Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Reuters)   Words stung, rifles were un-slung, shots rung, hands were wrung while lawyers flung dung from their tongues, and now the Hmong had better watch his bung   (today.reuters.com ) divider line
    More: Followup  
•       •       •

9851 clicks; posted to Main » on 17 Sep 2005 at 5:49 AM (11 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



276 Comments     (+0 »)
 


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2005-09-17 01:22:28 AM  
bra farking vo!
 
2005-09-17 01:27:27 AM  
Y'know I hate to say that this guy might've gotten a bum deal, but I think he may have gotten a bum deal. Around here (which is where it happened) there is a lot of Racism against the Hmong, especially since there are few jobs around here, and the government seems to keep sending them here to live anyway. Granted noone will admit it openly, but if you listen to people speak about their Hmong neighbors, nobody ever says anything kind. And it's not mentioned in this article, but in the local newspaper they did say that the two "witnesses" for the prosecution actually told 2 different stories on the stand.
 
2005-09-17 01:33:23 AM  
Niiice headline.
 
2005-09-17 01:34:18 AM  
No matter what really occurred, it sounds like he could have fled without killing so darn many people.

What were the victims thinking anyway?

"Hey Bob, let's hurl racial slurs at an armed and outnumbered man."

I'm not excusing the man's actions at all, but I can completely understand what caused him to snap.
 
2005-09-17 01:34:57 AM  
Wow. admins, my try at this is still in the black. I'd like you to take it down. This headline is awesome.
 
2005-09-17 01:35:38 AM  
P.S. - Out yourself, submitter. Great job.
 
2005-09-17 01:36:40 AM  
: claps :
 
2005-09-17 01:40:22 AM  
40below: P.S. - Out yourself, submitter. Great job.

THX!

I was waiting to see if it would be greenlighted, I didn't want to jinx it.

/first greenlight
 
2005-09-17 01:40:37 AM  
standing ovation to submitter for headline pwnage
 
2005-09-17 01:42:11 AM  
I am sure part of this story is missing, but there is that bit about 3 of the dead being shot in the back, and his testimony that not all them, but some of them deserved to die because of what they said to him.

No matter how ugly a picture I can make of the guys that got shot, I don't see this guy as a victim of the system. I see him as a guy who got pissed off and started shooting people until he satisfied his rage.
 
2005-09-17 01:42:51 AM  
Immaculate_Misconception:

THX!

I was waiting to see if it would be greenlighted, I didn't want to jinx it.


Wow, Bob Dylan is a TFer and now we know his username.

Nice Job!
 
2005-09-17 01:49:11 AM  
This headline sucks ass. I mean, no love for Alan Fung, egg foo yung, MC Young or Carl Jung?

This headline disgusts me.

/contrarian (and sarchasm)
 
2005-09-17 01:49:18 AM  
Immaculate_Misconception Been reading the Arcata police logs? Great job on the headline.
 
2005-09-17 01:49:28 AM  
how can y'all be so clever when it's so late?

nice headline

someone remind me to read it again tomorrow
 
2005-09-17 01:52:24 AM  
DaCricket: Been reading the Arcata police logs?


Nope, but I am right now.

Very funny stuff, thanks.
 
2005-09-17 01:55:19 AM  
i agree, headline kicks ass. i'm not even going to bother reading TFA. i mean, who comes to Fark.com for the articles anyways?

good job I_M
 
2005-09-17 01:55:58 AM  
I wonder if this will make the papers here. I remember it being a big deal when it happened, but we rarely get the follow ups.

And add me to the "nice headline" crowd.
 
2005-09-17 01:59:39 AM  
The headline is nice, but it misses the underlying issue.

That's right, the issue I'm not gonna touch with a ten foot pole.
 
2005-09-17 02:01:52 AM  
there's an article?
 
2005-09-17 02:07:47 AM  
Sphinx16

The headline is nice, but it misses the underlying issue.

That's right, the issue I'm not gonna touch with a ten foot pole.


That it's outrageous that immigrants are allowed to own guns?
That Wisconsin, rather than its portrayal in the Cheney-controlled mainstream media as a cheese-saturated hick backwater, is actually a festering criminal swamp?
That deer never hurt you, why should you be allowed to blow their furry little heads off?

What issue won't you touch with a 10-foot pole?
 
2005-09-17 02:24:42 AM  
That deer never hurt you, why should you be allowed to blow their furry little heads off?

i'll touch that one...it's called population control

not everyone wants Bambi eating their crops
 
2005-09-17 02:27:28 AM  
40below: What issue won't you touch with a 10-foot pole?

Ths racial issue. The Urban/Rural issue.
No matter what you say, somebody gets pissed off.

That it's outrageous that immigrants are allowed to own guns?
Nope. Why would that be a problem? My grandpa was an immigrant, and they gave him a farking plane to fly, with bombs and everything. Why would anyone not want immigrants to arm themselves? A vast majority of Americans are children or grandchilren or great grandchildren of immigrants.

That Wisconsin, rather than its portrayal in the Cheney-controlled mainstream media as a cheese-saturated hick backwater, is actually a festering criminal swamp?
Minnesotans think Wisconsin is a hick backwater, prove us wrong.

That deer never hurt you, why should you be allowed to blow their furry little heads off?
I think hunting with a gun is barbaric. If you want to hunt a deer with a knife or a bow, go for it. If you are disciplined enough to track and kill a deer on foot with a knife or rock or bow, good for you. It's not fair to rely on your technology.
Sitting in a blind, drinking a beer. Shame on you.
 
2005-09-17 02:32:06 AM  
Sitting in a blind, drinking a beer. Shame on you.

*rolling eyes*

ok, who let Ted Nugent on the internet again?

get over it! i would rather get shot in the head with a bullet and die instantly than with an arrow in the chest that causes internal bleeding and suffocation resulting in a slow, painful death...
 
2005-09-17 02:35:10 AM  
i'll touch that one...it's called population control

not everyone wants Bambi eating their crops


They do it here to cut down on traffic accidents. You can't drive 5 miles on the highway here without seeing a dead deer. And let me tell you, they can do some serious damage to a car traveling at 80 MPH.

This fact may sound like common knowledge, but when I was growing up in Dallas I would have thought that someone warning me about the risk of hitting deer on the freeway was joking with me.

As far as the Hmong man tresspassing on private property to hunt goes, I am very well versed in dealing with poachers.

During hunting season I rarely go 3 days without having to drive out back and run off some tresspassers from down state. It's not that I really mind the idea of their hunting on my land, it's that most people I know are idiots when it comes to gun safety, and I don't like the unnecessary gunfire around my house.
 
2005-09-17 02:39:08 AM  
Immaculate_Misconception

i completely agree with you. i've seen my fair share of dead deer on the road out in East Texas and even had a friend almost die in an accident when a deer went through his windshield...

as far as poachers go...if they are on your land, with loaded guns, and you go walking around YOUR land just to check things out, whos to say they wont shoot you thinking you are the deer...
 
2005-09-17 02:40:12 AM  
Oh, and when I go out back to deal with these farkers I'm always as nice as can be. I offer them a cup of coffee, and remind them that the sheriff should be here any minute. These two thing make clear 2 facts.

1. That I'm a pretty nice guy.
2. That they are still not welcome.

/not a hunter, grocery stores have meat
//got all of the early mornings I'll ever need in the Marines
 
2005-09-17 02:41:18 AM  
eyedvmtech: ok, who let Ted Nugent on the internet again?

Bwhahahaha! I'm totally not The Nuge.

My point was that we're near the apex of the food chain. Unfortunately for us, we're our own largest predator. By far.

i would rather get shot in the head with a bullet and die instantly than with an arrow in the chest that causes internal bleeding and suffocation resulting in a slow, painful death...
How many deers get hit by that perfect Hathcock-ian sniper?
I'd bet less than %1.

The majority of them seem to be shot by dangerously drunken buffoons sitting up high in a blind. That's like attacking a cyclops with a 3D puzzle. It's just not fair.

/waaay off the subject.
 
2005-09-17 02:43:45 AM  
eyedvmtech:

get over it! i would rather get shot in the head with a bullet and die instantly than with an arrow in the chest that causes internal bleeding and suffocation resulting in a slow, painful death...


I agree with the sentiment, but personally, I'd rather die of natural causes, or in my sleep.

/just sayin'
//dieing while farking would be nice too
///unless my wife found out, in which case she'd resuscitate me just to kick my arse
 
2005-09-17 02:46:19 AM  
Sphinx16

i think you may have your facts turned around a bit

all of the hunters that i know are die hard hunters...none drink while around loaded guns, all are very good shots and none do it for sport. they process and eat what they kill...

i honestly dont know the numbers, but like i said, most hunters go hunting for the meat, not the actual sport
 
2005-09-17 02:48:07 AM  
Immaculate_Misconception

i was speaking from the deer's point of view...

i'm sure deer would rather die in their sleep too

or while farking...lol
 
2005-09-17 02:48:51 AM  
More background if anyone cares:
Wisconsin State Journal (pops)

I read Vang's testimony earlier today in the paper, and basically he felt threatened by a bunch of guys on ATVs. After they threatened him and yelled at him and (possibly) fired a shot at his feet, he hunted them down one by one. He was very descriptive about how he crouched for cover and shot people as they were running away.

Very tragic. It was probably a chest-thumping encounter gone horribly wrong, where miscommunication among some parties trumped common sense.

