1 officer shot dead; another wounded

[MyrnaLoy]

Two Fond du Lac police officers were shot Sunday morning, one fatally, while responding to the home of a man who was firing a gun.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/wisconsin/118324489.html

[sharesunited]

1. Today's 2nd Amendment poster boy.

Wonder whether these officers believed that the public should have access to guns and ammo?

Amazingly, some do.

[MyrnaLoy]

2. I wonder

what the weapon was? I have a pretty good guess as to what type of firearm was used. More and more police officers are having to face better armed bad people. Many in the gun community fear the way police are "militarizing" themselves. Truth is, they have to keep up with the higher-powered weapons now being "collected".

[RSillsbee]

4. You're more than welcome

to cite evidence of your claim.

(You're really going to look like an idiot when it comes to light that the bad guy was using a bolt action .22)

[MyrnaLoy]

10. actually

did I make a claim? Did I mention a specific weapon at all? If so which specific weapon did I say?

Now let's put this shoe on your foot. Will you look like the idiot when it's not a .22? that was soooo easy!

[RSillsbee]

13. Yes , you did make a claim

You stated tha you have a prety good idea what type of weapon was used. So, please tell us what your guess is?

[MyrnaLoy]

17. we'll

wait and see .22 cal boy. HAhahahahaa

[MyrnaLoy]

25. Hmmm

"At about 6:30 this morning they were fired upon by a large caliber weapon," said Lemke. "Two officers and a K-9 unit were struck. Officer Craig Birkholz, 28 years old, died as a result of his injury." http://www.fox11online.com/dpp/news/local/shots-fired-in-fond-du-lac

You still wanna play this .22 cal boy? Still want to play that idiot card?

[AtheistCrusader]

60. What does 'large caliber weapon' mean?

[MyrnaLoy]

61. to me

personally? anything above a .38 in handgun and anything above .22 excluding rimfire ammunition. .223 on up in long guns.

[AtheistCrusader]

62. That's a pretty expansive group.

Also, doesn't account for same-caliber but higher power weapons, like a .357 Magnum. (which can fire .38 special fine BUT NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND)

[rl6214]

64. So you think every rifle is a large caliber weapon?

Because if anything above .22 is large caliber, that dosen't leave anything else.

[MyrnaLoy]

65. you did

see the rimfire exclusion right?

[Euromutt]

67. The number of rimfire rounds over .22 cal still in production is negligible

Sure, historically, you can find rimfire cartridges all the way up to .58 caliber, but the last of them went out of production 70 years ago, and practically by definition, individual reloaders aren't going to be messing about with rimfire cartridges because they can't reuse the brass (which is almost the entire point of reloading). So for all practical purposes, by defining as "high caliber" any centerfire long gun cartridge .223 and up, you're in effect classing practically all modern (and most not-so-modern) centerfire long guns as "high caliber."

So if practically everything is "high caliber" in your book, what's left to form "low" or "medium" caliber?

[AtheistCrusader]

88. .17hmr

LOL

Just teasing.

[Callisto32]

68. So your chart doesn't include .204 Ruger, which has, generally, more muzzle energy than .223...why?

[Callisto32]

120. I'll take your silence as an admission that your "criteria" are utterly capricious.

[MyrnaLoy]

96. still wanna go with .22 bolt action?

We also heard from multiple sources Monday about the weapons the gunman used. We're told he had a .308 hunting rifle, an assault rifle firing .223-caliber rounds, and a shotgun.http://www.wbay.com/Global/story.asp?S=14293031

[RSillsbee]

99. I'm OK w/ being wrong ( I was being facetious anyway )

That said any .308 will defeat most body armor, I bet my ass he didn't have an actual assault rifle ( I don't think .223 will defeat body armor) and I know a shot gun won't do the trick.

So what do you think we should do behind this? Ban all firearms?

[MyrnaLoy]

104. so

when you're wrong it's no big deal but if I would have been I would have been an idiot? Those were your words correct?

[RSillsbee]

105. Being wrong wouldn't have changed your status one iota

You don't suppose you could answer my question do you? What should we do in light of this anecdotal current events story? Ban fierarms nationwide?

[MyrnaLoy]

107. why would

I ban firearms, I would mine. So much for your broad brush. You should quit now, your idiot accusation is beginning to describe you.

[rl6214]

109. Notice you get no answers

Just insults.

[RSillsbee]

111. The whoel thread is flamebait. I caught that early on NT

[Atypical Liberal]

74. Watch the video

http://www.wisn.com/news/27254706/detail.html

It was not a .22. It also penetrated body armor. Not a .22. From the sound of it, it was some sort of civilian assault rifle.

[rl6214]

83. What "civilian assault rifles" are large caliber?

Ar15s are .223, not large caliber. AK47's are 7.69x.39, also not large caliber.

What else?

[RSillsbee]

85. If you want to push your definition maybe an AR 10?

But it's still not an "Assault" Rifle

[rl6214]

89. While most weapons that are called "assault rifles" really aren't

the media an anti gun groups love to call them assault rifles. They would also throw into that group the common sks 7.62x.39 which is not high caliber and the trusty old M1 Garand in 30.06 which would fall into the high caliber category.

Like you said though, not an 'assault rifle'

[Historic NY]

6. A high-powered rifle,...

bullet proof vests don't fair well w/o ceramic or armour plate inserts.

[RSillsbee]

11. As opposed to a low powered rifle?

Pretty much any hunting rifle will defeat body armor

[Euromutt]

66. That's because soft body armor isn't designed to stop rifle rounds

It's not that rifles are so fiendishly powerful that they can *gasp* penetrate body armor; it's that soft body armor, i.e. up to NIJ level IIIA, isn't rated to stop rifle rounds, and any law enforcement agency that purchases level II or level IIIA body armor knows damn well that they aren't, as do the officers who wear them.

[rl6214]

9. I would LOOOOVE to know how you have an idea

as to what the weapon was AND how you were able to come to the conclusion.

Please share with us what the weapon was. When it comes out I want to know whether you were right.

Please cite where this little gem came from. I am active on many gun forums and have NEVER seen anything remotely like this.
"Many in the gun community fear the way police are "militarizing" themselves"

[MyrnaLoy]

14. So

I wonder is now equal to "conclusion? Your reading skills really suck.

[rl6214]

21. "I have a pretty good guess as to what type of firearm was used."

My we are nitpicky as to how things are worded.

How about this, I would loove to know what your guess is as to what type of firearm was used. You must have some reason as to why you have this guess. Please let us know now so we can see how good your guess was.

By the way, I didn't insult you by saying anything similar to "Your reading skills really suck".
Why do you feel the need to do so?

[MyrnaLoy]

23. well

"At about 6:30 this morning they were fired upon by a large caliber weapon," said Lemke. "Two officers and a K-9 unit were struck. Officer Craig Birkholz, 28 years old, died as a result of his injury." http://www.fox11online.com/dpp/news/local/shots-fired-in-fond-du-lac

[rl6214]

26. "I have a pretty good guess as to what type of firearm was used."

Not willing to say what your guess is? Come on, you put it out there. Not willing to back up that statement? There are a lot of large caliber weapons.

"At about 6:30 this morning they were fired upon by a large caliber weapon," said Lemke. "Two officers and a K-9 unit were struck. Officer Craig Birkholz, 28 years old, died as a result of his injury." http://www.fox11online.com/dpp/news/local/shots-fired-i...

[MyrnaLoy]

29. am I wrong

so far? What was my guess by the way, what specific weapon did I mention?

[rl6214]

32. You WON"T say what your guess is.

Why is that? You make a statement but you won't back it up.

"I have a pretty good guess as to what type of firearm was used."

That's it, that's what you are going with, a high caliber weapon, which is what was stated in the original article?

You are all knowing aren't you.

[MyrnaLoy]

34. now why

do you suppose that is? Maybe I'm waiting for evidence? You should have thought of that before you called my PRIVATE guess a CLAIM! You see, people who really read don't jump to conclusions like you did. I had a feeling, kept the specifics to myself until I read more. Unfortunately for you my guess may be right. Now read this part a couple of times, my guess is private, when I get the facts I'll let you know. Do you guys still think it was a .22? That was the only specific weapon mentioned in this thread and that guy was put to rest very fast.

[rl6214]

37. By saying "I have a guess but my guess is private" means

you really don't know diddly.

"now why do you suppose that is?"
You are unwilling to back up what you say.


"Unfortunately for you my guess may be right"

Unfortunately for you it makes no difference to me whether you are right or not, it makes not difference to me one way or the other, you just don't want to be proven wrong. When the facts come out, you will say yup, that's what I thought it was, see I was right.

"Do YOU GUYS still think it was a .22?"

Read back through the thread, I never said it was a .22.

You still haven't provided anything to back this up:
"Many in the gun community fear the way police are "militarizing" themselves"

Why?

[Straw Man]

94. A "private guess"? Give me a break.

There's nothing private about posting "I have a pretty good guess" in an Internet forum. If you "had a feeling" and no further information, you had no business posting. If you're not willing to divulge what your guess is, then you're just playing an idiotic game in which you get to say "That's what I thought!" when the truth comes out.

So... what did you guess? Semi-auto centerfire rifle? That's probably what it was. And what conclusions do you draw? That's the really interesting part.

[Name removed]

92. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[friendly_iconoclast]

41. You never *did* say what your guess was. I take it we weren't supposed to notice...

...that little detail?

[rl6214]

43. It's her "private" guess

We are just supposed to take her word for it. She'll let us know later if she's correct or not.

[rl6214]

30. You still haven't backed this claim up

"Many in the gun community fear the way police are "militarizing" themselves"

[AtheistCrusader]

38. WHO COULD HAVE FORSEEN THIS EVENTUALITY?

Maybe the people in the bar that this guy told he was going to do it?


"Police visited Cruckson’s home several times over the past year for domestic complaints. His neighbors say he served a couple tours in Iraq and owned several weapons, including an assault rifle. He had told people at a nearby tavern that he was planning to start shooting people at 6 a.m. Sunday, and that’s when neighbors reported hearing the first shots."


Well, it's a good thing someone in the bar called the cops, eh?
I also found it interesting to note he was an Iraq War veteran. Much mention was made of the dead police officer's tours in Afghanistan. Not so much about the perp. Combat-related mental issues?

Edit: Sorry, this was supposed to be addressed to the OP. I'll repost it upthread.

[AtheistCrusader]

40. I also note, the bars closed 4h before the shooting started.

Nice to see someone called it in. And the Police bore the brunt of the loss for it, too.

[GreenStormCloud]

70. Reporters are fairly ignorant about guns and often get facts wrong. N/T

[MyrnaLoy]

97. well

http://www.wbay.com/Global/story.asp?S=14293031
We also heard from multiple sources Monday about the weapons the gunman used. We're told he had a .308 hunting rifle, an assault rifle firing .223-caliber rounds, and a shotgun.

[rl6214]

98. You keep posting this like it is a great revelation that YOU

came up with. You still won't post what your "secret guess" is but now that it's narrowed down to three for you, you have a much easier chance of getting it right.

You also still have not responded to this yet:

"Many in the gun community fear the way police are "militarizing" themselves"

You gonna cite where you came up with that one, you passed on a number of chances last night.

[rl6214]

102. Do you have a comment to go along with this ?

I mean you keep posting the same thing, over and over.

[MyrnaLoy]

103. don't

really need one.

[rl6214]

106. In other words you don't have anything to say

No point to your post.

[AtheistCrusader]

44. Like a deer rifle, that can go through 3 humans in a row wearing IIa vests?

When a cartridge is referred to in 'dwell time' of how long it takes to exit out the other end of a grizzly, 'higher powered' weapons starts to become a meaningless term.

[rl6214]

46. It is Wisconsin

Odds would be very good that it would be some sort of hunting rifle. Very common in the state.

[AtheistCrusader]

49. Could be an AR based platform.

Like an AR-10, as the AR-15 is not legal for deer in that state. (at least, not chambered in .223)
Could be a AK-47 type pattern civilian rifle too, as .30 caliber is legal, even if it's stumpy old 39mm. Just as useful for deer as the venerable .30-30.

[rl6214]

53. Could be one of a half dozen varieties of the SKS

A lot of 8mm Mausers and 7.62x54 Mosins were brought back after WW2

[GreenStormCloud]

69. Almost all center-fire rifle cartridges will penetrate a vest. N/T

[Atypical Liberal]

73. Almost certainly an assault rifle

You can hear it firing in this video of the event here:

http://www.wisn.com/news/27254706/detail.html

I counted at least 20 shots before the clip cut. Also the officer who survived, the bullets went through his bullet proof vest. Any hunting rifle will do that. Pistols usually won't.

The primary reason for the militarization of police forces, however, is mostly a symptom of the power grab that has come along as part and parcel of the War on Drugs. The War on Drugs, and the funding that comes along with it, has been a convenient excuse for police departments to buy all kinds of paramilitary gear.

[rl6214]

7. And how do you come to this conclusion?

"Today's 2nd Amendment poster boy"

Or are you just talking out your ass?


And what was done about this little bit of information?

"Witnesses told the Fond du Lac Reporter that they were familiar with the suspect, and he had spoken at a tavern about shooting people because of troubles with his girlfriend."

Terrible thing that happened where the suicide should have been the first thing he did.

Too bad the officers death has to be turned into a political football.

[sharesunited]

16. Guns and ammo in the hands of the public is HIGHLY political.

Especially when claimed as a constitutional right, of all things.

Especially when that claim is blithely reiterated despite the occurrence of an incident such as this one.

Such a tragedy. Now carry on dying.

[rl6214]

24. Here we will agree, it is HIGHLY POLITICAL

Even the president is now in agreement that it IS a constitutional right, of all things, not just claimed to be. You disagree with the president? You disagree with the SCOTUS decisions?

It is a tragedy, why be snarky about it? "Now carry on dying".

[sharesunited]

27. It is a constitutional right like separate but equal was. i.e., Pending further enlightenment.

Evolve already.

[rl6214]

28. When there is an amendment to the 2a

I will evolve. Until then I will continue to conceal carry wherever allowed by law.

[AtheistCrusader]

63. I'm already a tool using mammal.

Doing pretty good yo.

[WatsonT]

77. When even armed and uniformed policemen may be shot dead in the street

don't you think the rest of us should have the right to protect ourselves?

"Just call the cops" doesn't work so well when the cop is dead.

[spin]

91. Most of the police that I know in Florida support RKBA and concealed carry ...

They just don't like criminals with guns.

[RSillsbee]

3. In other news a drunk driver killed several people somewhere

perhaps we should restrict the rights of sober motorists to combat this problem

[MyrnaLoy]

5. such a sad, silly, and

childish comparison. It's sad that the people who protect us have lives that are so meaningless to you.

[RSillsbee]

8. The police DON"T protect us

I'm sorry they were shot (where were you and your moral outrage when I was getting ready to go to war to "protect" your right to buy cheap oil? Was my life meaningless to you?)but I'm not responsible for a criminal's misdeeds and I'm not giving up my civil liberties because of them

[MyrnaLoy]

12. plesaseeee

don't protect me ever, I really don't need you.

[RSillsbee]

15. PLEEASSE

make a post w/ a point we really need you to

[MyrnaLoy]

19. thanks!

[PavePusher]

80. No-one was offering to. Your protection is YOUR responsibility, no-one elses. n/t

[rl6214]

18. Is it really such a silly comparison?

What one person finds important for them ie:drunk drivers killing other drivers, another may find much less important because of how events may have impacted them personally.

How do we choose what causes are most important to us?

Is it based upon the number of deaths per year? Maybe it is dependent upon the ages of those who die, or the social or economic status?

Is the Million Mom March more important than Mothers against drunk drivers?

[MyrnaLoy]

20. in actuality

it's sad that it's the comparison you continually grasp. It's incredibly weak.

[rl6214]

22. I continually grasp?

Please show me where I have "grasped" this comparison before. Even once.

[slackmaster]

31. Auto-unrec for drive-by "current events" post with nothing to connect it to the forum topics

:nuke:

[rl6214]

33. Jpak in disguise

Just sayin, could be.

[MyrnaLoy]

36. which do you hate worse?

A police officer being shot or that a gun was used to do it?

[rl6214]

39. A person being shot

How about you?

