• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Navy official caught on camera threatening young men with a gun (1 Viewer)

Celebrity

DP Veteran
Joined
May 13, 2016
Messages
5,257
Reaction score
761
Location
VT, USA
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The man arguing with the men came out of a home, that according to public records, is owned by Karnig Ohannessian – a Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Environment).
This man exercised his right to bear arms as a private citizen, on his own private property, in a domestic dispute. If we can't trust a government employee to bear arms responsibly, then should we ban arms for government employees while not on duty? I don't think it's the government employee that's the problem. I bet this guy wouldn't have even got up out of his chair, if he didn't have a gun. How unprofessional and uncivil.

We should not enact a societal age limit to prevent old people from carrying arms. We should take steps to prevent senile people from threatening kids. Maybe there's a line that needs to be crossed in order to make sure that lethal force isn't thrown around at random.

Navy official caught on camera threatening young men with a gun | WUSA9.com
 
This man exercised his right to bear arms as a private citizen, on his own private property, in a domestic dispute. If we can't trust a government employee to bear arms responsibly, then should we ban arms for government employees while not on duty? I don't think it's the government employee that's the problem. I bet this guy wouldn't have even got up out of his chair, if he didn't have a gun. How unprofessional and uncivil.

We should not enact a societal age limit to prevent old people from carrying arms. We should take steps to prevent senile people from threatening kids. Maybe there's a line that needs to be crossed in order to make sure that lethal force isn't thrown around at random.

Navy official caught on camera threatening young men with a gun | WUSA9.com

Hmmmm...so instead of hammering this asshat, your solution is to assume all individuals over a certain age are senile or otherwise unfit to exercise a constitutional right. Pretty obtuse, biggoted thought process.
 
This man exercised his right to bear arms as a private citizen, on his own private property, in a domestic dispute. If we can't trust a government employee to bear arms responsibly, then should we ban arms for government employees while not on duty? I don't think it's the government employee that's the problem. I bet this guy wouldn't have even got up out of his chair, if he didn't have a gun. How unprofessional and uncivil.

We should not enact a societal age limit to prevent old people from carrying arms. We should take steps to prevent senile people from threatening kids. Maybe there's a line that needs to be crossed in order to make sure that lethal force isn't thrown around at random.

Navy official caught on camera threatening young men with a gun | WUSA9.com

Well, if the man had been black, we'd probably have another dead black guy on our hands, since in America it seems that if a black guy has a gun, the police have gotta respond with deadly force. But if the guy was white, well, ha-RUMPH, Second Amendment Rights to bear arms and all that!
 
Well, if the man had been black, we'd probably have another dead black guy on our hands, since in America it seems that if a black guy has a gun, the police have gotta respond with deadly force. But if the guy was white, well, ha-RUMPH, Second Amendment Rights to bear arms and all that!

Glen, can you get anymore hyperbolic? Do you just like being a rabble rouser with nothing but bull****?
 
Hmmmm...so instead of hammering this asshat, your solution is to assume all individuals over a certain age are senile or otherwise unfit to exercise a constitutional right. Pretty obtuse, biggoted thought process.

What's bigoted is assaulting young men with the threat of lethal force. I specifically stated that an age limit is not necessary, though I doubt that this individual is insane. At this time, no charges have been filed, but his motive was that "they were being loud." Clearly this is a pissing contest to him.
 
This man exercised his right to bear arms as a private citizen, on his own private property, in a domestic dispute. If we can't trust a government employee to bear arms responsibly, then should we ban arms for government employees while not on duty? I don't think it's the government employee that's the problem. I bet this guy wouldn't have even got up out of his chair, if he didn't have a gun. How unprofessional and uncivil.

We should not enact a societal age limit to prevent old people from carrying arms. We should take steps to prevent senile people from threatening kids. Maybe there's a line that needs to be crossed in order to make sure that lethal force isn't thrown around at random.

Navy official caught on camera threatening young men with a gun | WUSA9.com

He's not an old person.

In Illinois, I think I would have been arrested. He was NOT on his property, first of all, he was on the public sidewalk. Here, that would be considered brandishing a weapon. I'd probably lose my permit. Im assuming that was his wife trying to de-escalate the situation. My guess is that he was drunk. PS...that is not a domestic dispute.
 
Well, if the man had been black, we'd probably have another dead black guy on our hands, since in America it seems that if a black guy has a gun, the police have gotta respond with deadly force. But if the guy was white, well, ha-RUMPH, Second Amendment Rights to bear arms and all that!

Pretty broad sweeping generalizations. Is the shooting of legally armed African Americans a common occurance or a rarity? If it is a rarity, that was a pretty stupid statement.
 
Is it or is it not true that a black guy openly carrying a gun is seen by law enforcement as much more of a threat than a white guy openly carrying a gun?

I don't know what is going on elsewhere Glen, but in the Hampton Roads area, blacks open carry frequently and the most they ever get from a cop is..........

Hey how do you like that (pick your model/make)

I think 5 of my black buddies will open carry depending on where they are going. None of them ever reported to me about any bad situations.

Virginia is pretty much gun friendly.
 
Is it or is it not true that a black guy openly carrying a gun is seen by law enforcement as much more of a threat than a white guy openly carrying a gun?

You tell us? There was an African American legally open carrying a firearm in Dallas. He was not shot and killed or seen as a threat by law enforcement. He was later suspected of being one of the shooters after the fact but was exonerated. So Glen, how often does it happen?
 
What's bigoted is assaulting young men with the threat of lethal force. I specifically stated that an age limit is not necessary, though I doubt that this individual is insane. At this time, no charges have been filed, but his motive was that "they were being loud." Clearly this is a pissing contest to him.

Then why even bring up senility or age at all??. Call him what he is, an asshat that needs to be hammered.
 
Seriously? That whack job Navy guy should be arrested!

The kid never threatened him, or made any hostile action as far as the film shows..

The gun stays put until bodily harm is imminent.

I am ashamed to see a Navy man act that way.
 
Well, if the man had been black, we'd probably have another dead black guy on our hands, since in America it seems that if a black guy has a gun, the police have gotta respond with deadly force. But if the guy was white, well, ha-RUMPH, Second Amendment Rights to bear arms and all that!

How can you make that leap with a straight face? Police, white or black, even the occasional Mexican or Oriental, interact with millions with people, white or black, even the occasional Mexican or Oriental. Nearly all end well. Gun carrier or not.
 
Is it or is it not true that a black guy openly carrying a gun is seen by law enforcement as much more of a threat than a white guy openly carrying a gun?

Maybe that has something to do with the fact that blacks murder people in the U.S. at a rate roughly four times higher than would be expected, considering only their percentage of the population.

As for this person, the laws about brandishing firearms in that state may be unusual in some way. But assuming they are not, it's clear that what he can be seen doing violated one or more criminal laws. What I noticed is that he was in no way defending his property. Loud talk is not by itself a threat to anyone's property or safety. Also, the young men were standing on a grass parkway, and he was on the sidewalk. Neither would ordinarily be part of a residential lot, but rather public property. I would think the District Attorney has more than enough evidence to prosecute this man, and a jury might well convict him of crimes.
 
Last edited:
This man exercised his right to bear arms as a private citizen, on his own private property, in a domestic dispute. If we can't trust a government employee to bear arms responsibly, then should we ban arms for government employees while not on duty? I don't think it's the government employee that's the problem. I bet this guy wouldn't have even got up out of his chair, if he didn't have a gun. How unprofessional and uncivil.

We should not enact a societal age limit to prevent old people from carrying arms. We should take steps to prevent senile people from threatening kids. Maybe there's a line that needs to be crossed in order to make sure that lethal force isn't thrown around at random.

Navy official caught on camera threatening young men with a gun | WUSA9.com
The individual brandishing a gun may have been standing on the very edge of his property, but he's threatening citizens in a public space (the sidewalk & parkway), and not only impeding their free movement, but controlling their movement as he so directs.

He is either overcome with rage or otherwise feels empowered, because he continues to act out while being openly video taped!

I'm suspect age has nothing to do with this, and his being navy shouldn't either, but I'm at a loss to otherwise understand why he wasn't charged! :doh

WTH?

I can say this, though: Thank God we live in the age of individual, portable, and personal, video devices. I've twice used my cell phone to diffuse potential escalating situations!
 
He's not an old person.

In Illinois, I think I would have been arrested. He was NOT on his property, first of all, he was on the public sidewalk. Here, that would be considered brandishing a weapon. I'd probably lose my permit. Im assuming that was his wife trying to de-escalate the situation. My guess is that he was drunk. PS...that is not a domestic dispute.
Right.

He brandished a weapon, and impeded the free travel of citizens in a public space. Even further, he directed their physical movements at gun point (made them leave the area). I wouldn't doubt that's felony material, and yes in states like Illinois that would pull your permit, and I'd argue it should do so in every state.
 
The individual brandishing a gun may have been standing on the very edge of his property, but he's threatening citizens in a public space (the sidewalk & parkway), and not only impeding their free movement, but controlling their movement as he so directs.

He is either overcome with rage or otherwise feels empowered, because he continues to act out while being openly video taped!

I'm suspect age has nothing to do with this, and his being navy shouldn't either, but I'm at a loss to otherwise understand why he wasn't charged! :doh

WTH?

I can say this, though: Thank God we live in the age of individual, portable, and personal, video devices. I've twice used my cell phone to diffuse potential escalating situations!

Even if he were on his property, he cannot brandish. Brandishing doesn't mean holding. Brandishing means that he is waving it around in a threatening manner.

A lot of people have no idea what brandishing means.

He should have kept that gun in his back pocket.

Better yet....he should pawn it and use the money for a shrink!

This kid didn't deserve that treatment........even is he was possibly being an azz.
 
Is it or is it not true that a black guy openly carrying a gun is seen by law enforcement as much more of a threat than a white guy openly carrying a gun?

Oh ****, the Facebook page has you convinced. I cannot compete with that.

5 Statistics You Need To Know About Cops Killing Blacks | Daily Wire

5. Blacks are more likely to kill cops than be killed by cops. This is according to FBI data, which also found that 40 percent of cop killers are black. According to MacDonald, the police officer is 18.5 times more likely to be killed by a black than a cop killing an unarmed black person.


4. Black and Hispanic police officers are more likely to fire a gun at blacks than white officers.

3. The Post's data does show that unarmed black men are more likely to die by the gun of a cop than an unarmed white man...but this does not tell the whole story.
(WORTH READING)

2. More whites and Hispanics die from police homicides than blacks.

1. Cops killed nearly twice as many whites as blacks in 2015.

I'm sure all that doesn't compare with a facebook page though.
 
Even if he were on his property, he cannot brandish. Brandishing doesn't mean holding. Brandishing means that he is waving it around in a threatening manner.

A lot of people have no idea what brandishing means.
No, but thanks to your post we do now - thanks.

He should have kept that gun in his back pocket.

Better yet....he should pawn it and use the money for a shrink!

This kid didn't deserve that treatment........even is he was possibly being an azz.
:lamo
 
Even if he were on his property, he cannot brandish. Brandishing doesn't mean holding. Brandishing means that he is waving it around in a threatening manner.

A lot of people have no idea what brandishing means.

He should have kept that gun in his back pocket.

Better yet....he should pawn it and use the money for a shrink!

This kid didn't deserve that treatment........even is he was possibly being an azz.
Say Navy, do have any opinion on the specific meaning of the term "gunman"?

It always sounded harsh & criminal to me.

Here's what Mr. Webster has to say:

"a person (especially a man) who uses a gun to shoot someone or to try to shoot someone
Source: Merriam-Webster's Learner's Dictionary"


Source: Marriam Webster: Gunman
 
Say Navy, do have any opinion on the specific meaning of the term "gunman"?

It always sounded harsh & criminal to me.

Here's what Mr. Webster has to say:

"a person (especially a man) who uses a gun to shoot someone or to try to shoot someone
Source: Merriam-Webster's Learner's Dictionary"


Source: Marriam Webster: Gunman

It seems to be used mostly in the negative sense.....in my experience.

Shooter....gunman

Robber......gunman

Bad guy....gunman
 
It seems to be used mostly in the negative sense.....in my experience.

Shooter....gunman

Robber......gunman

Bad guy....gunman
Yeah, I was going to use "gunman" in another thread with a guy brandishing a gun at an anti-gun protest (he never fired), but refrained since I didn't want my post to be inflammatory.

To me, a "gunman" uses his gun in the furtherance of a crime beyond that of possessing or displaying the weapon itself - and that's what I follow in my posting.

So navy guy here = "man with a gun".

Dallas shooter = "gunman".
 
Yeah, I was going to use "gunman" in another thread with a guy brandishing a gun at an anti-gun protest (he never fired), but refrained since I didn't want my post to be inflammatory.

To me, a "gunman" uses his gun in the furtherance of a crime beyond that of possessing or displaying the weapon itself - and that's what I follow in my posting.

So navy guy here = "man with a gun".

Dallas shooter = "gunman".


The man in Dallas was carrying his rifle in a legal manner....he was not brandishing. To be considered brandishing, he would have to unshoulder the weapon and wave it around in a threatening manner, or in order to just scare people.

Technically:.... any person with a gun, whether concealed or open, is considered a man with a gun. But that doesn't meany anything other than .....the guy has a gun with him. Perfectly fine if it is legal in that state, and not in a no firearms allowed area. (restricted)

Dallas shooter = gunman Bad guy.
 
It seems to be used mostly in the negative sense.....in my experience.

Shooter....gunman

Robber......gunman

Bad guy....gunman

Most gun Prohibitionists assume everyone with a gun is a gunman...they are not capable of telling the difference...
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom