Anti-Gun Senator Shoots Intruder

rdx4me · November 14, 2009, 12:47 PM

Hope this isn't a re-post but I found it typical:

Anti-Gun Senator Shoots Intruder

Looks like it took about three weeks to surface & start making the email rounds. another one we didn't see on the National News....Wonder Why ? See link to story below. This NC Democrat State Senator is a diehard anti-gunner. He has voted for every anti gun bill that has crossed his desk, but when someone invaded his house, he picked up a gun for self defense. Hypocrites! See another news article below the link.

Anti-Gun Senator Shoots Intruder http://www2.timesdispatch.com/rtd/ne...me/287987/P10/

Aug 24, 2009 Long time Anti-Gun Advocate State Senator R.C. Soles, 74, shot one of two intruders at his home just outside Tabor City, N.C.. about 5 p.m. Sunday, the prosecutor for the politician's home county said.

The victim, Kyle Blackburn, was taken to a South Carolina hospital, but the injuries were not reported to be life-threatening, according to Rex Gore, district attorney for Columbus, Bladen and Brunswick counties.

The State Bureau of Investigation and Columbus County Sheriff's Department are investigating the shooting, Gore said. Soles, who was not arrested, declined to discuss the incident Sunday evening.

"I am not in a position to talk to you," Soles said by telephone. "I'm right in the middle of an investigation."

Soles, a top-ranking Democrat and the longest-serving member of the legislature, already was the subject of an SBI investigation over sexual misconduct allegations with former male clients.

The Senator, who has made a career of being against gun ownership for the general public, didn't hesitate to defend himself with his own gun when he believed he was in immediate danger and he was the victim..

In typical hypocritical liberal fashion, the "Do As I Say And Not As I Do" Anti-Gun Activist Lawmaker picked up his gun and took action in what apparently was a self-defense shooting. Why hypocritical you may ask? It is because his long legistlative record shows that the actions that he took to protect his family, his own response to a dangerous life threatening situation, are actions that he feels ordinary citizens should not have if they were faced with an identical situation.

It has prompted some to ask if the Senator believes his life and personal safety are far more valuable than yours or mine.. But, this is to be expected from those who believe they can run our lives, manage our money, raise our kids, and protect our families better than we can.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also, check the link below.

http://johnjacobh.wordpress.com/2009...oots-intruder/

CUBAN REDNECK · November 14, 2009, 12:54 PM

Another elitist exposed!

JWT · November 14, 2009, 01:04 PM

Yup, the 'general public' should not own guns but the elite folks that are elected to 'run' our government are more important, or otherwise qualified to own guns. Hypocrite is too good a word for these people.

RedneckFur · November 14, 2009, 05:13 PM

I'm orignally from Soles' hometown, and he's involved in alot of shady things.

There's alot of speculation from the locals that the the young men that Sole's shot were men that soles had molested as children. Soles is currently in a legal battle right now with another young man who claims that soles moletested him.

While I dont know all the details and Soles has freinds in every court in NC, I can say that I have seen him surrounded by teen-aged boys quite often.

Chances are the truth will never come out, even about this shooting, because the man is just too connected. Nearly every time he's been brought to court the case has been thrown out by prosecutors and judges that Soles makes healthy campaign contributions too.

Double Naught Spy · November 14, 2009, 08:01 PM

Holy cow rdx4me, what are you talking about? This happened nearly 3 months ago, not 3 weeks ago. Why didn't you hear about it on the national news? Probably because you weren't paying attention.

Buzzcook · November 15, 2009, 12:59 AM

So Senator Soles voted to ban all firearms for any reason? Do you have a link for that?

Kleinzeit · November 16, 2009, 04:04 PM

OK. A few things.

1) I'm as mad as anyone at politicians who want guns for themselves but not for us. BUT...

2) What has been posted here as a news report looks very much like it has been edited to add political commentary. If you have a link to the genuine article, post it. I'm tired of hearing people go on about politicians who distort the truth, but who then go right ahead and do it themselves. I could be wrong, but it sure looks like this article has been doctored.

