On October 30, Jim Duensing, who was chairman of the Nevada Libertarian Party until March, 2009, was shot by a Las Vegas policeman after the police had stopped Duensing for making an illegal turn and some illegal lane changes. According to this newspaper story, he was in a rental car, and he bolted and ran away from the police. He is still alive but is in critical condition. Duensing was also a Libertarian nominee for U.S. House last year.
Former Nevada LP State Chair shot by police, is in critical condition
October 31st, 2009 · 298 Comments
Filed Under: Libertarian Party
298 responses so far ↓
1 Brian Holtz // Oct 31, 2009 at 3:54 pm
Wow. In person in Portland I found Jim to be quite affable, and much less confrontational than he is online. I hope this situation wasn’t similar to what happened with a Vice-Chair of the LPFL in the 1990s, and that Jim will be OK. LG, what’s the word?
2 Brian Holtz // Oct 31, 2009 at 4:40 pm
The news story says the police say Jim was reaching for a gun, but it quotes a witness as saying “They shot him in the back. He was just running.”
A commenter at lvrj.com says that Jim had passed the Nevada bar, and had a concealed-carry permit.
Sounds like a prima facie unjustified shooting.
3 Steven R Linnabary // Oct 31, 2009 at 4:56 pm
“As the officer was chasing the individual giving him orders to stop, the individual reached into his pants pocket, front right, and retrieved what appears to be a .45-caliber handgun,” Montandon said.
Montandon said the officer saw the suspect try to pull out a “large folding knife.”
When somebody gives conflicting statements, it is standard procedure to assume they are lying. First, the cop claims he was pulling a .45 from his front pocket. This is VERY specific, and yet near impossible as a .45 is simply too large to fit in any front pocket of any trousers I own. Then the cop claims it was a “large folding knife”, which could be anything. What constitutes a “large” folding knife?
There are several other items in the story that piqued my curiosity. But any cop can testilie his way around these discrepancies.
PEACE
4 wolfefan // Oct 31, 2009 at 5:14 pm
Way too little in the story to reach any conclusions. The quote from the police spokesman about the knife is so truncated that it’s impossible to tell whether it conflicts with the one about the gun or not. There will obviously be more to come.
5 Pro-Pot Anti-Pot // Oct 31, 2009 at 6:13 pm
We will be praying for Jim.
6 Peace and love // Oct 31, 2009 at 6:24 pm
My thoughts and prayers go out to jim I know he will make a full recovery from all of this
after reading the news paper article I find that the story is not complete , they always hide the truth from the people
7 Beth Duensing // Oct 31, 2009 at 8:13 pm
Thank you all for your support and concerns. I have been with Jim most of the day and he is in good spirits and good condition. He is expected to have a full recovery.
Thank you to all who have sent good wishes.
8 Mik Robertson // Oct 31, 2009 at 8:17 pm
Tragic. Best wishes go out for a speedy and full recovery. Hopefully he will be able to tell his story soon.
9 Brian Miller // Oct 31, 2009 at 8:27 pm
From the article:
Police Department policy allows the use of deadly force based on the severity of the crime, whether the suspect is a threat to the officer or others and whether the suspect is actively resisting arrest or trying to avoid arrest by fleeing.
When a suspect dies at the hands of police, a jury is convened at a coroner’s inquest to determine whether the shooting was justifiable, excusable or criminal.
This would appear at first blush to be a “shoot first, ask questions later” policy.
10 tab // Oct 31, 2009 at 10:05 pm
I agree that a .45 likely won’t fit into someone’s front pocket.
I think the point of this story everyone is overlooking though is why did he run in the first place? Clearly if you take off from a police officer you are likely hiding something and thus putting your own life in danger.
Doesn’t mean he deserved to be shot, but why put yourself in that position?
11 wolfefan // Oct 31, 2009 at 10:22 pm
Hi Brian @9 –
Hard to say without reading the actual policy in full, but I interpret it a little differently. I know how PD self-investigations usually turn out, but my first read is it was not a good shooting based on two of the three factors listed above. Again, too hard to know at this point for lots of reasons, and I am by no means an expert.
12 Michael Cavlan // Oct 31, 2009 at 10:29 pm
Thoughts and prayers for Jim from Minnesota.
The cops are out of control, everywhere.
In Minneapolis, they recently shot a 16 year old kid in the back, Fong Lee. They then found a “weapon” beside him. The gun was one that had been “lost” from the Minneapolis police evidence room. I kid you not. It was obviously a throw a way.
Later the mayor of Minneapolis RT Rybak presented the officer with a medal. Then the officer was arrested for domestic violence against his wife.
Protect and serve who?
13 libertariangirl // Oct 31, 2009 at 10:57 pm
What a day . My prayers are with Jim and his family . I cant say much right now , not all the info is in.
2 things .
1.if Jim was reaching for his gun the officers woud be shot . Eyewitness says he’s doing nothin threatening .
2.Please bear with the LPN as we try to piece together what has happened
my thoughts are with his family .
press release to follow
14 libertariangirl // Oct 31, 2009 at 10:59 pm
Beth , when can we come see him?
15 libertariangirl // Oct 31, 2009 at 11:02 pm
Jims training is far superior to that of the police , had he been trying to pull his weapon , we’d be dealing with 2 dead officers.
16 Robert Milnes // Nov 1, 2009 at 2:38 am
lg, and what training might that be?
17 Don Lake, late at night // Nov 1, 2009 at 3:12 am
“why did he run in the first place? Clearly if you take off from a police officer you are likely hiding something ”
Legal lawful citizens do not have to obey illegal, unlawful orders. After visiting the [so called] Patient Advocate on an unrelated issue, I was told by an eight foot ten 600 pound security type to ‘come over here, I wanna talk to you’.
I looked around for witnesses [nearly empty San Diego County USDVA Hospital, day after Thanksgiving] I found none. I told the uniformed thug that I was headed back to the [so called] Patient Advocate.
May be I did run away, but with my recent medical history, it was more like hobbling. [And again, I did say where I was headed for ---- and for what reason [witnesses for the beating to come]!
The VA KGB found me in Patient Advocates. I was drug out, my feet off the ground, by the tight tight hand cuffs. Crying and shouting [me, not the thugs] I was finally brought back to earth, but only after the paniced look on my sweet heart’s face.
I never cursed. I never gestered. I did not spit. And I am the client, a grossly disabled veteran of that very hospital. I was treated like a convicted felon, with my wrists still showing marks after three hours.
They do it because they can ……..
18 Chuck Moulton // Nov 1, 2009 at 3:36 am
Best wishes to Jim for a full and speedy recovery.
19 Don Lake, late at night // Nov 1, 2009 at 7:20 am
James Duensing
2309 Reddon Circle,
89128 Las Vegas NV 89128
(702) 341-1775
jimduensing@jimduensing.com
20 Robert Milnes // Nov 1, 2009 at 8:29 am
I am glad to hear he survived this incident & is in hospital with wife recovering. Hopefully more facts will emerge in time to evaluate this incident. I personally have to agree that police in USA seem to get into deadly force incidents a lot. & usually there is a finding of justified by whatever agency, jury, grand jury, coroner’s inquest, internal affairs etc. also with animals there seems to be a kill it & ask questions later policy. Read The Age of Surveillance. Government agents seem to have a penchant for setting up confrontations. This might apply here. They know he has outstanding warrants. Know he is coming down the street or will be. Set up a “random” stop on some pretext, inspections, intoxication etc. & he gets caught up in it & rabbits. e.g. I assure the reader government agents are fully capable of such things. Or it could be coincidental. It is difficult to know for certain./// To update, I have been notified by attorney small inhertance will take about another 8 months. So my financial situation is still very bad & getting worse. Any assistance would be greatly appreciated. And fot the PLAS, I still hold out hope that today one or more candidates and/or activists will conduct a press conference. & that tomorrow & Tuesday can be dedicated to voter education./// What a joke. Not gonna happen. You are all losers & under government surveillance & gonna get picked off one by one & are too fucked up to do anything about it. So if/when martial law gets declared which side do you think I should go to, the losers or the winners? Assuming I have a choice & they’ll accept me.
21 Thomas L. Knapp // Nov 1, 2009 at 9:35 am
First and foremost, best wishes to Jim and to his family for a speedy recovery.
I’ve only met Jim a couple of times, but “violent criminal” is the last description of him that I’d come up with on the basis of those encounters.
At some point — and to my mind we are well past that point — the only way to make sense of American “law enforcement” is to think of the police in general as an occupation force, and assume that their real justification for shooting innocent civilians is “because we can get away with it.”
22 libertariangirl // Nov 1, 2009 at 9:43 am
he is a firearms instructor at Frontsite.
23 libertariangirl // Nov 1, 2009 at 9:46 am
The Libertarian Party of Clark County has no information, other than what the local media has reported, regarding the officer involved shooting of Raymond “Jim” Duensing. Until the events surrounding this incident are fully investigated, we will refrain from making any further statements.
The Libertarian Party of Clark County does not advocate fleeing the police as a means of peaceful conflict resolution. Raymond “Jim” Duensing, although a past officer of the party, holds no official standing within our party as an elected officer. Our thoughts go out to Jim Duensing, his family, and the officer involved in this incident.
Nathan Santucci
Chair
Clark County Libertarian Party
24 libertariangirl // Nov 1, 2009 at 9:48 am
thats our press release , i know some of you wont like it , too fucking bad . We in the LPNevada are in a predicament with the PR side so it is what it is .
PLEASE, PLEASE , PLEASE dont start with the blogging of conspiracy theories yet.
nothing matters right now except Jim recovering.
25 libertariangirl // Nov 1, 2009 at 9:54 am
incidentally he is going to survive , 1 broken arm , 2 other bullets passed right thru him. He’s in pain but good spirits.
to everyone who has written me on FB , email etc i will get back to you when I can , please be patient
26 Tom Blanton // Nov 1, 2009 at 10:23 am
It certainly is heartwarming to know that the thoughts of the Libertarian Party of Clark County go out to that brave officer who was forced to shoot a man in the back.
Perhaps the Libertarian Party of Clark County should send the officer some flowers.
It was a brilliant political move to issue this press release so that the general public will know that Libertarians support the police using excessive force to preserve order, just as all good Americans should. It certainly wouldn’t have prudent to wait until all the facts were known before issuing the press release.
27 Starchild // Nov 1, 2009 at 10:49 am
That’s the press release, Debra? (@23) I’m sorry, but it’s not just bad, it’s terrible! One of its own activists is shot in the back by cops, and his local party chapter’s initial reaction comes down more on the side of the police!
“The Libertarian Party of Clark County does not advocate fleeing the police as a means of peaceful conflict resolution.” (!)
So the Clark County LP *does* advocate, or at least fail to oppose, police shooting people in the back who run away from traffic stops? Some members of the public could well conclude that from what’s written.
This statement also makes it sound like the Clark County LP is trying to distance itself from Jim:
“Raymond ‘Jim’ Duensing, although a past officer of the party, holds no official standing within our party as an elected officer.”
How about:
(a) identifying Jim Duensing as Jim Duensing, the name he evidently prefers to use, rather than by his government-approved legal name?
(b) saying something positive about Jim and his association with the party and commitment to the cause of liberty?
(c) saying something about how many people are wrongly shot by police in Nevada or in the U.S., and how this kind of thing is a warning indicator of the country being in danger of becoming a police state
(d) demanding a full, independent investigation into this shooting, instead of the usual self-policing whitewash by the police?
(e) demanding to know why the officer who shot Jim is being put on *paid* leave at taxpayer expense
(f) demanding to know why the police department gets to withhold the names officers who shoot people from the public for 48 hours
Hopefully these or similar points will quickly make it into another, more detailed LPNV press release. If we’re lucky, the press will focus on that clarifying statement and ignore the shameful paragraphs of the initial statement published above with Nathan Santucci’s name on them.
28 tab // Nov 1, 2009 at 11:01 am
Don,
“Legal lawful citizens do not have to obey illegal, unlawful orders.”
Correct. But nothing the officer did was unlawful until the shooting.
1. He made several illegal turns
2. Was pulled over and had an outstanding warrant
3. The police asked him to get out of his car
4. He fled
That are the facts of the case up to this point. I don’t see any unreasonable requests by the officer.
If an officer asks you to get out and you flee on foot then you are putting yourself in an unwinnable situation.
So again the question is, why flee in the first place?
Not to mention the utter stupidity of running from the police anyways. They already had his car and his name so he wasn’t going to escape.
29 Starchild // Nov 1, 2009 at 11:09 am
Jim, you deserve every Libertarian’s sympathy and solidarity as a victim. We’d all do well to remember, “There but for a chance of fate go I.” I’m glad to hear from Beth that you are in good spirits and recovering from this horrible incident, and my thoughts and (non-diety-worshipping) prayers are with you.
30 Starchild // Nov 1, 2009 at 11:12 am
P.S. – I hope when you are better, you sue the pants off the Las Vegas Police Department and its trigger-happy, shoot-people-in-the-back employee.
31 Starchild // Nov 1, 2009 at 11:31 am
tab,
According to the story, Jim made *an* illegal turn (one) and several illegal lane changes. Big freaking deal. Probably half or more of the drivers out there change lanes without signaling on a regular basis, and for all we know Jim made the lane changes in question in his haste to pull over when he saw a cop car with its lights flashing behind him. Haven’t you ever gotten nervous while being followed by a cop and made a driving mistake you wouldn’t have otherwise?
As for the “illegal turn”, that’s about as bad as jaywalking — many places with no-turn signs are totally safe to turn, and the signs do nothing but cause vast quantities of extra oil being burned and extra pollutants pumped into the atmosphere from people driving the long way around to get to where they’re trying to go rather than just making the turn.
According to the eyewitness, the police had been targeting lots of drivers in the area, and this officer was probably on the lookout for any tiny infraction because he/she had some kind of quota, formal or otherwise.
The fact that Jim had warrants is no reason to automatically fault him either. If the warrants were for armed robbery or something that would be one thing, but I highly doubt any such thing was true. Far likelier these warrants — one more police tool to keep people in line and fearful from exercising their rights for fear of attracting official attention — were imposed as punishment for actions we should be applauding, such as failure to pay other bull—- citations.
All those details are mere footnotes however, and the bottom line is this: If you are a police officer and shoot a fleeing suspect who poses no threat to anyone in the back, you are putting yourself in a “morally unwinnable situation.”
May justice, morality, and accountability prevail!
32 libertariangirl // Nov 1, 2009 at 11:33 am
Starchild , we are in a PR nightmare , what we are publically saying now , isnt what is being said behind the scenes or what will be said in the future .
Id really love if you and others could quit passing judgement on us , you dont know how we’ve been hounded
you say:So the Clark County LP *does* advocate, or at least fail to oppose, police shooting people in the back who run away from traffic stops? Some members of the public could well conclude that from what’s written.
me _thats fucking bullshit and you know it . we mean had he not run , he wouldnt be shot .We dont advocate running over dumb shit , a fucking unpaid traffic ticket.
WE DONT ADVOCATE COPS SHOOTING PEOPLE IN THE BACK AND YOU KNOW IT. TO DAY THAT IS RUDE , IRRESPONSIBLE AND UNETHICAL AS AN ARGUMENT.
you dont know what we are dealing with
33 libertariangirl // Nov 1, 2009 at 11:34 am
to say that , not day that
and Beth is him mom not his wife:)
34 Brian Miller // Nov 1, 2009 at 11:47 am
It’s not a “PR nightmare.” If the man is no longer an officer, you simply respond that you have no comment as none of the confirmed facts behind the incident are public knowledge yet.
If they press you for more, you simply ask them if they asked the Democratic Party or Republican Party leads for statements about controversies involving their former leaders (there are hundreds of them), and when they say they don’t know, you reply “then why are we being held to a different standard?”
It’s easy and doesn’t require polarizing press releases that will look silly later regardless of the situation (e.g. someone was in the wrong that day and by extending sympathies and “thoughts” to them now, you’ll have MORE explaining to do later).
In marketing it’s best not to say anything if you don’t know *exactly* what to say.
35 NewFederalist // Nov 1, 2009 at 11:49 am
This is certainly a situation where the less said the better. Until ALL the facts are known any speculation is dangerous and can be twisted and spun to suit the intended audience. Sometimes silence IS golden.
36 tab // Nov 1, 2009 at 11:52 am
Starchild,
I think you are misunderstanding my point. I’m not trying to defend the shooting of Mr. Duensing. If he was indeed shot in the back I believe that is illegal by just about every cops standards.
I’m arguing that you don’t flee from the police when you are stopped for minor traffic violations. Nobody in their right mind would do something like that.
So instead of a traffic violation he decided to add on evading arrest and possibly more on top of the minor traffic incident.
37 las vegas property // Nov 1, 2009 at 11:53 am
Hello,
I am developing a blog focusing on the benefits of investing in property in the Las Vegas area. A Google alert turned up your site, and I was curious if you were interested in a link exchange. My site is still in development, but when finished I hope to have general investment tips and strategies, popular areas around the city to invest, as well as fee and contact info for local property management companies.
Thanks in advance for your consideration, and feel free to visit my site at http://lasvegasinvestmentpropertyguide.com.
Jeff
38 Brian Miller // Nov 1, 2009 at 11:57 am
you don’t flee from the police when you are stopped for minor traffic violations
Ordinarily, you are correct. However, there’s also instinct and extenuating circumstances to consider. For instance, when someone is tasered, it’s most common for that individual’s extreme “fight or flight” mechanism to kick in. If he was tasered several times as is claimed, it’s more than likely that his instinct was to flee.
Again, best not to comment until all the facts are known. If you were in a situation where you’d been repeatedly tasered, chances are you would attempt to flee regardless of your theory on what to do in such a situation — instinct is a powerful driver of behavior.
39 libertariangirl // Nov 1, 2009 at 11:58 am
I stand by Nathan Santucci and his choice of words in the release .
personally , Ive spoken with Jim and will be going to see him today or tomorrow. he is doing great and will undoubtedly have a lawsuit against the dept. in the future.
the sentence about him notbeing an officer was added becausethere was some confusion over that.
40 Brian Miller // Nov 1, 2009 at 12:02 pm
Regardless of where this goes, LG, you guys are going to have to issue another one when the facts are fully known.
Again, it was best to say NOTHING AT ALL until the facts were better known. Nobody can reasonably hold a political organization responsible for an ambiguous situation regarding a former officer, and you’ll be issuing “clarifying” releases for weeks to come now, which means the focus on LPNV will be this situation and not policy/elections.
41 Susan Hogarth // Nov 1, 2009 at 12:07 pm
lg,
Why did the LPN feel it necessary to issue a PR?
42 Brian Miller // Nov 1, 2009 at 12:12 pm
Is the contention that Shane Corey was involved in the development of the release also accurate?
43 Susan Hogarth // Nov 1, 2009 at 12:19 pm
Sorry, CCLP, not LPNV.
44 Susan Hogarth // Nov 1, 2009 at 12:19 pm
Brian, who made that ‘contention’?
45 libertariangirl // Nov 1, 2009 at 12:25 pm
geez…
Shane Cory WAS NOT INVOLVED in that release.
Here comes the rumor mill
Shane heard the story and texted our chair who asked his opinion thats all!~!
people need to stop spreading rumors
we put out a release because every paper and newsstation was hounding Nathan , Joe and even Tim Hagan .
We decided Nate would be official spokes person and that we would put out a release before some other libertarian spoke and by default that would become the ‘official’ statement .
What should Nate have done after being hounded by press.
He’s done a fine job and the release said as little as possible.
46 libertariangirl // Nov 1, 2009 at 12:27 pm
Nathan wrote it by himself and asked for editing from his excomm , period!
no outside person had any say at all.
Rowan Wilson needs to get her facts straight and Im gonna flippin write her right now . Shes the source for the Cory rumor
47 Austin Petersen // Nov 1, 2009 at 12:53 pm
I shot the sheriff, but I did not shoot the deputy…. too soon?
48 Denver Delegate // Nov 1, 2009 at 12:53 pm
News release makes it into updated story:
http://www.lvrj.com/news/friend-identifies-man-shot-by-police-68202707.html
Friend identifies man shot by police
By ANTONIO PLANAS
LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL
A friend and former colleague of a man shot by Las Vegas police after fleeing from an officer confirmed Saturday the wounded man is a local attorney who last year ran unsuccessfully for Congress on the Libertarian ticket.
The friend, a lawyer who did not want to be identified, last worked with Raymond James Duensing during the summer of 2007.
He said he spoke by phone Saturday morning with Duensing, who was recovering from his injuries at University Medical Center.
The friend said Duensing was being guarded in his hospital room by police and therefore was cautious about talking about the incident during their conversation.
The friend said Duensing, known to acquaintances as Jim, had wounds on his back and arm after being shot three times.
He added that he was surprised Duensing was shot by police Thursday afternoon after a routine traffic stop near Cheyenne Avenue and Jones Boulevard.
“I’ve known Jim for years. He’s not a nut. He’s not the kind of guy who’s going to flee from police.”
Police said the officer fired his weapon after Duensing was asked to get out of his Pontiac rental car because a records check indicated he had a misdemeanor warrant for his arrest.
