It is with a sense of mixed emotions that I post this, about a guy from my own original hometown....

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/Northeast/04/29/staten.island.arsenal/index.html

The culprit defines himself as a "survivalist" and had the cache in order to defend his home and family against whatever threat.

Who / What were they trying to survive ? No mention of water / food / medical supplies.....

Water/food/medical supplies don't make "scary" headlines! As for the guns/ammo, I have that many guns in my gun safe (no bombs!), that doesn't make me a "wacko survivalist", or does it? <img src="images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />
gino

There are places and individuals where 13 firearms and even explosives possession would be a social norm. Obviously, this couple displayed behavior that made the possession an issue. They may be called survivalists, but they weren't very good ones. My Grandparents had extensive food supplies. Part of this was the then norm of buying fresh or seasonal produce and "putting it up." Another part was the memory of The Great Depression. I think the last jar of strawberry preserves was finally consumed a few years after my grandmother's passing. It may have been an over reaction to hard times, but it tasted better than gun cleaning solvent <img src="images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

that was a pretty short article, what id like to know is, WHO snitched on this guy and why.
sounds like a slow news day and they needed SOMETHING to grab headlines. (maybe to distract our attention from something else?)

i feel its ok to have 13 guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, but the home made bombs is pushing it.

in a "situation" i can see making and using them, but making them and leaving them in your home is kinda stupid IF thats what he indeed did, and this story wasnt over-inflated like i suspect it probably was.

What? Doesn't EVERONE have matching, his-n-her's SKS' ?

The link below follows up on the article. Apparently he had Nazi literature, posters and weapons. Here a quote:

"Officials also discovered a vintage Nazi armband, a knife bearing swastikas and a vintage dagger with Gothic German lettering. His basement library included manuals on explosive and ammunition reloading, police said, as well as a copy of "Abandonment of the Jews," a book by David S. Wyman that accuses President Roosevelt of being anti-Semitic for refusing to intervene in the Holocaust earlier than he did"

http://www.silive.com/news/advance/index.ssf?/base/news/1083331006203760.xml

NY Post article did mention that he had food supply that would last him a few months. Also they quite often repeated "canned spam". Very interesting. I don't understand how did PD got a smell of him. I mean yes he maybe was potentialy unstable and violent but what did he do that made them watch him closer?

Matt

So was he a "nazi" or a "jewish sympathiser" with reminders of what evil men can do, and tried to have the means of avoiding it? The article does not mke it clear which "side" this family was on.

I am also curious how long the child will survive in the hands of child services. Far from everyone does.

Also, were there actual homemade bombs, or simply "bomb making materials" which could have included common household cleaners, plumbing detritis and some of his reloading materials. With the comon modern bias in the press and draconian disarming laws it is really hard to tell what actually happened from the article.

Grommit
I didn't comment on purpose. I have read other articles saying he took 9/11 events very badly, and went over the top in terms of preparedness against the threat he percieved.
Its hard to tell whats on a persons mind at the best of times. If I had to explain all my actions in some sort of logical reasoning, I'd struggle.
If you believe the article, the weapons he had were illegal and very dangerous, especially with a child around. For that reason alone its probably better he is in custody.

Someday your slingshot, or can of gas for your mower, or who knows what could be described as "dangerous for your kids to be around, and illegal as heck", and have you, or me, or any of us hauled off. As someone else said here, this is not an unreasonable amount of stuff as briefly described even though it is rather above "the average" nowadays.

Any restriction or law or action taken to protect someone from themselves or their parents may indeed save some, but will always kill others. Statistically more people are saved by seatbelts than are killed by them, but there are those who will and have indeed died because they had one on. Lower speed limits will save some and contribute to the death of others, hopefully fewer, but some will die because of it. Locking up guns in homes with children will save some, and like the family attacked by the guy with the pitchfork some time back, others will be left defenseless. And don't even get me started on the chickenpox vaccine that is supposed to save 5,000 children from the virus, and kill 5,000 elderly from shingles, an interresting tradeoff if you ask me.

