Note To Self: When Friend Brings a Semi-Automatic
Banned
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 3,319
Likes: 0
From: City
how the hell is one guy shooting 8 other unarmed people self-defense? The guy even stated he chased them and shot them in the back?!?
This has nothing to do with the guy being Hmong and everything to do with the guy killing 7 people. The guy knew he didn't put up that stand, so there is no confusion about whether or not he should be there. In this country, you cannot kill people for swearing at you, even if they are drunk.
You make a whole lot of assumptions about an area you obviously know nothing about. And I have yet to run into someone who really gives a rat's ass what you consider "hunting."
I quote:
"Despite Vang's allegations that he was provoked, he also admits shooting several hunters who were unarmed.
Vang, who earned a sharpshooting badge while serving in the California National Guard from 1989 to 1995, said one man was running and yelling, "Help me, help me," when Vang caught up to him and shot him in the back, leaving him groaning and dying on the leaf-strewn forest floor.
Police believe that victim was Joseph Crotteau, 20, whose body was found near that of his father, Robert, 42.
When two hunters, one of whom had a gun, sped to the scene on an ATV, apparently trying to help their friends, Vang said, he shot them off the vehicle, killing them. Authorities identified them as Allan Laski, 43, and Jessica Willers, 27.
When one of the victims he shot at stood up, Vang said he yelled, "You're not dead yet?" and fired again."
(http://www.startribune.com/stories/462/5100914.html)
There is absolutely no reason to believe that this guy was simply defending himself. The only gun found at the scene belonged to people who showed up after the shooting started.
This has nothing to do with the guy being Hmong and everything to do with the guy killing 7 people. The guy knew he didn't put up that stand, so there is no confusion about whether or not he should be there. In this country, you cannot kill people for swearing at you, even if they are drunk.
You make a whole lot of assumptions about an area you obviously know nothing about. And I have yet to run into someone who really gives a rat's ass what you consider "hunting."
I quote:
"Despite Vang's allegations that he was provoked, he also admits shooting several hunters who were unarmed.
Vang, who earned a sharpshooting badge while serving in the California National Guard from 1989 to 1995, said one man was running and yelling, "Help me, help me," when Vang caught up to him and shot him in the back, leaving him groaning and dying on the leaf-strewn forest floor.
Police believe that victim was Joseph Crotteau, 20, whose body was found near that of his father, Robert, 42.
When two hunters, one of whom had a gun, sped to the scene on an ATV, apparently trying to help their friends, Vang said, he shot them off the vehicle, killing them. Authorities identified them as Allan Laski, 43, and Jessica Willers, 27.
When one of the victims he shot at stood up, Vang said he yelled, "You're not dead yet?" and fired again."
(http://www.startribune.com/stories/462/5100914.html)
There is absolutely no reason to believe that this guy was simply defending himself. The only gun found at the scene belonged to people who showed up after the shooting started.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,328
Likes: 0
From: WA?
Originally Posted by WFO Racer,Nov 23 2004, 07:38 PM
My take is the guy was really lost. Note to self always know where you are when you hunt . They saw him in their stand. Got pissed swore at him most likely they had been drinking a few beers . When you hunt using a stand ( I can't call that hunting ) you have plenty of time to drink. Some redneck fired a warning shot to try and scare the guy. He turned and dropped them where they stood. If that's the way it happened the should let him go. Self defense . They couldn't have been good hunters if they use a stand and one guy drops 5 of them and they couldn't take him out .The demographics of that area are not Asian friendly , he is going to have a hard time getting a fair trial. That's all we need more anti- hunting and anti-gun press .
But they mentioned that there was only one gun between the "8" hunters...
I do feel that he shouldn't have killed ALL of them... I'm guessing that some of them ran... He should of let them run...
He managed to wipe pretty much the whole party with a single clip... Hate to say it... But impressive.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,328
Likes: 0
From: WA?
Originally Posted by no_really,Nov 23 2004, 10:35 PM
how the hell is one guy shooting 8 other unarmed people self-defense? The guy even stated he chased them and shot them in the back?!?