Police said Duensing then fled and was unsuccessfully Tased and shot several times after he reached in his front pocket for a .45-caliber handgun. Police also said Duensing reached for a large folding knife.
“He was Tased. He did tell me that,” Duensing’s friend said. “I think when the officer Tased him, it scared the crap out of him. I don’t think he expected to be Tased over a traffic stop.”
The friend said Duensing didn’t tell him if he had carried a weapon during the shooting. But he said Duensing does have a concealed weapons permit and also works at a gun range as a shooting instructor.
Police said in a news release that Duensing is 31, but Clark County Detention Center records, where he was booked in absentia on a charge of resisting a public officer with a weapon, indicated he’s 33.
The friend said Duensing told him he was pulled over because he drove through an intersection in a right-turn-only lane.
He said Duensing expects to be released from the hospital in two or three days and has obtained an attorney.
Duensing unsuccessfully ran for Congress against Shelley Berkley, D-Nev, in 2008, 2006 and 2004, generally garnering 2 percent to 3 percent of the vote.
Clark County Libertarian Party chairman Nathan Santucci said Duensing was the party’s state chairman until earlier this year.
“The Libertarian Party does not advocate fleeing from police as a means of peaceful conflict resolution,” Santucci said. “Although he is a past officer of our party, he currently holds no official standing with our party as an elected officer. Our thoughts go out to him, his family and the officer involved in the incident.”
Metropolitan Police Department policy is to release the identity of an officer who fires a weapon in the line of duty within 48 hours. As of Saturday afternoon, the identity of the officer involved in the shooting hadn’t been released. The officer has been placed on administrative leave pending an internal investigation.
One witness to the incident questioned whether Duensing had a gun.
Brandi Burks, 19, said she was standing outside her apartment complex on Cheyenne, west of Michael Way, when the shooting took place.
Burks said motorcycle officers had been patrolling the street heavily on Thursday, pulling over speeders.
Burks said a motorcycle officer stopped Duensing’s car on the far right lane of eastbound Cheyenne, near Michael Way.
The officer asked the driver to step out of the vehicle. Duensing stepped out and began running northwest across Cheyenne, Burks said. The officer told Duensing to stop, she said, but he kept running.
As he was running, he kept grabbing his pants, as if to hold them up, Burks said. She did not see a gun.
She saw the officer fire his gun at Duensing when he reached the sidewalk. He went down, and officers handcuffed him.
Capt. Randy Montandon, who briefed the media at the scene after the Thursday shooting, said he saw Duensing’s gun.
According to Las Vegas police policy, police can use deadly force based on the severity of the crime, whether the suspect is a threat to the officer or others and whether the suspect is actively resisting arrest or attempting to avoid arrest by fleeing.
Contact reporter Antonio Planas at aplanas@reviewjournal.com or 702-383-4638.
49 Starchild // Nov 1, 2009 at 12:53 pm
Whoops! Thanks for the correction on Beth’s relation to Jim, Debra!
Please do understand, I’m not calling any of *you* shameful, only the
press statement itself. I’m glad to hear you’ve been hounded, if this
means that what was written was what it was due to being put out in a
rush under pressure rather than to an unwillingness to call the police
on their murderous authoritarianism and stand behind one of your own.
I truly hope a stronger and more pro-freedom statement will be
forthcoming.
If it turns out that something is going on behind the scenes which
would justify the statement that was released, I will certainly
apologize for my comment, but I can’t imagine what it could be. What
possible, hypothetical reason could justify making the unnecessary
statement to the press that the Clark County LP does not condone
fleeing from the police to resolve a peaceful situation, while saying
nothing about not condoning police officers shooting fleeing people in
the back?
I wrote, “So the Clark County LP *does* advocate, or at least fail to oppose, police shooting people in the back who run away from traffic stops? Some members of the public could well conclude that from what’s written.”
And I think that’s true. The general public is not as familiar with the Libertarian Party’s perspective as we are. Commenting only that “The Libertarian Party of Clark County does not advocate fleeing the police as a means of peaceful conflict resolution” while saying nothing against police shooting people in the back who run away, could easily give members of the public the impression that the LPCC puts most of the blame for what happened on Jim.
I think I know you well enough to feel confident that *you* don’t look at the situation that way, but in these days of presidential candidates like Bob Barr and Wayne Allyn Root, I couldn’t say for sure how others in the Nevada party whom I don’t know might look at it.
50 Brian Miller // Nov 1, 2009 at 12:55 pm
Susan, it was a claim mailed anonymously to a bunch of people and I figured I’d be the one to “clear the air.”
51 Brian Miller // Nov 1, 2009 at 12:57 pm
The press release debate is immaterial at this point — it’s already out there for better or for worse.
52 Starchild // Nov 1, 2009 at 1:00 pm
“Shane heard the story and texted our chair who asked his opinion…”
And the opinion that he offered was??
53 Starchild // Nov 1, 2009 at 1:05 pm
Brian,
The point of discussing the press release is to ensure the next one that goes out is better.
54 libertariangirl // Nov 1, 2009 at 1:05 pm
our State Chair Joe Silvestri , not Nathan . I dont know what Cory said , and I dont care.
I dont know why he would even tell Rowan that or why it even matters, and it was not an anonymous email , it was Rowan because she brought it to my attention .
I dont know why people are trying to make controversy where there isnt any . Shane flippin Cory had nothing to do with anything.
55 libertariangirl // Nov 1, 2009 at 1:12 pm
Joe Silvestri is not even on the the LPCC excom.
Brian , please stop spreading the rumor Corey had anything to do with our release its just bullshit . total fucking fabrication. it only adds to the allure for some that there is some evil cabal controlling things from the top down .
NOONE BUT THE CCLP EXCOM HAD ANY SAY IN THE RELEASE AND NOONE WILL FOR FUTURE RELEASES.
NOT WAYNE , NOT SHANE , NOT AARON
just knock it off , the fact that an anonymous email telling folks shane was involved is such crap trying to start shit that isnt there .
plain fucking retarded
please stop it
56 Starchild // Nov 1, 2009 at 1:17 pm
Debra,
So your assertion is that Shane Cory [former LP executive director who had close relations with the Bob Barr campaign and was widely believed to have somewhat conservative leanings] texted Nevada LP chair Joe Silvestri about the story, and that Joe asked Shane’s advice — but that no one who actually worked on writing the press release heard this advice?
57 Starchild // Nov 1, 2009 at 1:19 pm
Let me revise that last question slightly– no one who actually worked on writing the press release *or voted to approve the press release* heard Shane’s advice?
58 Brian Holtz // Nov 1, 2009 at 1:37 pm
LG, now you know what it’s like to be hounded by uninformed outsiders over the handling of potential negative publicity. Ignore the hounders, and do what you know is right.
59 Starchild // Nov 1, 2009 at 1:51 pm
Brian,
If there had been more concern over doing what people know is right, and less concern over potential negative publicity, people like me would probably be saying “excellent press release!” right now, instead of wondering what went wrong.
Other than Jim’s full and speedy recovery, I wish nothing more in this situation than to see the entire Libertarian Party and libertarian movement standing 100% behind him, and demanding accountability and answers about his shooting at the hands of those who are supposed to “serve and protect.”
60 libertariangirl // Nov 1, 2009 at 2:10 pm
Brian , point taken . The irony is not lost on me.
61 Brian Holtz // Nov 1, 2009 at 2:14 pm
Starchild, LG (and others) will understand the context of my comment @58, but you apparently do not — thus rendering your @59 somewhat ironic. I’ll send you an email offline to get you up to speed.
Replace “wondering” with “loudly and prematurely wondering”, and you might start to understand my point.
62 libertariangirl // Nov 1, 2009 at 2:15 pm
Starchild , no. Shane texted /spoke with our State Chair , dont know what was said.
Nathan wrote the release on his own and submitted for editing to his exomm .
whether or not Silvestri relayed info to Santucci about what Corey said is such a ridiculous question.
Who cares ?
I just spoke with Nathan , he told me noone had any say or influence period .
I stand by him and the release . We do not advocate running from the police over a traffic stop .
this whole Corey thing is unnecessary drama where there is none .
63 libertariangirl // Nov 1, 2009 at 2:33 pm
there was no vote to approve . we trust Nate , he asking for editing and that was it.
He is doing a fine job .
64 Thomas L. Knapp // Nov 1, 2009 at 3:59 pm
LG,
Kudos for not trying to shift blame to Mr. Cory for LP Nevada’s stupid and disgusting release. Not shifting blame is the first step toward the first step (the first step is admitting you have a problem).
Regards,
Tom
65 libertariangirl // Nov 1, 2009 at 4:05 pm
Seriously , I asked Rowan if she started that rumor and she said no . I have no reason not to believe her so I apologize for naming her above…
What do you think we should have said Tom?
66 Robert Capozzi // Nov 1, 2009 at 4:15 pm
I’m with Brian Miller on this. Saying as little as possible — which the release came close to doing — was the appropriate response.
IF this should become an issue for the CC or NVLP to make a big deal out of, there will be time for that.
67 libertariangirl // Nov 1, 2009 at 4:25 pm
exactly what were trying to do and Im already in trouble with my team for posting anything at all here .
I just have no restraint when defending my team against rumors and accusations.
hey , at least I didnt break the story anywhere:)
68 Robert Milnes // Nov 1, 2009 at 4:33 pm
Ok, I’ve read more than enough. Sufficiently, who what where when & why. In my opinion, knowing the national political situation as I do & the government, specifically agents & their minions, I’m confident in saying the following now about this incident. It looks to me this is very likely an insurance move to guarantee there is no last minute PLAS support, specifically a press conference in Washington. I can just hear the think tank type meeting. What do we do about the possibility of some sort of last minute support for PLAS this weekend? Well, let’s shoot one of them. That will get their attention & withdraw any attention from PLAS & time & energy & money etc for at least a few days. So what if down the line somebody gets killed or sued. Well who & where & what circumstances? Get somebody looking at a lot of time & make a deal in exchange foe a drive-by? No. Too obvious & possible down twisted effects. Sniper Bob Milnes? No, he’s not expendable & too obvious. Tom K. No, ex Marine. Too many would object to shooting an ex-Marine. Barr, Root, Viguerie, Paul, etc. NO! They are our dupes! We need them. So who. Well there is this guy in Nevada. Has outstanding warrants. Ran for Congress. Former LP party official. Firearms instructor with permit to carry. Let’s make sure he is carrying when we move on him. The pretext will be general random motorcycle patrols stopping speeders etc. at a certain general location where he’ll be. He’ll get stopped & confrontation proceeds. lg, sorry but Second Amendment buff firearms instructor is no match for the poolice. Didn’t you see The Shootist? Sure it is fiction set in turn of the century Carson City, Nevada. But nevertheless target practice is far different from any sort of shooting involving anybody. We’ll eventually hear Jim’s version & why he rabbited. & whether he was really carrying or not. Meanwhile no press conference this weekend in Washington, huh?
69 Thomas L. Knapp // Nov 1, 2009 at 5:05 pm
LG,
You write:
“What do you think we should have said Tom?”
Until all the facts are in, as little as possible.
If a statement was absolutely necessary?
1. Confirm that yes, Jim is a past LPNV chair, without trying to dissociate yourselves from him (if for no other reason than that any attempt at dissociation is going to ring hollow — he’s your past chair and a three-time nominee for Congress, not some dude who once attended a party meeting).
2. “We pray for his full and speedy recovery,” etc. Leave the cop out of the condolences. The cop isn’t in the hospital with multiple gunshot wounds. At the very worst, he’s home watching TV with pay after shooting someone in the back, and with every prospect of getting away clean even if it was a bad shoot. At the very most and best, he did a job for which he applied and for which he is paid. He didn’t charge into a bank to save hostages from an armed robber, or rescue a little kitten from a tree. He just shot a guy in the back, that’s all.
3. “We don’t have all the facts and we’re not willing to jump to conclusions just so you guys have something to print. Like everyone else, we hope to learn the truth of what happened as quickly as possible.”
Defaulting to a “there must have been a good reason for the cops to do this” position, which is what the “we don’t recommend …” bit amounts to, is just as irresponsible as coming out with a statement that Jim was absolutely correct in his actions. You don’t KNOW what happened. Hell, people who were THERE aren’t really sure what happened, or at least their accounts conflict. Pretending to know things you don’t know is almost always a bad idea.
70 Don Lake, late at night // Nov 1, 2009 at 5:50 pm
Tom Knapp, the Heart Land’s voice of reason and rationale ??????
71 Robert Capozzi // Nov 1, 2009 at 5:56 pm
Yes, for unlikely future events of this nature, a release probably should read something more like this:
“At this time, the Libertarian Party of Clark County can only confirm that Mr. Duensing is a member in good standing. Until the events surrounding this incident are fully investigated, we will refrain from making any further statements. We wish him a speedy recovery.”
As others have noted, while Jim could be a civil and sociable. In recent years, he’s also been quite vocal in advocating the 9/11 Truth position, which many if not most Ls do NOT hold. One gets the sense that CCLP is understandably concerned that Jim can be a controversial figure. Nevertheless, his treatment should be fair and respectful, and at this point nothing indicates he deserves to be disassociated from. OTOH, I certainly understand why the CCLP would want to take a public position against “fleeing from the police.”
72 Thomas L. Knapp // Nov 1, 2009 at 6:08 pm
Bob,
The fact that Jim is a fairly prominent “Truther” is one of the best reasons not to suddenly start trying to dissociate from him now.
He was a “Truther” when he ran for Congress three times. He was a “Truther” when he chaired the LPNV twice. While I’m not a “Truther” myself in the same sense of the word as he is, the LPNV apparently didn’t consider that a reason to dump him, and I see no reason to question their decision not to.
The LPNV didn’t attempt to dissociate from him then. Waiting until the media comes nosing around years later and then doing so is pretty much publicly saying, “hey, we’re willing to be guilty, we just don’t want to get caught.”
If you’re going to stand by a guy through three congressional campaigns and two chairmanships, then please have the good grace not to stab him in the back after a cop shoots him in the back.
73 Jim Duensing // Nov 1, 2009 at 6:42 pm
First, I’d like to thank everyone for their prayers and well wishes.
I have suffered a broken arm. It is currently pinned in 4 places. Additional surgery on it will probably take place on Wednesday.
The shots to my midsection missed all vital organs. Three shots were fired from behind me and to my right. The doctors believe that two of the shots made contact. It appears that one entered my right pec, bounced off my sternum, went through my left pec, then shattered my humerous just above my left elbow. The second shot went in my lower right abdomen and exited my left abdomen without hitting any vital organs.
I am well on the way to recovery. and expect to be released from the hospital shortly after my surgery on Wednesday.
I am disappointed that the CCLP issued a press release without having spoken to me first. As a result, it contains misstatements of fact.
Here is what happened.
I was pulled over for driving straight through an intersection in a right turn only lane. I did signal for my lane changes to the left.
After exiting the vehicle at the officer’s request, I was standing with my back to the vehicle. The car’s open door was to my right. My hands were raised above my head. I was calmly speaking to the cop attempting to talk my way out of being taken to jail over an unpaid High Occupancy Vehicle ticket.
With my hands raised above my head, the cop shot me with a taser in the chest. As I have had heart problems since my premature birth, I believe a Taser to be a lethal weapon. Several people without heart conditions have been killed by this weapon.
When the taser began electrocuting me, instinct took over. I have been shocked by standard 120 volt electricity, which is what is used in your home. That was bad enough. Metro’s tasers contain “50,000 volts of pain compliance” according to one of the cops at the family law court who was operating the checkpoint.
Let me tell you, it is quite painful.
I immediately turned to my left and began moving away from the source of the electrocution. By the time I got to the back of the vehicle, I had reached up with both hands, grabbed the electrodes, and pulled them away from my chest. The juice then flowed through my arms – not my heart. As I lay here in my hospital bed, I firmly believe this instinct saved my life.
I continued running away from the taser. I heard the cop fire it again, but did not feel an additional shock.
I was running down the sidewalk with empty hands. I heard three pops from behind me. At first, I thought it was another taser shot. Then, I saw my left arm dangling.
I was taken down by a second officer – who was nearby conducting a separate unrelated traffic stop. He had me lying facedown on my broken arm. It was at this point that he found my licensed and registered pistol in my right cargo pants pocket and my Emerson folding knife in my right front pocket.
Let me reiterate. I am a firearms instructor at the world’s largest firearms training facility. I always carry a gun and at least one knife. I NEVER pulled either of these items out of my pockets.
The shooter was on my right side and from his perspective had to have been able to see that my right hand was indeed empty. The officer that I was running toward never reached for any weapon.
I’d like to publicly thank the Trauma surgeons at the UMC Medical facility. They did an excellent job. The reason additional surgery on my arm is necessary is because the wounds to my chest took priority. For good reason, they worry first about life, then about limb.
Again, thanks everyone for their well wishes. I have spoken to several people on the phone since being released from custody – although I still have not heard from the CCLP or the NVLP chairs.
To my knowledge, the CCLP had not issued a press release in years. I’m not sure why it felt compelled to issue one in this instance which contained misstatements of fact and which clearly tried to distance the CCLP from one of its members. Although, not an officer, I am a voting member of the CCLP excomm. Needless to say, my editing advice was not sought on the press release before it was issued.
Incidentally, I was returning from a trip to Carson City, following the Teabagger Express in support of my 2010 Senate campaign to unseat the Senator from Searchlight.
The campaign website is http://www.HellForHarry.com. I feel compelled to mention this, because neither the RJ nor the LP included this information in their written statements.
Rather than send flowers, please send your condolences in the form of campaign contributions
In liberty, with eternal vigilance,
Jim Duensing
74 libertariangirl // Nov 1, 2009 at 7:17 pm
im getting the major chastisement for saying anything at all . LOL
big boss and mini b are smacking my hand for daring to disobey their orders.
Jim , I dont know if ill be down tonite or tomorrow , me and Angy we’re gonna come but I dont think she can or rather I havent heard back.
Ill come by tomorrow , unless I hear back from her.
75 Chuck Moulton // Nov 1, 2009 at 8:44 pm
That’s awful, Jim. I hope you sue the police… make them regret their actions and get compensation for your injuries.
76 Mik Robertson // Nov 1, 2009 at 8:58 pm
Getting on the road to recovery is the first thing. Take it a step at a time and consider things carefully. Good to hear the prognosis is good!
77 John C // Nov 1, 2009 at 9:04 pm
I don’t know Jim Duensing or anything about him, but I believe his story as 100% truth.
The police ALWAYS lie about these things. I first read about this on the InjusticeNews feed. As a regular reader of that and sites like The Agitator, I am never surprised by any police shooting.
I am sure the cop will get a medal soon.
78 Gary Williams // Nov 1, 2009 at 11:11 pm
“Sounds like a prima facie unjustified shooting.”
Given than it was traffic violations – of course it was. Running away IS NOT reason to shoot someone, be it in the front OR the back.
However, if any charges are laid you can bet your bottom dollar “Force Science Research Center” will get the call to mount yet another “stress” defense for a jury chosen precisely for it’s susceptibility to the pseudo-science dog & pony shows that FSRC Director Bill Lewinski specializes in.
After the sharp rise in paramilitary policing that started in the 80s, the military mindset that is now rampant among LEOs has resulted in the same “take no chances” mindset that is appropriate for military operations in foreign countries ONLY. And that’s when FSRC came into it’s own.
While presenting a thin veneer of scientific objectivity, it’s purpose is simply to provide FOP and other such orgs. with “data”they can supply union lawyers with to sway juries, media, public opinion, or use in presentations for politicians to ensure the continued flow of those toys the Pentagon started handing out, as well as the immunity from prosecution they enjoy so they can continue to enjoy their toys.
Here’s a paper they put out that purports to sound like they’re just trying to get at the truth of what happened at a the scene of an officer-on-civilian shooting death. Note how each recommendation sounds like precisely the kind of thing defense lawyer would hope to be able to to with his officer-client before a statement is taken from him.
http://www.forcescience.org/fsinews/2008/11/stress-memory-important-new-findings-from-fsrc-research/
79 tab // Nov 1, 2009 at 11:26 pm
I don’t know if it’s just me, but if a lawsuit is planned I don’t know if I would post versions of the event online. May want to keep that under wraps until the trial has concluded.
80 Robert Milnes // Nov 1, 2009 at 11:29 pm
Jim, I’m glad and relieved that you are in recovery and have commented here about this incident. My interest in this is that I am concerned about a fellow lib. & about a police shooting victim. But I’m also concerned about the PLAS. However my name is not John C. @77. I do not assume you have given a 100% accurate account. You might be leaving out something or exaggerating or mistaken etc. First of all based on your account we all are going to have to adjust the shot in the back rhetoric. In order for your right & left pec & sternum to be hit & subsequently Left -I assume-arm which was broken by the bullet impact & right > left lower abdomen, the shooter was on your right almost directly 90 degrees. Unless you were being pursued from behind & turned to your right & was shot at that time, position & angle. Either way you were not shot in the back. & if your account is accurate, what provoked the officer to taze you? If there was no provocation, then he was trying to provoke YOU into going for your weapon whereupon he would shoot you dead. Meaning he was DIRECTLY involved. However I believe in most domestic covert operations, the police are DUPED into doing what they do. So further questions if you don’t mind. Did the officer see you going straight in a right only lane & then follow you, promptly turning on his lights & pulling you over promptly? Or was he following you for some time & were you aware of him back there & trying to evade, maybe speeding? & you say you got out upon request & had your hands up. Did the officer tell you to put your hands up or did you do that on your own? If the latter that is body language saying “I’m carrying but displaying my hands for you to see I’m not going for my gun.” You see, I’m no expert but I have been pulled over or stopped while walking by the police several times so I am somewhat familiar with the routine. & I just visited the Frontsite website. Wow! Gunlovers resort! Better training than police or military. I doubt it. Somebody, probably Piazza is making some $ though. I’m interested in further investigation of this matter but to be honest I’m more interested in how it has or might affect the PLAS. Please keep us informed as to your recovery.
