Exceptional video log of a tension-filled city council meeting touching on gun ownership

[Plot Device]

I have seen a lot of real life city council meeting clips on YouTube over the past five years. And most of the time we witness such a meeting via only one camera, and then the true action (if actual "action" such as full on fistacuffs ever happens) gets lost due to a bad camera, poor focus, or a fixed camera incapable of pivoting to the sweet spot of good line-of-sight capture. Those other YouTube videos seem to represent a good AUDIO log of the meeting, but almost always fail to give us a good VIDEO log of what happened.

However, this particular city council chamber found in Washington City, Washington, (there was also mention of Oak Harbor, Wasington) seems to be equipped with no less than five cameras. And what's more is that it also seems there is a professionally trained video director at a switching baord, switching quite strategically between all five cameras, zooming in an out, pivoting the cameras, and doing a real world class job of capturing everything going on in the chamber meeting. This video log is rivetting to watch. It took place on Tuesday, January 15, 2013.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKpLhNiC8zg


Here we see some very good tension in the meeting --the tensionn is subtle, but definitely there. We see the power tables get turned several times on the various players. The whole thing is easy to follow due to the excellent camera work. It almost felt like an episode of Law & Order when we see either a grand jury or an appeallate court proceding. (There's a movie script somewhere in here!)

[Don]

Yeah for the Mayor! I loved his apology for the hoplophobes, noting they were "the same council members who also tried to dictate whether you were able to wear a hat in council chambers." He might as well have come out and called them control freaks.

That council member is precisely the political class stereotype that L. Neil Smith was writing about in Why Did it Have to be ... Guns?

What his attitude -- toward your ownership and use of weapons -- conveys is his real attitude about you. And if he doesn't trust you, then why in the name of John Moses Browning should you trust him?

If he doesn't want you to have the means of defending your life, do you want him in a position to control it?

If there's ever a civil war, the mayor and those two city councilmen will be on opposite sides.

Thanks for posting. Nice to see some intelligence in action.

[leahzero]

Excellent video.

Mayor Scott Dudley: "I feel safer that you are here."

Re-elect this guy.

[LOG]

See, that's the kind of guy pro-gun advocates need.
As opposed to more Alex Jones or NRA people.

[Williebee]

"hoplophobes"?

Don, you have no more evidence of that than to claim that the councilman was a "cocklaphobe" (irrational fear of hats.)

But that was a well-timed injection of a perjorative.

There's been enough overheated and irrational conversations in most of the city council and county board meetings I've been to that I'd be perfectly fine if they were a gun free zone. Here in our little burg the county meetings are (they are in a courthouse) and the city meetings are not (and yet they are in a building in the middle of a city park, weird.)

A quick search shows this being spun as the councilman leaving after his motion to ban guns from council meetings was not passed. But, I'll have to go listen to it again, is that the motion he actually made, or was it to have that one guy check his gun with the police?

ETA: I take it back, he says "If we have someone..." it wasn't specific to the individual.

[Don]

Originally Posted by Williebee

"hoplophobes"?

Don, you have no more evidence of that than to claim that the councilman was a "cocklaphobe" (irrational fear of hats.)

But that was a well-timed injection of a perjorative.

Well, I was basing that opinion on the fact that the councilman walked out on the job he was elected by the taxpayers to perform because he discovered that someone was exercising their legal right to carry a concealed weapon.

I thought that was better than simply assuming he's an asshat who left the room in a snit because he didn't get his way.

Phobia or temper tantrum? Neither one looks good on an elected official.

[Windcutter]

That was kind of strange, actually.
Not the kind of thing that makes him look good or popular, so not a tactical move.
Why leave then?

[Don]

Originally Posted by LOG

See, that's the kind of guy pro-gun advocates need.
As opposed to more Alex Jones or NRA people.

For every Alex Jones or Wayne LaPierre out there, there are millions of sane, responsible gun owners, and any number of people capable of expressing their position eloquently. As with most other issues, however, the blowhards and loons are the ones that get the press, for some apparently unfathomable reason.

Piers Morgan had a choice of millions of gun owners or hundreds of gun advocates to debate when he chose to tackle gun control. Any guess why he and his producers picked tinfoil Alex from all those possibilities?

[Xelebes]

Originally Posted by Don

For every Alex Jones or Wayne LaPierre out there, there are millions of sane, responsible gun owners, and any number of people capable of expressing their position eloquently. As with most other issues, however, the blowhards and loons are the ones that get the press, for some apparently unfathomable reason.

Because they have a sufficient following. When they jumped the shark into loon territory, it was known. What ultimately needs to happen is the "responsible gun-owners" to band together and put forward necessary regulations. As it stands, these folks are the representatives of the responsible gun-owners.

Piers Morgan had a choice of millions of gun owners or hundreds of gun advocates to debate when he chose to tackle gun control. Any guess why he and his producers picked tinfoil Alex from all those possibilities?

Because it was Alex Jones on his radio show demanding that Piers be exported for saying such a response to the Newtown shooting. Piers found it amusing and invited him to debate. Alex Jones also happens to have quite the following, enabling that petition to get over a hundred thousand signatures on it.