This has nothing to do with the guy being Hmong and everything to do with the guy killing 7 people. The guy knew he didn't put up that stand, so there is no confusion about whether or not he should be there. In this country, you cannot kill people for swearing at you, even if they are drunk.
You make a whole lot of assumptions about an area you obviously know nothing about. And I have yet to run into someone who really gives a rat's as what you consider "hunting."
I quote:
"Despite Vang's allegations that he was provoked, he also admits shooting several hunters who were unarmed.
Vang, who earned a sharpshooting badge while serving in the California National Guard from 1989 to 1995, said one man was running and yelling, "Help me, help me," when Vang caught up to him and shot him in the back, leaving him groaning and dying on the leaf-strewn forest floor.
Police believe that victim was Joseph Crotteau, 20, whose body was found near that of his father, Robert, 42.
When two hunters, one of whom had a gun, sped to the scene on an ATV, apparently trying to help their friends, Vang said, he shot them off the vehicle, killing them. Authorities identified them as Allan Laski, 43, and Jessica Willers, 27.
When one of the victims he shot at stood up, Vang said he yelled, "You're not dead yet?" and fired again."
(http://www.startribune.com/stories/462/5100914.html)
There is absolutely no reason to believe that this guy was simply defending himself. The only gun found at the scene belonged to people who showed up after the shooting started.
This has nothing to do with the guy being Hmong and everything to do with the guy killing 7 people. The guy knew he didn't put up that stand, so there is no confusion about whether or not he should be there. In this country, you cannot kill people for swearing at you, even if they are drunk.
You make a whole lot of assumptions about an area you obviously know nothing about. And I have yet to run into someone who really gives a rat's as what you consider "hunting."
I quote:
"Despite Vang's allegations that he was provoked, he also admits shooting several hunters who were unarmed.
Vang, who earned a sharpshooting badge while serving in the California National Guard from 1989 to 1995, said one man was running and yelling, "Help me, help me," when Vang caught up to him and shot him in the back, leaving him groaning and dying on the leaf-strewn forest floor.
Police believe that victim was Joseph Crotteau, 20, whose body was found near that of his father, Robert, 42.
When two hunters, one of whom had a gun, sped to the scene on an ATV, apparently trying to help their friends, Vang said, he shot them off the vehicle, killing them. Authorities identified them as Allan Laski, 43, and Jessica Willers, 27.
When one of the victims he shot at stood up, Vang said he yelled, "You're not dead yet?" and fired again."
(http://www.startribune.com/stories/462/5100914.html)
There is absolutely no reason to believe that this guy was simply defending himself. The only gun found at the scene belonged to people who showed up after the shooting started.
True he didn't put up that stand, but public property also has stands around. The stand was also empty.
No you can't kill people for swearing at you... But if you cared about his side of the story... He said he was fired upon which the bullet landed 30-40 feet away from him. This is enough for me to fire back fearing for my own life. (And given his military experience, he probably did the most defensive thing he could, offense.)
Banned
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 3,319
Likes: 0
From: City
he is an admitted mass murderer. What he says is not above suspicion. Being in Washington state, I doubt you have any idea what that part of Wisconsin is like. You cannot put a permanent stand on public land, and it is the hunter's responsibility to know whether they are on private land or not. If you wander from public land to private, you will have to cross signs posting the area as private. All this is moot, as the guy confessed to the killings. He went nuts and killed 6 people, and tried to kill more. Going all Rambo in the woods on unarmed people is not legal, and in no way constitutes self-defense. Quit trying to make excuses for the guy just because he is Asian - he is a cold-blooded killer with no excuse.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 651
Likes: 0
From: San Francisco
So what group of eight would go "Hunting" with just one rifle??
I'm not saying the guy should of killed them all, but we don't know the "Real" truth that happened.
You think the guys that survived is gonna say, "hell I guess we should not of fVcked with him, if we knew he was gonna kill us." It's one story vs. another and we will never know.
I'm not saying the guy should of killed them all, but we don't know the "Real" truth that happened.