81 Robert Milnes // Nov 1, 2009 at 11:58 pm
Jim, tab @79 has a point. You are looking at possible criminal & civil proceedings. OTOH, if domestic surveillance for political reasons is involved, you have a complete dismissal defense. It was mentioned in The Age of Surveillance. I believe it was SCOTUS Alderson decision 1969. Dismissal upon evidence of unfair/illegal/unconstitutional previous domestic surveillance information used by LEO and/or prosecution or government agents particularly FBI.
82 mensrea // Nov 2, 2009 at 1:59 am
The word is ’shocked’ not ‘electrocuted.’ Electrocution means death by contact with electricity. You were shocked.
83 libertariangirl // Nov 2, 2009 at 2:10 am
I prematurely posted our press release . I thought that our Chair , Nathan had posted it already and I was reposting it here.
I was wrong , nothin went out and I (like my usual big mouth) jumped the gun .
I apologize only to Nathan Santucci if I caused him any undue stress.
As for jim , I went to the hospital and i swear , as god as y witness , the boy is not human.
Not only is he lucid , talkative and upbeat , he is turning down pain medicine!!!!!!
RU effin kidding me??
seriously , im a little freaked out at how unscathed he is.
I am so relieved he will be ok . No matter what bad things have transpired between us , it takes a near tragedy to realize whats important and what isnt.
84 mensrea // Nov 2, 2009 at 2:43 am
^
You’re not helping with the lawsuit. There is no intersection of Pain Free Street and Big Money Ln.
85 Robert Milnes // Nov 2, 2009 at 3:11 am
Jim, mensrea has a point. You have been shocked. Physically & mentally. You literally came within an inch of your life. The bullet that went through your pecs & shattered your bone could just as soon gone through your heart and/or lungs. It is ok to kick back & take it easy. Movement affects the stitches or do you want to flash your scars to the chicks? LOL is going to hurt. Don’t pork lg with the curtain open i.e. in front of witnesses. Take your meds. Chill. & get well soon.
86 Thomas L. Knapp // Nov 2, 2009 at 3:34 am
LG,
THANK YOU for taking responsibility there.
Regards,
Tom
87 Jill Pyeatt // Nov 2, 2009 at 4:28 am
Jim, I don’t know you (I don’t think), but I’m very sorry for your trouble and I’m very pleased you’re doing so well. I do wonder if you’re actually typing yourself with a broken arm? It hurts just to think about it.
On a cynical note, I think that many of us who are speaking out loudly about this abysmal state of things in this country can expect this kind of treatment. It’s hard to think this was an attack against any old random person.
88 D. Frank Robinson // Nov 2, 2009 at 5:11 am
Libertarians and all other third party candidates would be advised to be accompanied by a chase car with at least one video camera to record any incidents that arise.
In the early 1980s several Libertarians here in Oklahoma City were order by police, at the behest of officials of the State Fair authorities, to stop soliciting signatures for a ballot access petition. This was NOT during the Oklahoma State Fair. It was a public gun show on the grounds where the Oklahoma State Fair is held.
Two of the petitioners were arrested for refusing to stop. I was not because I did leave and called our attorney.
NO excessive force was used by officers of the Oklahoma City Police Department in that incident. Their behavior was civil and restrained. And of course our petitioners did not resist arrest; and we were prepared to seek legal redress.
The action resulted in a law suit that vindicated the right to petition on the public property of the State Fair grounds at any time when the State Fair was not in operation and a small sum in damages was paid to the plaintiffs (us) by the City of Oklahoma City.
Today I would not be so confident of respectful and civil treatment by police.
Twenty years ago the corporate media were not so eager to act as PR agents to justification police aggression. Today, independent citizen news reporters need to grab their video cameras and fill the void.
Best wishes and sympathy to Jim for a full recovery and public vindication.
To LP people: get a grip and do not turn on one another until the evidence is available to consider, then render your judgments.
Founding Chair and Chair Emeritus, LP of Oklahoma
89 Robert Capozzi // Nov 2, 2009 at 6:53 am
Some here seem to be suggesting that Jim was targeted and hunted down to be assassinated…am I getting that right? Anything’s possible, of course, but I urge against jumping to that conclusion.
OTOH, this could be an EXCELLENT opportunity to unmask police brutality. Using a taser on an HOV violator who has a heart condition: Wow, what a setup! And then shooting him in the back!
Horrible stuff. In this case, Rahm Emanuel is right: “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.”
90 Aroundtheblockafewtimes // Nov 2, 2009 at 9:33 am
This is an excellent opportunity for Wayne Allyn Root to use his media soapboxes to call attention to the use of unreasonable force by police, not only in Nevada but everywhere.
If that pisses off some conservative police-lovers, then so be it.
91 Kevin O'Connell // Nov 2, 2009 at 10:47 am
According to Duensing’s statement he was pulled over to be given a traffic violation ticket. The officer checked and found an outstanding warrant on him. Duensing stated he was trying to “talk” the officer out of arresting him, this is where things begin falling apart.
By talking back to the officer to try and convince him not to take him in it means he had been told he was under arrest. At this point the officer will be telling him to comply with being cuffed and taken in. Just because he does not want to be arrested is no excuse for not complying with this lawful order by this cop which as an attorney he was aware of. \
With Duensing not complying he is resisting arrest. The officer then has some options as to what force to administer to bring Duensing to jail.
http://www.lvrj.com/news/identity-of-man-shot-by-lv-police-revealed-67906552.html
“Police Department policy allows the use of deadly force based on the severity of the crime, whether the suspect is a threat to the officer or others, and whether the suspect is actively resisting arrest or trying to avoid arrest by fleeing.”
The officer correctly choose to what is referred to as a “less lethal” device, in this case a taser. While Duensing may have heart problems that make him more at risk to a taser this would not be known to a police officer. Perhaps Duensing would have preferred to be beaten down with a nightstick but he did not offer this as an option to the officer.
By Duensing’s statement he was tasered and then fled the scene. He says he did not try to draw any weapon which another officer thought he either had done or was trying too.
The news article reported one witness, a 19 year old girl named Burks, who said she saw the police pull him over, shoot him as he ran but did not see him draw a weapon. That she did see him pulling at his pants but she thought he was trying to keep his pants from falling down as he ran. The problem with this witness is she also says she did not see him tasered which both Duensing and the police confirm what happened. Apparently this witness did not have a very good view of events.
Do not forget the arrest of former LP of Wisconsin Jeff Wood on Oct 22 of this year. The police cruiser’s camera and microphones recorded the arrest. It is likely that the traffic stop of Duensing was also recorded. Do not be surprised if the police give him time to make false statements then release such a tape to the public.
Duensing resisted arrest, fled from arrest and was shot, after less lethal force was used, apparently within guidelines for use of force. No matter what shortcomings are found with the police officers actions Duensing by his own words is responsible for his getting shot.
92 Kevin O'Connell // Nov 2, 2009 at 10:55 am
tab // Nov 1, 2009 at 11:26 pm wrote:
I don’t know if it’s just me, but if a lawsuit is planned I don’t know if I would post versions of the event online. May want to keep that under wraps until the trial has concluded.
———————–
You are smarter than a 5th grader and an attorney!
————————
This guy has a lot on the line. As an attorney he is legally an “Officer of the Court” his resisting an arrest may be enough to get him disbarred.
Looks like you understand the saying “Give a man enough rope and he will hang himself”. If this guy makes statements that are later proved false any further court testimony on his part will be discredited.
Also consider such false statements may be detrimental in a disbarment hearing.
93 Kevin O'Connell // Nov 2, 2009 at 11:00 am
Gary Williams // Nov 1, 2009 at 11:11 pm wrote:
“Sounds like a prima facie unjustified shooting.”
Given than it was traffic violations – of course it was. Running away IS NOT reason to shoot someone, be it in the front OR the back. ”
—————————
He was not shot for a traffic violation. He was a prisoner, under arrest, attempting to escape.
Shooting a prisoner attempting to escape, regardless of convictions or charges against them, is within the general boundaries for use of deadly force.
94 libertariangirl // Nov 2, 2009 at 11:25 am
RU serious? You think cops should shoot people just for fleeing? this when their warrant was for unpaid traffic tickets?
I believe the police protocol you listed is reserved for people running when they were about to get arrested for murder or something heinous.
They already had his name and info , even if he had fled , they’d have gotten him later if he didn’t turn himself in.
Tom K_ thanks I always try to take responsibility when Im wrong , and believe me I do it ALOT!
95 Melty // Nov 2, 2009 at 12:02 pm
I don’t get how he was a “prisoner”
96 Kevin O'Connell // Nov 2, 2009 at 12:12 pm
Melty // Nov 2, 2009 at 12:02 pm wrote:
I don’t get how he was a “prisoner”
——————————
Because he was, by his own admission, told he was being taken in due to an outstanding warrant. That made him a prisoner. His running made him an escaping prisoner.
97 Susan Hogarth // Nov 2, 2009 at 12:20 pm
Brian @50:
Susan, it was a claim mailed anonymously to a bunch of people and I figured I’d be the one to “clear the air.”
There’s a fine line between ‘clearing the air’, and ‘making a tool of yourself by spreading rumors sent toy you by people who know you’re gullible enough to spread them’.
Oh, no, wait; there isn’t.
98 Kevin O'Connell // Nov 2, 2009 at 12:26 pm
libertariangirl // Nov 2, 2009 at 11:25 am wrote:
RU serious? You think cops should shoot people just for fleeing? this when their warrant was for unpaid traffic tickets?
———————————-
author’s reply;
It is not what I think, it is as reported in the newspaper. I was only quoting police department policy as reported in the newspaper, link below (again).
http://www.lvrj.com/news/identity-of-man-shot-by-lv-police-revealed-67906552.html
“Police Department policy allows the use of deadly force based on the severity of the crime, whether the suspect is a threat to the officer or others, and whether the suspect is actively resisting arrest or trying to avoid arrest by fleeing.”
======================
I believe the police protocol you listed is reserved for people running when they were about to get arrested for murder or something heinous.
====================
author’s reply;
Perhaps, but I found no quote to that effect. Can you?
========================
They already had his name and info , even if he had fled , they’d have gotten him later if he didn’t turn himself in.
=====================
That was an option that they did not choose to exercise. I cannot blame them for that. There is always the possibility that the person they were arresting was using a fake ID, ID theft is common today. Plus he was not in his own car, it was a rental so an ID link through car registration does not exist. He could have matched photo ID with Department of Motor Vehicles driver’s license database. But still there would be that matter of issuing a warrant for the new charges of escape. So they were fully justified in pursing him as an escaping prisoner or for fleeing arrest.
Still I reserve full judgment. Let’s see what other witnesses show up and more importantly if there is a police cruiser surveillance tape of the incident.
Based on the man’s statements he was in the wrong. As to how much, if any, in the wrong the police officers were is yet to be determined.
Just because this guy is liked in the Libertarian community is no reason to rush to unqualified support. Remember Hitler was good to his family and many serial killers were liked by the people who knew, or thought they knew, them.
Time to wait and see.
99 NSFW // Nov 2, 2009 at 12:29 pm
Kevin misses the point. Even the witness’ story backs up justification for the use of force. When a police officer is pursuing a suspect who keeps reaching for his waistband and can’t see what exactly he’s reaching for, he is justified in assuming a weapon could be drawn.
That’s especially true when the suspect ripped Taser cords out of him and fled. Since the officer clearly knew Jim’s identity enough to see he had warrant for his arrest, the officer also probably saw he had a concealed carry permit and wasn’t going to wait for him to turn around and announce his intent.
100 NSFW // Nov 2, 2009 at 12:40 pm
And it’s not like he was being arrested by National Security Forces for “thought crimes.” He didn’t pay a traffic ticket and had a bench warrant. It’s like being picked up for vagrancy.
That’s no reason to fear for your life and run from the police.
101 Thomas L. Knapp // Nov 2, 2009 at 12:47 pm
Kevin,
TALKING to a police officer is not “resisting arrest.” That being the case, the rest of your argument fails for lack of foundation.
102 MengerFan // Nov 2, 2009 at 12:52 pm
Wow. There are some sick folk posting here. If your mother were shot in the back while fleeing from a rapist, would you say it was her fault?
103 Kevin O'Connell // Nov 2, 2009 at 12:56 pm
Brian Miller // Nov 1, 2009 at 12:02 pm wrote:
Regardless of where this goes, LG, you guys are going to have to issue another one when the facts are fully known.
Again, it was best to say NOTHING AT ALL until the facts were better known. Nobody can reasonably hold a political organization responsible for an ambiguous situation regarding a former officer, and you’ll be issuing “clarifying” releases for weeks to come now, which means the focus on LPNV will be this situation and not policy/elections.
——————————–
Brain’s points, made in several posts not all quoted here, are excellent.
Any comments now that do not match the facts as they are later revealed would result in a series of “clarifying” releases for weeks to come now.
The problem of later releases is that many, if not most, people will not pay them any attention if they are read at all. For that matter later releases may not, count on it, be included in later news media reports.
Makein inacurate releases too early before the facts are in only harms any organizations public image.
Of equally level of damage is other organization officials making their own personal statements. This only results int he organization later having to make even more clarifying statements that will not be effective.
Among Libertarians there is the belief that they can make any statement on their own and not involve their party.
For an officer this is not true at all. The official rank does not come on and off, anything done in the political arena affects the party. There are many who would argue against this but they fail to understand that this decision is made in the mind of non-party public and they themselves have no influence.
Brian has given darn good, first rate advice and many here argue against it. Libertarians are their own worst enemy.
104 NSFW // Nov 2, 2009 at 1:00 pm
Obviously there are some “sick folks posting here.” Please explain how getting traffic tickets and not paying them is the same as being a rape victim.
105 Kevin O'Connell // Nov 2, 2009 at 1:02 pm
Thomas L. Knapp // Nov 2, 2009 at 12:47 pm wrote;
Kevin,
TALKING to a police officer is not “resisting arrest.” That being the case, the rest of your argument fails for lack of foundation.
———————-
Couple that with saying refusing the arrest and / or not complying with the lawful order that they were under arrest and you have resistance. If the officer says turn around and put your hands behind your back to be cuffed and you refuse the order and continue talking you are resisting arrest.
At that point the officer would have to choose what level of force to use to force compliance. In this case the less lethal force of a taser was used. The lethal force of shooting was only done when they had a prisoner attempting to escape.
Also a witness observed the fleeing man garbing at his pants. This can be interpreted by the police officer as reaching for a weapon.
106 libertariangirl // Nov 2, 2009 at 1:08 pm
again , i jumped the gun like a retard and posted the release before it went out . I was mistaken in thinking Nathan Santucci had released it already, this happened because apparently Im a terrible listener and direction follower.
at any rate , discounting my mistake , no official release has been made and no official release will be made as of yet . Expect the CCLPand the LPN to say nothing , at least right now.
me? i can say whatever I want from a personal standpoint , but my statements should not be construed as being party related at all.
Im glad Jim is doing so well.
107 Kevin O'Connell // Nov 2, 2009 at 1:14 pm
NSFW // Nov 2, 2009 at 12:29 pm
wrote;
Kevin misses the point. Even the witness’ story backs up justification for the use of force. When a police officer is pursuing a suspect who keeps reaching for his waistband and can’t see what exactly he’s reaching for, he is justified in assuming a weapon could be drawn.
That’s especially true when the suspect ripped Taser cords out of him and fled. Since the officer clearly knew Jim’s identity enough to see he had warrant for his arrest, the officer also probably saw he had a concealed carry permit and wasn’t going to wait for him to turn around and announce his intent.
======================
Good points, but I also failed to cover one very important point in this part of the debate.
It has been argued that since this warrant was for a traffic violation shooting the escaping prisoner should not have been done.
Everybody, reread the news article and the man’s statement. He was NOT shoot by the arresting officer. He fled the arresting officer and was shot by another officer who was conducting another traffic stop nearby.
It is very possible that the officer that shot the man had no idea of what the warrant was on him was for. It may have been for murder, rape or any other violent crime as far as he knew.
Still even if the other officer knew at the time the man was an escaping prisoner which demanded immediate action, no time to convene a debating society.
This guy screwed up big time by resisting arrest and attempting escape. He is ground zero for this whole mess. I think it is time for some Libertarians to apply the concept of Personal Responsibility to this guy for his actions.
108 NewFederalist // Nov 2, 2009 at 1:15 pm
LG- like a retard??? Well geez… let’s see who else we can offend!
109 Don Lake, late at night // Nov 2, 2009 at 1:24 pm
libertariangirl // Nov 2, 2009 at 1:08 pm
” i … posted the release before it went out . I was mistaken in thinking Nathan Santucci had released it already…. ”
Thank good ness for small favors, such a counter productive action, and not typical of Libs!
110 Kevin O'Connell // Nov 2, 2009 at 1:40 pm
libertariangirl // Nov 2, 2009 at 1:08 pm wrote;
me? i can say whatever I want from a personal standpoint , but my statements should not be construed as being party related at all.
—————————————
I agree that anything you say from your personal standpoint “should not be construed as being party related at all”. This however does not in anyway affect the way things are in the real world.
As far as I can tell you are the Vice Chair of the Clark County LP, If you are not the Vice Chair but hold any another elected or appointed position what I say holds true… Anything you say that is in the political arena reflects back on the Libertarian Party. You get no choice in this matter.
Anything said by the officer of an organization on almost any subject reflects back on the organization. Their “personal” view will be regarded as supported by the organization. Their personal view will be regarded as what the members knew and voted into that office. Be it by rank and file organization member or organization officers filing an appointed position.
Think about it, have not you yourself commented about the Republicans or Democrats as a group based on some comment by a party official? If Libertarians participate in this type of thinking you can bet the rest of the world does also.
You attitude is selfish and contrary to the interests of the people that put you in your office. If they tolerate continued actions based on your opinion then they get the leadership they deserve. Like I said, Libertarians are their own worst enemy.
111 libertariangirl // Nov 2, 2009 at 1:52 pm
well I guess they can replace me if they like.
is not like Ive said anything untrue or controversial . Compared to my usual tone and frequesnt posting , Id say Ive had amazing restraint in not saying what I wanted .
so your saying as an excom member one shouldnt ever be able to comment on anything w/o it being construed as the party position.
thats ridiculous .
112 libertariangirl // Nov 2, 2009 at 1:54 pm
You get no choice in this matter.
me_LOL , sweetheart , theres always a choice
113 Kevin O'Connell // Nov 2, 2009 at 2:12 pm
libertariangirl // Nov 2, 2009 at 1:52 pm wrote:
well I guess they can replace me if they like.
is not like Ive said anything untrue or controversial . Compared to my usual tone and frequesnt posting , Id say Ive had amazing restraint in not saying what I wanted .
so your saying as an excom member one shouldnt ever be able to comment on anything w/o it being construed as the party position.
thats ridiculous .
======================
I never mentioned an “excom member”, I was referring to a member who was a current officer or other such position.
Are you stating you are not a current officer?
114 libertariangirl // Nov 2, 2009 at 2:22 pm
Semantic man in tha house??
excomm and officer means the same thing to me
I am a current excom member/ officer of both the NevadaLP as well as Clark Counties , duh.
what a dumb question lol
115 Kevin O'Connell // Nov 2, 2009 at 2:29 pm
libertariangirl // Nov 2, 2009 at 2:22 pm wrote;
Semantic man in tha house??
excomm and officer means the same thing to me
I am a current excom member/ officer of both the NevadaLP as well as Clark Counties , duh.
what a dumb question lol
=========================
Not dumb at all, dumb would be to ignore an ambiguous point.
I took excomm to mean Executive Committee member and a current one.
While this means the same thing to you I, nor anyone else, has reason to believe you have the same idea as I or others.
It could also mean ex-committee member. There is nothing dumb about making an ambiguous point clear.
116 libertariangirl // Nov 2, 2009 at 2:38 pm
ok
117 Scott Lieberman // Nov 2, 2009 at 3:00 pm
There are a lot of comments at the link I list below. If you read just some of them, it will become clear that it is probably a good idea that if you are stopped by the police for a traffic violation, and especially if you have a bench warrant out on you, then you should tell the police officer immediately that…
a. You have a CCW permit
b. You are carrying a weapon (or two, in the case of Mr. Duensing)
http://www.downrange.tv/forum/index.php?action=printpage;topic=5920.0
118 libertariangirl // Nov 2, 2009 at 3:09 pm
very interesting comments
119 Brian S // Nov 2, 2009 at 3:35 pm
Let’s not lose sight of the real issue here – the cops shot a senatorial candidate multiple times, immediately before an election. How coincidental can this be, really?
