Tactical Response, VIA The Blaze firewire

[A-FIXER]

Ok all just posting this as to put a view of the Strong Views of Pro Freedom Gun Supporter
(Do not get offended as there is some strong language) and I hope admin lets the 1st Amendment be shown.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/01/11/tactical-response-ceo-goes-ballistic-over-obamas-gun-control-plans-if-it-goes-one-inch-further-im-going-to-start-killing-people/

A good start to discussions

[Neeco]

James Yeager is an idiot.  It's a shame his rants get picked up by the media.  He makes the average, civilized gun owner look batguano crazy.  If he is to be our poster child, we are doomed.  Why can't they pick up on reasonable debates such as the one Travis Haley produced. While its a thought rambling more than a clear pointed defense, it's far better than Yeagers "I'm gonna start shooting people" tirade.

[A-FIXER]

It may be as you say or is one of those who believe in his freedom so strongly that he is willing to put it on the line. Not so much different that it can be said from the black panthers putting a 1million bounty on zimmermans head, or that the goverment will consider those that don't comply with there mindboggling firearms restrictions a criminal and address them as such. Again I post this for discussion and views.

[Neeco]

It may be as you say or is one of those who believe in his freedom so strongly that he is willing to put it on the line. Not so much different that it can be said from the black panthers putting a 1million bounty on zimmermans head, or that the goverment will consider those that don't comply with there mindboggling firearms restrictions a criminal and address them as such. Again I post this for discussion and views.

I understand what you are saying, and I agree.  I am willing to stand up for my rights as well.  Don't get me wrong.  But to say he is anything but a lunatic, albeit a well trained lunatic, is ludicrous.

It would behoove you to watch a few of Yeagers videos.  He was called a coward at one point and drew up a Duel Contract for anyone that would sign it.  Said it was a duel to the death and was adamant that someone come sign it and duel him...  Made internet fame earlier in the decade (2000's) while working for Edinburgh Risk as a contractor.  In a crappy situation, some criticize his actions when under fire.  While I think he reacted fine in a SHTF situation, he's never lived it down and sometimes acts as though he has something to prove. 



There is alot more to MY opinion then just the one video.  Everyone is entitled to whatever makes them happy.  You are no different.  But unless you are a Yeager follower, please do some research on him before you jump on his bandwagon.   Here is a link, you can find whatever you want to read about it.

https://www.google.com/search?q=james+yeager+iraq&aq=f&oq=james+yeager+iraq&aqs=chrome.0.57j0l3j62l2.5526&sugexp=chrome,mod=5&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#hl=en&tbo=d&sclient=psy-ab&q=is+james+yeager+coward&oq=is+james+yeager+coward&gs_l=serp.3..0i8i30.107921.108204.2.111717.3.3.0.0.0.0.85.234.3.3.0.les%3B..0.0...1c.1.zatJmJ9GjUA&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.&fp=70f902665fe3d8c&biw=1264&bih=634

[wallace11bravo]

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/state-suspends-handgun-carry-permit-of-tactical-response

[gsd]

Well that is usually the first step when you go of the deep end like a dipwad. And it just so happens to be on TV when you do so.

Idiot.

[Neeco]

Hahaha, lost his permit! That's what he gets, for being an idiot.

EDIT: This statement was poorly written.  Ha, I acknowledge it is written in poor taste when our rights are being challenged.  I am in no way defending the States decision. 

[JTH]

I've always thought he was an idiot, so there's my background regarding him.

His classes (and while I have NOT been to any of his classes, I've seen his series of Tactical Pistol DVDs) are basic, not bad, but nothing beyond standard.  So the hype that he normally gets doesn't impress me.

....and yet----here we have someone who says stupid things but hasn't performed any illegal actions and someone removes his carry permit because they think he might be a threat?

Hm.  And here I thought we were about people's rights.  Don't forget the 1st, while you argue the 2nd.

I agree he's an idiot. (But I don't think that has actually changed recently---I've always thought he was an idiot.)  However, how does that make a state government entity have the power, without any judicial review, to nullify his carry permit?

[sigh]  I hate this.  Of all the people who could be poster children for supporting self-defense rights, the ones non-gun-people hear about are Alex Jones and James Yeager.  That's just great.

And yet---last I knew, whether we agreed with people or not, we believed in people's rights.  What happened to Yeager's rights, I wonder?

[Neeco]

I've always thought he was an idiot, so there's my background regarding him.

His classes (and while I have NOT been to any of his classes, I've seen his series of Tactical Pistol DVDs) are basic, not bad, but nothing beyond standard.  So the hype that he normally gets doesn't impress me.

....and yet----here we have someone who says stupid things but hasn't performed any illegal actions and someone removes his carry permit because they think he might be a threat?

Hm.  And here I thought we were about people's rights.  Don't forget the 1st, while you argue the 2nd.

