FN Herstal Firearms banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
609 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Gtac in northern wiscon has employed private security to protect a mining operation from domestic terrorists wanting to shut down the exploratory mining mission in prelude to the gtac iron mine.

At least one guard is using a scar16 to protect freedom from hippy terrorists in northern wisconsin!!

Go FN!!

gtac-armed_guards_1_-_courtesy_rob_ganson1.jpg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,109 Posts
Freakin' hippies...
 
  • Like
Reactions: parapyropig

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,109 Posts
A bottle of water thrown at some one is a weapon.

And they would be littering, thus hurting the environment, they are supposedly trying to protect... :?:


:eek:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
43 Posts
Apparently the local prosecutors didn't consider it weapon, since the only person charged was charged burglary and criminal damage of property, not even simple assault, much less any terrorism related crime. Furthermore, GTAC never claimed that anyone's life was in danger.

The single incident which resulted in GTAC's employment of Bulletproof Securities (BPS) was a demonstration in the summer of 2013 in which bottles and cans were thrown, tires were allegedly slashed, and a 27 year old woman attempted to take a camera from a GTAC employee.

GTAC claimed that they needed armed security to protect their property, not anyone's life; so apparently the safety of their employees wasn't their primary concern, leading one to conclude no one was threatened (or their employees are less valuable to them than their equipment).

Wisconsin law, however, doesn't allow use of deadly force to protect property. At the time, they were operating on public land, from which they had no right or authority to bar anyone. So basically, I could show up at that site and burn every piece of GTAC property there, and as long as no one was inside anything I burned, and I didn't pour gas on anyone and chase them with a lighter, all GTAC or BPS could legally do was call the sheriff. So exactly what was the threat that required the presence of weapons capable of deploying deadly force over hundreds of meters? GTAC never claimed any such threat. No one ever claimed that anyone opposed to the mining project posed any kind of deadly threat to anyone. That project, by the way, is opposed by the Sierra Club, every Native American tribe in Wisconsin, and every city in the affected watershed, except one. Round up all those unAmerican terrorist bastards and send them to Gitmo now.

Why did they need camouflaged, heavily armed guards hiding in the woods? BPS say they were taking pictures of illegal campers who were watching the GTAC site. Since they had no right or authority to prevent anyone from being there, that doesn't hold any water either.

The only reason I can think of for the presence of such heavily armed mercenaries was to intimidate the citizens of Wisconsin. That's Afghan warlord, Central American death squad, and drug cartel stuff; not stuff that should happen in our country.

You should also wonder about the professionalism of BPS. The founder and owner of the company claims to be a former police chief, although he started BPS with money from his real estate business which is run from the same office in Scottsdale, AZ. You would think that a former police chief would be well-versed enough in the law to have recommended a more appropriate response to GTAC.

And just to reinforce how fairly everyone involved was treated, you need to know that BPS was operating illegally in Wisconsin at the time, since they lacked the required permit from the state. When they did get around to requesting the permit, there was evidence that they lied to state officials about the various local, county, and state agencies they claimed to have coordinated with prior to arrival. Not only were they not punished, they were never even investigated. They simply got their permit. The woman, on the other hand, was charged with crimes that could have resulted in 17 years imprisonment and tens of thousands of dollars in fines and restitution. She pled no contest this week and was sentenced to nine months in prison and five years probation.

So were "domestic terrorists" operating in Wisconsin? You betcha; and I know who they were.

Every member of this forum should be up in arms (sorry, couldn't resist) about this incident because it plays into the hands of everyone who'd like to take away our 2nd Amendment rights: look, another gang of armed thugs running around with guns to replace their manhood, looking for reasons to shoot people. If I lived in Wisconsin, I'd be even more concerned that my governor thought it was fine to import these people to intimidate the citizens of his state.

Finally, if you really think it's okay to shoot someone who throws a water bottle at you, you should just go join the Brady Coalition right now, because you'll do less damage to the cause of the 2nd Amendment that way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
Apparently the local prosecutors didn't consider it weapon, since the only person charged was charged burglary and criminal damage of property, not even simple assault, much less any terrorism related crime. Furthermore, GTAC never claimed that anyone's life was in danger.

The single incident which resulted in GTAC's employment of Bulletproof Securities (BPS) was a demonstration in the summer of 2013 in which bottles and cans were thrown, tires were allegedly slashed, and a 27 year old woman attempted to take a camera from a GTAC employee.

GTAC claimed that they needed armed security to protect their property, not anyone's life; so apparently the safety of their employees wasn't their primary concern, leading one to conclude no one was threatened (or their employees are less valuable to them than their equipment).

Wisconsin law, however, doesn't allow use of deadly force to protect property. At the time, they were operating on public land, from which they had no right or authority to bar anyone. So basically, I could show up at that site and burn every piece of GTAC property there, and as long as no one was inside anything I burned, and I didn't pour gas on anyone and chase them with a lighter, all GTAC or BPS could legally do was call the sheriff. So exactly what was the threat that required the presence of weapons capable of deploying deadly force over hundreds of meters? GTAC never claimed any such threat. No one ever claimed that anyone opposed to the mining project posed any kind of deadly threat to anyone. That project, by the way, is opposed by the Sierra Club, every Native American tribe in Wisconsin, and every city in the affected watershed, except one. Round up all those unAmerican terrorist bastards and send them to Gitmo now.

Why did they need camouflaged, heavily armed guards hiding in the woods? BPS say they were taking pictures of illegal campers who were watching the GTAC site. Since they had no right or authority to prevent anyone from being there, that doesn't hold any water either.

The only reason I can think of for the presence of such heavily armed mercenaries was to intimidate the citizens of Wisconsin. That's Afghan warlord, Central American death squad, and drug cartel stuff; not stuff that should happen in our country.

You should also wonder about the professionalism of BPS. The founder and owner of the company claims to be a former police chief, although he started BPS with money from his real estate business which is run from the same office in Scottsdale, AZ. You would think that a former police chief would be well-versed enough in the law to have recommended a more appropriate response to GTAC.

And just to reinforce how fairly everyone involved was treated, you need to know that BPS was operating illegally in Wisconsin at the time, since they lacked the required permit from the state. When they did get around to requesting the permit, there was evidence that they lied to state officials about the various local, county, and state agencies they claimed to have coordinated with prior to arrival. Not only were they not punished, they were never even investigated. They simply got their permit. The woman, on the other hand, was charged with crimes that could have resulted in 17 years imprisonment and tens of thousands of dollars in fines and restitution. She pled no contest this week and was sentenced to nine months in prison and five years probation.

So were "domestic terrorists" operating in Wisconsin? You betcha; and I know who they were.

Every member of this forum should be up in arms (sorry, couldn't resist) about this incident because it plays into the hands of everyone who'd like to take away our 2nd Amendment rights: look, another gang of armed thugs running around with guns to replace their manhood, looking for reasons to shoot people. If I lived in Wisconsin, I'd be even more concerned that my governor thought it was fine to import these people to intimidate the citizens of his state.

Finally, if you really think it's okay to shoot someone who throws a water bottle at you, you should just go join the Brady Coalition right now, because you'll do less damage to the cause of the 2nd Amendment that way.

Seriously, thank you. Great info, great perspective. I've been lurking here since purchasing my scar 16 but haven't been compelled to post until now. About the only thing I fear more than a militarized police force is a militarized rent-a-cop force; operating illegally on public land no less. I'm a bit saddened that all it took was the perception that they are "protecting our freedom from hippies" to make this ok. Smh.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top