3) Posting comments here about "typical hypocritical liberals" is way out of line. Apart from being against the rules of this forum, it is an insult to all the gun-owning liberals who share this forum with you, and to all the free-thinking people who resent having cheap hate-mongering shoved in their face. If you don't have the good manners and decency to show a little bit of respect to people who are actually on the same side as you, then I suggest you go join one of those less civilized forums where you can rant to your heart's content. I'm tired of hearing this talk about a "liberal elite" ruling over the "common man". Half the "elite" in this country are conservative, and half the common people are liberal. To suggest otherwise is to repeat ignorant conspiracy theories and we don't do that here either.

Brian Pfleuger · November 16, 2009, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kleinzeit

OK. A few things.

I agree with you on all counts.... except this:

Quote:

...half the common people are liberal.

Only about 20% of the American people identify themselves as liberal.

Kleinzeit · November 16, 2009, 05:31 PM

Well, yes, you're right there. I did over-simplify a little.

If I were to state my case more carefully, I would probably say things like...

"liberals" aren't all "elites"
"conservatives" aren't all "common folk"
some conservatives are "elites"
some liberals are "common folk"
there are different kinds of "conservatives" (fiscal, social, etc.)
there are different kinds of liberals (fiscal, social, etc.)
there are different kinds of elites (politicians who exert power over the lives of common folk; wealthy industrialists who exert power over the lives of common folk, etc)
not all people who call themselves "conservative" do so for the same reasons, or agree on every point with all other people who call themselves "conservative"
not all people who call themselves "liberal" do so for the same reasons, or agree on every point with all other people who call themselves "liberal"
there are liberals who favor gun rights
there are conservatives who don't

etc. etc.

The main reason the proportion of "conservatives" is so much higher than the proportion of "liberals" is that there are so many issues that one may hold a conservative position on, that many people who might otherwise be considered liberal will nonetheless identify themselves as conservative. As that Gallup link you kindly provided shows, 22% of registered Democrats call themselves "conservative", while only 4% of Republicans call themselves "liberal." Anyway, it might not come out to 50/50 but it isn't all black-and-white, us-versus-them, either.

(But I think you know that.)

My point is: this is exactly why people who call themselves "conservative" shouldn't go around assuming that everyone on the other side of politics is necessarily against all of their causes.

Brian Pfleuger · November 16, 2009, 05:56 PM

Quote:

My point is: this is exactly why people who call themselves "conservative" shouldn't go around assuming that everyone on the other side of politics is necessarily against all of their causes.

Agreed. The opposition can divide our cause without our assistance. I have to come to realize over the years just how difficult is is to keep the peace among groups of people with a common interest and major differences. I have seen untold numbers of situations wherein a group of people are in 99% agreement on every major issue, yet will easily divide themselves along that 1%.

It is much more difficult to keep the peace amongst such a diverse group of people as the membership of TFL. Especially considering that on forums directed at the other "hot button" issues, many of us would be on opposite sides. Considering those difficulties, on the whole, the moderators and members do a remarkable job of maintaining civility.

Kleinzeit · November 16, 2009, 06:04 PM

Yes, the mods are a great asset.

I'm still looking around on that Gallup site. It's fascinating. Here's some good news: from 2008 to 2009, the proportion of Democrats who say that the laws on the sale of guns should "stay the same" or become "less strict" rose from 32% to 34%.

I'm glad to see that figure is rising. And I'm really glad to see how high it actually is! I had no idea. According to the same poll, 29% of Republicans think the laws should be more strict.

peetzakiller's point - about how easy it is for us to become divided - is absolutely spot-on. So again, let's keep it civil, OK people?

zxcvbob · November 16, 2009, 06:13 PM

Quote:

The victim, Kyle Blackburn, was taken to a South Carolina hospital, but the injuries were not reported to be life-threatening, according to Rex Gore, district attorney for Columbus, Bladen and Brunswick counties.

So just because the bad guy ends up shot, he's now the "victim"? I'm surprised everybody else missed that.

Uncle Billy · November 16, 2009, 06:23 PM

never mind.

which is why I deleted the offending post! Antipitas

Kleinzeit · November 16, 2009, 08:32 PM

Wish I'd seen what you wrote before you deleted it.

Coming back to the OP, what I'd like here is an update. Apparently this is old news. But presumably, there was some kind of fallout from this incident - journalists getting stuck into him for his inconsistency, interviewers pushing for a response, fellow "liberals" (I don't even know if he actually counts himself as one; 63% of Democrats don't count themselves liberal) criticizing him for having a gun, etc.

I am aware of the considerable mileage that various conservative commentators have gotten out of this on the web. What I'm really interested in though is whether this has changed the debate in any way. Has anyone actually succeeded in drawing him on this?

Buzzcook · November 16, 2009, 10:04 PM

Kleinzeit I agree with your assessment that half the common folks are liberal, even though Pete is right that only a minority self identify as such. If we track polls on political issues the majority tend to support liberal positions over conservative one. Often the majority is to the political left of the democratic party.

Luckily the majority position on gun laws seems to favor gun ownership.

Buzzcook · November 16, 2009, 10:18 PM

http://www.starnewsonline.com/articl...f-police-calls

Same source as the last. Seems as if there has been an on going history of bad acts by the person who was shot.

http://www.fayobserver.com/Articles/2009/11/11/951257
Soles may not run again

I didn't expect to see a lot more detail about the shooting. With some exceptions what you read in the first week after an incident is about as detailed as you're going to get. After a certain point it's just spin.

Kleinzeit · November 17, 2009, 05:50 PM

Thanks for those links, Buzzcook. And for the support.

This Soles guy is a real puzzler... I don't want to cast judgment on him on the basis of a few rumors, but he sure has managed to get himself into some weird-looking situations with these young men, these "clients" of his.

I wonder whether he didn't bring some of this trouble on himself. I also question whether he ought to have shot at this guy for kicking at his door. But I don't question his right to have a gun in his possession for purposes of defending himself and his property. I would like to hear him explain why he thinks he should be allowed this and I shouldn't.

November 14, 2009, 12:47 PM	#1
rdx4me Member Join Date: November 18, 2008 Location: NW Florida Posts: 46	Anti-Gun Senator Shoots Intruder Hope this isn't a re-post but I found it typical: Anti-Gun Senator Shoots Intruder Looks like it took about three weeks to surface & start making the email rounds. another one we didn't see on the National News....Wonder Why ? See link to story below. This NC Democrat State Senator is a diehard anti-gunner. He has voted for every anti gun bill that has crossed his desk, but when someone invaded his house, he picked up a gun for self defense. Hypocrites! See another news article below the link. Anti-Gun Senator Shoots Intruder http://www2.timesdispatch.com/rtd/ne...me/287987/P10/ Aug 24, 2009 Long time Anti-Gun Advocate State Senator R.C. Soles, 74, shot one of two intruders at his home just outside Tabor City, N.C.. about 5 p.m. Sunday, the prosecutor for the politician's home county said. The victim, Kyle Blackburn, was taken to a South Carolina hospital, but the injuries were not reported to be life-threatening, according to Rex Gore, district attorney for Columbus, Bladen and Brunswick counties. The State Bureau of Investigation and Columbus County Sheriff's Department are investigating the shooting, Gore said. Soles, who was not arrested, declined to discuss the incident Sunday evening. "I am not in a position to talk to you," Soles said by telephone. "I'm right in the middle of an investigation." Soles, a top-ranking Democrat and the longest-serving member of the legislature, already was the subject of an SBI investigation over sexual misconduct allegations with former male clients. The Senator, who has made a career of being against gun ownership for the general public, didn't hesitate to defend himself with his own gun when he believed he was in immediate danger and he was the victim.. In typical hypocritical liberal fashion, the "Do As I Say And Not As I Do" Anti-Gun Activist Lawmaker picked up his gun and took action in what apparently was a self-defense shooting. Why hypocritical you may ask? It is because his long legistlative record shows that the actions that he took to protect his family, his own response to a dangerous life threatening situation, are actions that he feels ordinary citizens should not have if they were faced with an identical situation. It has prompted some to ask if the Senator believes his life and personal safety are far more valuable than yours or mine.. But, this is to be expected from those who believe they can run our lives, manage our money, raise our kids, and protect our families better than we can. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Also, check the link below. http://johnjacobh.wordpress.com/2009...oots-intruder/ __________________ "What's the speed of dark?"