I agree he's an idiot. (But I don't think that has actually changed recently---I've always thought he was an idiot.)  However, how does that make a state government entity have the power, without any judicial review, to nullify his carry permit?

[sigh]  I hate this.  Of all the people who could be poster children for supporting self-defense rights, the ones non-gun-people hear about are Alex Jones and James Yeager.  That's just great.

And yet---last I knew, whether we agreed with people or not, we believed in people's rights.  What happened to Yeager's rights, I wonder?

I am not LEO, nor have I studied law enough to know, but isn't threatening to kill people considered a Terroristic Threat?

The law in Tennessee: http://www.capitol.tn.gov/Bills/106/Bill/SB0069.pdf

SENATE BILL 69 
By  Bunch
AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 39,
relative to terroristic threats and acts.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE:
 SECTION 1. Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 39, Chapter 17, Part 3, is amended by
adding a new, appropriately designated section:
 Section 39-17-318.
  (a) A person commits the offense of a terroristic threat who threatens to:
(1) Commit any crime of violence;
(2) Release any hazardous substance as defined by 42 U.S.C. § 9601;
(3) Burn or damage property with the purpose of terrorizing another or
causing the evacuation of a building, place of assembly or facility of public
transportation; or
(4) Cause serious public inconvenience in reckless disregard of the risk of
causing such terror or inconvenience.
(b) No person shall be convicted under subsection (a) solely on the
uncorroborated testimony of the party to whom a terroristic threat is communicated.
(c) A person commits the offense of a terroristic act who:
(1) Uses a burning or flaming cross or other burning or flaming symbol or
flambeau with the intent to terrorize another or another's household;
(2) Shoots at or throws an object at a conveyance that is being operated
or that is occupied by passengers; or
(3) Releases any hazardous substance as defined by 42 U.S.C. § 9601 or
releases any simulated hazardous substance under the guise of a hazardous - 2 -  00077071
substance for the purpose of terrorizing another or causing the evacuation of a
building, place of assembly, or facility of public transportation.
(d) A violation of subsection (a) is a Class E felony.
(e) A violation of subsection (c) is a Class D felony; however, if any person
suffers serious physical injury as a direct result of an act giving rise to a violation of
subsection (c), the violation shall be classified as a Class A felony.
 (f) A person shall be guilty of the offense of a terroristic threat or act who
commits or attempts to commit a terroristic threat or act with the intent to retaliate
against any person who:
(1) Attends a judicial or administrative proceeding as witness, attorney,
judge or party for the purpose of producing any record, document, or other object
in a judicial or official proceeding; or
(2) Provides to a law enforcement officer, adult or juvenile probation
officer, prosecuting attorney, or judge any information relating to the commission
or possible commission of an offense under the laws of this state or of the United
States or any information relating to the commission of a violation of the
conditions of bail, pretrial release, probation or parole.
(g) 
(1)  A violation of subsection (f) by the commission of or attempted
commission of a terroristic threat is a Class C felony.
(2) A violation of subsection (f) by the commission of or attempted
commission of a terroristic act is a Class B felony.
 SECTION 2.  This act shall take effect upon becoming a law, the public welfare requiring

[Neeco]

With that said, the 1st amendment gives you the right to speak your mind, not make threats that are conceivably, able to be acted upon.  In this case, a weapons instructor trained by the USG says he is going to start killing people if the POTUS doesn't stop doing something.  To me, that is as real as it gets.  Even though we know him to be an idiot.  You just can't say things like that to a national audience without repercussions. 

[JTH]

With that said, the 1st amendment gives you the right to speak your mind, not make threats that are conceivably, able to be acted upon.  In this case, a weapons instructor trained by the USG says he is going to start killing people if the POTUS doesn't stop doing something.  To me, that is as real as it gets.  Even though we know him to be an idiot.  You just can't say things like that to a national audience without repercussions. 

Didn't he say he would respond with lethal force to illegal actions forced upon him?

Hm.  Haven't many, many people said similar things on this forum?

Again---I think he's an idiot.  However, how is this different in speech from the things people have said here?  That people have said on Facebook? 

So my question would be---is resisting illegal actions with lethal force is a crime of violence?

Did he threaten specific people?  No.  Did he say he would start killing people if no one came to take his guns?  No.  Did he say that if anyone's guns were taken, he would start shooting people?  I don't believe so. 

So---what part of that (other than it was loud and more significantly broadcast) was any different than the people on this forum saying "from my cold, dead hands" or "NOBODY is gonna take my guns" or any one of the other variations we've seen?

So---where was the threat of a crime? 

And even more so---how was his permit pulled by a regulatory agency without any sort of judicial review?

[dcjulie]

Okay, while I don't happen to be a fan of Yeager and I think he's an idiot, I don't agree with what has happened here.  Merely pulling his CCW permit because he identified his reaction to an action is ludicrous. 

