Sue the living shit out of'em. The only justification for paramilitaries in this country is the Drug War. Who supports the drug war? The same paramilitaries.

Fuck'm. Hopefully the next owner gets off a couple shots off and puts a paramilitary in the hospital instead of a civilian, because this shit is ridiculous.

I hope his fellow gets everything he's suing for and more. PPB does nothing to stop property crime in North Portland. You're on your own, something this man obviously knew.

1) From a tactical perspective, this seems botched on the police for using another person's property for a raid without notice. That's just asking for problems especially in a bad neighborhood. They should know better or exercise some common sense if this is what occurred.

2) I do not believe people have the right to confront people on your property with a gun for trespassing -- they must be in fear of their life and their property. Retreat to your home, lock the doors, and call police first.

Let's be objective here; if this incident was a rural Republican NRA homeowner who confronted someone on their property with force, people (on here) would probably be arguing we need more gun laws to control the gun-freaks.

The individual who was unfortunately shot has a criminal case against him, ostensibly for gun charges. It sucks he got shot, he sounds like a good family guy trying to protect his family, but understanding gun laws is something people in the US need to have more veneration for.

3) Being 100% against the "War on Drugs" is so... college level thinking. I'd say, try having crack heads turning tricks near your home or dodging needles in your street. Even in places where drugs are legal, or quasi-legal, these problems are still there.

Locking people up at a high cost versus forced treatment is definitely something to consider, I do not disagree with this nor how things have played out regarding anti-drug measures, but there's needs to be carrot in front of them to change. A drug user won't change their habits until they hit rock bottom or are forced to, which is something to consider for those making arguments for complete legalization of drugs.

@ws:
2. Call the cops? Yeah, that always works. Did you read the story about the cops who shot an innocent civilian who was only trying to protect his own family because he knew the cops were not going to come and protect his family? Huh, I just read that article. Call the cops? I'm going to guess you live somewhere in Multnomah Village. Like when the police force shut down a whole neighborhood because of bike thief with crazy eyes? Hahaha!

2.5 "ostensibly for gun charges". This man was within his legal rights under the Oregon Constitution and the Oregon Revised Statue. He was confronting strangers with an unloaded weapon - in what more civil way could this man of acted, if he knew his gun was unloaded? Do you think he threatened them, at all, with an unloaded gun? Any charges against him for unlawful firearm use are totally bogus, you should really look in to this, especially Section 27. "...understanding gun laws..." indeed.

3. So you support policies that kill Mexican children needlessly? The deaths, violence, and general criminality that are a direct result of drug prohibition are an entirely fine trade off, in your reasoning, for not dealing with crackheads in your neighborhood.

@fidelity:

1) Lots of people call the police with no incident. I have and they helped myself and my family out tremendously. They aren't perfect, and nobody is, but I'd rather live with police than without. Most people also agree with this and will call the police in these situations.

I do not live in MV. It's a neat place, actually. What's with the ad-hominem attack? I'm not attacking you like this and worded my response appropriately...

2) I am not privy to the charges against him and neither are you. I do not want to live in a world where it's legal for someone to pull a gun on you when you simply trespass or accidentally go on someone's property. I am not a lawyer, but here is something pertinent:

http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/161.html

ORS 161.225

"...When the person reasonably believes it necessary to prevent the commission of arson or a felony by force and violence by the trespasser."

Here is a possible case study:

http://www.katu.com/news/local/Man-denies-…

Please link to the Oregon Constitution and/or appropriate links to ORS where you believe he is within his legal rights to approach someone outside with a gun for simple, non-criminal trespass.

My argument: There has to be justification to use force or threat of force. Given these cops were not there to rob the guy's house, set it on fire, or hurt him (even though he may not have known this), his case looks weak if I have the facts right.

3)"So you support policies that kill Mexican children needlessly?"

No, I actually never said that nor did I state that I agree with the War on Drugs in its entirety. Brevity cannot explain my entire positions on drugs, but I don't want to see junkies smoking crack in front of kids next to a park either, I think that should be illegal and the a drug-abuser held accountable to better themselves, which hopefully would include success drug-rehab instead of a prison sentence and expungement of their drug criminal record.

If it was proved it was an unloaded gun, then he's not using physical force.

However, even if the gun was loaded, if you see an armed person in all black in your yard I think it's pretty reasonable to believe that person may be in your yard to commit a violent felony, especially after that person refuses to leave after you tell them to.

The bottom line is if the cops didn't properly identify themselves and a reasonable person wouldn't have been able to ID them as cops anyway IN THAT MOMENT, then this guy has a pretty good case.

@Colin

I'd doubt he knew they were carrying weapons, otherwise he wouldn't have have pulled an UNLOADED weapon on them. That's like...bringing an unloaded weapon to a gunfight, I don't think that's the case here.

You also have to remember the law is tricky. An unloaded weapon may not be that different legal wise than a loaded one (for instance, you can still be charged with felony drug charges for selling fake drugs, and *I believe* charged with armed bank robbery when using a pretend gun).

I'll just say this:

If he can prove that he himself, his family, and his home were in severe threat as described by the law and that he had no ability to escape to inside his home, he deserves to win.

I still retain my stance that I think it's wrong to confront simple trespassing with the utmost (threat) of force. This ain't Texas. Did the individual in question do this? I simply don't know for sure.

Above the points I've made, everything is speculation on my part, I don't know the case to make too many more passing judgements.

Thanks.