You think the guys that survived is gonna say, "hell I guess we should not of fVcked with him, if we knew he was gonna kill us." It's one story vs. another and we will never know.
Banned
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 3,319
Likes: 0
From: City
the victims weren't carrying guns when they went out to see who was in their stand. Not very threatening, unarmed facing an armed man.
The guy confessed - not much to "wait and see." The guy is now a suspect in at least one other killing. Racism is an ugly thing, but to assume a group of hunters in Wisconsin deserved to die because they were not Asian is
ed up.
The guy confessed - not much to "wait and see." The guy is now a suspect in at least one other killing. Racism is an ugly thing, but to assume a group of hunters in Wisconsin deserved to die because they were not Asian is
ed up.
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,173
Likes: 0
From: =)
no_really, where are you getting this information from (suspect in at least one other killing)? This is pretty crazy stuff.
I find it strange that the two stories presented such differences, especially in steering our emotions. One leads me to initially believe he may be guilty and psychotic and the other makes me feel something is seriously amiss (ie. the masses' word against one person, to cover something up possibly). So much for unbiased press.
Either way, this is horrible. Something went seriously wrong in those woods (sounds like a movie).....
I find it strange that the two stories presented such differences, especially in steering our emotions. One leads me to initially believe he may be guilty and psychotic and the other makes me feel something is seriously amiss (ie. the masses' word against one person, to cover something up possibly). So much for unbiased press.
Either way, this is horrible. Something went seriously wrong in those woods (sounds like a movie).....
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,173
Likes: 0
From: =)
by the way no_really, my first sentence's purpose was to find more sources to read, not saying you are wrong, etc. I'm very curious to see where this will all lead, hopefully to a confession by him or them so we can finally know the truth.
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,173
Likes: 0
From: =)
Last comment...I've been reading some more and I see this in more than one source:
So Vang was in the tree stand and some guys come to ask him to leave. So if this is truly the case, then I know if it was my property (I also believe most ppl would act the same as I would), I wouldn't think of it as a big deal and ASK the person to leave. Simple right? here's the thing, I would NOT, and I emphasize this since this is the strange part, I would NOT ask or expect in this case, a bunch of guys to jump on their atvs to come to the tree stand. Were they ALL coming to help ASK a single person to leave their tree stand? Some reports specify that they started coming BEFORE the call for help, meaning they came right after they found out someone was in their tree stand (the first radio call to ask if the tree stand was in use).
My point, if I was with a buddy and ran into someone in my tree stand, I would simply ask them to leave. Why did the others in the atv feel compelled to come? Something is wrong here. The thing is, all the reports I read didn't mention anything wrong at the time of the initial radio call....so I just can't seem to ignore why a bunch of guys felt they needed to go there. It only takes a single person to ask someone to leave, not a gang.
I don't mean to say "HE IS INNOCENT" at all, just making a point.
Anyone else come up with any interesting points or questions? Man, I wonder if we'll ever know the truth....
So Vang was in the tree stand and some guys come to ask him to leave. So if this is truly the case, then I know if it was my property (I also believe most ppl would act the same as I would), I wouldn't think of it as a big deal and ASK the person to leave. Simple right? here's the thing, I would NOT, and I emphasize this since this is the strange part, I would NOT ask or expect in this case, a bunch of guys to jump on their atvs to come to the tree stand. Were they ALL coming to help ASK a single person to leave their tree stand? Some reports specify that they started coming BEFORE the call for help, meaning they came right after they found out someone was in their tree stand (the first radio call to ask if the tree stand was in use).
My point, if I was with a buddy and ran into someone in my tree stand, I would simply ask them to leave. Why did the others in the atv feel compelled to come? Something is wrong here. The thing is, all the reports I read didn't mention anything wrong at the time of the initial radio call....so I just can't seem to ignore why a bunch of guys felt they needed to go there. It only takes a single person to ask someone to leave, not a gang.
I don't mean to say "HE IS INNOCENT" at all, just making a point.
Anyone else come up with any interesting points or questions? Man, I wonder if we'll ever know the truth....