I hope that Wisconsin doesn't treat this as a verdict on race, as it has a very sizable Hmong population living among white guys.
 
2005-09-17 02:49:11 AM  
I have no contribution to this thread other than my praise for the submitter! Well done!
 
2005-09-17 02:56:01 AM  
 
2005-09-17 03:00:43 AM  
Oh, and IM, in case you hadn't figured it out until now, it's always a good idea to stay out of threads you submit, particularly after they hit the main page and take off on tangents you never thought possible. They'll drive you nuts, particularly on days where you have six or ten of them going.

Like chicks from the nest, wish them well, let them go and get back to submitting. You can never win trying to draw back the debate to what was originally your intent. Get a few hundred such car wrecks under your belt and you'll understand.
 
2005-09-17 03:02:33 AM  
Deadmeat: After they threatened him and yelled at him and (possibly) fired a shot at his feet

That was the part I really didn't like. From what I understand, the guy was an infantryman in a long and bloody war. Would anyone expect any different reaction from a returning Vietnam Vet?

You shoot at someone's feet, you better expect a serious farking response.

This is the 400# gorilla nobody seems to see.
 
2005-09-17 03:05:45 AM  
eyedvmtech:

i think you may have your facts turned around a bit

all of the hunters that i know are die hard hunters...none drink while around loaded guns, all are very good shots and none do it for sport. they process and eat what they kill...

i honestly dont know the numbers, but like i said, most hunters go hunting for the meat, not the actual sport


You're probably right, but when you said I might be Ted Nugent, I got a bit unctious.

I think that if you are going to pretend and use the word "hunt", you should at least give the "prey" a smidgen of opportunity. To give it a semblance of fairness.

But that's just me.
 
2005-09-17 03:07:58 AM  
eyedvmtech:

.none drink while around loaded guns, all are very good shots and none do it for sport. they process and eat what they kill...

Sorry, I was using a popular stereotype to my benefit.
Sincere apology.
 
2005-09-17 03:18:49 AM  
Sphinx16

I'm not defending anyone.

My take on it is that it was a clash of cultures where the native Wisconsin hunters wanted a guy off their land and decided to be a little too crude for Vang's defense mechanism in their delivery.

Vang responded to protect himself, but the law thought he was a bit overzealous.

I only added the (possibly), regarding someone shooting at Vang, because only Vang testified to it to my knowledge. I'd be curious what the forensics says on it.

Again, I think it was a tragic happening where everyone thought they were on the right side of things and it turned out really bloody.

If I had less facts on this case I'd probably side towards Vang, but where it stands in the courts it looks like he used deadly force in excess. But again, if I was in his shoes I would have probably done the same thing. It's hard to outrun an ATV on foot.

/Straddling the fence for the first time in a while
 
2005-09-17 03:20:02 AM  
The hunters around here are usually sober. As far as I can tell they mostly hunt for the meat too. But by and far most of them can't shoot for crap.

I heard a story from one of my wife's cousins last week about howw he missed some poor animal at 120 yards with a rediculous $1500 rifle he owns. I ticked him off when I laughed at his story, even more when I suggested that he join the military and learn to shoot.

I'm no super marksman or anything, but very accurate shots at 500-1000 meters are part of basic rifle proficiency, and these guys act as though a 4" group at 100 yards is an amazing accomplishment.

/just sayin'
 
2005-09-17 03:24:52 AM  
Slight threadjack:

I'd like to start hunting deer, so I can take a very non-committed responsibilty for my meat eating habit. I also love venison.

Any ideas where to start? I think my best bet might be to hook up with an estabished group with an extra rifle.

My only problem is I hate killing things. I think if I can hit it from far enough away with a clean shot I'll be cool there.

/exception: I'd like to hunt in CWD land too, but I somehow doubt that's good eatin'
 
2005-09-17 03:25:02 AM  
Deadmeat:

If I had less facts on this case I'd probably side towards Vang, but where it stands in the courts it looks like he used deadly force in excess. But again, if I was in his shoes I would have probably done the same thing. It's hard to outrun an ATV on foot.


I think if I were in his shoes, and if a shot were fired at me I would have assumed the prone position and shot anyone who was clearly armed. At least this way I could claim that I was only eliminating those who were posing an immediate threat to me.

But seeing as the story seems to be that only one person in the group he fired upon was armed it would appear obvious to me that he went way too far.
 
2005-09-17 03:31:21 AM  
Immaculate_Misconception: I think if I were in his shoes, and if a shot were fired at me I would have assumed the prone position and shot anyone who was clearly armed. At least this way I could claim that I was only eliminating those who were posing an immediate threat to me.

But seeing as the story seems to be that only one person in the group he fired upon was armed it would appear obvious to me that he went way too far.



From what I read only one hunter was armed, but it's possible that up to two were armed at the time. Vang says he was worried about others running for weapons.