November 14, 2009, 05:13 PM	#4
RedneckFur Senior Member Join Date: January 14, 2007 Location: Central NC Posts: 1,424	I'm orignally from Soles' hometown, and he's involved in alot of shady things. There's alot of speculation from the locals that the the young men that Sole's shot were men that soles had molested as children. Soles is currently in a legal battle right now with another young man who claims that soles moletested him. While I dont know all the details and Soles has freinds in every court in NC, I can say that I have seen him surrounded by teen-aged boys quite often. Chances are the truth will never come out, even about this shooting, because the man is just too connected. Nearly every time he's been brought to court the case has been thrown out by prosecutors and judges that Soles makes healthy campaign contributions too. __________________ In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. -George Orwell Last edited by RedneckFur; November 14, 2009 at 05:16 PM. Reason: spelling

November 14, 2009, 08:01 PM	#5
Double Naught Spy Senior Member Join Date: January 8, 2001 Location: Forestburg, Montague Cnty, TX Posts: 12,717	Holy cow rdx4me, what are you talking about? This happened nearly 3 months ago, not 3 weeks ago. Why didn't you hear about it on the national news? Probably because you weren't paying attention. __________________ "If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher." -- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011 My Hunting Videos https://www.youtube.com/user/HornHillRange Last edited by Double Naught Spy; November 15, 2009 at 05:18 AM.

November 16, 2009, 05:31 PM	#9
Kleinzeit Senior Member Join Date: January 30, 2009 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 566	Well, yes, you're right there. I did over-simplify a little. If I were to state my case more carefully, I would probably say things like... "liberals" aren't all "elites" "conservatives" aren't all "common folk" some conservatives are "elites" some liberals are "common folk" there are different kinds of "conservatives" (fiscal, social, etc.) there are different kinds of liberals (fiscal, social, etc.) there are different kinds of elites (politicians who exert power over the lives of common folk; wealthy industrialists who exert power over the lives of common folk, etc) not all people who call themselves "conservative" do so for the same reasons, or agree on every point with all other people who call themselves "conservative" not all people who call themselves "liberal" do so for the same reasons, or agree on every point with all other people who call themselves "liberal" there are liberals who favor gun rights there are conservatives who don't etc. etc. The main reason the proportion of "conservatives" is so much higher than the proportion of "liberals" is that there are so many issues that one may hold a conservative position on, that many people who might otherwise be considered liberal will nonetheless identify themselves as conservative. As that Gallup link you kindly provided shows, 22% of registered Democrats call themselves "conservative", while only 4% of Republicans call themselves "liberal." Anyway, it might not come out to 50/50 but it isn't all black-and-white, us-versus-them, either. (But I think you know that.) My point is: this is exactly why people who call themselves "conservative" shouldn't go around assuming that everyone on the other side of politics is necessarily against all of their causes. Last edited by Kleinzeit; November 16, 2009 at 05:39 PM.

November 16, 2009, 06:04 PM	#11
Kleinzeit Senior Member Join Date: January 30, 2009 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 566	Yes, the mods are a great asset. I'm still looking around on that Gallup site. It's fascinating. Here's some good news: from 2008 to 2009, the proportion of Democrats who say that the laws on the sale of guns should "stay the same" or become "less strict" rose from 32% to 34%. I'm glad to see that figure is rising. And I'm really glad to see how high it actually is! I had no idea. According to the same poll, 29% of Republicans think the laws should be more strict. peetzakiller's point - about how easy it is for us to become divided - is absolutely spot-on. So again, let's keep it civil, OK people? Last edited by Kleinzeit; November 17, 2009 at 06:07 PM. Reason: Anothers poster's inapproriate comment was deleted, so I'm deleting my response to it.

November 14, 2009, 12:54 PM	#2
CUBAN REDNECK Senior Member Join Date: May 8, 2009 Location: SW FLORIDA Posts: 318	Another elitist exposed!

November 14, 2009, 01:04 PM	#3
JWT Senior Member Join Date: March 16, 2007 Location: Southern Arizona Posts: 3,888	Yup, the 'general public' should not own guns but the elite folks that are elected to 'run' our government are more important, or otherwise qualified to own guns. Hypocrite is too good a word for these people.