I do not know if this guy is dangerous nuts or not. But especially as fewer and fewer guns are considered an arsenal, and more and more people get locked up and their kids put away with a long string of strangers, the war on weapons in family homes will cause more and more deaths. If this was still a free country, we would not have wars on possessions that others find offensive or threatening. We would enforce laws against criminal behaviour and activities, not crimes of alleged thought and possessions. We would laud preparedness and be thankful that someone on our street might be able to stop a mob before it got to our family. Instead, we seem to have a generation trying to play god and deciding to try to save some at the expense of others.

So what is the line? If you think he went over the top, where should he have stopped? Please understand that this is a serious question. You seem to be saying that there is either no need for the guns, or a certain number per person or family that is justifiable, or certain types are just evil on their own merits. While I admit that this family went rrather farther than I would dream of, I am very curous if I am worthy in your sight to be hauled off to jail and have my kids parceled out also. (Yes, I have a can of gas also, and a slingshot) I am just asking for an objective description of the line between sane preparedness and/or fun hobby, and a dangerous and unstable person that society needs to be protected from. I have to grant that this family may indeed have gone over the edge, but I do not see any solid evidence of it in the news report.

I have been trying not to pass judgement in my posts in this subject. I don't draw any lines. All I can comment on is my interpretation of the press reports.
I don't disagree with you on any of your points. The "nanny state" affects us in many aspects of our lives, not just gun control.
I couldn't and wouldn't try to set the boundaries of what is acceptable or not. We all have to live within the laws of our country. (It woud be an interesting to find out if members of this forum think it is alright to break the law in the name of self defence - I think I do already)
So please if I read a few reports on this matter, (and with a lack of any other information, I have to assume the stories are at least partly correct) and then comment on them here, I am not taking a stance on gun control, political policy, or taking the moral high ground - I am saying, in this case, from what I've read I would agree with the authorities.
I'll leave line drawing to those who know better.

Not only would I break the law for the purpose of self-defense, but I would take "pre-emptive" action for the purpose of self-defense. After all, if our government can protect themselves in this manner, we citizens should be able to protect ourselves in this manner.

Personally, I believe we should free the rest of our breathren and finally end the revolutionary war by annexing England first, and letting the ruling parties that we eject live, but with the provisio that they could not own any weapons or avail themselves to any help, police or private, if they are attacked in their homes or on the streets. We could have them all live next to Rosie ODonnell.

After all, what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

Bountyhunter

The idea of "freeing" anybody doesn't appeal to me. I can think of very few altruistic liberation wars where the end result wasn't more suffering and oppression. I certainly don't intend to impose my ideas of freedom on other cultures. Our american revolution is hardly won here at home. Perhaps a little real revolutionary fervor discrete from affected black beret, Che Guevara T shirt wearing cafe orators and their kissing cousin cammie clad, Idaho seperatist fellow losers is in order first.

Chris:

You are right about the idiocy of war in general, but the idea that government bodies like the TSA seem to be a harbringer of the type of doctrines that so many of us feel revulsion for, makes one feel good to vent and dream of changing injustices to the masses on any scale, no matter how ridiculous it may sound.

Bountyhunter

"If you don't like the news, go out and make some." Or, as Ralph Nader says " If you don't turn onto politics, politics will turn on you." Sometimes I want to shoot the TV and hide,flee, escape into pleasures, loved ones,religon or a six pack of Guiness.Then I see the latest moral insult by some efeet, slack jawed elitist who can't put his own pants on without instructions and get good and mad again <img src="images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" /> I'm a dangerous man when angry: I vote, withold taxes, walk instead of drive, and talk treason in irish pubs.

I think you go over the line if you have "seven homemade bombs"

I have heard stories of rather common items being described in official reports as "bombs". Such things as vinegar and baking soda in close proximity to a 2 liter soft drink bottle. Since the soft drink bottles can take up to 300 psi in certain circumstances, it could build up some rather impressive pressure before failure of the pressure vessel, and might actually damage or at least scare someone, I would hardly call it a "home made bomb" especially if it was not even constructed as something that would actually perform as feared, but such has been officially described at least once.

My point is that from the article, I can not tell if the bomb was actually constructed, or more like parts, or just his containers of smokeless powder for reloading, stored all too close to primers, or just in the same building. I have to grant that I do not know for sure that there were not pipebombs or other obviously functional thingies found that I would hate to have in close proximity to any children if at all avoidable, but the description is just vague enough to sound like the truth was being stretched yet again, at least to some extent.

I'll try to be careful to not offend, but here's my opinion.

This forum is a great place to express ideas and to help each other. I have great respect for the posters here at ETS. That's why I guess I'm so surprised that people here are giving this guy so much latitude.

It seems to me that we, as a group, have evaluated his collection based on the individual pieces he possesed. I think we need to look at the bigger picture here. He's is a dangerous guy. No question in my mind. Not beacuse of his Spam or his reading material, but rather his collection viewed as a whole.

Sure, if he had 13 weapons and bomb components in a rural North Dakota, it might not be the same issue. Unfortunately, however, for his many neighbors in NYC he is reckless at the very least.

I really don't think the police closed down the neighborhood begause of his vingear and baking soda. He's not shooting cans off the fence on his rural property with a .22 either.

Throw the book at him. Lock him up. It seems like common sense and the right thing to do. I wouldn't call him a "Survivalist". I'd call him a "Felon". (if proven guilty .... of course.) <img src="images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

etehiver,

The only problem is that you are making an assumption that he had bombs just because it is in the report. What kind? Pipe bombs? Grenades? Cherry bombs?

I don't believe most conspiracy theories, but I do believe we have an over zealous ATF and FBI in this country. And there are a lot of over zealous prosecutors who want to make a name for themselves. This guy may be guilty, but not until he has his day in court.

In the second article it says this:
"At an NYPD Bomb Squad facility, specialists destroyed seven fuse bombs packed with nails and screws that had been discovered in the basement, police said. "

Okay, even I'd have to admit that that's a little over the top! <img src="images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

A little?

that article is pretty scary if you read it.

the agents staged a fake car accident, to "prevent a violent stand off". (or just to lure him out and pick him off easier if there was no witnesses about more then likely).

look at how they are painting this guy (as well as other "survivalists")..

"and the basement was outfitted like a survivalist's den, with posters of Adolf Hitler and Che Guevara on the wall, hundreds of food cans and water bottles on shelves, a gas mask and numerous bottles of cooking gas used for camp stoves."

reading between the lines its meant to mean...dont prepare yourself for anything,dont be independant or a free thinker.
just be a sheep and rely only on your govt for everything they know better then you after all..least thats MY take on it.

i know people who collect ww2 items and LOTS of items will end up having a swastika on them,unless you ONLY collect allies items. but it doesnt make these people nazis.

i also like how they added "I believe that he may have been smoking marijuana immediately before the warrant was issued."
which would make it alot easier for the public to swallow if he had to be "taken by force".

this entire story disturbs me greatly.
the way they acted, and the way he acted as well.

if i had the room id dedicate as much as possible to storing extra food water and other emergency items.

but if he DID make bombs, hes definitly got a screw loose too.

i still want to know who snitched on this guy to get the law after him, i didnt see any reasoning in the article.

Man, this was one confused dude! <img src="images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" />

Maybe he was just trying to be politically correct.

Hitler, a faciest.

Che, a PHRASECENSOREDPOSTERSHOULDKNOWBETTER..

At least the feds can't accuse him of biased treatment of political beliefs.

Bountyhunter

"just be a sheep and rely only on your govt for everything they know better then you after all..least thats MY take on it."

Thats a good point, I didn't think of it like that. So much for freedom of speech/expression.