120 Aroundtheblockafewtimes // Nov 2, 2009 at 3:43 pm
Let this be a lesson to us all. Even if you’d like to kick the LEO in the balls, it would appear in your best interest to be respectful and follow instructions. Your lawyer can bail you out a lot easier than you can overcome a beating, gunshot wound, or worse.
A jury in your civil suit against the LEO and his employers will look on your false arrest more favorably if you didn’t act the wise guy or the tough guy or the guy with something to hide.
Remember that revenge is a dish best eaten cold.
121 Robert Capozzi // Nov 2, 2009 at 3:53 pm
Former Radical Caucus leader, former (I think) Republican during the Rothbard-walk-out, Eric Garris has posted on this matter on the frequently read LewRockwell.com.
Notice that Garris repeats the CCLP “press release” story, etc.
122 Don Lake, late at night // Nov 2, 2009 at 4:01 pm
Aroundtheblockafewtimes // Nov 2, 2009:
“Let this be a lesson to us all…. to be respectful and follow instructions. ‘
Citizens For A Better Veterans Home has just channeled a number of messages from voices of the past [Hitler, Stalin, .....]! They thank you for urging others to quietly stand in line and go along …..
Active reprisals ?????? Passive resistance ????? Resistance is NOT futile!
123 Robert Capozzi // Nov 2, 2009 at 4:01 pm
Which reminds me, in some ways, the shooting officer DOES need some “thoughts.”
This story has unfolded in a twisty twisted way, but one thing that’s pretty clear is the cop didn’t need to shoot Jim in the back. Sounds like Jim’s body will heal, I trust, but the shooting cop’s conscience may not. Even if the cop was technically within guidelines, he’ll always know the pain he caused.
124 Marc Seltzer // Nov 2, 2009 at 4:03 pm
“libertariangirl // Oct 31, 2009 at 11:02 pm
Jims training is far superior to that of the police , had he been trying to pull his weapon , we’d be dealing with 2 dead officers.”
This is the kind of stuff that’s not going to help him at trial.
I’m sure he’s a good guy, but if Jim was running from the police, then sorry, his training SUCKS. I’ve dumped plenty of time and money on training and can gun sling with the best of them, but GOOD training teaches you that the best gun fight is the one you avoid. Evasion + furtive movements = shot by police. I’m no fan of oppressive government by any means, but the police are people who, for all intents and purposes have de facto legal authority to kill you. There’s a time and a place to bow to authority.
He got shot; if he lives, he’s going to jail. Let it serve as a lesson to choose your battles wisely.
125 Robert Milnes // Nov 2, 2009 at 4:04 pm
Yes, very interesting comments. Particularly the one about Jim has a lot at stake here. Possible criminal, civil & disbarment proceedings. Grand Jury, IAD investigation etc. & I restate my 3 most important points. He was not shot in the back by his own account. He has a complete vindication possible defense if he can show evidence of surveillance information being used against him. Monday is now pretty shot & no press conference, So everybody get ready for the election loses tomorrow. I will tell you I told you so!
126 Bob Bogus // Nov 2, 2009 at 4:07 pm
“When somebody gives conflicting statements, it is standard procedure to assume they are lying. First, the cop claims he was pulling a .45 from his front pocket. This is VERY specific, and yet near impossible as a .45 is simply too large to fit in any front pocket of any trousers I own. Then the cop claims it was a “large folding knife”, which could be anything. What constitutes a “large” folding knife?”
Cops are like politicians. They lie ALL the time. You can NEVER believe ANYTHING they say without independent verification.
127 Robert Milnes // Nov 2, 2009 at 4:13 pm
aroundtheblockafewtimes, good comment & you make good points. However I believe the saying is” Revenge is a dish best served cold.”
128 Kevin O'Connell // Nov 2, 2009 at 4:20 pm
Don Lake, late at night // Nov 2, 2009 at 4:01 pm
Aroundtheblockafewtimes // Nov 2, 2009:
“Let this be a lesson to us all…. to be respectful and follow instructions. ‘
Citizens For A Better Veterans Home has just channeled a number of messages from voices of the past [Hitler, Stalin, .....]! They thank you for urging others to quietly stand in line and go along …..
Active reprisals ?????? Passive resistance ????? Resistance is NOT futile!
——————————————
One of the themes in the messages here is to know when to shut up.
Those last three lines could come back to haunt you if you were ever in a situation where a police officer stepped across the line of the law and you had to defend yourself.
Showing postings like this to a jury would likely be interpreted as advocating killing police officers. That you dispute this is of no matter, it is what a jury chooses to believe.
From now on when a police officer tells you to do anything it is in your interest to meekly do as you are told.
129 libertariangirl // Nov 2, 2009 at 4:28 pm
The officer who shot Duensing was identified by police Sunday as David Gilbert. He’s an officer in the traffic bureau who has been with the Metropolitan Police Department since February 1993.
130 Eric Garris // Nov 2, 2009 at 4:49 pm
Responding to Robert Capozzi:
–If the Clark County LP did not release the statement, how did the newspaper get it?
http://www.lvrj.com/news/friend-identifies-man-shot-by-police-68202707.html
– The fact that I was a leader in the Radical Caucus 26 years ago, or my current party affiliation does not seem relevant to any of my comments, which Capozzi does not quote at all.
Here is my post:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/041902.html
If anyone has a correction to make, I would be happy to post that to the LRC blog as well. My email address is egarris2@antiwar.com.
131 Kevin O'Connell // Nov 2, 2009 at 4:53 pm
Bob Bogus // Nov 2, 2009 at 4:07 pm wrote:
“When somebody gives conflicting statements, it is standard procedure to assume they are lying. First, the cop claims he was pulling a .45 from his front pocket. This is VERY specific, and yet near impossible as a .45 is simply too large to fit in any front pocket of any trousers I own. Then the cop claims it was a “large folding knife”, which could be anything. What constitutes a “large” folding knife?”
Cops are like politicians. They lie ALL the time. You can NEVER believe ANYTHING they say without independent verification.
————————–
Bob,
The devil on this one is in the details. The man wrote he was wearing cargo pants which are simeler to military fatigues. These pants have an extra pocket on each leg. The hangs on the outside of the pants rather inside like most pockets. The pocket starts about mid thigh and ends at just at the knee. These designs vary with the pocket on the front or on the side. The pocket is extra large and yes you can carry a gun in there.
As to the size of the .45 that is something that varies. There are cut down models of the classic Colt M1911 .45 Cal semiautomatic such as the Para Ordnance PDA. Designed to be a ‘carry gun’ it has an overall length of 6 1/2″ of which 3″ is the barrel compared to the 5″ barrel of it’s full sized cousin. The overall height is 4 3/4″ due to it’s magazine being shortened reducing bullet capacity.
Several manufacturers make cut down concealment versions of the .45 cal semiautomatic hand gun.
To get a revolver in .45 cal smaller you need a snub nosed barrel like 2 1/2″ and a 5 shot cylinder rather than a six shot cylinder. Off hand I do not know anyone who is making these.
Charter Arms did make a .44 cal 5 shot revolver named the Bulldog with a snub nosed barrel. This was in response to a request to make a gun to meet Air Marshal’s needs. This gun got public attention when use by the Son of Sam killer.
So not only was he physically capable of having the gun on him at the time he himself wrote on this very page “Let me reiterate. I am a firearms instructor at the world’s largest firearms training facility. I always carry a gun and at least one knife.”
So yes, he had a gun on him.
132 John C // Nov 2, 2009 at 5:06 pm
Don’t know if it’s the same guy, but I remember a guy named Kevin O’Connell from YEARS ago ( probably late 90s) who spent all his time bashing Libertarians on the internet.
133 Kevin O'Connell // Nov 2, 2009 at 5:46 pm
John C // Nov 2, 2009 at 5:06 pm
Don’t know if it’s the same guy, but I remember a guy named Kevin O’Connell from YEARS ago ( probably late 90s) who spent all his time bashing Libertarians on the internet.
===================
Well, not ALL of my time.
The Libertarians have so torn up their own party with infighting there is almost nothing left to oppose.
In a country of around 300 million the core of the LP has shrunk to few thousand.
Libertarian used to frequent the web openly posting. Now most of them have withdrawn into e-mail groups closed to the public where they can agree with each other and not face be debunked.
Not exactly a target rich environment.
Even Mike Huben gives them little time and effort anymore.
134 Robert Capozzi // Nov 2, 2009 at 5:56 pm
EG, interesting. Your link certainly confirms that the release was issued. Libertarian Girl, Debra Dedmon (forgive the misspelling, if it’s incorrect) is a frequent commenter here on IPR, is an LPNV and CCLP activist, and she’d told us the release WASN’T released after she told us it was. #23 and #83. Not exactly sure what the truth is on this matter.
To be clear, all I’d said was: “Notice that Garris repeats the CCLP ‘press release’ story, etc.” It appears Garris was using IPR quotes from Jim Duensing (or at least someone posting with that name), yet there was contradictory information in the same thread.
In this thread, I’d noted that Jim has been an exponent of 9/11 Truth. Yet, this episode caused me to check out his campaign site, which includes THIS bit: “Instead, we must focus our attention on apprehending known terrorists like so called ‘General’ Ahmed, who was the chief financier of 9/11 and who is still at large.” This might indicate that Jim has moved away from the Truther position, but I can’t say. Indeed, this crazy shooting just shows how important it is to suspend judgment until all the facts are in, especially in a situation such as this.
Eric, as for your former leadership in the Radical Caucus, and MNR’s bolting the LP, you’re right; it’s not relevant. Whatever gets you through the night’s all right with me. I’d prefer it if the LRC bloggers didn’t frequently employ the “libertarian” sniff anytime a self-identified L goes off the plumbline y’all seem to believe has been codified. It hasn’t. But, then, who am I to begrudge you your apparent sanctimony?
135 libertariangirl // Nov 2, 2009 at 6:00 pm
Eric , I was confused too. First my people tell me that I blew it reposting a release that hadnt yet gone out , then I see the same statement in the paper in an article before I ever reposted it .
so anyways I feel better , I did not break the release.
136 libertariangirl // Nov 2, 2009 at 6:11 pm
I guess Nathan issued a statement to the RJ directly but never sent out a press release to all media.
I take severe issue with anyone saying we ‘threw him under the bus’.
It’s outrageous, inflammatory and wrong
137 Brian Holtz // Nov 2, 2009 at 6:40 pm
Unfortunately, Bob, that bit about a Pakistani General allegedly financing 9/11 is 100% pure Truthiness.
For a quick overview, see the 9th row in my table at http://knowinghumans.net/2006/09/fact-checking-911-truth-movement.html.
For full details, see http://www.911myths.com/html/pakistan_s_isi_link_to_9_11_fu.html.
138 Robert Capozzi // Nov 2, 2009 at 6:43 pm
LG, yes, I’d say the release was a somewhat awkward attempt at inoculation. “Thrown under the bus” is an grand overstatement, IMO.
But avid readers of LRC.com would probably agree that that site is anti-LP, by and large. Its writers rarely say positive things about LP candidates, and are more likely to find fault with Libertarians, calling them “libertarians.”
Interestingly, Mr. Garris broke with MNR in 1983 as I recall, supporting the Crane Machine candidate over Dr. Rothbard’s pick of David Bergland. If I have the history correct, Garris and Raimondo later re-connected with Murray and Bill, only to have Bill later leave the fold as Murray became increasingly “paleo.”
If (more or less) correct, I’d like to know from Eric how he and Murray made up. It might be instructive for us today. Perhaps, perhaps, we can launch a new Era of Good Feelings in the LM…
139 Robert Capozzi // Nov 2, 2009 at 6:47 pm
bh, thanks. I’ve not delved into the labyrinth-like Truther thing. At least he doesn’t say Cheney was the chief financier….
140 Craze // Nov 2, 2009 at 7:13 pm
Now I remember why I refuse to join the libertarian Party. It’s just a giant clusterfck. Why Libertarian Girl chooses to make public how disorganized and incompetent the state party is, I don’t know. But thanks for confirming that I want no part in this high school drama.
141 Robert Capozzi // Nov 2, 2009 at 7:20 pm
craze, are you judging clusterfcks? I say Not that there’s anything wrong with that
Seriously, Craze, haven’t you noticed that the “majors” have their own versions of clusterfcking?
142 Joshua Wise // Nov 2, 2009 at 7:30 pm
O’Connell you are a ridiculous person!
No one’s going to get the better of your opinion, that’s for sure!
No matter how much you spam. No matter how many times you reiterate your points.
A man was shot for fleeing from a traffic violation.
But you don’t want to debate from logic, so people point out it isn’t justified legally.
So you use weseal words to suggest any “fleeing” subject is justification for deadly force.
So people point out that’s wrong, and your specifics are intentionally wrong.
So you muddy the water by claiming “We don’t know all the facts”.
Thus bringing us back to square one, it’s your unprofessional opinion. A very loud and repetitive opinion. Skewing everything you can to play much more than the Devil’s Advocate.
Keep swinging away, at everyone and everything that suggests even slightly that the police weren’t 100% right. Use all the hyperbole and rhetoric you can, because your “facts” are vacant and inapplicable.
143 Steven R Linnabary // Nov 2, 2009 at 7:37 pm
A man was shot for fleeing from a traffic violation.
Quite the opposite there, Josh. The victim has stated he was fleeing from an unprovoked attack. Please get your facts straight.
PEACE
144 Craze // Nov 2, 2009 at 7:41 pm
Seriously, Craze, haven’t you noticed that the “majors” have their own versions of clusterfcking?
————-
This is true. And Thus I stay away from them too :-p (But then again, at least they try to at least look organized in public)
145 Tom Blanton // Nov 2, 2009 at 8:34 pm
Capozzi, you neglected to question Garris about who he associated with in 7th and 8th grades.
Actually, I am more curious about who you and Holtz associated with during your pre-teen formative years. I’m trying to figure out why neolibertarians turn into angrytarians when ever a noninterventionist appears.
146 NSFW // Nov 2, 2009 at 8:39 pm
A man was shot for fleeing from a traffic violation.
No, he was shot because the officer felt he was reaching for a weapon, and didn’t want to wait until he saw muzzle flashes aimed his way to confirm.
Yes, even police officers have a right to self-defense if they feel their life is in danger. This entire thread is one big display of why most libertarians refuse to associate with what they see as a bat-sh!t crazy “kill the cops” Libertarian Party.
147 robert capozzi // Nov 2, 2009 at 9:01 pm
tb, can’t help ya, as I AM a non-interventionist.
148 Michael Cavlan // Nov 2, 2009 at 9:04 pm
Folks,
especially Jim.
FYI
Say NO MORE. NOTHING.
This guy O’Connell could very well be a cop.
Looking for information or ways to try to subvert the future lawsuit.
Say FUCK ALL from here on in.
Been There, Done That with cops.
149 Steven R Linnabary // Nov 2, 2009 at 9:45 pm
He didn’t pay a traffic ticket and had a bench warrant. It’s like being picked up for vagrancy.
And like being picked up for “vagrancy”, you might not be aware of a violation. I was pulled over once because my license had been suspended. There was no reason for it as I had paid the ticket in question, and no letter was sent telling me otherwise. And in this day of red light cameras, having an unpaid traffic violation is hardly out of the question.
That’s no reason to fear for your life and run from the police.
As the victim has stated, he was running from an unprovoked attack. In traffic stops, I have had cops lunge at me to get me to raise my arms (a sure way to get shot).
This entire thread is one big display of why most libertarians refuse to associate with what they see as a bat-sh!t crazy “kill the cops” Libertarian Party.
I haven’t seen a single “kill the cops” post here. I have seen some concern over bat-sh!t crazy cops and those that worship them. Indeed, most libertarians don’t worship anything having to do with the state.
PEACE
150 Kevin O'Connell // Nov 2, 2009 at 9:54 pm
Michael Cavlan // Nov 2, 2009 at 9:04 pm wrote:
Folks,
especially Jim.
FYI
Say NO MORE. NOTHING.
This guy O’Connell could very well be a cop.
Looking for information or ways to try to subvert the future lawsuit.
Say FUCK ALL from here on in.
Been There, Done That with cops.
========================
While DI am not acop this only echos what others, and even I, have written here.
It is well past the time to stop and find out the real facts.
As for who is listening here a Garry Reed wrote this artical some of which consists of quotes from this thread.
http://www.examiner.com/x-26370-Libertarian-News-Examiner~y2009m11d2-Nevada-libertarian-shot-during-traffic-stop
One quote from the article reads;
“Clark County Libertarian Party chairman Nathan Santucci seemed to both accept and distance the Party from Duensing, saying, “Although he is a past officer of our party, he currently holds no official standing with our party as an elected officer.”
However, in the most recent follow-up article in the Independent Political Report Duensing says, ” I am a voting member of the CCLP excomm.”
151 Don Lake, late at night // Nov 2, 2009 at 10:07 pm
NSFW // Nov 2, 2009 at 8:39 pm
“A man was shot for fleeing from a traffic violation….. most libertarians refuse to associate with what they see as a bat-sh!t crazy “kill the cops” Libertarian Party.”
Dear Neo Socialist Fascist Warrior, and your basic gripe against the federal and state constitutions is ………….
152 Don Lake, late at night // Nov 2, 2009 at 10:17 pm
Craze // Nov 2, 2009 at 7:13 pm
“Now I remember why I refuse to join the libertarian Party. Why Libertarian Girl chooses to make public how disorganized and incompetent the state [Nevada] party is, I don’t know. But thanks for confirming that I want no part in this high school [amateur hour] drama.”
Same with the next door types in San Diego County and all over California ………..
153 NSFW // Nov 2, 2009 at 10:19 pm
You doctored my quote to make it look like I was supporting the concept of shooting people for traffic violations, when I was pointing out that was not the case at all.
If you not only lie about people’s quotes, but use the term “Neo Socialist Fascist Warrior” to describe people who think a police officer can defend himself when he was reason to believe he is about to be shot, you have worse psychiatric problems than Milnes.
154 Don Lake, late at night // Nov 2, 2009 at 10:30 pm
And yet I use my real name, real mailing address, real email, and real voice mail. [Buck, buck, er uck, buck, buck ......]
You needlessly slammed the libertarians! And then condemn me ??????? [Buck, buck, er uck, buck, buck ......]
155 Endif // Nov 2, 2009 at 10:33 pm
Sorry you got tasered and shot, ‘bro’.
1. Maybe you shouldn’t have RUN from a WARRANT. You comply, dipshit, or they take you down. That’s how this works.
Glad I didn’t take his CCW class. =/
2. This Nevadan will continue to vote for Harry. Actually, this has inspired me to donate to his campaign. Good work.
3. I’m shocked you teabaggers aren’t spinning this as some kind of political assassination attempt. You must be slipping. Maybe it’s tinfoil poisoning? I wonder if your health insurance plan covers that..
156 Robert Milnes // Nov 2, 2009 at 10:35 pm
Psychiatric problems? I don’t have no stinking psychiatric problems.
Yes you do.
Oh. Nevermind.
157 Robert Milnes // Nov 2, 2009 at 10:42 pm
Endif, I spinned it as a possible political assassination attempt. See comment #68 et al. But libs here don’t seem to be feeding into it. Yes, they must be slipping.
158 libertariangirl // Nov 2, 2009 at 10:47 pm
Endif , your going to vote for Harry?
ROFLMAO , you useless statist.
every single candidate on the ballot would be a better choice than Harry .
** since everything I say reflects my CCLP according to some officers and folks here , let me qualify this is just my personal opinion:)
159 Don Lake, late at night // Nov 2, 2009 at 10:56 pm
So Endif, what is your politcal back ground and philosophical paradigms ?????? If not a healthy skeptic of the ruling Establishment Duopoly, why are you posting on INDEPENDENT Political Report ???????
160 libertariangirl // Nov 2, 2009 at 11:14 pm
Craze , we are as organized and as competent as we can be when dealing with something of this magnitude .
I made nothing public , I responded to a story that had already broke.
In Nevada we have no precedence or pre-conceived protocol to deal with something like this .
we’re doing the best we can so you can STFU now.
peace
*** this is not an official LPN or CCLP post
161 libertariangirl // Nov 3, 2009 at 12:06 am
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=30817344&id=1311444248
162 Robert Milnes // Nov 3, 2009 at 5:42 am
Oh boy! It is Tuesday, voting day! I can’t wait to vote for losertarians Kaplan & Paff for Governor & Lt. Governor of NJ. NOT! & then come back to my computer & follow all the third party losers lose their races. & then I can breathe a sigh of relief. Phew! They could have won!
163 Robert Milnes // Nov 3, 2009 at 5:48 am
Yes thank heaven Jim got shot so they were all diverted from possibly a last minute Hail Mary press conference. God has answered my prayers. Catholic Trotskyist is right. We must include the CP in the Holy Alliance so we can have prayers in public schools. Gott mit uns!