November 15, 2009, 12:59 AM	#6
Buzzcook Senior Member Join Date: November 29, 2007 Location: Everett, WA Posts: 6,126	So Senator Soles voted to ban all firearms for any reason? Do you have a link for that?

November 16, 2009, 04:04 PM	#7
Kleinzeit Senior Member Join Date: January 30, 2009 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 566	OK. A few things. 1) I'm as mad as anyone at politicians who want guns for themselves but not for us. BUT... 2) What has been posted here as a news report looks very much like it has been edited to add political commentary. If you have a link to the genuine article, post it. I'm tired of hearing people go on about politicians who distort the truth, but who then go right ahead and do it themselves. I could be wrong, but it sure looks like this article has been doctored. 3) Posting comments here about "typical hypocritical liberals" is way out of line. Apart from being against the rules of this forum, it is an insult to all the gun-owning liberals who share this forum with you, and to all the free-thinking people who resent having cheap hate-mongering shoved in their face. If you don't have the good manners and decency to show a little bit of respect to people who are actually on the same side as you, then I suggest you go join one of those less civilized forums where you can rant to your heart's content. I'm tired of hearing this talk about a "liberal elite" ruling over the "common man". Half the "elite" in this country are conservative, and half the common people are liberal. To suggest otherwise is to repeat ignorant conspiracy theories and we don't do that here either.

November 16, 2009, 06:23 PM	#13
Uncle Billy Senior Member Join Date: June 10, 2009 Location: Small city in New York Posts: 482	never mind. which is why I deleted the offending post! Antipitas __________________ Despite the cost of living, have you noticed how popular it remains? Last edited by Al Norris; November 16, 2009 at 09:08 PM. Reason: Correct. Pure politics is not condoned

November 16, 2009, 08:32 PM	#14
Kleinzeit Senior Member Join Date: January 30, 2009 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 566	Wish I'd seen what you wrote before you deleted it. Coming back to the OP, what I'd like here is an update. Apparently this is old news. But presumably, there was some kind of fallout from this incident - journalists getting stuck into him for his inconsistency, interviewers pushing for a response, fellow "liberals" (I don't even know if he actually counts himself as one; 63% of Democrats don't count themselves liberal) criticizing him for having a gun, etc. I am aware of the considerable mileage that various conservative commentators have gotten out of this on the web. What I'm really interested in though is whether this has changed the debate in any way. Has anyone actually succeeded in drawing him on this?

November 16, 2009, 10:04 PM	#15
Buzzcook Senior Member Join Date: November 29, 2007 Location: Everett, WA Posts: 6,126	Kleinzeit I agree with your assessment that half the common folks are liberal, even though Pete is right that only a minority self identify as such. If we track polls on political issues the majority tend to support liberal positions over conservative one. Often the majority is to the political left of the democratic party. Luckily the majority position on gun laws seems to favor gun ownership.

November 16, 2009, 10:18 PM	#16
Buzzcook Senior Member Join Date: November 29, 2007 Location: Everett, WA Posts: 6,126	A couple of updates http://www.starnewsonline.com/articl...f-police-calls Same source as the last. Seems as if there has been an on going history of bad acts by the person who was shot. http://www.fayobserver.com/Articles/2009/11/11/951257 Soles may not run again I didn't expect to see a lot more detail about the shooting. With some exceptions what you read in the first week after an incident is about as detailed as you're going to get. After a certain point it's just spin.

November 17, 2009, 05:50 PM	#17
Kleinzeit Senior Member Join Date: January 30, 2009 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 566	Thanks for those links, Buzzcook. And for the support. This Soles guy is a real puzzler... I don't want to cast judgment on him on the basis of a few rumors, but he sure has managed to get himself into some weird-looking situations with these young men, these "clients" of his. I wonder whether he didn't bring some of this trouble on himself. I also question whether he ought to have shot at this guy for kicking at his door. But I don't question his right to have a gun in his possession for purposes of defending himself and his property. I would like to hear him explain why he thinks he should be allowed this and I shouldn't.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search