Sounds to me like there was too much adrenaline to go around, and he thought better to be safe than sorry.

Horrible for all involved.
 
2005-09-17 03:31:25 AM  
Deadmeat:

You summed up everything I've felt about this case from the beginning. I wasn't trying to say you defended anyone at all. I was trying to say that "(possibly) they fired a shot at his feet" might mean something different to you and me than it might mean to a retired army rifleman.

This whole thing stinks. Stinks of poorly trained LEO's, stinks of lazy self-important D.A.'s, stinks of the whole inbred process. There's a feeling that Vang didn't get a fair trial, that there was no possible way that he'd get one. True or not, it's there. We're gonna have to deal with it.
 
2005-09-17 03:34:41 AM  
Immaculate_Misconception:

I think if I were in his shoes, and if a shot were fired at me I would have assumed the prone position and shot anyone who was clearly armed. At least this way I could claim that I was only eliminating those who were posing an immediate threat to me.

I think you answer my two most important questions about this whole fiasco.

What if you were a combat-trained veteran of a losing army?
What would you do then?

That's the point I think is missed in the whole "Hmongs are bad" tirade that the local news is fixated on.
 
2005-09-17 03:38:53 AM  
Sphinx16: You summed up everything I've felt about this case from the beginning. I wasn't trying to say you defended anyone at all. I was trying to say that "(possibly) they fired a shot at his feet" might mean something different to you and me than it might mean to a retired army rifleman.

This whole thing stinks. Stinks of poorly trained LEO's, stinks of lazy self-important D.A.'s, stinks of the whole inbred process. There's a feeling that Vang didn't get a fair trial, that there was no possible way that he'd get one. True or not, it's there. We're gonna have to deal with it.



Sphinx16: Big hugs, I'm with you. Shame you're a Vikings fan.

What I don't understand is the lack of forensic evidence telling us who fired at all. Maybe because I watched 6 CSI episodes since it's been on - I think they can find shell casings and match it up to a gun.

Too much he said, he said. With Vang's demeanor I guess he thought he did everything for the right reasons, and I bet the other guys didn't think anything would go that far.
 
2005-09-17 03:46:58 AM  
Sphinx16:

What if you were a combat-trained veteran of a losing army?
What would you do then?


I have experienced combat first hand on more than one occasion. And honestly, I can't see why winning or losing has anything to do with it.

In a war soldiers have rules of engagement that they must adhere to. Sometimes they are insanely restrictive and sometimes they allow too much individual discretion. These guidelines partially exist to remove any need for "prolonged judgement" on the part of the individual soldier.

Having been there certainly makes me acutely aware of what my reactions would be to receiving gunfire.

As I said earlier, I would assume the prone firing position (to make myself a smaller target), and return fire immediately targeting only those individuals who were armed. Whether they were pointing a weapon at me or not would not be a factor in my reaction. If they didn't want to fight they could have thrown up their hands or dropped to the ground unarmed. If he thought they were "runnung for their weapons" he should have hastened his escape. IMHO there was zero justification for killing the unarmed individuals. While I understand his actions, I still don't condone them.
 
2005-09-17 03:49:52 AM  
Deadmeat: Shame you're a Vikings fan.
We all have our own faults, including you. :P

What I don't understand is the lack of forensic evidence telling us who fired at all.
That's why I cry "Poor LEO's!". These guys are among the worst in the nation. Ours aren't any better.

With Vang's demeanor I guess he thought he did everything for the right reasons, and I bet the other guys didn't think anything would go that far.

That's why this whole case left a bad taste in my mouth.

Obviously there was a confrontation between Vang and the land-owners.

The issue is whether or not that confrontation was potentially deadly.
Deadly for Vang, or deadly for the others?
Nobody denies that Vang shot the other guys, but was it justifiable?
Does our own prejudice stand in the way?
 
2005-09-17 03:51:05 AM  
I will say this though.

I would assume that someone must have fired a shot at him, and here's why:

NO COMBAT VETERAN I KNOW OF would willingly start a firefight with an armed force of superior numbers at such close range unless he felt his life were in immediate danger and he had no other choice but to stop and fight.
 
2005-09-17 03:52:06 AM  
Immaculate_Misconception: While I understand his actions, I still don't condone them.

Was looking for a sentence that expressed what I believe. Search over. Exactly.
 
2005-09-17 03:56:16 AM  
To add to my last thought.

It's one thing if this guy were just some gun-toting nutball who wacked-out a group of folks. But my experience tells me that training and experience trump judgement most of the time.

With that said, it just wouldn't be in the guy's nature to start such a fight without deeming it to be 'his only chance'. I'm not saying he didn't want a fight. I'm saying that no experienced soldier would 'pick' this fight on these terms.
 
Displayed 50 of 276 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Newest | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report