[AtheistCrusader]

47. This makes no sense.

What, exactly, are you trying to ask?

[MyrnaLoy]

35. just like those

good shooting posts huh?

[AtheistCrusader]

42. Agreed.

Neither reflect policy/law, unless maybe in applicability of the law, in questionable self-defese or exercise of castle doctrine type laws.

[MyrnaLoy]

50. then

why do the forum regulars hate stories like this and not the "good shooting" posts? Look at all of the comments, attacks on the OP actually. I've always found it fascinating that in this forum people, for the most part, attack what they don't want to see. It's almost a fundamental thing, good shoot YEA! Cop killed, take it away, we don't want to see it!

The regular forum members, without question, will attack the poster within seconds of posts about crimes with guns, why is that? I've done some testing in this forum. I've posted news stories with just the facts, no comment from me at all. Within one or two comments a regular attacks the poster without mentioning the story at all. It's as if the misuse of a firearm to them should be hidden from their eyes, if they don't see it, it doesn't happen?

Can anyone make the claim that there are more "good shootings" than criminal uses of a gun? We both know the answer to that. Why hide from it?

[AtheistCrusader]

52. People have biases.

I personally have grown tired of yelling 'meaningless anecdote' at both sides, the 'good shoot' (I detest that term) crowd, and the 'crazed gunman' crowd.

Both are obnoxious to me. An appeal to emotion is a logical fallacy.


I want to know, from the comments in this thread (A) why 'higher caliber' weapons are an issue, given any rifle can perforate a standard police issue vest, hunting rifles moreso than military weapons, and (B) why no mention was made (until I did it) that the perp was also an ex-soldier, and people were warned hours before the shooting started, and apparently nobody did anything about it.

[rl6214]

45. So you agree that these posts are crap

YUP

[MyrnaLoy]

51. not at all

I think it's important to see the good and bad side of guns, you? Do you not want to see the bad?

[AtheistCrusader]

54. Anecdotes have no place in policy discussion.

Now, if someone was trying to show how a particular law failed or caused a problem, with an anecdote, that might be valuable. Most of these are just drive by doorbell ring, sack of burning dog shit on the porch posts. (from both sides.)

[MyrnaLoy]

56. I must

have missed the posts where you chastised all of the "good shoot" threads.

[AtheistCrusader]

58. Yes, you did miss them.

And as I said, I have grown weary of pointing it out to both sides.

[rl6214]

55. I think the good shoot/bad shoot posts are stupid

All of this NRA/GOP/GOOD SHOOT/BAD SHOOT/ACCIDENTAL SHOOTING posting is just crap. You want to debate the issues, bring up when/why/where you (And by you, I don't mean you specifically) think a particular law or part of a law is good, bad or otherwise. I know what guns can do, as I believe most people in this forum do as well.

It is extremely irritating to see the "he, she, they are assholes" posts. They serve no purpose.

[MyrnaLoy]

57. so

if I search your name I will not find one "Good Shooting" post?

[rl6214]

59. Closest you'll find

is a post about a family that was massacred using a knife and one about the Libyan uprising and having guns available.

[slackmaster]

75. Yes, and I have never posted one of those either

:hi:

[AtheistCrusader]

48. WHO COULD HAVE FORSEEN THIS EVENTUALITY???

Maybe the people in the bar that this guy told he was going to do it?


"Police visited Cruckson’s home several times over the past year for domestic complaints. His neighbors say he served a couple tours in Iraq and owned several weapons, including an assault rifle. He had told people at a nearby tavern that he was planning to start shooting people at 6 a.m. Sunday, and that’s when neighbors reported hearing the first shots."


Well, it's a good thing someone in the bar called the cops, eh?
I also found it interesting to note he was an Iraq War veteran. Much mention was made of the dead police officer's tours in Afghanistan. Not so much about the perp. Combat-related mental issues?


Bars close 2am in that state. Shooting started at 6am. Cops had 4 hours to do something about it, if only someone had picked up the phone when this jackal ANNOUNCED HE WAS GOING TO START KILLING PEOPLE AT A SPECIFIC TIME AND PLACE.

[one-eyed fat man]

71. I am quite unsure.

How does one know what some drunk in a bar shooting off his mouth really means?

Who has not ever expressed a desire to "kill" somebody over something? Doubtless there are those who awoke to this story, had heard his threats, and dismissed them as the meaningless ranting of a drunk.

So, what is the never fail absolute discriminator between someone blowing off steam with hollow threats and the disturbed mind that follows through?

Nothing like the crystal clarity of hindsight.

[one-eyed fat man]

76. Turns out the threats were not why the cops came.

http://www.postcrescent.com/article/20110321/APC0101/103210454/1014/APC0204/Story-photos-video-Gunman-shoots-two-Fond-du-Lac-policemen?odyssey=nav|head

Deputy Chief Kevin Lemke said officers went to the home after a woman came to the police department to report a sexual assault involving Cruckson.

[AtheistCrusader]

84. Exactly.

The people in the bar, prior to 2am, did not report the threats that this man made, that he was going to start shooting people at 6am.

4 hours, at least, the police could have intervened, because nobody said anything.


Could have prevented one officer's death, another's critical injury, and possibly 1 sexual assault.
If I hear someone flapping their gums in a bar, drunk or not, that they are going to kill someone, I call the cops. Guaranteed.

If for no other reason than, alcohol tends to remove our inhibition against things we want to do, secretly, but would never otherwise actually do.

[GreenStormCloud]

72. The shooter had prior criminal arrests.

http://www.news10.net/video/default.aspx?bctid=843539748001#/Recent+Videos/Press+conference+on+Fond+du+Lac+police+officer+killed/52821470001/52747302001/843539748001

[Hoyt]

78. But apparently not serious enough to keep him from acquiring a gun capable of this.

[Hoyt]

79. What is predictable is that the pro-gunners will nitpick all anti-gun comments and implications.

[RSillsbee]

81. Yes, the pro gunner are somewhat notorious for demanding the truth NT

[MyrnaLoy]

95. you mean

the truth that you said he was gonna have a .22? LOL

[oneshooter]

100. A .223 round IS a 22 caliber. n/t

[RSillsbee]

101. Let's be fair it's .003 bigger NT

[rl6214]

110. No real discussion

Just snark

[Name removed]

108. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RSillsbee]

112. WTF are you talking about? NT

[rl6214]

82. The thing is there wasn't much in the way of anti gun comments

just personal attacks

[RSillsbee]

86. Seems to be a lot of that going around NT

[MyrnaLoy]

115. this from

the guy who called me an idiot.

[MyrnaLoy]

114. why would

I be anti-gun? I own guns LOL.

[rl6214]

116. Don't think I pointed you out directly

Just made a general statement.

[MyrnaLoy]

117. is making

general comments a common thing for you? Do you generally judge large groups of people?

[rl6214]

118. Did you actually read what I posted?

Here it is:

"The thing is there wasn't much in the way of anti gun comments"

Now where in this statement does it say or imply anyone is anti gun?

And again, instead of talking about any issue, you are attacking the person.

Is attacking people on an internet forum a common thing for you? Do you generally attack rather than discuss the issues?

[rl6214]

119. Where was it said you were anti gun?

I specifically said there wasn't much in the way of anti gun comments.

[AtheistCrusader]

87. Prediction fail. Review my posts in this thread.

This incident was preventable. The perp announced his intentions at least 4 hours before it happened.

Nobody did anything. Nobody called the cops.

As a result, there was a sexual assault, one officer dead, one officer injured.

[GreenStormCloud]

90. The US population is about 310 million.

Out of that many people some of them are going to do bad things with guns. But they are so few that it fails to establish a reason to take my guns from me.

[Kennah]

93. Let's see here

Criminal history back to 1998, when the 30 year old shooter would have been 17-18.

http://www.wfrv.com/news/local/Shooting-suspect-had--118373634.html

Spent some time in the Army.

http://www.postcrescent.com/article/20110321/APC0101/103210454/Story-photos-video-Troubled-Army-vet-kills-one-injures-another-officer-shooting?odyssey=nav|head

Seems we're still engaged in the bizarre policy of offering up the Army for those with a criminal past as a path to righteousness.

[rrneck]

113. Is there a point to this thread in our future? nt