelter's phone, though. A church across from the shelter allowed me store the mower and sleep there.

    In KC the shelter was packed and fights/robberies happened every day. Lots of people on Heroin. Maybe some on Crack. That was the early '90s.
  • rich Mantic 2012/08/06 20:29:57
    rich
    You are right about the situation in shelters, but they have cleaned them up a bit here anyway, lately. I'm glad you found your way out. Take care.
  • jere.ch... rich 2012/08/05 22:02:42
    jere.chievres
    Well it's a good thing your NOT a cop you would have a major law suit on your @$$.
  • rich jere.ch... 2012/08/06 17:59:35
    rich
    Jere.ch . . . what city are you in as well?

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

Living

2014/10/01 08:14:45

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals