Jump to content

Recommended Posts

oh, and I would ask nicely one time, that anyone wanting to refer to mr vang as a laotian or gook or any other name other than an american that served his country, please refrain from doing so, as no matter what this man may have or have not done, you are still speaking about someone that served our country.

Edited by Bvamp
Link to post
Share on other sites

I do agree with you about him being an American. If he was really in the National Guard he must be a U.S. Citizen. I find it verry strange that they only mentioned one gun at the scene. I wonder if they checked the guns at the cabin to see if any of them had been fired. I bet they will never find out what really happened.

 

 

12 or 13 years ago a teenage guy close to my home was killed in his tree stand. He was shot by a boy about 11 or 12 years old. The boy ran off and hid in the woods and was found the next morning. After the investigation the decided it was an accident. The guy that was killed was known to be a bully and just think what kind of reaction an 11 or 12 year old kid would have when threatened. Since this guy was in his tree stand an accident seems to me unlikely. The boy that shot him is the about the same age as me and I know him but no one ever talks about what happened around him anymore. Stuff like this seems to just get swept under the rug.

Link to post
Share on other sites
well, Im sure you all are hearing the news about this guy that apparantly shot 5 guys dead, and wounded 3 others with "an assualt type weapon" out in wisconsin on sunday. heres the link for those who havent heard yet on CNN.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/11/22/hunters.slain/index.html

 

 

SaigaShooter posted this further down in this thread, and I wanted to put it up here where it was easily found by someone first visiting this thread:

 

Mr. Vangs statement can be read here: http://www.wausaudailyherald.com/frontpage/pegl.pdf

 

 

 

I had a few thoughts on this, of course. (ya'll should know me by now)

 

1 - it sure sounds like the guy that shot them might have been acting in self defense. if he had gone postal, where were the coup de grace shots to the head? and where was the shootout with police, and why was his gun not loaded when they grabbed him? I know here, if you get caught on someone's land in thier treestand, you will most likely be threatened with bodily harm, (hunters got a big pair on them as you all probably know, when they are out toting around thier guns in the woods, especially on thier own land) and a statement to such from a couple guys with deer guns would certainly be a case to act in such a manner, in my opinion.

ok, i didn't bother reading any of the posts in this thread, but...

 

there was one rifle between the forst group of 5 who were shot. i assume that the one with the rifle was shot first, and the others were mudered afterwards. the second group of people were shot from several hundred feet away as they approached.

 

that sounds like the shooter was on the offence, not the defense.

 

furthermore, he was not a hunter. he was a poacher.

 

he was not acting in self defense. he murdered all those people

Link to post
Share on other sites

read the police report chips.

 

the guy that was shot first DID in fact have a gun. but the only gun found was off some distance next to two others who were shot dead. vang is also claiming the girl and 24 year old drove up on him at high speed and slammed on the brakes, skidding right past him and the guy that was the one driving did not dismount nor let the girl get out of the way before drawing on vang, THEN he shot a few rounds at the guy, hitting both of them.

 

he was accidentally tresspassing, but none the less tresspassing. his deer tag was valid i think too.

 

tell me, how did the guy that both parties agree was shot first with the gun not have one?

Link to post
Share on other sites

How come only one gun was at the scene, but vang states that 4-5 people had guns (other than him)?

 

Vang has a criminal record, 2 cases of a domestic disturbance involving him, and 1 case of him threatning his wife with a pistol.

 

Not much is known of the frst 2 cases but there is alot known about the incident with the pistol.

 

Mr vang got into a argument with his wife after she stated that she did not want go get a divorce. He procedded to threant to kill her with a handgun. The police arrived and found the handgun in the couples bedroom, the magazine was full, and there was a round in the chamber. No charges were pressed because his wife didn't want to co-operate with investigators.

 

It sounds to me like Vang is unstable, and has a short fuse. It also seems that he has a record of domestic violence and spousal abuse. If current gun legislation worked the way it should have, Mr. Vang should not have been allowed to buy his saiga in the first place. Given this knowledge and what we know about the shooting, it seems entirely possible that Vang went off the deep end after being insulted and kicked off the private property. I think he started it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This whole sorry affair is quite timely,with the Scott Peterson trial about over,

now they will have a new 'trial of the century'. This one has it all ASSAULT weapons HATE CRIMES! Every hot buzzword except gay marriage!

 

News at 11!

 

G O B

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is more than likely unrelated, but I'll relate it to you folks anyway :haha:

 

WAOW TV-9/34 is reporting that during the 2001 Wisconsin Gun-Deer season, a Nielsville man was found dead on his property from 2 gunshot wounds in the back. Police were looking for a man matching Vangs description, as well as a car that matches his. Vang had a Wisconsin hunting license for the 2001 Gun-Deer season. While there is no physical evidence matching these 2 crimes, it is quite intrigung.

 

Who knows gob, we may just be able to work gay marriage into this yet!

Link to post
Share on other sites
What's so bad about using the word "Laotian," Bvamp? (if that's in fact what nationality he is). :unsure:

 

As far as I know, it carries no racial connotations.

Vang's a Hmong, though nothing wrong with the Laotian word.

 

Either way you cut it, he killed 5 people in cold blood. Only one could possibly even pass for self-defense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

no, nothing wrong with that, but he is an american nonetheless.

 

as for the previous incident that SaigaShooter brought up, maybe thats why the guy had a 200 dollar saiga. cheap replacement? dunno.

 

no matter what happens when all is said and done, I have taken the line of logic about this because the man does still have a right as an american to be innocent until proven guilty, and that is taken away when people start screaming bloody murder no way no how. I cant see the shooting of 8 people as really that justifyable, although it is remotely possible. the guy's statement is pretty darn clear and he even admits to shooting people that did not observe having a gun. He knew he would have to say that, so why didnt he wait for an attourney? I think there is a possibility that some evidence may have been tampered with by the guys that he didnt shoot at that showed up at one point. Let me put this question to you all....would YOU leave guns and ammunition next to your dead friends' bodies with a guy running around killing people? Or would you retreive the stuff so as to make sure the guy doesnt have any more armament?

 

in any event, its messed up, and a damn shame no matter what happened. either the guy had to defend himself, and took down a few people at the outset in what he thought was self defense (the only gun would have been somehting someone would go for I would think once the guy with it dropped), or if the guy wasnt in the right and shot 8 people, whats that going to tell the gungrabbers about the brady bill? if he is unstable and prone to be violent, they could make it so that anyone arrested ever, AND anyone having the cops called on them and just for SHOWING UP and put that into the system as a "2 times and we take all your guns, boy" type of thing. Imagine that. even having the cops CALLED for a domestic violence call and without even arresting you, once they are called once or twice, its the same as if you were convicted in terms of your gun rights. Now THAT would be bad.

Link to post
Share on other sites
even having the cops CALLED for a domestic violence call and without even arresting you, once they are called once or twice, its the same as if you were convicted in terms of your gun rights. Now THAT would be bad.

I got a better idea... make a law where the police are required to press charges themselves (if the victim fails to do so) in such cases of domestic abuse where there is significant evidence (bruises, eye witnesses, etc.) of what took place. The police can then use reports from officers and subpoena the 'vicitm'. The fact that the wife didn't want to press charges when a crime was committed is BS imo, it also takes the guilt away from victim if they didn't want to be the ones sending them to jail.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rook- Many states already have simular laws. Bullies/abusive people can too often intimidate family from pressing charges,and get away with it for years. As long as some mechanism is included to keep vindictive people from falsely accusing others , it is a great idea. However if the right of due process is not specifically included in the law-you could loose your right to see your children or to own firearms when your wife decides to screw you over and take up with the local crack dealer!

 

G O B

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest_wed4life

I am sure this guy is a real upstanding citizen.

That is why he quickly turned himself in (like O. J. & Scott Peterson)

because we all know that these individuals are inoccent.

 

Wake up & smell the coffee.

Link to post
Share on other sites

interesting opinions. either way, its less people breathing my air.

 

I like how so many people assume the rednecks are totally innocent. If vang was such a nutjob, why didnt he start shooting from the tree stand where he had a tactical advantage?

 

and yeh, at the very least there were murders no matter what way you look at it. but what was the cause? nobody is going to say "yeh we all were being racist pigs and are guilty of a felony hate crime, and we got shot in the process of commiting one"

 

i find it difficult to believe the guy just went off for no reason.

 

if vang did think he was about to be shot by the kid who failed to drive over him with the ATV, (whyd the kid stop btw? was he asking for directions?? you cant tell me someone is that stupid to try to stop the guy without running him over first or taking a shot at him (or even to KEEP GOING once they knew it was the guy)) and then when vang shot at him, it can be argued the woman was shot accidentally in the process, and that isnt murder, its manslaughter. she had no business rolling up on the back of a quad without a weapon to a scene where you can HEAR someone blowing off a lot of rounds at your friends. I cannot believe anyone would be that stupid to ride up like that unarmed at that point. who said stupidity cant kill? they are wrong.

 

he is going to prison for life either way, most likely, I agree with you there, guest, but the one of the things that remains is that someone could very well say..."why do you people have guns? you dont defend yourselves with them when you need to?" and then the one I think is going to come up "what entitles one to self defense, and how far can you go with it?"

 

The government is looking for reasons to strip our freedoms as it is. Hopefully they dont figure out how to turn this incident into a showcase for thier reasons.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Id send them all to jail. I still think the guy shot after being shot at, as well as think it was a stretched case of self-defense. I also believe that vang's statement about them surrounding him and antagonising him with racial slurs and intimidation is true. AND I also believe that when he said ...one of you fuckers are still alive?... was a comment that was made out of his SURPRISE to the fact, not out of anger. And the girl? you can say anything you want, but she WAS on the quad, and WAS one of the pair on it that rolled up on vang. they HAD NO BUSINESS chasing him down at that point, and if she was being dragged along by the driver of the ATV, that is HER fault for getting on the ATV. What was she thinking not getting off the quad where the bodies were. She was doing what again? Also, what about vang throwing away his ammo? postal individual == kill until killed.

 

answer this then zipperhead....what were all these hunters doing in the woods without guns on the second day of deer season, and what were the ones that rode up on vang that were shot doing out looking around for vang without a gun? "shots fired, we have been hit. call the cops" ??? you are trying to say that guys responding to that wont be armed? the kid on the quad with the girl was out unarmed chasing down vang on a 4 wheeler, right? they didnt find a gun there. BULL BULL BULL. someone went around and PICKED UP AT LEAST ONE gun. whats up with THAT? i think they are convienently not trying to figure that one out. ALL hunters i know that use ATVs to get around have those waterproof gun cases mounted to thier quads. ALL of them. you are saying none of these ATVs had those? when didnt they have them, before or after vang shot them? NOT ONE guy I know that hunts with a vehicle DOESNT use a gun carrier, and I have NEVER seen hunters afield without a weapon. the hunters in wisconsin must be different than the ones here....

 

I think the guy acted in self defense initially and it got carried away. I know guys here that arent from america that served in this countries armies that would beat you silly if you called them a nigger or a gook, and told them to go home to africa or china after doing so, even if it were twenty of you. someone would be going with them to the hospital at that point. they arent nutjobs.

 

school for self defense. nice. you should send the cops here that pop 14 year old kids in the back of the head when they are down on thier faces in cuffs, or the ones that have you cuffed on the ground and put an un-safed .45 in your eye because they think you are lying to them about who you are. Unlike you, i dont care to teach myself what to say and what not to say to the cops or public if i should ever have to draw down on someone that is going to kill or injure me. aim for the chest, and do a double tap. say nothing. its pretty damn simple.

 

I see it like this. no matter if I am innocent or guilty, i will go to jail. why? because thats how it is where I am. the courts do as they wish to who they feel like, and you cant do SHIT about it unless you have ten grand for a good lawyer, or know the court officers and get it thrown out by someone's daddy or uncle. So pulling the trigger for me would mean jail time either way.

 

...but Id still be the one doing the time above ground.

 

we shall see what the investigators find, although no matter what, I firmly believe they will taint thier reports to help get vang convicted on all counts. this has always been my experience with cops. an honorable cop is a rare breed.

Edited by Bvamp
Link to post
Share on other sites

what about vang throwing away his ammo? postal individual == kill until killed.

 

 

He said he didn't want to kill anymore. while walking through te woods, he came down from his adrenaline fueled fit of rage, and realized he was in deep shit.

 

 

And about gun cases on 4 wheelers. most people park along the road and walk to their stands. Or, just shoulder the rifle on the ATV if they don't have a gun case mounted on it.

Edited by SaigaShooter
Link to post
Share on other sites

1. I live in southwest MN and live 3 hours from the Twin Cities area. I have been to Frogtown MN, which is a suburb of St. Paul and has a heavy population of Hmong residents.Looking at the address, it looks like he lived in Frogtown. Hmong for the most part do not have a respect or aknowledgement for personal property. Even if there were no signs posted, there is also sings posted when the land is PUBLIC and you can hunt on it. He did ask someone for directions before all this happened, so he should of know where he was.

 

2. Vang has had previous cases of domestice assault, you guys are assuming that he got that gun legally through an FFL dealer, we don't know that. If he did get it from an FFL dealer, I don't see a reason why he couldn't of, he was not considered a felon, when he assaulted his wife there were no charges, therefore it never really happen legally, it was just a complaint.

 

3. It doesn't sound like a case of self defense. From what Vang stated he shot at the guys that came at him with ATV and stopped at a 45 degree angle, one of them was a girl, I don't know, but for some reason, i don't think a female would be very gun ho and go after someone that is shooting at them.

 

4. There was also a reports that someone was hiding behing and ATV and he came around the corner and shoot at the person trying to avoid getting shot at.

 

5. Bvamp and no intent to diss you or anything. You are assuming that what he is saying is 100% factual. For some reason I think he might of streached the truth in is interview with the investigators. I am a MN Law Enforcement student and one rule of thumb is to treat eveyone as a suspect.

 

6. Yes he served in the Armed Services and hats off to him. Yes he's a US citizen. But last time I checked, US Armed Forces Veterans that are US citizens don't have the right to just go and shoot and kill people. Let alone a total of 6 people.

 

7. Just cause yells racial slurs, it is not a reason to go and kill 6 people. Yes he was pissed and yes there were guns involved. But he still shot people in the back. I don't know what kind of self defense it is to excecute someone in the back.

 

This is just my opinion and just what I think from what i have read on this thread. Correct me if you think i am wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

my whole point to argueing on vang's behalf is that noone else would have, and it isnt fair to either side. yeh, the more I look at it, the more he is guilty as sin, but he still deserves to be heard and considered. If noone were to speak for the guy, this thread would look a LOT different than a bunch of gun guys trying to discuss what the hell happened out there. it would be about two posts stating what a nutjob the guy is, instead of addressing the issue of why?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, for those of you who predicted that the anti-gun folks would jump on this one, you can collect the money on your bets. What kills me is what the NSSF guy said. What the fuck? Better take you blood pressure meds and sit down before you read this...

 

(from the Brady Campaign website)

 

NOW, WITH SIX HUNTERS DEAD,

WILL THE NRA TELL THE TRUTH

ABOUT MILITARY-STYLE ASSAULT WEAPONS?

For Immediate Release:

11-23-2004 Contact Communications:

(202) 898-0792

 

"This is not a gun you go deer hunting with."

Lawrence Keane, senior vice president and general counsel

National Shooting Sports Foundation

New York Times, 11-23-04

 

 

 

"They can be used for hunting. They are not any more

powerful, and they're not... you can hunt anything. People

hunt everything from deer to any type of game."

Wayne LaPierre, President

National Rifle Association

Hardball with Chris Matthews, 9-8-04

 

 

Washington DC - The SKS rifle apparently used by the hunter to kill six other hunters in Wisconsin Sunday wasn't banned under the Federal assault weapons ban that expired September 13, but it should be banned for civilian use. Designed for use in war, even the gun industry admitted yesterday that it's not intended for hunting.

 

It may, in fact, be the first time the official spokesman for the National Shooting Sports Foundation has admitted that any military-style semiautomatic assault rifle is inappropriate for hunting. Lawrence Keane, senior vice president of the group, went further, and even told the New York Times that the SKS isn't a humane weapon for hunting deer. "The reason the SKS is not used by hunters, Mr. Keane said, is that it is designed for combat soldiers and is therefore underpowered for killing an animal like a deer with a single shot, the goal of good hunters," The Times wrote. "'The ethics of hunting are you don't want the animal to suffer needlessly,' Mr. Keane said."

 

Prior to the expiration of the assault weapons ban, the industry's spokespersons were unified in describing these types of weapons as perfectly normal for use by hunters. It was one of the industry's main arguments for letting the ban expire.

 

Since the ban's expiration, high-profile crimes involving assault weapons have already become more commonplace. Plano, Texas police are searching for members of a bank robbery gang that have opened fire on police with AK-47s, and that same weapon is believed to be the weapon of choice of a killer or killers who have shot eight people in West Palm Beach, Florida.

Edited by SaltPeter
Link to post
Share on other sites

so he's saying a 30-30 (because 7.62x39 and 30-30 are very close) is no longer good enough to hunt deer with? what happened, did deer suddenly become bullet resistent? If i can't use a 30-30 what should i use then? A .50cal barret? That would definatley have enough knock-down power dont ya think?

 

Who wants to bet that Mr. Keane is unemployed by the end of the month?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gentlemen,

 

It's been a long time since I've posted in this forum although I've regularly perused the forum to see if there are any topics on which I'd like to voice my thoughts. This is one of them.

 

Mr. Vang is Hmong, not Laotian. Despite the racial difference, both people lived in the same country, Laos. The reason I pointed this out is that I too am Hmong and I do live in Wisconsin. As can be presumed, the news of this event were not well received among those of us living in the state. Most of the Hmong that I know are avid hunters and those I know are quite aware of private property and trespassing laws. If it is clearly posted, we stay clear unless we have previously attained permission to hunt there. I can say though that I don't doubt the truth behind the many Hmong and Laotians trespassing in that particular area of the state. The majority of hunters there that are Hmong/Laotian actually come in from Minnesota, primarily the Twin Cities there. Most of them have no respect for private land and for that matter, are probably rather ignorant of the laws (which of course is not an excuse).

 

In having said that, I can also make this point. The majority of Hmong men that are Mr. Vang's age and older have had combat training and experience. That is why we are here. Our people sided with the US Military forces in a lost war (police action) to protect the land they lived on. When the US pulled out of Vietnam and surrounding countries, the families of those Hmong and Laotian soldiers who fought alongside US troops were taken as well. I'm sure that most of you (forum members) are clear on this but for the sake of all others who might be reading this, I felt I must re-iterate history.

 

I know for a fact that there is animosity toward my race in that "neck o'the woods". I also know that during gun deer season or for that matter, bow season as well, testosterone tends to run rather high and more often than not, what might be considered a civilized man becomes more of a barbaric brute. When you get a group of them together and add in some alcohol, the atmosphere of one-upsmanship and the desire to shoot something, it's entirely possible for a shot to have been squeezed off at Mr. Vang. I firmly do believe he returned fire in self defense. I also believe that Mr. Vang stepped over the line of self defense though when he continued to shoot. While I cannot say where or when I would have stopped shooting myself, looking on it from an outside perspective, I can say that killing five (now six) is rather extreme. It would have been prudent to flee the area to safety after dropping the man who had taken a shot after you... perhaps it may have been necessary to shoot the next person who picked up the rifle from the fallen one as well to ensure you don't get shot in the back while fleeing.

 

It is difficult to say what one will do when one feels the need to kill in order to preserve one's own life. I honestly can't say that if I were in that situation, with the same kind of training Mr. Vang had (which I don't -- I am a second generation Hmong/American) I wouldn't have taken the same actions. My father fought in Vietnam with US Army Rangers he said and one thing he was always taught to do was eliminate any and all threat he perceived on the battlefield. Granted the deep woods of NW Wisconsin are a long way away from the jungles of 1967 Vietnam but if I had a handful of men (who at least one of which had already taken a shot at me) after me, I might consider them all a threat as well.

 

I am eagerly awaiting the outcome of this incident and until then, I am not claiming Mr. Vang's innocence nor am I condemning his actions. There are far too few facts in the light and far too many discrepancies between the statements of Mr. Vang and his "victims" and their associates. For now, let's hope the sheriff's department in Sawyer County, WI is an honorable department and they do their jobs to the letter of the law. If that is the case, the antis may not have as much fuel to add to their fire as one may believe they might with this case.

 

In passing thought, I too am a hunter. I've graduated from Hunter's Education and am an avid hunter and firearms enthusiast. While the majority of my post here sounds quite defensive of Mr. Vang, I am as the cliche states, on the fence about this one. I will reserve my own judgements on the incident till more facts are revealed. I can tell you this though. I do not endeavour the jobs of the local law enforcement units there nor do I desire to be any CSI member assigned to this incident.

 

Take care.

Link to post
Share on other sites

SammoH- I agree , there is not enough information to form an educated opinion on this one. Even with Bvamp's posting of the police report this whole thing is senseless. The police report calls the weapon a"saiga SKS" is the rest of the report equally inaccurate? Also predudice and hatred are not exclusive property of any group-either side or both may be guilty of it in this case. I wish the investigators good luck and wisdom. We are all loosers when senseless crap like this happens.

 

G O B

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest_Zipperhead

I'd rather do without a picture, thanks, because if released, that just give the anti's an image to put out to the media/public.

 

Oh, and the anti's making this an issue...that's not a bet, that's a sure thing. Heck, the anti's would fire themselves if they missed any incident.

 

Call me crazy, but I think it's sad that a few here are willing to overlook the possibility our Asian hunter may have oppened fire and killed folks without provocation, while automatically assuming that the "rednecks" did.

 

Honestly, I have no idea what REALLY went on in the woods. My only opinions of the subject are based on Vang's OWN TESTIMONY. Which sinks himself real badly. At best he screwed up horribly causing multiple counts of manslaughter. At worst, he murdered 6 in cold blood. He's being charged with the latter.

 

Maybe there will be proof that the landowner who apparently pointed a gun at Vang, may have fired a shot first (dunno how they'd figure that but its not my job!). That would make one count of self defense...but I just can't see ANY court give him a pass over the other shootings, regardless if it all started as self defense.

 

Imagine for a minute if Vang was a Caucasian police officer, or a game warden...and picture the outcry the ACLU would have over his actions. Now do you see? :unsure:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bvamp-Sorry to have misquoted-the post was annonymus.

Zipperhead-Thats what I was trying to say nicely. Vang may be a nut case. His own testimony shure sounds crazy. If the reports that 4 of these people were shot in the back are true, that pretty well blows the self defence defence. We still need a LOT more information to draw any type of positive cocllusions.

And YES I see the gungrabbers having a field day with this one! We need to be vigilant and keep state and/or local politicians from using this as a smokescreen to shove anti-gun legeslation down our throats! (after all if we have those same EVIL weapons then shurely we must be as dangerous a he is!)

 

G O B

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Chatbox

    Load More
    You don't have permission to chat.
×
×
  • Create New...