Anti Abortion Activist gunned down

jlew24asu

blackredyellow wrote:

I agree with you more times than not, but you are wrong here... No news article that I have read claimed that he shot the guy because of the signs

are we talking about the same story?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/12/us/12slay.html

Prosecutors said that the suspect had singled out Mr. Pouillon because of the visible style of his regular protests at the school

---

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32799068/ns ... nd_courts/

because he didn't like the activist holding a sign with graphic images of a fetus in front of students.

---

http://news.aol.com/article/anti-aborti ... lon/666862

Police say the gunman had grudges against several people and didn't like Pouillon holding a sign with graphic images of a fetus in front of students.

blackredyellow wrote:

or that he disagreed with the signs or his message.

I agree here. this is still unclear.

polaris_x

jlew24asu wrote:

I'm going off what the prosecutors have been saying.

Prosecutors said that the suspect had singled out Mr. Pouillon because of the visible style of his regular protests at the school, but that they were uncertain whether the broader political message of the protests was at issue.

“There was some displeasure with how open he was,” said Sara Edwards, the chief assistant prosecutor for Shiawassee County. “He tended to carry big signs with very graphic pictures of fetuses.”

so ... basically he NEVER did make a statement like you said ... and based on what you just posted yourself ... it's CLEARLY open to interpretation ... heck, if you read what you posted ... all they are saying for sure is that they think he didn't like the way the guy was protesting in front of schools ...

i really don't know what else to add? ... it should be obvious now no?

jlew24asu

polaris_x wrote:

jlew24asu wrote:

I'm going off what the prosecutors have been saying.

Prosecutors said that the suspect had singled out Mr. Pouillon because of the visible style of his regular protests at the school, but that they were uncertain whether the broader political message of the protests was at issue.

“There was some displeasure with how open he was,” said Sara Edwards, the chief assistant prosecutor for Shiawassee County. “He tended to carry big signs with very graphic pictures of fetuses.”

so ... basically he NEVER did make a statement like you said ... and based on what you just posted yourself ... it's CLEARLY open to interpretation ... heck, if you read what you posted ... all they are saying for sure is that they think he didn't like the way the guy was protesting in front of schools ...

i really don't know what else to add? ... it should be obvious now no?

I'm only echoing what the police and prosecutors are saying. its not open for interpretation.

polaris_x

jlew24asu wrote:

the guy shot him because he didn't like the graphic anti abortion signs he displayed. the guy was clearly disturbed but he clearly says one of the reasons he shot the guy was because of his graphic anti abortion signs. you make it sound like I'm making that up.

again - where does he make a statement? ... he doesn't ... you have no proof - further arguing this shows your unwillingness to accept that you either misread something or made something up ...

the statement you provided was this:

Prosecutors said that the suspect had singled out Mr. Pouillon because of the visible style of his regular protests at the school, but that they were uncertain whether the broader political message of the protests was at issue.

VISIBLE STYLE of his regular protests ... NOTHING attributed to the him being an anti-abortionist! ... and the prosecutors clearly state they were UNCERTAIN if the broader political message was at issue ... so, you are clearly misrepresenting those statements ...

polaris_x

from your own links

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/12/us/12slay.html?_r=1
Ms. MacCleery said Friday’s shooting did not seem to her to be tied to the abortion debate since the suspect was also charged in the killing of the second man, Mike Fuoss, 61, the owner of a local gravel company, who did not appear to be involved in the abortion issue...

Prosecutors said that the suspect had singled out Mr. Pouillon because of the visible style of his regular protests at the school, but that they were uncertain whether the broader political message of the protests was at issue...'

http://news.aol.com/article/anti-aborti ... lon/666862
'The county's chief assistant prosecutor, Sara Edwards, said there didn't appear to be a "triggering event" but Pouillon's presence outside the school seemed to aggravate Drake. It was "the fact that he was outside the high school with his signs in front of children going to school," she said.'

Byrnzie

'Its not open for interpretation'. Sure, It's a cut and dry case:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/12/us/12slay.html
'Prosecutors said that the suspect had singled out Mr. Pouillon because of the visible style of his regular protests at the school, but that they were uncertain whether the broader political message of the protests was at issue.'

Yep, it's clear that Anti-Abortion killers also have a penchant for being Anti-Gravel too. I wonder what the third intended victim was guilty of? I suspect that he sold shoelaces. Someone told me once one time that Anti-Abortion killers don't like people who sell shoelaces, and gravel.

Night night!

jlew24asu

polaris_x wrote:

jlew24asu wrote:

the guy shot him because he didn't like the graphic anti abortion signs he displayed. the guy was clearly disturbed but he clearly says one of the reasons he shot the guy was because of his graphic anti abortion signs. you make it sound like I'm making that up.

again - where does he make a statement? ... he doesn't ... you have no proof - further arguing this shows your unwillingness to accept that you either misread something or made something up ...

the statement you provided was this:

Prosecutors said that the suspect had singled out Mr. Pouillon because of the visible style of his regular protests at the school, but that they were uncertain whether the broader political message of the protests was at issue.

VISIBLE STYLE of his regular protests ... NOTHING attributed to the him being an anti-abortionist! ... and the prosecutors clearly state they were UNCERTAIN if the broader political message was at issue ... so, you are clearly misrepresenting those statements ...

I already said it was unclear whether his motives were driven by political beliefs. but its very clear he killed him, according to the police and prosecutors (not me), because of his style of protesting.

how can you say it has NOTHING to do with abortion when the protest style in question is about abortion.

jlew24asu

polaris_x wrote:

again for the 3rd or 4th time - are we to assume he hates all gravel pit owners?

no. he held a grudge against that person for reasons unknown. or at the least the police and prosecutors haven't said yet that i can find.

polaris_x

jlew24asu wrote:

how can you say it has NOTHING to do with abortion when the protest style in question is about abortion.

where do i say it has nothing to do with abortion?? ... all i have ever said that is based on the fact he went and killed the gravel pit guy and was gonna go kill a 3rd ... it isn't necessarily the case he was killed because he was an anti-abortionist ...

i already said you can draw your own conclusions but apparently mine are not allowed or incaccurate because of your fake proof ... based on misrepresentation and selective quoting ...

Cosmo

Being Pro-Choice does not mean you are Pro-Abortion or Pro-Death... it means you are Pro-Choice.
And I agree with everyone who says Death by murder is a horrible crime, for whatever reason... because it goes against the laws of civil society. And the criminal must be brought to justice.
...
Also... since the Liberal Media is reportedly not following this case... I suggest that those of you whom see this as a Pro-Choice vs. Anti-Abortion battle, instead of a hothead psycho from a small town where everyone knows everyone else left his house with a gun to get himself some 'Street Justice', keep us Liberal Death Mongers up to date on this case as it moves throught our justice system.

brandon10

jlew24asu wrote:

polaris_x wrote:

firstly ... you said that we wouldn't care and that it would be "good riddance" - we've already disproven your myth on that

brandon10 wrote:

To be honest, I don't find it all that sad. Lots of people die everyday. And there are many people who die everyday that lead a more cival existence than this fellow.

I wouldn't actually use the term "good riddance". But really, there are thousands and thousands of people who die every day from murders and car accidents. So I'm supposed to get all sad about the creep who showed gross pictures to little childeren? I don't think so.

It's not cool for anyone to die like this.

Shouldn't God have looked out for him?

jlew24asu

brandon10 wrote:

jlew24asu wrote:

polaris_x wrote:

firstly ... you said that we wouldn't care and that it would be "good riddance" - we've already disproven your myth on that

brandon10 wrote:

To be honest, I don't find it all that sad. Lots of people die everyday. And there are many people who die everyday that lead a more cival existence than this fellow.

I wouldn't actually use the term "good riddance". But really, there are thousands and thousands of people who die every day from murders and car accidents. So I'm supposed to get all sad about the creep who showed gross pictures to little childeren? I don't think so.

but you'll cry like little girl when a Dr who aborts nearly full term babies are murdered?

brandon10 wrote:

It's not cool for anyone to die like this.

nice backtrack. too bad you've fully exposed your disgusting self.

brandon10

[

nice backtrack. too bad you've fully exposed your disgusting self.

I think you may be a few fries short of a happy meal.

It's not backtracking. It was in the same post where I said I didn't give a rats ass about the creep. I was just stating that I don't think anyone should die like that. If you would start to comprehend what people are saying to you, then things might get easier for you.

jlew24asu

brandon10 wrote:

[

nice backtrack. too bad you've fully exposed your disgusting self.

I think you may be a few fries short of a happy meal.

It's not backtracking. It was in the same post where I said I didn't give a rats ass about the creep. I was just stating that I don't think anyone should die like that. If you would start to comprehend what people are saying to you, then things might get easier for you.

whatever you say buddy. your hate and bias is rather sickening.

brandon10

jlew24asu wrote:

brandon10 wrote:

[

nice backtrack. too bad you've fully exposed your disgusting self.

I think you may be a few fries short of a happy meal.

It's not backtracking. It was in the same post where I said I didn't give a rats ass about the creep. I was just stating that I don't think anyone should die like that. If you would start to comprehend what people are saying to you, then things might get easier for you.

whatever you say buddy. your hate and bias is rather sickening.

Ha.....you sure told me.

God bless you

gimmesometruth27

it sucks the guy died. but when you politicize things on school property someone is bound to get pissed. look at how uptight everyone got when obama wanted to talk to the kids and tell them to stay in school, yet it was ok for them to see dead fetus pictures at school all the time? if it was a private school i would have had no problem with it, but there is no place for that in a publicly funded school. it is a smaller town so i am sure that those two may have known each other or had a prior confrontation at one time. i have a hard time believeing that of all people to kill he happened to choose this guy.

_

1. I think if this guy's death went unmentioned and undiscussed it would primarily because we all agree that it was a tragedy, so there's not much controversy except that which you're trying to stir up.

2. I can't help but notice that you don't give equal weight to the other guy's murder. Should we then accuse you of not caring or of being happy that that guy died? Of course not. Likewise, just because some of us haven't given equal time to the discussion of this guy's death as to Dr. Tiller's, it doesn't mean we don't care about him or are happy he died.

3. I don't believe it's clear that just because he didn't like the guy holding up a picture of an aborted fetus in front of a school it means that he killed the guy because of some pro-choice ideology, as was clear in in the case of Dr.Tiller's murder. He could very well support the message, but just not the method of delivery. He could have snapped because it reminded him of a child he lost to abortion, or fetal demise, or whatever. We really don't know.

4. Given that 2/3 of the people he intended to kill had nothing to do with the pro-choice movement, I think the guy's actions were more about his own personal problems than an attempt to make a statement on behalf of the pro-choice movement. The guy who killed Tiller was an active member of the "pro-life" movement, had a history of anti-abortion crime, and was very clear that he killed Dr. Tiller on behalf of that cause.

5. Yes, it's a tragedy that this guy died, as it is equally tragic when anyone dies. But with regard to politics and access to healthcare and women's rights, this guy's death simply doesn't have the same effect as Dr. Tiller's. Thousands of women will now go without adequate healthcare because of the death of Dr. Tiller - and this was the purpose of is murder. The nation lost 50% of our late-term abortion providers. Doctors across the contry are now more afraid to practice. Dr. Tiller was, in a sense, the leader of the pro-choice movement. I'm happy for this guy to have been able to do his part to support his cause, but comparing his death to Dr. Tiller's is like comparing the death of one of the millions of civil rights protesters to the death of Dr. King.

cincybearcat

I'll never get over how you use the term women's rights.

decides2dream

scb wrote:

1. I think if this guy's death went unmentioned and undiscussed it would primarily because we all agree that it was a tragedy, so there's not much controversy except that which you're trying to stir up.

2. I can't help but notice that you don't give equal weight to the other guy's murder. Should we then accuse you of not caring or of being happy that that guy died? Of course not. Likewise, just because some of us haven't given equal time to the discussion of this guy's death as to Dr. Tiller's, it doesn't mean we don't care about him or are happy he died.

3. I don't believe it's clear that just because he didn't like the guy holding up a picture of an aborted fetus in front of a school it means that he killed the guy because of some pro-choice ideology, as was clear in in the case of Dr.Tiller's murder. He could very well support the message, but just not the method of delivery. He could have snapped because it reminded him of a child he lost to abortion, or fetal demise, or whatever. We really don't know.

4. Given that 2/3 of the people he intended to kill had nothing to do with the pro-choice movement, I think the guy's actions were more about his own personal problems than an attempt to make a statement on behalf of the pro-choice movement. The guy who killed Tiller was an active member of the "pro-life" movement, had a history of anti-abortion crime, and was very clear that he killed Dr. Tiller on behalf of that cause.

5. Yes, it's a tragedy that this guy died, as it is equally tragic when anyone dies. But with regard to politics and access to healthcare and women's rights, this guy's death simply doesn't have the same effect as Dr. Tiller's. Thousands of women will now go without adequate healthcare because of the death of Dr. Tiller - and this was the purpose of is murder. The nation lost 50% of our late-term abortion providers. Doctors across the contry are now more afraid to practice. Dr. Tiller was, in a sense, the leader of the pro-choice movement. I'm happy for this guy to have been able to do his part to support his cause, but comparing his death to Dr. Tiller's is like comparing the death of one of the millions of civil rights protesters to the death of Dr. King.

just read the OP and skimmed the last page......have to say, as ever scb, you summed it up nicely. it is absolutely tragic when anyone dies, most especially murdered, no matter their beliefs. i do not need to possess the same belief system as another to feel that their loss of life is tragic and wrong.