164 Nathan Santucci // Nov 3, 2009 at 6:14 am
First and foremost, I would like to say that I spoke with Jim Duensing on Sunday evening and he is doing very well. I am thankful that he is going to have a speedy and full recovery. Two members, one of whom is an officer of the CCLP, were by his side in the hospital keeping him company as we spoke. I come to this site perhaps once a week so you can imagine my surprise to see such fury directed at the Clark County LP. Okay, most of the fury was directed towards me.
At 7:30pm on Friday, I read an online article about an officer involved shooting concerning one Raymond J. Duensing. I thought, how odd is this that someone with the name Duensing was involved? At 8:30 pm I received a call from the Review Journal asking me to confirm that our Congressional candidate was involved. I declined to speculate.
I sent out an email to the LPN and the CCLP early Saturday morning stating that it sounded fairly positive that the police had shot Jim Duensing after an altercation. I received more press inquiries on Saturday morning regarding Jim Duensing. I refused to answer any questions. Jim’s mother sent an email on Saturday morning confirming that Jim had been involved in an altercation. I refused to comment after several more media inquiries. My quotes from the Review Journal came from a Saturday afternoon phone interview with a journalist who also confirmed that Jim Duensing was involved. He informed me that his article would appear on Sunday. My thoughts were compiled in my head and on the computer through out most of Saturday. I was still in shock. The reporter asked some personal questions regarding Jim, which I refused to answer. He asked some questions that I felt would be damaging to the party. I only answered questions that I considered to be of a neutral tone. A few of my remarks were not mentioned in the article. One of my remarks was misquoted. I understand that many of you were upset by my quotes in the paper. I accept that. Most of the local television and radio news reports surrounding this event were incredibly biased. My intentions were to be supportive of Jim and to keep the damage to our party at a minimum.
There was never a press release issued. Nothing was mailed or emailed by me to ANY new agencies. I gave one interview. A draft of a press release was hastily written after my phone interview with the Review Journal and sent to the CCLP executive committee by me on Saturday night. My belief was that we would craft a release that was neutral, but supportive, via the CCLP Ex Com. I used some of the quotes I gave to the Review Journal interview in the draft press release I wrote Saturday night. I felt that by responding to these negative questions, we could quell any future negative press. I informed our officers to make changes to the draft in an effort to improve it. I had planned to send the press release out Monday morning after using Sunday to review it. After much contemplation Saturday night and Sunday morning, I decided it was best to say nothing more. My mistake was not informing our officers of this decision quick enough. I got up and went to work on Sunday morning. Needless to say, I was surprised to see that it was posted here.
Again, no press release was ever given to any media outlet in Nevada by me. I spoke with Jim on Sunday evening and he accepted my explanation of the events. We talked for quite sometime. We both agreed that The CCLP will not issue any more statements or “non” press releases regarding this event. The Libertarian Party of Nevada was never involved. He then asked me to post something here. I apologize for not posting sooner.
Starchild, Susan Hogarth and Thomas L. Knapp. I understand that you are concerned by these events. I work very hard for this party and am open to constructive criticism. Any future guidance you would like to share with me would be appreciated. I would prefer to discuss this with you rather than commenting back and forth on this forum. Please email me at IHATEMAGIC2@aol.com
165 Melty // Nov 3, 2009 at 8:13 am
Is “early n often” da motto on lightnin guns in Vegas?
166 Shane Cory // Nov 3, 2009 at 9:09 am
How in the heck did I get pulled into this PR argument?
I sent a simple message to Joe that said, “Please keep me informed on Jim’s status. Very sad to hear.”
Through the banana network, I guess that can be interpreted as some mystery code to hammer out a press release but in reality it was just me, nervously wanting to know how Jim was doing.
Joe did call me back but I missed his call.
Now here’s the real conspiracy . . .
———————-
Wayne Root called me to tell me about Jim. While I was talking to Wayne, Steve Gordon called in to tell me the same. I gave Steve Joe Silvestri’s number to find out Jim’s condition.
Steve talks to Silvestri at a bar sitting next to Stacey McCain. McCain bumps into a former Gingrich aide at Shelley’s Backroom and blabs the story.
The aide tells Newt, Newt calls Wayne. Wayne’s like, “Hey old buddy!” Newt says he’s “interested in the story I heard and want to help.” He says he’ll “send in Rove.”
Rove hit the ground in Nevada, finds Silvestri and asks, “Joe, so I hear Sarah Palin is going to run for governor as a Libertarian.”
Joe replies, “Dude, where did you hear that?”
Rove, “Some drunk reporter talking to one of Newt’s guys in D.C.”
Joe says, “Uhh, don’t think that’s true but my friend just got shot by police. Can you help us write a press release?
———————-
Sorry, couldn’t resist. In case you can’t take a joke, only the first paragraph is true . . . maybe.
I will say that it’s funny reading this thread because if anyone is competent enough to handle this legal/PR “issue” for Jim, it’s Jim.
While I would have been devastated if Jim had been killed, it’s good to hear that he’s been shot in the arm. Now if I make it to Vegas before he has time to get in physical therapy, I may be able to beat a one-armed Jim in the rifle competition that I owe him. Jim, how’s next week looking for you?
I hope Jim, Beth and the family are holding up. If there’s anything the Duensings need from the libertarian community aside from the standard bitching and whining, please just let us know.
Joe, Nate, and Debra, I hope you guys are doing well.
167 Jim Davidson // Nov 3, 2009 at 10:04 am
Best wishes to Jim Duensing for a speedy recovery.
The pig is an evil thug who should be tasered and shot after being convicted by a jury.
Good thing this didn’t happen in Keene, NH. The activists there would be having a candle light vigil for the pig.
168 libertariangirl // Nov 3, 2009 at 10:14 am
Shane , LOL funny , but you shoulda added some illuminati/CIA spin . very funny , im cutting and pasting , will give you cred
169 Robert Milnes // Nov 3, 2009 at 11:06 am
Shane, yes, he was shot in the arm, which broke it. By his account, AFTER the bullet went through BOTH pecs. Also in the lower abdomen, same angle. If the 1st bullet was an inch or two deeper i.e. to the left, it would have most likely been a heart shot & he’d have dropped dead on the spot. I don’t like you & all your rightist buds particularly why don’t you choke on it (cigar) Steve Gordon & his GOP reactionary friends most particularly Ron Paul, the $35 million dinosaur fossil. Conspire that text.
170 libertariangirl // Nov 3, 2009 at 11:07 am
http://www.lvrj.com/news/shooting-accounts-conflict-68834087.html
171 Thomas L. Knapp // Nov 3, 2009 at 11:54 am
LG,
Thanks for that link. Overall, a positive article which gets Jim’s side of the story out. And frankly, his version is more believable than the cop’s.
172 Jeffrey Quick // Nov 3, 2009 at 12:52 pm
“After exiting the vehicle at the officer’s request, I was standing with my back to the vehicle…. My hands were raised above my head. I was calmly speaking…
With my hands raised above my head, the cop shot me with a taser in the chest. ”
Now tell me, what probable cause did the cop have to taser Jim? I don’t much care about the legalities of Jim getting shot. But unless reality is at radical variance with this account, the cop started it. This guy is no rookie. By that point he knew who Jim was. So what reason to we have to believe that this was not a politically-motivated attack?
173 Kevin O'Connell // Nov 3, 2009 at 2:57 pm
tab // Nov 1, 2009 at 11:26 pm wrote:
I don’t know if it’s just me, but if a lawsuit is planned I don’t know if I would post versions of the event online. May want to keep that under wraps until the trial has concluded.
————————–
Sharp advice, still, and apparently nobody advised this guy Duensing to do this as he is giving out telephone interviews to the press.
You speak of a lawsuit but you forget, first are the criminal charges.
First the traffic ticket, minor but justifies the traffic stop.
Resisting arrest
Escape
Attempted murder of a police officer. – - – - – If that gun just fell out of the pocket as he hit the ground it is still indicative that he attempted to pull a gun on a police officer(s).
Duensing is in serious legal trouble and can face years in jail. The police and prosecutor’s office are simply sitting back and allowing him to make all the public statemetns he can. Those of you he talked to or e-mailed can expect to be called as witnesses.
Duensing was admitted to the State Bar 4 1/2 years ago but shows no liability insurance which is required to operate as a privately practicing attorney. Perhaps he is covered under a blanket policy by a law firm he works for, depends on Nevada Law.
The registered address for his law practice is 7500 West Lake Mead Blvd. Suite 9-276, Las Vegas, NV 89128. His office phone is lsited as (702) 953-1489. He has no fax number.
The above address is a shopping center and the Suite 9-276 is The UPS Store / Mail Boxes Etc. at store front #9, mail box #276.
This indicates that Jim is not actively practicing law. He could have failed to update the State Bar of his office address and insurance status but you would have to ask him.
This indicates that Jim is not what he needs to have right now, an experienced criminal law attorney.
Slowly information is coming out and it is conflicting. I made the mistake of amusing he had been pulled over by a patrol car when in fact it was by a cop on a motorcycle. There may be no video from this stop, I do not know how well motorcycles are equipped with recording devices.
So far the only uninvolved witness to step forward is a 19 year old girl who did not see the taser used. So her vantage point may not have allowed her to accurately see what occurred.
Cosidering the charges Jim is facing he could,
Spend years in jail
Be disbarred
Have his firearm permits revoked and be prohibited from possession or using firearms ending his being a firearm instructor permanently.
In addition some states have election laws that prevent convicted felons from serving in elected office, including in political parties.
Without a strong credible witness to the contrary of what the police state this guy is in for years of trouble.
He needs to shut his mouth as do his supporters. Most important he needs to have an experienced criminal attorney represent him.
174 libertariangirl // Nov 3, 2009 at 3:03 pm
Kevin , LOL your an idiot . He’s being charged with resisting arrest thats all . His bail was 3,000 , pretty insignificant . And the weapon was never taken out , not even the cops say that , they said he was reaching.
geez , talk about not knowing wtf you’re talking about
175 libertariangirl // Nov 3, 2009 at 3:04 pm
previous post not LPN or CCLP officer or party related
176 Mike Renzulli // Nov 3, 2009 at 3:55 pm
While it is only natural for like-minded people to sympathize when something like this happens to one of their own. The facts, however, do speak for themselves.
I have read the comments by Jim Duesing and the LVRJ article referenced and have concluded the comments made by Kevin O’Connell are, in fact, correct.
I am no fan of tasers or police misconduct. I am also no fan of Kevin O’Connell (aka LightonLiberty) and have sparred with him and prevailed on numerous occasions in debates on a libertarian e-mail chatgroup.
However, based on my assessment, it seems Jim Duesing did, in fact, flee from an arrest and the arresting police officer used the correct judgement for this incident.
If this was politically motivated then the police officer should be disciplined. However, the possibility of that is looking like that is not the case and Jim Duesing did act in error.
177 Kevin O'Connell // Nov 3, 2009 at 4:47 pm
libertariangirl // Nov 3, 2009 at 3:03 pm wrote:
Kevin , LOL your an idiot . He’s being charged with resisting arrest thats all . His bail was 3,000 , pretty insignificant . And the weapon was never taken out , not even the cops say that , they said he was reaching.
geez , talk about not knowing wtf you’re talking about
==================
I am an idiot?
You fool, you are only reading the charges that have been placed against him so far. They could have filed additional charges today, they can file additional charges something like up to a year later.
As for the $3,000 bail, even if paid he is not going anywhere. He was admitted to the hospital in critical condition and advanced to fair condition. He is not going anywhere for awhile. Even if he did leave the hospital his physical condition does not allow him to run.
The police are in position to allow him to think he has relatively minor problems with the law. Give him time to make statements they can use to discredit his character should he testify on his behalf either in a criminal trail or civil lawsuit.
My guess is that the police are canvassing the area of the arrest looking for witnesses, solidifying their case.
Jim has been running his mouth claiming he was tasered without provocation. That he was shot several times without proper cause. Just for this alone they will take any opportunity they find to pound him into the ground like a tent peg.
With supporters liked you he does not need enemies.
178 Thomas L. Knapp // Nov 3, 2009 at 5:37 pm
Mike,
You write:
“However, based on my assessment, it seems Jim Duesing did, in fact, flee from an arrest and the arresting police officer used the correct judgement for this incident.”
Then your “assessment” is FUBAR, unless you’re assuming that Duensing is lying.
If he’s telling the truth, he did not flee from an “arrest,” he fled from a deadly force ASSAULT with a Taser.
If he’s telling the truth, the assailant then attempted to murder him.
It is never appropriate for a police officer to use deadly force except in defense of his own life or the lives of others.
If you believe Duensing, there was never any reasonable basis for the belief that he represented any danger to the officer or to bystanders.
Now, I’m not delusional enough to believe that a court will agree with what I have to say next, but what I have to say next is, in my opinion, the cold hard truth:
In any conflict of claims between a law enforcement officer and an arrestee of a “he said, she said” nature the word of the arrestee should be considered prima facie true. There are two reasons for this:
1) The arrestee is the one being prosecuted, and is therefore the one entitled to presumption of innocence; and
2) The collective record of law enforcement lends its members’ statements about the same level of credibility as the statements of any random member of Compulsive Liars Anonymous.
179 Kevin O'Connell // Nov 3, 2009 at 5:41 pm
At least this guy hired an attorney, a guy named Cal Potter quoted in the article below.
http://www.rgj.com/article/20091103/NEWS07/91103036/1018/SPORTS/Ex-Libertarian-candidate-denies-pulling-gun-on-Las-Vegas-cops-who-Tasered-him
Previously I wrote that I expected the police were continuing shoring up their end, the article confirms this.
“A department spokesman, Sgt. John Loretto, declined to comment Tuesday.
“The investigation on our end is still ongoing,” Loretto said. “We’re not going to comment on the subject’s account of what happened.”
180 libertariangirl // Nov 3, 2009 at 6:03 pm
Kevin you’re a tool. I am not a Duensing supporter ,in fact he and I are at odds more often than not. But since you don’t really know anything about anyone , why should you know that.
I AM an opponent of police abuses.
you just gotta be a republican:) roflmao
181 libertariangirl // Nov 3, 2009 at 6:05 pm
http://www.liberty-watch.com/2010/1/duensing.php
LOL , Jims story made Pig-Tales at Liberty Watch .
Thanx Lew the Libertarian!
182 Mike Renzulli // Nov 3, 2009 at 6:11 pm
Tom,
If a police officer establishes that someone he stops has an outstanding warrant, decides to initiate an arrest and gives an order to them to turn around and put their hands behind their back and they refuse then the defendant is resisting arrest.
Regardless of Duesing’s reasons for fleeing, by him refusing the order, the cop opted for the less deadly option. If a cop feels threatened (which seems to be the case) he is going to act to preserve his life and will not give a hoot if the arrestee has any medical conditions.
While I can understand why he did, when Duesing removed the tasers and then fled, he buried himself further. Now, worst part about it, are the statements he is making to the press which prosecutors can use against him when (not if) he is brought up on charges.
Also a witness observed Duesing grabing at his pants as he fled. This can be interpreted by the police officer as reaching for a weapon.
It looks like the cop who stopped him was not the one who shot Duesing but another one close by attending to another matter and decided to assist the cop who stopped Duesing which the cop who opened fire obviously interpreted Duesing’s grabbing at his pants as raching for a weapon.
Jim Duesing’s big mistakes are not just fleeing the scene but also for not complying with the cop’s order. He had a warrant out for him and he knew this.
What could have been a minor incident where Duesing would have spent a day or two in jail, pay a fine and then leave can potentially escalate into Jim Duesing being a convicted felon doing hard time in prison.
183 Thomas L. Knapp // Nov 3, 2009 at 6:55 pm
Mike,
“If a police officer establishes that someone he stops has an outstanding warrant, decides to initiate an arrest and gives an order to them to turn around and put their hands behind their back and they refuse then the defendant is resisting arrest.”
First of all, non-compliance and resistance are two entirely different things.
If I’m standing with my hands over my head and you tell me to put them behind my back and I don’t, I’m not complying.
If you attempt to move my arms behind my back and I push you away, THEN I’m resisting.
There’s a difference — and if the law doesn’t take cognizance of that difference, then the law is a ass.
Speaking of asses, anyone without their head up theirs should be able to understand that the reasonable presumption at this point is that Duensing was the victim and that the cop was the perpetrator. That reasonable presumption may turn out to be incorrect, but it’s still the reasonable presumption.
184 Alice Lillie // Nov 3, 2009 at 6:57 pm
I just *now* found out about this!
It was on Freedom’s Phoenix earlier today and that is where I saw it.
I do not see where Jim failed to comply. Of course as a member of LPCC I am partial to Jim, but it looks as though he was just standing there calmly talking to the officer trying not to be taken to jail, when, out of the clear blue sky, the officer tased him at point blank range. (For political reasons, perchance?)
He ran for his life!!! What else could he do? In terrible pain and fearful of cardiac issues, he turned and removed the electrodes…what would you have done? He had to get out of the line of fire or risk sudden death. You’ll notice he never pulled his gun. I guess he did not want to esculate.
As for the police gunfire…wasn’t that over the top? If there were bystanders they would have been endangered.
The police can be so trigger-happy and so sure they are better than the rest of us. I think maybe the best way to deal is to keep your distance but if there is an encounter, do what they say and issue a grievance later. A serious grievance from a safe distance.
I think Jim was doing it right and just happened to encounter the wrong policeman.
But then, I wasn’t there. But that is how it looks.
Glad he’s recovering so nicely and I hope to *heck* he sees this thru in court, first with an innocent verdict, then with a major lawsuit.
185 Kevin O'Connell // Nov 3, 2009 at 7:13 pm
Alice Lillie // Nov 3, 2009 at 6:57 pm
I just *now* found out about this!
It was on Freedom’s Phoenix earlier today and that is where I saw it.
=====================
You “saw” as in a video tape of the event or you just read some stuff?
If you read then you are reading what two parties, which we all can agree have reason to be biased, claim.
186 Mike Renzulli // Nov 3, 2009 at 7:16 pm
Tom,
The law maybe, as you say, “an ass” but it still doesn’t detract from the fact that Duesing refused to obey the cop’s orders which can be used against him and, while I am no lawyer, I am sure Duesing can and will be charged with resisting arrest.
Jim Duesing could have avoided all of this mess by obeying the cop’s orders. Now he faces jail time and being branded as a felon.
Even if he gets reduced sentences, Duesing maybe facing jailtime and whole stack of medical bills that will cost him big time.
This wasn’t an issue of police brutality. Rather it is about someone who realized he screwed up and panicked.
For all of the talk from libertarians about personal responsibility on the part of others, we should also apply the same standard to our own, like Duesing, who we can still call a comrade but when they screw up we need to tell them so.
187 Galileo Galilei // Nov 3, 2009 at 7:33 pm
Quote of the Week Regarding Jim Duensing by MelissaWV:
“Holy wow this guy is Rambo! He was simultaneously running, holding his pants up, pulling a handgun AND pulling a folding knife! These cops were certainly in mortal danger, because someone this awesome was OBVIOUSLY going to shoot over his shoulder, like in the movies, and hit one of them squarely between the eyes, while flinging his knife and piercing the other one’s heart. Then he was going to leap into a getaway vehicle driven by a beautiful woman, and threaten our freedom!”
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=2393354&postcount=23
188 Galileo Galilei // Nov 3, 2009 at 7:33 pm
TRAFFIC STOP: Shooting accounts conflict
Attorney denies police report he pulled gun from pocket
The attorney who was shot multiple times by a Las Vegas police officer during a traffic stop last week denies that he pulled a gun from his pocket, as police said he did.
Raymond James “Jim” Duensing, a 32-year-old lawyer who unsuccessfully ran for Congress, on Sunday used a political Web site to post his account of what happened before the shooting.
READ THE REST:
http://www.lvrj.com/news/shooting-accounts-conflict-68834087.html
____
Man Shot by Officer Speaks Out
The man who was shot by a Metro police officer is speaking out. 32-year-old Raymond James Duensing used a website to recount his version of what happend when he was shot. He claims that he was pulled over on Cheyenne Ave just West of Michael Way by motorcycle officer David Gilbert. Gilbert allegedly stopped him for driving through an intersection in a right turn only lane. He claims that he stepped out of the vehicle with his arms above his head and thats when the officer used his Taser. Duesning says he pulled the taser prongs from his chest and out of instinct started to run, that’s when he was shot. He did have a knife and gun on him but he claims he never took them out. Gilbert has been placed on administrative leave and an investigation is pending.
http://www.kxnt.com/Man-Shot-by-Officer-Speaks-Out/5586504
____
Man Shot By Vegas Police Denies Pulling Gun
A former Libertarian congressional candidate on Tuesday denied police accounts that he pulled a gun while running from a Las Vegas police officer who shot him last week.
Raymond James Duensing Jr. said he was the author of a Web posting that acknowledged he had a gun and a knife in his pockets when he ran from Officer David Gilbert after he was stopped in a rental car for a traffic violation. He also wrote that he always carries a gun and at least one knife, and that his gun was licensed and registered.
“I NEVER pulled either of these items out of my pockets,” he wrote.
READ THE REST:
http://cbs13.com/wireapnewsca/Ex.congressional.candidate.2.1288951.html
____
Candidate: Arrest, Taser ‘Quite Painful’
Duensing Ran For Congress In 2008
An attorney who plans to challenge Sen. Harry Reid in 2010 claimed his recent arrest during a traffic stop in Las Vegas left him with a broken arm.
