Malinowski murder by ATF

[LouderVol]

He didn't start it, the ATF did.

not when he was selling guns to known criminals? guns that were then used in multiple violent crimes. I guess that just doesn't exist in your timeline.

its some weird world of cause and effect you guys live in. you act like the ATF just pulled a random street address out of a hat and chose to go take his life.

 

[hog88]

There is a good chance something deeper lead up to the search along with this guy getting shot.

The guy was a good candidate to run the new ATF FFL rules through the court system, he had to go.

 

[PEPPERJAX]

The guy was a good candidate to run the new ATF FFL rules through the court system, he had to go.

No body cams
Agents covered the door camera
Called off the search a week prior when he wasn't home

 

[KptVFL]

never said it did. stop trying to put words in my mouth.

Malinowski's own actions, several of them in the wrong, lead to the result of him being dead. he started it, and it ended with him dead.

Not following the logic of "he started it".

Isn't like he went down to the ATF office and started shooting.

Just seems logical that the situation could have been avoided.

 

[hog88]

No body cams
Agents covered the door camera
Called off the search a week prior when he wasn't home

It was a kill mission. The agency did not want to be challenged.

 

[BreatheUT]

Briana Taylor???

I can't remember. Was there a boyfriend she was involved with who was problematic or is that a different case?

 

[LouderVol]

Not following the logic of "he started it".

Isn't like he went down to the ATF office and started shooting.

Just seems logical that the situation could have been avoided.

I have been saying that the whole time. Malinowski's actions were also part of that situation that could have been avoided. but apparently its taboo in here to bring up that the guy was under investigation for aiding violent criminals, and that he shot first.

its also not like the ATF just drew a random name out of a hat. They had A reason to be there, and a judge signed off on it. Malinowski's likely illegal actions of selling multiple guns to multiple criminals used in multiple violent crimes, are what started this. Now does that reason mean he should have been shot? no. which is why I called it questionable at the start, but everyone wants to ignore that so they can make this guy into some George Floyd level martyr who didn't do nuffin.

 

[Godfatha]

never said it did. stop trying to put words in my mouth.

Malinowski's own actions, several of them in the wrong, lead to the result of him being dead. he started it, and it ended with him dead.

Shirley you can't be serious. The unannounced raid on the middle of the night started it.

 

[LouderVol]

Shirley you can't be serious. The unannounced raid on the middle of the night started it.

his likely illegal actions started it. and its likely only because it hasn't been proven in a court of law.

the unannounced raid in the middle of the night, came from a warrant.
the warrant came from a judge.
the judge signed the warrant because the ATF had proof of him making multiple illegal gun sales.
The ATF had proof of him making multiple illegal gun sales after an investigation into how his recovered guns were ending up being used in multiple violent crimes.
his guns were being used in multiple violent crimes because he was directly selling to known criminals.
it all started with him.

I am serious and don't call me Shirley. Its called following a chain of events. no one has yet to even put forth an argument about why any event before the shooting should be ignored.

 

[KptVFL]

I have been saying that the whole time. Malinowski's actions were also part of that situation that could have been avoided. but apparently its taboo in here to bring up that the guy was under investigation for aiding violent criminals, and that he shot first.

its also not like the ATF just drew a random name out of a hat. They had A reason to be there, and a judge signed off on it. Malinowski's likely illegal actions of selling multiple guns to multiple criminals used in multiple violent crimes, are what started this. Now does that reason mean he should have been shot? no. which is why I called it questionable at the start, but everyone wants to ignore that so they can make this guy into some George Floyd level martyr who didn't do nuffin.

No martyr making from me! Of course his previous actions contributed to there being a warrant.

I was commenting on nothing more than how the warrant was served. If you bust into a house in the middle of the night, unannounced, it is reasonable to get shot at. The ATF is well aware of this. Couple that with body cams being turned off and it's reasonable to think that something smells off about it.

 

[McDad]

his likely illegal actions started it. and its likely only because it hasn't been proven in a court of law.

the unannounced raid in the middle of the night, came from a warrant.
the warrant came from a judge.
the judge signed the warrant because the ATF had proof of him making multiple illegal gun sales.
The ATF had proof of him making multiple illegal gun sales after an investigation into how his recovered guns were ending up being used in multiple violent crimes.
his guns were being used in multiple violent crimes because he was directly selling to known criminals.
it all started with him.