[Williebee]

Originally Posted by Don

For every Alex Jones or Wayne LaPierre out there, there are millions of sane, responsible gun owners, and any number of people capable of expressing their position eloquently. As with most other issues, however, the blowhards and loons are the ones that get the press, for some apparently unfathomable reason.

And yet one of those "blowhards" is the CEO of the NRA. How did that happen? He was named such by the NRA's board of directors. IOW, the membership chose him to speak for them.

I thought that was better than simply assuming he's an asshat who left the room in a snit because he didn't get his way.

I think I'll go with asshat rather than assume someone has a mental problem. Add to that, the video indicates that particular councilman has a history of disagreement with that particular citizen. Could be equally possible that the councilman's problem is the idea that that one guy has a gun. We don't know if he has a legitimate point or not.

It was interesting to note how the size of the crowd was decimated with the councilman's departure. Might be they know something about the gunman that the mayor doesn't.

[clintl]

Originally Posted by Williebee

It was interesting to note how the size of the crowd was decimated with the councilman's departure. Might be they know something about the gunman that the mayor doesn't.

Yeah, I noticed the crowd seemed a lot smaller after the guy revealed he was carrying, too. You kind of wonder if there's a local nuance going on here that we outsiders aren't privy to.

[Plot Device]

Originally Posted by clintl

Yeah, I noticed the crowd seemed a lot smaller after the guy revealed he was carrying, too. You kind of wonder if there's a local nuance going on here that we outsiders aren't privy to.

I watched the vidoe 2 times in a row to check for that crowd-diminishemnt thing.

We saw a bird's eye view of THREE rows of folding chairs for citizen/spectators, all of them almost entirely full. And we saw our former-infantryman-turned-private-security-guard sitting in the fronnt row.

Then ...

We saw another bird's eye view of just ONE row of foplding chairs for citrizens/spectators. And again we saw the former sodlier sitting there.

What happened to the other two rows of folding chairs?? Not sure what was up with that.

Could it be he sat in a DIFFERENT set of chairs after his gun-toting confession at the microphone?? Such as ...... maybe we originally saw him (before the confessed to conceal carrying) sitting amid a triple row of chairs on the NORTH side of the room. But then after he had his second go at the microphone when he said "Yes, I be packin' heat," perhaps he then sat himself in a single row of chairs on the WEST side of the room.

I tried to scan the background behind the triple row to comapre it later to the background behind the single row, and I wasn't able to discern any differences.

Anyone here got an inkling??

[Williebee]

It was interesting that he didn't say he was carrying to protect himself, but to protect others. Wonder what the local cops think of him.

[Plot Device]

Originally Posted by Williebee

It was interesting that he didn't say he was carrying to protect himself, but to protect others. Wonder what the local cops think of him.

Local cops all over the State of Washington (and in all 50 states for that matter) are fully aware that there are citizens everywhere with CCW permits. They are also fully aware that a lot of private security guards have CCW's for their jobs, and are futher aware that a lot said private duty security guards continue to carry concealed even after hours, off duty, while wearing civilian clothing.

I think most cops don't give a rip about the folks who have gone through the safety training classes, and earned their CCW's, and thus know HOW too carry concealed. Instead, I think most cops are worried about the idiots who are carrying concealed WITHOUT such a permit, who most likely never took a gun safety course, and are clueless about the proper protocols of carrying concealed.


If your REAL question is: "I wonder if the cops know this dude on sight and I wonder what they think of him as a person in general," to that I can only say I don't know. Most cops I know have a general respect for anyone who served in the armed forces, unless they prove to be a total douchebag. And frankly, this citizen in the video didn't strike me as a douchebag.

[Celia Cyanide]

Originally Posted by Williebee

It was interesting that he didn't say he was carrying to protect himself, but to protect others. Wonder what the local cops think of him.

I had to wonder that, too. He seems sincere. However when someone I don't know claims they would defend me with their life, I tend to not believe them.

[muravyets]

Originally Posted by Celia Cyanide

I had to wonder that, too. He seems sincere. However when someone I don't know claims they would defend me with their life, I tend to not believe them.

I may believe them, but that would make me not want them around me long enough to test it. There's something kind of hinky about that sort of thing. I don't want someone with that mindset to be armed. That's just my personal reaction.

[Xelebes]

Originally Posted by muravyets

I may believe them, but that would make me not want them around me long enough to test it. There's something kind of hinky about that sort of thing. I don't want someone with that mindset to be armed. That's just my personal reaction.

There is something a bit possessive about it, as though they are jockeying for power. A person assuming power that people did not ask from him.

[clintl]

I agree somewhat. His notion that he's doing everyone else a favor by carrying does seem a bit twisted. The mayor agreeing with that notion, too.

[Plot Device]

Originally Posted by Celia Cyanide

I had to wonder that, too. He seems sincere. However when someone I don't know claims they would defend me with their life, I tend to not believe them.

Originally Posted by muravyets

I may believe them, but that would make me not want them around me long enough to test it. There's something kind of hinky about that sort of thing. I don't want someone with that mindset to be armed. That's just my personal reaction.

Originally Posted by Xelebes

There is something a bit possessive about it, as though they are jockeying for power. A person assuming power that people did not ask from him.

Originally Posted by clintl

I agree somewhat. His notion that he's doing everyone else a favor by carrying does seem a bit twisted. The mayor agreeing with that notion, too.

Dudes ... the guy was in the US Infantry, served in Afghanistan, and was wounded in the line of duty. What more do you want of him??

He is fully trained in how to handle a weapon, took an oath to defend the Constitution, was obviously in no less than one combat scenario where his life was likely in danger as well as the lives of his teammates, was probably more than willing at any given moment during his entire tour(s) of duty to defend his teammates with his very life, and now that he is back here in the States, he is using all of the above skills and characteristics in the execution of his civilian peace-time profession as a security professional. Thus his military-acquired willingness to defend those around him has not been (he says) diminished.

Would you rather that the kind of guys we send into battle be selfish assholes who couldn't be bothered to step up and protect their teammates? Would you rather than the hundreds of thousands of security professionals currently emplyed here in the USA --and who are conceal carrying most of the time-- likewise be selfish assholes with no real regard for the peple around them??

I really wish a former military serviceman or woman would chime in here. There is a need for someone who has walked a mile in those exact moccasins to speak up with their own opinion of this guy's claims of being willing to defend the lives of the people in that room.

[Zoombie]

As someone whose most life threatening situation has been cars refusing to slow down when I hold up a stop sign, I still hope that I'd be able to protect others if I'm ever put in that kind of situation.

But that really isn't something you can judge until you are in that situation...

[Plot Device]

Originally Posted by Zoombie

As someone whose most life threatening situation has been cars refusing to slow down when I hold up a stop sign, I still hope that I'd be able to protect others if I'm ever put in that kind of situation.

But that really isn't something you can judge until you are in that situation...

I'm pretty confident he has indeed been in that situation.

[Zoombie]

Oh, I know...but, not everyone can be in the armed forces, not everyone can or should be in that situation.

Thus, can everyone say they'd protect their fellows?

I mean, it's an admirable thing to aspire too, but I can see why (when most people say it) others might thing could get a bit nervous.

[Williebee]

Originally Posted by Plot Device

Dudes ... the guy was in the US Infantry, served in Afghanistan, and was wounded in the line of duty.

From where are we to know this to be true?

What more do you want of him??

He is fully trained in how to handle a weapon, took an oath to defend the Constitution, was obviously in no less than one combat scenario where his life was likely in danger as well as the lives of his teammates, was probably more than willing at any given moment during his entire tour(s) of duty to defend his teammates with his very life, and now that he is back here in the States, he is using all of the above skills and characteristics in the execution of his civilian peace-time profession as a security professional. Thus his military-acquired willingness to defend those around him has not been (he says) diminished.

(Same question applies.)

Would you rather that the kind of guys we send into battle be selfish assholes who couldn't be bothered to step up and protect their teammates? (Some of them are. Some are not. Service members are not one thing. We are not all that which was reflected at Abu Grhaib, either, for example.) Would you rather than the hundreds of thousands of security professionals currently emplyed here in the USA --and who are conceal carrying most of the time-- likewise be selfish assholes with no real regard for the peple around them??

I really wish a former military serviceman or woman would chime in here. There is a need for someone who has walked a mile in those exact moccasins to speak up with their own opinion of this guy's claims of being willing to defend the lives of the people in that room.

A former serviceman just did.

There is much that we don't know about this story. Enough that assumptions that either man is some kind of hero are just that, assumptions.

ETA: and btw, it could also be that both the councilman and the citizen are a couple of assholes that just don't like each other. Dunno. Not up for assuming that, either.

[clintl]

Originally Posted by Plot Device

Dudes ... the guy was in the US Infantry, served in Afghanistan, and was wounded in the line of duty. What more do you want of him??

That's all admirable, but he's a civilian now. I'd like him to act like one. Also, I'm not sure who he thinks he's protecting the good citizens of Oak Harbor from - according to this, there hasn't been a murder there since 2004.

http://www.city-data.com/crime/crime...ashington.html

[Ambrosia]

Originally Posted by Williebee

...

It was interesting to note how the size of the crowd was decimated with the councilman's departure. Might be they know something about the gunman that the mayor doesn't.

And it might be they were reacting with fear because a couple of the council members hurried out of the chambers. Especially with all the coverage of mass shootings of late. They obviously didn't stay around to hear what the Mayor said, just ran when they saw the council members exiting, scene left.

People are skittish these days. Don't blame them. I would have stayed, myself. Perhaps with an eye to where the most defensible position was in case bad things went down. But the guy carrying didn't have the look of a crazy about him. There was nothing in his speech or mannerisms that would lead me to believe he was going to pull out his gun and start blowing people away. I would have followed my gut instinct that the guy was on the level and stayed put.