In an online statement to supporters, Raymond “James” Duensing denied pulling a gun from his pocket when he was approached by officers last week in the area of Cheyenne Avenue and Michael Way.
He admitted, however, having a registered pistol in one pocket and a folding knife in another.
Duensing said he was pulled over for driving through an intersection in a right turn only lane. He was also questioned about an unpaid traffic ticket.
After he was pulled over, police said Duensing was uncooperative and forced the officer to shoot him with his Taser. Duensing claimed he was “calmly speaking” to the officer and did nothing to provoke him.
“With my hands raised above my head, the cop shot me with a Taser in the chest,” he said in a statement. “Let me tell you, it’s quite painful.”
Metro police have not commented on the investigation.
After he is released from the hospital, Duensing plans to renew his pursuit of Reid’s senate seat. In 2008, he ran unsuccessfully for Congress as a Libertarian, garnering only 2 percent of the vote against popular Democrat Shelley Berkley.
http://www.fox5vegas.com/news/21507755/detail.html
189 Pro-Pot Anti-Pot // Nov 3, 2009 at 7:53 pm
who knew Shane Corey was a comedian?
190 Steven R Linnabary // Nov 3, 2009 at 8:18 pm
The law maybe, as you say, “an ass” but it still doesn’t detract from the fact that Duesing refused to obey the cop’s orders which can be used against him and, while I am no lawyer, I am sure Duesing can and will be charged with resisting arrest.
You are right that Duensing will probably be charged with resisting arrest… as well as fleeing, illegal traffic maneuvers (you can bet there will be SEVERAL traffic charges), disobeying a lawful order, making faces at the cop, and anything else they can think of to throw at him thinking that SOMETHING should stick. SOP.
And you can bet that the cop at trial will use buzzwords such as “the suspect became extremely agitated” and the “suspect went into a confrontational stance”, maybe even “suspect had the strong smell of alcohol about his person” or “suspects eyes had a drug induced look about them”…again SOP.
It’s called “testilying”, and again this is SOP.
This whole thing has also led me to believe that it is stupid for a person to have a CCW license when this right is guaranteed by our Constitution. The cop undoubtedly knew about this when he ran the license, possibly making him a bit nervous and trigger happy.
Finally, we don’t even know if Jim was aware he had an outstanding misdemeanor warrant. This could easily be why the cop said he became “extremely agitated” when in actuality he may have been merely incredulous.
PEACE
191 Thomas L. Knapp // Nov 3, 2009 at 8:28 pm
Mike,
You write:
“The law maybe, as you say, ‘an ass’ but it still doesn’t detract from the fact that Duesing refused to obey the cop’s orders”
At this point, there’s no particular reason to assume that the “fact” you just cited is a “fact” at all.
There are conflicting accounts of what happened, and the more facially credible account is Duensing’s (@73) which makes no reference at all to him having been GIVEN in any “orders” TO refuse to obey.
It would be nice if we could safely assume that a cop wouldn’t just plug a taser into someone by accident or as a joke, or tase and then shoot someone dead for no better reason than that they can get away with it and absent any actual non-compliance or resistance — but that’s just not a safe assumption, or even a reasonable one.
“Jim Duesing could have avoided all of this mess by obeying the cop’s orders. ”
As I’ve already pointed out, you don’t know if he was even GIVEN any orders TO obey.
Unless there’s video, the only two people who know that are Jim and the cop … and if it comes down to Jim’s word versus the cop’s word on that, well, Jim’s a solid citizen and the Vegas PD is a local franchise of what has long since become little more than a national criminal gang.
192 Kevin O'Connell // Nov 3, 2009 at 10:10 pm
Thomas L. Knapp // Nov 3, 2009 at 8:28 pm
Unless there’s video, the only two people who know that are Jim and the cop … and if it comes down to Jim’s word versus the cop’s word on that, well, Jim’s a solid citizen and the Vegas PD is a local franchise of what has long since become little more than a national criminal gang.
======================
And you think that is what a jury will think? That a jury will believe Jim over a police officer?
193 Jacqueline // Nov 4, 2009 at 4:02 am
FYI to those of you who don’t live in Las Vegas, the cops here have a long history of shooting unarmed people, shooting people in the back, shooting an unarmed woman in front of her children, shooting people kneeling in their yards with their hands behind their heads, etc. Then they go out and CELEBRATE afterward. They even have t-shirts they printed up for their “Baby Daddy Removal Team” that they wear whenever they shoot a black guy. It’s fucking sick. The police here are completely out of control.
194 Thomas L. Knapp // Nov 4, 2009 at 4:18 am
Kevin,
I didn’t say that that’s what I think a jury will think.
We’re not a jury. We don’t have a judge ordering us to put his instructions ahead of reality and isolate ourselves from any knowledge he hasn’t pre-screened. We’re free to examine the facts at will instead of having an approved version of them spoon-fed to us, and we should do so.
Once we believe we’ve ascertained those facts, then we might discuss whether or not there’s anything productive we can do with them.
For that matter, we can discuss the two things at the same time (there are about 920,000 registered voters in Clark County; about 200,000 people read the Sunday Review-Journal … would a full-page ad, which costs a few thousand dollars, help pre-inform the likely jury?), but one will affect the other.
195 DON // Nov 4, 2009 at 4:22 am
POST a piccture of this traitor COP.
so we know who to AIM at…
EXECUTE TRAITORS.
196 Pirate News Radio & TV // Nov 4, 2009 at 4:42 am
Post the cop’s audiotapes and video on youtube ASAP.
197 Kevin O'Connell // Nov 4, 2009 at 7:30 am
DON // Nov 4, 2009 at 4:22 am
POST a piccture of this traitor COP.
so we know who to AIM at…
EXECUTE TRAITORS.
=====================
That’s smart Don.
Jim made a posting here regards the incident. So you can bet the police copied it and are monitoring this site.
You have called for the murder of a police officer. Did you by chance do this from your home computer? Your place of employment?
Do not be surprised if the police pull the records and see who surfed in and made a post in the name of Dan.
If you are by chance a member of the LP, especially holding a position, that could result in some very negative publicity. Consider also if you are ever a candidate for public office.
Consider also that if you posted from your employers computer all the police have to do is inquire, most employers will simply fire you for this. The police can lean on you by proxy.
Dan, engage your brain before making statements.
198 Kevin O'Connell // Nov 4, 2009 at 7:37 am
Thomas L. Knapp // Nov 4, 2009 at 4:18 am
Kevin,
I didn’t say that that’s what I think a jury will think.
We’re not a jury. We don’t have a judge ordering us to put his instructions ahead of reality and isolate ourselves from any knowledge he hasn’t pre-screened. We’re free to examine the facts at will instead of having an approved version of them spoon-fed to us, and we should do so.
Once we believe we’ve ascertained those facts, then we might discuss whether or not there’s anything productive we can do with them.
=======================
Time to stop being so self centered. Jim will not be judged by you or a group of his friends, he will be judged by a jury. A jury decides whether to believe him or a cop. A jury decides if they just want to believe him at all.
==================
For that matter, we can discuss the two things at the same time (there are about 920,000 registered voters in Clark County; about 200,000 people read the Sunday Review-Journal … would a full-page ad, which costs a few thousand dollars, help pre-inform the likely jury?), but one will affect the other.
===================
Attempting to influence a jury, I doubt his attorney would endorse this.
Think ahead, this could result in a change of court location. Due to pretrial publicity court cases have been moved to courts in other areas.
If you truly believe the general population in Las Vegas will not believe a police officer’s testimony this action is counter productive.
199 John C // Nov 4, 2009 at 11:22 am
Of course the general population will believe a police officer. So?
200 libertariangirl // Nov 4, 2009 at 12:56 pm
Ok look this is a hijack . Its been brought to my attention of the irony of Nevada’s situation and california’s with their bad publicity event initials M.B.
I absolutely apologize to the LPC excom members who’s job I made harder by attacking their problem loudly and vocally when I should have STFU.
I have a big mouth that often hurts and doesnt help . With the MB situation , while I stand by my veiw of him and his actions , I don’t stand by my decision to make other LP’ers , in a state that isnt even mine , job more difficult , or to attack their process of decision making.
I am often wrong , but when I realize it , when it is brought to my attention , I more often than not admit and rectify it .
So , to all the members of the LPC excom , please accept my apology for butting in to something that was none of my business and for making any decisions you had to make harder.
I will try to learn a lesson from the irony over our own situation in NV. I will repost this apology in the cal-libs group and any othr groups I can think of .
Brian , Seebeck if you could pass it on to your excom , Id appreciate it.
Debra Dedmon
201 Jill Pyeatt // Nov 4, 2009 at 1:11 pm
Thanks, LG, I definitely saw the similarities in the two situations. I appreciate your apology.
202 libertariangirl // Nov 4, 2009 at 1:18 pm
oh , and while Im at it I apologize to my excom for the same thing.
I gotta real problem with big-mouth syndrome.
anyone with a cure for that contact me privately
203 libertariangirl // Nov 4, 2009 at 2:02 pm
your welcome Jill , Im not reposting anywhere , just here , fols would rather just let it die and I agree , but I needed to say it so…
204 libertariangirl // Nov 4, 2009 at 2:03 pm
Jim is having surgery on his arm today . Let’s all hope it goes well .
205 Galileo Galilei // Nov 4, 2009 at 3:58 pm
Jim Duensing Shooting Story Grows Legs
http://truthjihad.blogspot.com/2009/11/jim-duensing-shooting-story-grows-legs.html
206 Ace Cards // Nov 5, 2009 at 8:49 am
Well here is yet another controversial incident involving violence and law enforcement. I read the posts and they are simular to posts I’ve read concerning other police shootings that had many people concerned. My point is why bother to worry about because it ain’t gonna change. Go ahead and post about how awful we get treated by those that are supposed to help and protect us. Offer more traditional system related solutions or other. Spineless Idiots!! Time and again I see and hear calls to vote in new leaders that will ‘adress’ this problem, yeah that works great. The way I see it the police nation wide are becoming less and less respectful, and much more violent towards the citzens they encounter. I suspect this will only get worse. Something inside the average cops midset had drastically changed from that of old. The day is coming when they will regularily inflict a very high level of violence justified or not against the citizens. I mean hell why not just start rounding us up and stuffing all into the gas chambers. I doubt ther’d be any resistance. I mean they must have broken the law right? Or its a good thing because the police said they were terrorists. Its for public safety don’tcha know. I constantly hear excuses for all police abuse incident these days. Cops can do any damn thing they want to people right now and the spineless whimps do nothing but bow their heads and submit the same way most u.s. citizens submit to any new law or directive from authority, never consider if it is obsurd evil or moraly wrong, just obey. Oh wait perhaps a lawsuit might be levied on behalf of some abused ‘resident’ by the ‘radicals’ amonst us. Or maybe a push for a new law or changes to existing laws, and of course vote in new leaders. Yes those are avenues that will surely work. This nation almost deserves its fate. Citizens still persist in using a broken system and expect a positive result. It is true we are a nation of fools and cowards ready to be abused at the drop of a hat by an out of control authoritarian system. But hey I got tickets to sundays game!! I’m barbecueing before hand, no problem if it rains we’ll just bring the grill indoors. We’ll take my new Humvee to the game, come and check it out……….!!!!
207 Mike Renzulli // Nov 5, 2009 at 9:41 am
Tom,
According to Duensing’s own statement he was pulled over for a moving violation. The officer checked and found Duensing had an outstanding warrant. Duensing stated he was trying to “talk” the officer out of arresting him.
By talking back to the officer to try and convince him not to take him in it means Deunsing had been told he was under arrest. At this point the officer will be telling him to comply with being cuffed which usually means that the suspect is ordered to turn around and put their hands behind their back.
Just because Duensing does not want to be arrested is no excuse for not complying with the officer’s instructions which, as an attorney, Duensing should be aware of.
With Duensing not complying he is resisting arrest. When a suspect refuses to obey, the officer has options as to what force to administer to bring a suspect into custody.
In Duensing’s case, the cop opted for tasers.
It does not take a jury nor a video to understand or comprehend what can happen in a situation like what happened with Jim Duensing.
If he gets off due to the bad publicity surrounding this case, he will be lucky. Otherwise, I think the likelyhood of Jim Duensing going to jail is very likely.
208 Galileo Galilei // Nov 5, 2009 at 11:30 am
The odds are more likely the maniac cop will go to jail. Talking about a potential ticket is not resisting arrest, it is freedom of speech, and the right to petititon the government.
The cop had a short fuse. Shooting someone in the back over an allegded illegal lane change or oustanding parking ticket is not acceptable!
209 libertariangirl // Nov 5, 2009 at 11:51 am
LOL , there isnt a chance the cop will go to jail .Inquests NEVER RULE AGAINST THE POLICE.
And the D.A will not file charges , nor will there be an indictment . What a foolish thing to say.
210 Thomas L. Knapp // Nov 5, 2009 at 11:54 am
Mike,
I seem to recall that you’re an Objectivist. If so, you really, really, really need to dust off your copy of Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology and sort out the conceptual difference between “non-compliance” and “resistance.”
I don’t know if that will help with the rest of your faulty applications of logic in this matter, but it’s a start, anyway.
211 libertariangirl // Nov 5, 2009 at 11:55 am
remember , remember the 5th of November
212 Kevin O'Connell // Nov 5, 2009 at 1:11 pm
Galileo Galilei // Nov 5, 2009 at 11:30 am
The odds are more likely the maniac cop will go to jail. Talking about a potential ticket is not resisting arrest, it is freedom of speech, and the right to petititon the government.
The cop had a short fuse. Shooting someone in the back over an allegded illegal lane change or oustanding parking ticket is not acceptable!
================
Jim was not “talking about a potential ticket”, Jim was talking about an outstanding arrest warrant.
Jim was not shot for an outstanding parking ticket,
Jim was shot fleeing the police, who had a lawful arrest order for him which he has not disputed, and for attempting to draw a pistol on a police officer.
That Jim disputes he was trying to draw his pistol on the officer is not at issue, he only had to appear to the officer to be trying to draw that pistol. Even the one reported witness saw him grabbing at the front of his pants. Though this witness did not think he was trying to draw his pistol the officer had another vantage point. From the officer’s vantage point it appeared Jim was trying to draw his pistol, that is all it takes. If I were in a situation and I thought someone was trying to draw their gun on me I would be compelled by that circumstance to fire on them. Most people would, a cop is no different.
What strikes me about this is the officer only fired three times, most cops empty their chambers / clips.
Jim screwed up big time, his ‘personal responsibility’. He turned what would have been a simple go to the station, under arrest, and pay the fine and that would have been the end of it. Now he is in the hospital with big hospital bills. Wondering if his employer will keep him on as a firearms instructor. Wondering if he will be disbarred. Wondering if his firearms permit will be revoked. Wondering if he will be doing jail time. Wondering if he will go bankrupt and lose everything.
By the way, the news services have been quoting this web page. Think before you post.
213 Galileo Galilei // Nov 5, 2009 at 1:36 pm
“They shot him in the back.”
See Jim recovering at the hospital, and with Dylan Avery at the 2008 Libertarian Leadership Conference:
http://www.liberty-watch.com/2010/1/duensing.php
also….
Read the Official Police Press Release of October 30:
http://www.lvmpd.com/news/pdfs/2009/103009release.pdf
214 Galileo Galilei // Nov 5, 2009 at 1:37 pm
Kevin;
You have a dangerous pro-police mindset.
You need to be de-programmed.
215 Bruce Cohen // Nov 5, 2009 at 11:49 pm
Re: Hijack at 200
That LPCA Board Members contacted Debra Dedmon to gloat about Mister Deunsing’s situation and consequent bad PR for the LPNV is just atrocious.
That they gave her a hard time about her strong words and feeings about the M/att/ew B/arn/es situation is even more atrocious.
The fact of the matter is that the LPCA, seemed to be, by every indication, hoping to ignore the situation and keep MB on board.
They were apologizing for him, making exuses for him, claiming the possibility of ‘consent’… As well as blaming me as somehow personally responsible for the situation.
Not to mention claiming I was somhow gaining political capital from the MB mess.
Of course, no apology forthcoming from the folks who were wrong about the situation.
The fact of the matter is that if Debra and other folks had not gotten hot under the collar and started giving the LPCA heck, MB would still be serving there today.
It’s a terrible shame that people would make apologies for a serial and unrepentant child molester.
It’s a bigger shame yet that folks would point fingers outside of the circle that nominated and elected him DESPITE the warnings, including the ones I made.
Debra has NOTHING to apologize for, and in fact, should be applauded for doing the difficult, but right thing, holding people’s feet to the fire.
Thank goodness for her and the few honest souls left on the LPCA board for seeing this monster is no longer a LPCA board member.
If the LPCA board really wanted to do the right thing, they would not leave it alone with MB’s resignation, but would EXPEL him and give explicit reasoning why they did so.
In fact…
WHY IS MB still a member of the LPCA?
Is this the kind of person we want to associate with?
Not me, thank you.
Oh yea, but I am mean for telling the truth about him publicly, what, about 5 years ago?
Yeah, I’m so mean… I should be more nice to serial liars who contribute nothing, are convicted child molesters and don’t bother telling people with children when he’s around them.
Who on the LPCA Board would let MB alone with their young relatives, I ask you?
216 libertariangirl // Nov 6, 2009 at 12:24 am
Now that Jim has been shot by police and has some street cred , he can finally write that rap song he’s been wanting to write.
217 Melty // Nov 6, 2009 at 1:29 am
Yeah, some simple go to the station, under arrest, pay fine . . . he got zapped by a potentially lethal zapgun, and for what?
Careful on them right turns Vegas! Drive around the block and think about it before you go signalling lane changes. Could be the death of ya, in more ways than one.
218 libertariangirl // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:10 am
some rapper names I thought of …
Ray-Ray
J-Syndrome ( also hereby known as an affliction causing folks to disobey orders by cops)
Eternal Vigilance ( he signs that at the bottom of every email) * it sounds more like a group than a single tho
J-Dizzle
219 Kevin O'Connell // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:50 am
Bruce Cohen // Nov 5, 2009 at 11:49 pm
That they gave her a hard time about her strong words and feeings about the M/att/ew B/arn/es situation is even more atrocious.
====================
I think you missed ny previous post where I wrote “By the way, the news services have been quoting this web page. Think before you post.”
Writing “M/att/ew B/arn/es ” will defeat search engines but the pres is reading this thread. So they know write away to check out Mattew Barnes or Matthew Barnes in the California LP.
220 Don Lake, late at night // Nov 6, 2009 at 1:58 pm
“The fact of the matter is that the LPCA, seemed to be, by every indication, hoping to ignore the situation and keep MB/ “M/ att /ew B /arn /es” on board.
They [LPCA] were apologizing for him, making exuses for him, claiming the possibility of ‘consent’… As well as blaming me as somehow personally responsible for the situation.
Not to mention claiming I was somhow gaining political capital from the MB mess.
Of course, no apology forthcoming from the folks who were wrong about the situation.”
Citizens For A Better Veterans Home was founded in 1998, and we felt that after the neglect of Democans and Republicrats of obviously abused military veterans that alternative groups would rally with us.
Some Libertarian INDIVIDUALS finally had the light bulb come on over their head[s]. Mostly the silence was deafening.
Amazingly where you are criticized by partisans for the longest time just to hear your words come out of other people’s mouths. California [in and out of San Diego County] Libs are some of the biggest do nothings in the ‘Loyal Opposition’!
Debate, debate, debate and ignore the real problems of real people. This includes mega sympathetic groups: elderly, disabled, former military ……..
221 Don Lake, late at night // Nov 6, 2009 at 2:13 pm
“Jim screwed up big time,[t] his [was his] ‘personal responsibility’. He turned what would have been a simple [situation to] go to the station ……”
disrobe, enter the showers …….
222 Jill Pyeatt // Nov 6, 2009 at 5:13 pm
I would respond to Bruce Cohen’s ridiculous accusations in 215, but since he has no friends or credibility with the Libertarian party I won’t bother.
223 Kevin O'Connell // Nov 6, 2009 at 5:38 pm
Jill Pyeatt // Nov 6, 2009 at 5:13 pm
I would respond to Bruce Cohen’s ridiculous accusations in 215 [215 is the comment number], but since he has no friends or credibility with the Libertarian party I won’t bother.
====================
I have to agree and disagree.
To reply in detail would open a new topic which would be better suited to a new thread. I agree with your action.
I disagree with your reason, not your action. Simply because one is not a supporter is a counter productive reason not to consider what they say. In fact Libertarians often say people should listen to them and consider what they propose because they offer a view that is not mainstream.
It is from one’s opposition that critical details are reported that the faithful supporters shun.
If one wants the whole truth then all information must be considered.
224 Alan Pyeatt // Nov 6, 2009 at 9:32 pm
Bruce @ 215: These accusations are really not helping your credibility. Everybody on here already knows that you are a tool of the power elite, whose goal is to destroy the libertarian movement from within.
Since you are not an ExecCom member, you can not possibly know if this situation was discussed, nor what might have been said, nor what action, if any, might have been taken. As a result, this statement: “They were apologizing for him, making exuses for him, claiming the possibility of ‘consent’… As well as blaming me as somehow personally responsible for the situation,” is not based on any knowledge of the situation whatsoever. Rather, you are talking out of your azz.
Fortunately, you blew your cover long ago, and no longer have any real effectiveness as a trojan horse.
225 Don Lake, late at night // Nov 6, 2009 at 11:47 pm
Libertarian Agents Provocateur: is faux Lib Bruce a KKKalifornian ??????
226 Alan Pyeatt // Nov 7, 2009 at 5:24 am
BTW, I’m REALLY glad to hear that Jim’s going to recover fully. Maybe this case can be the catalyst for real change.
227 Thomas L. Knapp // Nov 7, 2009 at 7:04 am
The matter of Matthew Barnes just popped up in the press.
My guess is that the only connection between the discussion here and the story is that the discussion here pissed Bruce Cohen off enough to get him to pull out all stops and find a cub reporter — any cub reporter — willing to do an amateur night hit piece on the San Bernadino County LP. The token “academic source” fairly obviously had his quotes pre-chewed for him by someone from the Cohen/Starr faction of LPCA.
And hey … the world didn’t end!
If I had to bet on which will end up costing the LP more votes and donor dollars :
1) This story; or
2) Any random Wayne Allyn Root invocation of his 2008 LP VP nomination in an infomercial for some new scheme (latest: The $1,495 “Money Matrix Insider” forex program);
I’d put my money on the latter.
228 libertariangirl // Nov 7, 2009 at 9:54 am
You know now I wish I wouldnt have apologized . For fucks sake I cant win for losing . While a few people were glad I publically aopogized , a few werent and im with the latter now .
*big ole tired fed up sigh*
229 Kevin O'Connell // Nov 7, 2009 at 11:14 am
libertariangirl // Nov 7, 2009 at 9:54 am
You know now I wish I wouldnt have apologized . For fucks sake I cant win for losing . While a few people were glad I publically aopogized , a few werent and im with the latter now .
*big ole tired fed up sigh*
======================
I have observed over the last 17 years that one thing Libertarians enjoy doing is putting a knife into the back of a fellow Libertarian. This is usually because the other Libertarian is not a “real” Libertarian in their view.
My other observation is that Libertarians are like bomb grade uranium. Get too many of them together and they reach critical mass and self destruct.
Libertarians are their own worst enemy.
230 Kevin O'Connell // Nov 7, 2009 at 11:28 am
Thomas L. Knapp // Nov 7, 2009 at 7:04 am
The matter of Matthew Barnes just popped up in the press.
My guess is that the only connection between the discussion here and the story is that the discussion here pissed Bruce Cohen off enough to get him to pull out all stops and find a cub reporter — any cub reporter — willing to do an amateur night hit piece on the San Bernadino County LP. The token “academic source” fairly obviously had his quotes pre-chewed for him by someone from the Cohen/Starr faction of LPCA.
And hey … the world didn’t end!
If I had to bet on which will end up costing the LP more votes and donor dollars :
1) This story; or
2) Any random Wayne Allyn Root invocation of his 2008 LP VP nomination in an infomercial for some new scheme (latest: The $1,495 “Money Matrix Insider” forex program);
I’d put my money on the latter.
==================
The shooting story went out via Associated Press. So every reporter in the country is in position to search the name Jim Duensing. When they do, and they did, this site and this thread pops up. Quotes from this site and this thread have appeared in several publications.
Once Barnes name was posted here along with that he is an official of the LP and a sex offender all of the reporters that come back and recheck this site knew about it.
So nobody had to call a reporter to get the story published. Like I and several other here have posted, one must be careful what one says in a public forum.
Also the reporter is seldom the one who gets the story printed. Nothing gets printed, except for a few indy publications mostly on the internet only, that does not get approval of the Editor.
I have met a couple of reporters and stories they have written never got published because the Editor quashed it. One reported I met said his story was quashed in mid research, often reporters are required to register stories they are working on with the Editor, because their Editor decided it was not “news worthy”.
231 Thomas L. Knapp // Nov 7, 2009 at 12:26 pm
Kevin,
Re-think your logic.
Yes, the initial AP story made it easy for people to arrive at this thread by searching on “Jim Duensing.”
And, if one did so, they might indeed notice the references to Matthew Barnes.
Chances of a reporter (apparently so new that he doesn’t appear on the paper’s masthead) at a small-town (paid circulation 7,000) daily in San Bernadino County, California randomly, or by no-particular-reason assignment, searching on Duensing, reading this thread and coming up with a story? About as close to zero as it’s possible to get.
Someone called the Redlands Daily Facts and talked it up as a little piece of sensationlism that would move copy.
I’d bet money they hooked the reporter up with the academic source — already pre- primed with the “Libertarians just don’t care enough about winning elections, they run prossss-teee-toots” talking point — too.
I ‘ve worked the newspaper racket from every side — reporter, editorial board member, guy trying to get a story covered — for more than 30 years, and I know a planted piece when I see one.
232 Jill Pyeatt // Nov 7, 2009 at 12:33 pm
Libertarian Girl, I appreciated your apology. It showed character and some class, both of which are missing in some people who call themselves Libertarians.
Please forgert about it now and forget about Bruce Cohen. His job is to make trouble and to make true Libertarians look bad. He’s a has-been.
233 Len // Nov 7, 2009 at 12:33 pm
Let see:
Duensing admits – 1) he ran away while being arrested 2) the cop who shot him was to his RIGHT (based on the wounds he was to the right and slightly to his front) 3) he had his .45 in his RIGHT pants pocket
The witness said he 1) disobeyed orders to stop and 2) kept grabbing pants
So here’s probably what happened either he grabbed his pants to stop them from falling down or he grabbed the gun bulge to keep it from banging against his leg. In either case if a fleeing suspect puts his hands anywhere near where he has a gun he should not be surprised when he gets shot.
234 Bruce Cohen // Nov 7, 2009 at 12:34 pm
According to a Redlands, California newspaper
the San Bernardino LP, of whom MB was a member of for many years, including those where I met and interacted with him at… (And during he time period I tried to raise some kind of alarm about this person.)
http://www.redlandsdailyfacts.com/sanbernardinocounty/ci_13732035
According to that article, the SBLP knew full well of the sex convictions.
The shame and scandal deepens. It appears that at least some of the LPCA Board of Directors full well KNEW that Mister B was a registered sex offender and chose to ignore this and other serious personality problems of his.
They also didn’t bother to tell folks around them about this problem.
As I read information provided to me, it appears that Mister B said to the court he was not ‘cured’ or reformed.
Be that as it may, it seems to me that all those who factually knew, (not suspected, as I did, but KNEW) had a moral responsibility to share this information with others that could reasonably be expected to want or need to know this information about MB.
There are a handful of Libertarians I know personally who MB was at their homes or events with them and their children.
This is a very scary proposition.
How to prevent this kind of danger in the future by learning what was done wrong this time is my concern.
Not playing trojan horse or some other kind of fanciful silliness.
That it is a potential PR nightmare pales besides the risk those who knew and didn’t inform created for Libertarians with children is the issue.
I think it’s a clear initiation of force and a ‘lie of omission’ problem for those people who knew.
That he was a dishonest oaf with no table manners or social graces would be enough for me to not want him at my birthday party.
But this truly crosses the line.
And to those people who chastised Debra Dedmon, a mother, for her natural mother’s protective reaction towards all children is wrong.
Plain wrong.
Call me a troublemaker, mean, whatever you want, go right ahead.
That I am right, was right and my warnings and public denunciations of MB went ignored does not make me bad/mean/a trojan horse.
And it doesn’t make Debra bad for her to hold the LPCA’s feet to the fire.
They are his ‘friends’.
They nominated him.
They spoke publicly for him.
They campaigned for him.
They elected him.
Let them feel the pain of their own actions.
I would not be involved in the least except folks keep pulling me back in.
My only original involvement was to send roughly two dozen ‘insiders’ a forwarede email I got about MB’s convictions.
No huge public mass emails or group emails.
So, folks on the LPCA board…
Do your jobs.
Grow membership.
Raise Money.
Get Voters
Support Candidates
Try and resume publication of the LPCA email and magazines that you inherited as good going concerns from us.
And put this behind us all.
Get back to work, I hope you succeed and as far as the Trojan Horse thing?
Yeah right.
Get a life and get to work.
235 LP PARTY HAVE TO SET BETTER EXAMPLE // Nov 7, 2009 at 1:09 pm
I think any libertarian who is going to hold an elective Office or higher should have a background check. Those who know about someone felony past and don’t report it should also be removed. Chances are they have their own skeletons in the closet. The LP Party really should be a better cleaner party as we already have dirty toilet paper all over the Democrap and Repulipuk. Does the Libertarian have to follow this same path. If this situation doesn’t get cleaned up, we will look like the other two party and be catagorized that we are like the two merged party. We already have it hard enough to try to get people elected as it is. You really have to put your best foot forward and all of those who stand behind the wrong doers are only shooting yourself in the foot.
236 Todd Andrew Barnett // Nov 7, 2009 at 1:41 pm
Since this thread is dealing with the Las Vegas cops’ tasering and shooting of Jim Duensing, I covered that incident on my show last night with Amber Danelle, Scott Bieser, and Eddie Luetge (yes, former Boston Tea Party Secretary Michelle Luetge’s husband). I mentioned IPR’s coverage on the show as well as one commenter’s pathetic point on Duensing.
Here’s the URL:
http://tinyurl.com/yzydhx2
I hope everyone listens to it and provide some feedback if possible.
Yours in Liberty,
Todd Andrew Barnett
Host, Liberty Cap Talk Live
237 Galileo Galilei // Nov 7, 2009 at 2:07 pm
Why the Innocent Flee From the Police
by William Norman Grigg
“Why did he run?” This question thrusts itself upon us every time an unarmed or otherwise harmless person is gunned down while fleeing from police.
Often that inquiry takes the form that assumes the guilt of the victim:
“If he did nothing wrong, why did he run?”
It’s also common for that second version to contort itself into a nicely circular argument:
“Well, he ran, and resisting arrest is a crime, so obviously he got what was coming to him.”
For reasons unclear to a mind not enthralled by statist assumptions, most people simply assume that both reason and morality dictate an unqualified duty to surrender without cavil or complaint whenever armed, violence-prone strangers in peculiar government-issued garb seek to restrain one of us.
This is why police are trained to interpret any hesitation, reluctance to cooperate, inhospitable body language, or verbal expression of resentment as “resisting arrest” and thus a justification for the use of “pain compliance” – or even lethal force. Police and their apologists likewise insist – contrary to both law and judicial precedent – that there is no right to resist even a clearly unwarranted or abusive arrest, or even for a citizen to take steps to protect himself when he’s on the receiving end of unjustified physical violence from police.Police are constantly catechized about the dangers they encounter when they conduct traffic stops or detain people on the street. Why, the random “civilian” they encounter might be armed, trained in the use of weapons, and prepared to use violence without warning! This is to say that this hypothetical “civilian” would be … just like the typical police officer.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/grigg/grigg-w115.html
238 Gene Trosper // Nov 7, 2009 at 5:19 pm
@234 I am one Libertarian who stood up to defend you regarding allegations you were the person behind the initial email about Matthew Barnes. However, I’d like to point out that although some people are seething with anger over this whole mess being publicly exposed, it shows how little they really are concerned over pedophilia tarnishing the LPC. If the specter of anyonymous emails anger them more than the revelations of pedophilia, then we have an internal culture that mere fundraising and professionalism will not be able to neutralize.
239 Bruce Cohen // Nov 7, 2009 at 6:09 pm
First of all, thank you, Gene.
Secondly, you are correct in your comments here, 100%.
Thank you for the refreshing common sense approach.
240 Gene Trosper // Nov 7, 2009 at 8:49 pm
@239 while we may have some differences over a few political strategies and policies, that does not prevent me from giving credit where credit is due and offering defense when needed. Hopefully some people will read this and think twice before making assumptions.
241 Jim Davidson // Nov 7, 2009 at 11:43 pm
So, 22 years ago, Matthew Barnes, at the age of 19, was convicted of something to do with a person under age 14. And the policy of the Puritanical moral “majority” is that there can never be enough punishment for such a person, never an end to the “threat” such a person poses, regardless of facts of the case or circumstances. Curious.
I thought Christians were supposed to be about forgiveness.
It seems to me that this publicity is great for the LP and libertarians generally. We should look forward to highlighting the extent to which the laws against many types of behavior make no sense. There is no way to rehabilitate a felony conviction, and there are an increasing number of felonies. The political system wants to create a permanent underclass of unpersons, untouchables.
The system sucks. Highlighting how it sucks and why is as good a way to generate interest in the party and in the cause of liberty as any other.
242 Gene Trosper // Nov 8, 2009 at 12:05 pm
@241 I await with baited breath for you to organize the BTP NAMBLA Caucus so your organization can begin reaping the windfall of publicity.
243 Don Lake, late at night // Nov 8, 2009 at 12:13 pm
Ehwwwwww!
And the Roman Polanski award goes to …………..
A whole lot of human behavior is based in the physical [sexual orientation, etc]. Pedophilia has a very, very low cure rate. [I can not use the word 'rehabilitation as that implies a positive beginning which has been re-echieved!]
Standing up for Pedophiles, the road to ruin!
244 Don Lake, late at night // Nov 8, 2009 at 12:24 pm
Curious.
“I thought Christians were supposed to be about forgiveness.”
————- And Jim,, is this a political blog or a religious web ????? You wanna get into god talk off site with Cory Quirk and Doctor Donald Grundman ???? You can start with pedophilia and end up with sexual ‘fisting’!
Boy I sure am sorry for the LEO’s attempted murder on you, but your reputation sure has preceded you on the coastal side of Lake Tahoe! Yet another radical Lib Jerk!
245 Bruce Cohen // Nov 8, 2009 at 1:03 pm
Re: Jim Davidson at 241 –
“So, 22 years ago, Matthew Barnes, at the age of 19, was convicted of something to do with a person under age 14.”
**WRONG!!!***
MB was in a leadership position of power.
He took advantage of this position.
He molested three little boys all in the same
period, that he was convicted for and all indications say there were plenty of others.
His statement to the court appears to reveal that MB himself says he has not, cannot and will not reform.
“And the policy of the Puritanical moral “majority” is that there can never be enough punishment for such a person, never an end to the “threat” such a person poses, regardless of facts of the case or circumstances. Curious.”
****WRONG!!!****
If he was ‘reformed’, if there was no ‘threat’, then why did the LPCA and the LPSB HIDE what they knew about him?
Why did they speak disparaginly about me when I aired my opinions and suspicions about MB?
They COVERED IT UP because they KNEW what people would say, inside and out of the LP.
After it was exposed, they still tried to apologize and rationalize the actions, like you are, Jimmy.
If he was ‘cured’, then why was he not open about it?
Alchoholics tell their friends, associates and families. And, they avoid places where alcohol is sold, or if they must go to one, bring a ’sponsor’ with them.
Did MB tell parents of his past when he was around their children, or even ALONE with them, no matter how short the time period?
And as far as your silly red herring about there
‘never being enough punishment’… MB got a reduced sentence in a plea bargain. He got a break. He’s still under supervision and has to report in and behave a certain way, as part of the plea deal.
WHICH HE’S NOT LIVING UP TO!
“I thought Christians were supposed to be about forgiveness.”
#1 That’s not what Christianity is about.
#2 This is not a Christian discussion, or even a
Libertarian discussion, it’s a MORAL one.
“It seems to me that this publicity is great for the LP and libertarians generally. We should look forward to highlighting the extent to which the laws against many types of behavior make no sense. There is no way to rehabilitate a felony conviction, and there are an increasing number of felonies. The political system wants to create a permanent underclass of unpersons, untouchables.”
****WRONG!!!****
This is HORRIBLE and embarrassing PR for the LP and it’s subsidiaries.
It reinforces the image that we are a bunch of crazies with no standards of membership.
MB is no poster child for overlegislation.
Using him as an example would play into the hands of the statist lawmakers.
“The system sucks. Highlighting how it sucks and why is as good a way to generate interest in the party and in the cause of liberty as any other.”
****WRONG!!!***
We need GOOD examples of how the system is flawed. MB is someone who should still be locked up, and I for one hopes he gets violated by his Parole Officer.
He’s still on Social Network pages… I’m guessing that’s not allowed by his TOP.
And WHY is he on them, anyway?
246 IN AGREEMENT // Nov 8, 2009 at 6:54 pm
In spite of what some of you feel against Bruce Cohen, I have to agree on this. Don’t let your feelings get in the way of what you feel against Bruce. The reality it I have to agree with his statement!!!!
This is HORRIBLE and embarrassing PR for the LP and it’s subsidiaries.
It reinforces the image that we are a bunch of crazies with no standards of membership.
247 Kevin O'Connell // Nov 8, 2009 at 8:08 pm
Bruce Cohen // Nov 8, 2009 at 1:03 pm
He’s still on Social Network pages… I’m guessing that’s not allowed by his TOP.
And WHY is he on them, anyway?
===================
I cringe a little on replying as this is off topic for this thread.
Well TOP, Terms Of Parole I think you mean, ends when parole ends. My guess is that his parole period ended some time ago.
Looks like right now his only requirement is to be a registered sex offender. With this there are local jurisdiction restrictions, depends on the offender’s location.
248 Don Lake, late at night // Nov 8, 2009 at 10:49 pm
Andre “Open” Aggessi is a Nevadian with time on his hands ………
249 libertariangirl // Nov 8, 2009 at 11:00 pm
what a dumbass , he’d rather soil him image to sell books .
I guess he doesnt care about the youth school here he opened and the image he represents to millions of youths , and now that image is , I can do Methamphetamine and be the best at something too.
nice going andre , at least you got people talking right?
250 Don Lake, late at night // Nov 9, 2009 at 2:04 am
Lib Grrl: Of course, I was merely spot lighting the obvious! I am not a registered Lib, but Steven Kubby, Bruce Cohen, Jim Davidson, and Brook Shield’s former husband are some of the last folks that would present a positive spin on Liberty. And Jim has had a negative ‘bad boy’ image in and out of state for the longest time.
Relax Lib Grrl, I was being sarcastic. I can not feel that you were being serious about me being serious with out having your sense of humor surgically removed ….
The Democans and Republicrats are laughing at us! You R the dumb ass ………….
251 Robert Capozzi // Nov 9, 2009 at 8:28 am
Wait a second: Someone had what might be called a skeleton in his closet. It was revealed and dealt with in an appropriate way.
Happens all the time. It was handled in an adult fashion. No damage of any consequence.
252 libertariangirl // Nov 9, 2009 at 11:08 am
Fuck Andre Agassi:)
253 Susan Hogarth // Nov 9, 2009 at 11:33 am
From : http://www.sbsun.com/ci_13732035?source=most_viewed
Jack Pitney, a professor of political science at Clarmont McKenna College, said Libertarian Party members generally don’t care enough about winning elections to keep such public relations snafus from happening.
“A lot of people in both (major) parties, and independents as well, have libertarian beliefs, but this is the kind of problem that keeps them from even thinking about the Libertarian Party,” he said, noting that Barnes’ case is not the first of its kind.
“Not long ago, the Libertarian Party’s candidate for lieutenant governor was Norma Jean Almodovar,” Pitney said. “She was a prostitute.”
1) Yes, because parties who do ‘care enough about winning elections’ manage to ‘keep such public relations snafus from happening.’ Can’t tell if this is reporter or interviewee stupidity.
2) The interviewee shows absolutely no sense about the American two-party system, which is FAR more responsible for voter reluctance than the fact that some county party might have someone who committed a crime (or ‘crime’) in the past. The same thing obviously doesn’t keep people from voting, say, Democrat. Or Republican.
3) The interviewee seems to be equating prostitution with child molesting. Dude is sick.
254 Steven R Linnabary // Nov 9, 2009 at 1:44 pm
“Not long ago, the Libertarian Party’s candidate for lieutenant governor was Norma Jean Almodovar,” Pitney said. “She was a prostitute.”
Not long ago??? Sheesh, that was 1986 !! If we are going to go back 20 years or more, we can bring up republicans running David Duke for several elections and democrats running Lyndon LaRouche and his followers for umpteen elections!! LaRouche even beat Gore in several primaries in 2000!!
PEACE
255 Galileo Galilei // Nov 9, 2009 at 5:41 pm
Well known Republicans who have been busted and/or involved in bad PR scandals since Bush’s 2nd term began:
(not counting all the bad 9/11 press)
Scooter Libby
Tom Delay
Larry Craig
Alberto Gonzalez
Dick Cheney (shooting his friend)
Ted Stevens
Jack Abramhoff
Mark Foley
This is just off the top og my head.
Paranoia over one negative article is just stupid.
Seven reasons not to Join the republican party
http://www.libertariansforjustice.org/?q=node/30
256 Kevin O'Connell // Nov 10, 2009 at 9:33 am
#
#
255 Galileo Galilei // Nov 9, 2009 at 5:41 pm
Well known Republicans who have been busted and/or involved in bad PR scandals since Bush’s 2nd term began:
(not counting all the bad 9/11 press)
Scooter Libby
Tom Delay
Larry Craig
Alberto Gonzalez
Dick Cheney (shooting his friend)
Ted Stevens
Jack Abramhoff
Mark Foley
This is just off the top og my head.
Paranoia over one negative article is just stupid.
==================
This is a general statement and as such is correct, but one must consider circumstance.
In a battle of attrition the Republicans and Democrats are much larger and can take a higher loss rate including scandals.
The smaller organization, or business for that matter, trying to take on a giant must outshine the giant in all public categories. Since they are unseating an incumbent which is proven in the public’s eye they are considered an untested entity. They will be less trusted and be given more critical view than the incumbent. Call this the devil one knows if you wish.
I sum it up as the Democrats and Republicans can absorb scandals much better than the LP. With the LP the scandals result in a disproportionally larger amount of damage.
257 Steven R Linnabary // Nov 10, 2009 at 12:45 pm
OTOH, the incident involving Jim Duensing is not necessarily a “scandal”, quite unlike the above mentioned republican scandals. Most of the above mentioned republican scandals involved republicans hanging their collectivist heads in shame (all except the Cheney shooting) with guilty pleas.
The Duensing affair very well might be an opportunity for the LP to talk about out of control police violence. This MIGHT be the “silver bullet” many Libertarians have been waiting for.
Of course, it WON’T be the proverbial silver bullet if Jim cops to anything more than forgetting to pay an obscure traffic violation or having an overinflated tire.
AFAIC, this “scandal” pales in comparison to the LP nominating a drug warrior for President or a neocon war monger for VP.
PEACE
258 Jim Davidson // Nov 10, 2009 at 4:21 pm
@245 Go fuck yourself, Bruce Cohen. Please do so in a way that is as public and demeaning for you as possible, and get arrested, convicted, and imprisoned as a sex offender. Do these things, and I might listen to you. Shouting “wrong” doesn’t appear to document your outrageous claims, doesn’t make me like you, and does encourage me to dismiss you as a bozo.
I gather that you don’t give a shit about Jim Duensing, either, you vile little statist pervert.
Don late writes “I am not a registered Lib, but Steven Kubby, Bruce Cohen, Jim Davidson, and Brook Shield’s former husband are some of the last folks that would present a positive spin on Liberty. And Jim has had a negative ‘bad boy’ image in and out of state for the longest time.”
I am not a registered anything. I’m not registered to vote, and I have written extensively against voting. I am quite sure the votes aren’t being counted.
Steve Kubby presents a very positive view of liberty, and is an inventive, creative guy. I don’t know why you don’t like him, Don.
I haven’t had a bad boy image for the longest time. Jesus was a bad boy much longer ago, and with far more people noticing it (and punishing Him in the Roman style) than me. Spartacus would be another example of a bad boy for a longer time.
Very few people know me at all. And I like it that way. Judging by the shrieking on this page from Bruce Cohen, you people suck. And if you mean to distance yourself from him, do a better job. He’s an embarrassment who ought to be ostracised.
259 Jim Davidson // Nov 10, 2009 at 4:26 pm
@250 Don, which husband of Brooke Shields? Andre Agassi is the only former husband. He’s a registered Democrat. What are you on about?
260 Erik Geib // Nov 10, 2009 at 5:14 pm
SL @254:
Fact Check:
Lyndon La Rouche did not beat Gore in any primaries in 2000, and barely even registered 3% of the total primary season vote.
261 Gary Williams // Nov 10, 2009 at 9:24 pm
“Police Department policy allows the use of deadly force based on the severity of the crime, whether the suspect is a threat to the officer or others, and whether the suspect is actively resisting arrest or trying to avoid arrest by fleeing.”
Kevin. You posted evidence that rebuts your own assertion. If the words following “the seriousness of the crime” had of been “or” instead of “and”, you would have a case. But as written here, the seriousness of the crime is to be taken into consideration AS WELL AS what follows, their both being inclusive, not separate items of evaluation.
262 Don Lake, late at night // Nov 10, 2009 at 9:49 pm
“Steve Kubby presents a very positive view of liberty, and is an inventive, creative guy. I don’t know why you don’t like him, Don.”
“Maybe due to first hand knowledge where he [via neglect and non communication] acts like he is stoned often. Same with his photos [especially the official picture]!
263 Kevin O'Connell // Nov 10, 2009 at 10:09 pm
Gary Williams // Nov 10, 2009 at 9:24 pm
“Police Department policy allows the use of deadly force based on the severity of the crime, whether the suspect is a threat to the officer or others, and whether the suspect is actively resisting arrest or trying to avoid arrest by fleeing.”
Kevin. You posted evidence that rebuts your own assertion. If the words following “the seriousness of the crime” had of been “or” instead of “and”, you would have a case. But as written here, the seriousness of the crime is to be taken into consideration AS WELL AS what follows, their both being inclusive, not separate items of evaluation.
====================
You misread the quotation.
One Libertarian bemoaned to me of such things, One of the people he knew was at a LP meeting quoting the first four words of the 1st amendment of US Constitution “Congress shall make no law” insisting that per the Constitution Congress had no power to make any law.
What I quoted was from a newspaper article, not from the police department policy book.
You mistake the use of the word ‘and’ plus the use of commas to mean that all conditions have to be met.
In the case of Jim Duensing he was fleeing arrest, for this he could be shot, but he wasn’t. In his case the officer fired when Jim became a “threat to the officer or others” He did this by reaching to his pants where his gun was. It matters not if he drew the gun or not, the act of trying to draw his weapon, even just the appearance of trying to draw his weapon, is within the policy for the use of deadly force. It was this final act on Jim’s part that caused the officer to shoot Jim.
Remember even a witness saw Jim grabbing at his pants. Though the witness did not think
Jim was drawing a gun that was the officer’s responsibility to make that determination.
Remember also that the officer was up close enough to see the outline of the gun in Jim’s pocket. The witness was not as close as the officer.
264 Steven R Linnabary // Nov 11, 2009 at 1:16 am
SL @254:
Fact Check:
Lyndon La Rouche did not beat Gore in any primaries in 2000, and barely even registered 3% of the total primary season vote.
I stand corrected. LaRouche never received over 5% in any state primary, though for some reason it stuck in my mind that he had.
It was my understanding that he had won several primaries, but they were barely reported and that the DNC would not honor his delegates due to a DNC rule that only “certain” candidates votes would be counted. I don’t know why this error stuck in my mind. mea culpa.
PEACE
265 Don Lake, late at night // Nov 11, 2009 at 2:24 am
The board of Cannabis Science, the San Francisco research and development firm aiming to develop medicines derived from marijuana, resolved today to “immediately remove and terminate all corporate contracts” with Chief Executive Steven Kubby. Without citing specific instances, the board resolution said Kubby (pictured) “failed to conduct his duty in the manner that it is in compliance with his fiduciary duties to preserve shareholders value and corporate integrity.” Furthermore, the board said it “hereby” removed his power to negotiate, sign agreements or conduct banking on behalf of the company………….
266 Don Lake, late at night // Nov 11, 2009 at 2:28 am
If the JPG photo would have transferred, you would have seen YET ANOTHER grinning stoner picture …………
267 Birds of feathers Flock together // Nov 11, 2009 at 11:00 am
I guess those who defends the criminals and make excuses are a lot like them.
268 Bruce Cohen // Nov 11, 2009 at 11:03 am
Steve Kubby is a close personal friend of mine.
I know the whole story about Cannabis Science, from start to finish. I was even offered the opportunity to have an equity share, several times, in several ways.
Mister Kubby has done nothing wrong, did nothing wrong, and never would do anything wrong. The information Don quotes from the Press Release is a one sided document, and the whole truth is far less interesting.
I also know some of the other people involved and I do hope they can all resolve their differences soon.
That non of them are saying anything bad publicly about each other leads me to read the tea leaves and think we might see an end to the disagreement in short order.
Oh, and as to Mister Davidson, I have to thank him for his gentlemanly behavior. He joins the Pyatt family in their ‘Angry Ostrich’ approach to life and politics.
If they choose to ‘hate’ me over my statements, I’m perfectly happy to continue to be the lightning rod, saying what the majority often doesn’t want to or can’t say, but are thinking.
269 Don Lake, late at night // Nov 12, 2009 at 5:18 pm
“Mister [Lake: Steve Grinning Stoner] Kubby has done nothing wrong, did nothing wrong, and never would do anything wrong. [Lake: Wow, saint hood just around the corner! You are obviously a studied, objective source ----- not!]
The information Don [Lake] quotes from the Press Release is a one sided document [Lake: true enuf!] and the whole truth is far less interesting [Lake: your grossly biased opinion]. ”
Lake: Let’s say that Lake is ENTIRELY wrong about Kubby’s erratic non communication and mis communication . [Even tho others say the same!]
In spite of your [beleaguered, suspect, disrespected] reputation [on the West Coast, via personal observations in the last decade ....] do you continue to excused the horrible, horrible photo[s] and personal [Denver National Convention 2008] observation[s] of Mister Kubby?
Plz deny that, even among Libs, that your personal friend Steven is not known wide and far as a ’stoner’!
On a personal, reformist note: I greatly admired the former California state reform party chair, one Jeff Rainforth. He did more for abused veterans in a few weeks in 2003 and 2004 than all other politicals [attention faux advocates and mind less Bible Thumpers Cody Quirk and Doctor Don Grundmann and other CP type fakers] put together.
I personally saw him [Jeff Rainforth] act like a Meth addict going thru with drawl in the May 2004 state convetion in Northern California. His behavior was totally suspect.
Should I disrespect the truth as I saw it to ‘protect’ and ‘PR’ my [so called] friend ???? Hey, if the reform movement does not adequately full fill a function for our culture, then the party does not deserve to exist!
Epilogue: Rainforth got AND LOST a high profile Nader job after his hyper, Dennis the Menace, act in the Bay area. Rainforth has since included a personal drug history on his face book.
I take no pleasure in exposing Kubby’s stoner and Rainforth’s edgy demeanor. But it would be immoral not to mention it!
270 libertariangirl // Nov 12, 2009 at 6:00 pm
Steve Kubby smokes weed?? I dont believe it.
271 libertariangirl // Nov 12, 2009 at 6:02 pm
DL__I personally saw him [Jeff Rainforth] act like a Meth addict going thru with drawl in the May 2004 state convetion in Northern California.
me__ you watched him sleep for 18 hrs a day and eat the other 6 ??
272 Don Lake, Prove Me Wrong ........... // Nov 12, 2009 at 8:17 pm
Lib Grrl: It is not that he ingests pot or has need, recreaational or medical, to do so! This not the issue!
The issue is that he promises to respond to folks [and fails], slurs his words over the tele phone and is seen in a possible inebriated state on nummerous occations.
No, I saw him [Rainforth] ‘lead’ the convention, with ‘runs’ back to his hotel room. Had he spent 12 minutes rolling up his sleeve and main lining ’some thing’ under the strong room lights in front of dozens of attendees, does that mean that a bed room video[s], with or with out me or Rob Lowe are of any consequence ????
Get real! [Oh, You got any copies of Jeff Rainforth, Rob Lowe, Don Lake in bed together ????? What is the price ????? Any extra shipping ????] You sure do not act like some one with a 136/ 154 IQ, except for severe communications disabilities ……….
273 libertariangirl // Nov 12, 2009 at 8:27 pm
dude , go take your meds.
274 Don Lake, Prove Me Wrong ........... // Nov 12, 2009 at 8:44 pm
136/ 154 ………… and your logic, your rationale, your, argument, your mind set ??????
You sure are silly, silly, silly ……….
Instead of non sequitor zingers, why don’t you prove me wrong ??????
In the fight for citizen Liberty and Freedom, your contribution is ??????
275 Thomas L. Knapp // Nov 12, 2009 at 9:03 pm
“do you continue to excused the horrible, horrible photo[s] and personal [Denver National Convention 2008] observation[s] of Mister Kubby?”
He was the single best candidate in Denver in terms of personal presentation and did not so much as a single time publicly come off as a “stoner.”
276 Don Lake, Prove Me Wrong ........... // Nov 12, 2009 at 11:29 pm
[a] others disagree
[b] his stills on his sites
277 Thomas L. Knapp // Nov 13, 2009 at 10:58 am
Don,
“Others” may disagree — but “others” weren’t the single person who spent the most time in his presence and shared a room with him in Denver.
“Stills on sites” have nothing to do with what you claimed regarding Denver.
278 libertariangirl // Nov 13, 2009 at 1:26 pm
TK , he’s nuts dont waste your time.
279 Bruce Cohen // Nov 15, 2009 at 2:20 pm
I have never seen Mister Kubby inebriated or observed him to slur his words.
I have lived with him for short periods of time while traveling and campaigning, both at my home and at hotels.
He is a clean freak, and a gracious roommate.
I have never seen him ‘act like a stoner’, either.
All of that being said, Mister Kubby does need this particular medicine to stay alive.
This is not some case of a college student talking his doctor into prescribing pot for his nerves.
Mister Kubby has a rare form of adrenal cancer that requires this MEDICINE.
As far as me having a ‘bad reputation’, with enemies like those, I appreciate my Libertarian friends all the more.
My phone rings every day from Libertarians wanting help and advice at all levels and locales.
That Mister Lake finds me so interesting and threatening as to require OR to find out about me is reassuring as to my power to influence the free world!
BWAHAHAHA!!!
PS Watch out, Pyatt family!
The GOP just wrote me another big check.
Matching the one the Dems wrote me.
All to destroy the LP and make you look bad
for voting for, working with and supporting
and making exucses for a CHILD MOLESTER!
Jim Deunsing running from the cops, using his version or theirs? A tragety. Glad no one died.
Glad everyone will end up ok.
Worst case for Jim? Whoops, misdemeanor, slap on wrist. Learn from it.
Best case for the Molester?
Errrrr… People covering up for him and him being around young children unsupervised.
Hmmm…
Let me think…
Best case is what we know happened for sure.
I think the Nevada Libertarians have nothing to apologize to the Pyatts for.
280 Don Lake, Prove Me Wrong ........... // Nov 15, 2009 at 2:56 pm
Don Lake, Prove Me Wrong ……….. // Nov 12, 2009
“It is not that he ingests pot or has need, recreational or medical, to do so! This not the issue!” [Again!]
281 libertariangirl // Nov 15, 2009 at 3:23 pm
dont say “nevada libertarians” I only speak for myself . The nevada libertarians ( the rest of em) really wish Id do it less.
282 paulie // Nov 21, 2009 at 6:59 pm
Sorry, late to the party…just getting online after two months or so with practically no access. Needless to say I have a mountain of email to sort through etc., but I called in to Todd Barnett’s show last night and talked with Jim Duensing and a few other people about what happened. I’ll try to find a recording and post it here.
283 hi // Nov 21, 2009 at 7:37 pm
libertariangirl ,
If your overall attitude is any reflection of how your “party” operates, it is no wonder your being “hounded” and are in PR turmoil.
I just wanted to make it clear that your press release has completely alienated you from the libertarian movement. Any regular Joe out there knows that you wait until you know the facts before you open your mouth, doubly true political party, and the like. Common sense 101.
You say he would not have been shot if he didn’t run, how the hell do you know that? Next I suppose your going to tell us that being tazed is justifiable if your trying to reason with someone who wants to strip your freedom from you for using a carpool lane?
I suppose Jim, with his heart condition, should have just sat there and let the officer taze him for an unknown period of time, rite?
Regardless of whether or not Jim’s actions were justifiable or not, your organization acted unethically to be making critical remarks without even having all the information of the indecent when you did so.
I suspect that the real PR nightmare has not even started yet. I know I personally will hold you people accountable for your actions in Jim’s hour of need.
I only need to read into this event far enough to discover a tazer was used before any physical threat was made to the officer, anything after that moment in time, that Jim may have done is, in my eyes, justified
Have you ever been tazed before? I didn’t think so.
284 paulie // Nov 21, 2009 at 8:00 pm
Found the show, see followup:
http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2009/11/liberty-cap-talk-live-interview-with-former-libertarian-party-of-nevada-chair-jim-duensing/
285 paulie // Nov 21, 2009 at 9:19 pm
@128
From now on when a police officer tells you to do anything it is in your interest to meekly do as you are told.
That’s brilliant, Kevin. I am a police officer. I am ordering you not to question or verify whether I am in fact a police officer. I am ordering you to run headfirst into a wall and spill your brains all over the floor. It is in your interest to meekly do as you are told.
286 Susan Hogarth // Nov 21, 2009 at 9:25 pm
Re: #279 I frequently find Bruce’s prose to be difficult to parse. Can someone help me out with this bit? That is, does anyone have any idea what Bruce meant when he wrote it?:
PS Watch out, Pyatt family!
The GOP just wrote me another big check.
Matching the one the Dems wrote me.
All to destroy the LP and make you look bad
for voting for, working with and supporting
and making exucses for a CHILD MOLESTER!
287 Susan Hogarth // Nov 21, 2009 at 9:54 pm
I should clarify: I know there’s something about someone that Cohen’s taken a disliking to (Barnes). My curiosity is really only about the “big check” and “Destroy the LP” parts…
288 libertariangirl // Nov 21, 2009 at 10:00 pm
I dont care what you hold me responsible for , Ive made my peace with Ji as has Nathan Santucci ,he’s going to live and not go to jail , and thats all that matters
289 paulie // Nov 21, 2009 at 10:12 pm
Galileo Galilei // Nov 3, 2009 at 7:33 pm
Quote of the Week Regarding Jim Duensing by MelissaWV:
Is MelissaWV Matt Harris’s ex?
290 paulie // Nov 21, 2009 at 10:45 pm
lg
I gotta real problem with big-mouth syndrome.
anyone with a cure for that contact me privately
Email sent.
291 paulie // Nov 21, 2009 at 11:21 pm
You can start with pedophilia and end up with sexual ‘fisting’!
Sexual fisting? As opposed to what cops do? Oh wait….
292 Andy // Nov 22, 2009 at 1:03 am
Jim is a great guy and a heck of a Libertarian activist. I’m glad he is OK and I wish him a full and speedy recovery.
293 paulie // Nov 22, 2009 at 10:51 am
Susan @ 286
As I understand it, Bruce is referring to @ 279 are several comments (see #224 in this thread for example) where the Pyeatts call him an anti-liberty infiltrator who was sent to destroy the libertarians from within, but whose cover was blown. I imagine that this discussion may not be the first place they have posted such thoughts.
294 paulie // Nov 22, 2009 at 11:05 am
Speaking of infiltrators, Kevin O’Connell in #133 admits to being an anti-libertarian of the Mike Huben variety:
Yet, elsewhere in the thread O’Connell is full of advice for Libertarians, allegedly on how to be more successful; and in previous threads on IPR, O’Connell makes himself out to be a factional partisan of reform libertarians: see for example:
http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2009/02/boston-tea-party-invites-other-party-groups-to-affiliate/comment-page-1/#comment-38943
http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2009/07/peter-orvetti-can-the-libertarian-movement-welcome-%e2%80%9cmoderates%e2%80%9d/comment-page-1/#comment-78465
http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2009/07/peter-orvetti-can-the-libertarian-movement-welcome-%e2%80%9cmoderates%e2%80%9d/comment-page-1/#comment-78499
http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2009/07/rick-randall-time-to-oust-the-anarchists-from-the-libertarian-party/comment-page-1/#comment-78884
http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2009/07/rick-randall-time-to-oust-the-anarchists-from-the-libertarian-party/comment-page-2/#comment-79340
http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2009/08/brian-holtz-towards-a-st-louis-accord-for-the-libertarian-party/comment-page-1/#comment-90206
http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2009/08/brian-holtz-towards-a-st-louis-accord-for-the-libertarian-party/comment-page-1/#comment-90563
So, which is it? Is O’Connell an anti-libertarian, a partisan of a faction in the libertarian movement, or somehow both? Inquiring minds want to know.
And if he is a Mike Huben style anti-libertarian as he indicates in comment 133, why would any libertarians think his advice on how we conduct ourselves, what codes we hold ourselves to, or our internal disagreements is well meant?
295 paulie // Nov 22, 2009 at 11:10 am
In the referenced comments, Kevin does not use his last name, but he does use the same email address attached to those posts that he used to post the comments in the Duensing thread, and John C. refers to him as lightonliberty, which he does not dispute.
296 paulie // Nov 22, 2009 at 11:19 am
BTW, Andy and Gary (and perhaps one or two other people) may be interested to know that O’Connell previously surfaced last year on LFV bashing Gary during the initial discussion of the “Massachusetts Burning” issue. I haven’t checked, but there’s a good chance those comments are still there, or at least can be found e.g. through archive.org.
Up til now, I did not connect that Kevin O’Connell to Kevin/lightonliberty that has been a regular poster on the AZLP yahoo group for years and has occasionally posted at IPR, as this is the first thread here where he has used his last name.
297 Bill Glassberg // Jan 5, 2010 at 6:30 pm
I stand behind Jim , he is a true patriot . And to all you non- truthers ; if you don’t know 9/11 was an inside job it’s because you are a coward and you do’nt want to know the sick,demented TRUTH.
298 Brad // Jan 5, 2010 at 6:36 pm
the truth is out there.
way, way out there.
Leave a Comment