What makes his declaration any different that me having this conversation with someone:

Question:  What would you do if some guy attacked you and tried to rape you?
My answer:  I'd defend myself with any means necessary.
Question:  Would you shoot him?
My answer:  Yes, if need be.

Now, is my scenario any different?  Just because I'm not a ranting idiot (I'm really not, and actually I'm rather shy) do the laws have different meaning to me?  Self defense is just that - defending oneself against illegal action.  Depending on the circumstance, lethal force is justified. 

[A-FIXER]

Self defense is just that - defending oneself against illegal action.  Depending on the circumstance, lethal force is justified.

As it stands to me, as in DC Julies response no there is only circumstances that change and not that I am his follower as I placed this to show the passion runs deep in our 2nd A and that many amercians would and could do....

[Neeco]

The way I see it is this:

I can say "From my cold, dead hands" - That is not a threat. That is a statement that can be construed a multitude of ways.  One of which, would be the way it is typically said, in reference to someone taking away something of someone else's.  But there is no overt threat there, no mention of "killing".

I can say " I am going to defend my property and family with any means necessary"  - That is not a threat either, it is a statement without any action or reaction.

If I said " I am going to shoot the first person that comes in my home, LEO or not" Is getting much closer to a direct threat against something other than a generality.  Something specific was mentioned with a specific action mentioned. 

If I said " I am going to kill you, if you do not stop xxxxx."  That is a direct threat with action being taken if you continue to do xxxxxx. 

If I said " If the POTUS doesn't do xxxxx, I am going to start killing people." It is the same as the example above, except now he has brought in our President and has also brought the attention of the authorities in one action. 

Is there a difference in those statements?  Not really, except the "specific threats" mentioned.

Now, had Yeager simply said, "You will have to take this weapon from my cold, dead hands if you think I am going to do anything POTUS says regarding gun control".  I doubt he would be in hot water. 

It was the way he worded his threats, clear and concise.  If x doesn't stop, I am going to kill people.  How is that any different than what we act against overseas?  If you change the setting, the color of his skin, and his language, we would all be calling for him to be arrested and tried as a terrorist.

IMHO and YMMV.  Everyone is entitled to there own beliefs.  This is just what I believe. 

Now, on to whether or not the State had the right to yank his permit?  That is entirely out of my lane, and I will not act like I understand ANY of the laws that the DHS uses or can use.  Should there have been a hearing to decide his fate? Probably.  But again, clearly out of my lane.

[lneuke]

He said something in a fit of anger, yes, and it was not a smart move at all on his part.  However, the state pointlessly and stupidly took away his legal right to conceal a firearm because he made threatening remarks (at no one in particular).  Now, whether you like Yeager or not is besides the point, but what the state did was indeed completely ridiculous and pointless.  Here's why:

If Yeager was truly intent on going out and shooting people, do you think he would give a crap if his CCP was revoked?  Everyone here always argues against anti-gunners saying that the lawless will ignore the law, making gun laws completely meaningless and only punishing the law abiding.  This is completely true, and as of yet Yeager seems to have been in full compliance with the law regarding his revocation.  All that has been done is that he lost the legal ability to defend himself, family, and bystanders with a concealed firearm... This is just another example of legislative idiocy, pushing the notion that they're "protecting" us with laws that do absolutely nothing.

No one on this website can support his CCP being revoked without being a hypocrite, regardless of how much of an idiot Yeager may or may not be.  It's important to stick to your own logic in these situations, even if it's convenient to stray away from it at times.

[Neeco]

Luke-

I clearly stated that I wasn't going to argue for or against what the State did.  It's out of my lane.

But to clarify:

I don't support his permit being revoked.  I agree that it was unconstitutional. The fact is, it was revoked.  My point wasn't the legality of the situation or the laws surrounding it, it was more of a "Play stupid games, win stupid prizes".  I believe strongly in ALL of our rights.

That being said, wanna go put some lead on steel? I need to run to Cabela's then I was thinking of stopping by our "range" for some drills... 

Text me if you would like to go.  Its cold, but what better way to find out if the gloves I have work right! Ha. 

[JTH]

That being said, wanna go put some lead on steel? I need to run to Cabela's then I was thinking of stopping by our "range" for some drills... 

Text me if you would like to go.  Its cold, but what better way to find out if the gloves I have work right! Ha. 

Good thing to find out before the steel challenge match a week from tomorrow. 

[Neeco]

Good thing to find out before the steel challenge match a week from tomorrow. 

Yep!  I would offer to you, but I am certain your range is far better equipped then mine! I need to get on it next time they hold the membership classes...

Luke passed, so looks like it will be a solo day...

[lneuke]

Sorry, been in Omaha with the wife/grandparents! 

[wallace11bravo]

http://snafu-solomon.blogspot.com/2013/01/update-james-yeager-is-going-on-msnbc.html