I am serious and don't call me Shirley. Its called following a chain of events. no one has yet to even put forth an argument about why any event before the shooting should be ignored.

I agree a lot with what Kpt and others have shared.

This guy brought heat upon himself. He was breaking the law in a significant way. But given his access to weapons a no knock at night seems like incredibly bad judgement.
Can we not have a couple of guys stake him out and pull him over headed to the grocery store or something?

 

[GroverCleveland]

Briana Taylor???

If I recall that correctly, the police were completely wrong and should have been tried for murder. There were some consequences to the police and the city I believe in that case, although not much comfort to Brianna.

 

[McDad]

If I recall that correctly, the police were completely wrong and should have been tried for murder. There were some consequences to the police and the city I believe in that case, although not much comfort to Brianna.

Agreed.

 

[GroverCleveland]

his likely illegal actions started it. and its likely only because it hasn't been proven in a court of law.

the unannounced raid in the middle of the night, came from a warrant.
the warrant came from a judge.
the judge signed the warrant because the ATF had proof of him making multiple illegal gun sales.
The ATF had proof of him making multiple illegal gun sales after an investigation into how his recovered guns were ending up being used in multiple violent crimes.
his guns were being used in multiple violent crimes because he was directly selling to known criminals.
it all started with him.

I am serious and don't call me Shirley. Its called following a chain of events. no one has yet to even put forth an argument about why any event before the shooting should be ignored.

Just a couple of points and to the lawyers on here, correct me if I'm wrong.

ATF was executing a search warrant, not an arrest warrant. Seems that implies they did not have "proof" to arrest him, but only evidence to support a search warrant. Two different things.

While I am a big proponent of the adage if you sleep with dogs, you'll wake up with fleas and apparently he engaged in, at the least, suspicious behavior and at worst felonious crimes, the government shouldn't execute people based on suspicions. As someone else said, he was a well-known and respected person. This could have been done in an entirely different manner and it takes little, I believe, to see that.

 

[ButchPlz]

Just a couple of points and to the lawyers on here, correct me if I'm wrong.

ATF was executing a search warrant, not an arrest warrant. Seems that implies they did not have "proof" to arrest him, but only evidence to support a search warrant. Two different things.

While I am a big proponent of the adage if you sleep with dogs, you'll wake up with fleas and apparently he engaged in, at the least, suspicious behavior and at worst felonious crimes, the government shouldn't execute people based on suspicions. As someone else said, he was a well-known and respected person. This could have been done in an entirely different manner and it takes little, I believe, to see that.

Nailed it. We are very specifically a country of innocent until proven guilty. Going in with a mission to execute someone (which is clearly demonstrated by the ATF's actions here) is some middle ages level ****.

 

[LouderVol]

Just a couple of points and to the lawyers on here, correct me if I'm wrong.

ATF was executing a search warrant, not an arrest warrant. Seems that implies they did not have "proof" to arrest him, but only evidence to support a search warrant. Two different things.

While I am a big proponent of the adage if you sleep with dogs, you'll wake up with fleas and apparently he engaged in, at the least, suspicious behavior and at worst felonious crimes, the government shouldn't execute people based on suspicions. As someone else said, he was a well-known and respected person. This could have been done in an entirely different manner and it takes little, I believe, to see that.

not arguing that, never had. people were trying to put those words in my mouth, but I didn't.

The issue with the execution argument is that Malinowski shot first, and hit an agent. no idea if it was that first shot, or if there was a gun battle. If the ATF had shot first, you would have a point, like with Briana Taylor (who didn't even have a gun).

any intent we think the ATF might have had goes away when they are shot at serving a legal warrant. Doesn't matter if it was an arrest or search, doesn't matter to the way it turned out that it was a no knock, even if we don't like them. By the letter of the law the ATF were in the right. we can argue about the letter or the spirit of the law, but as things currently are they were within the letter of the law. We as the living get to have that argument, to Malinowski its all a moot point.

 

[YankeeVol]

I have been saying that the whole time. Malinowski's actions were also part of that situation that could have been avoided. but apparently its taboo in here to bring up that the guy was under investigation for aiding violent criminals, and that he shot first.

its also not like the ATF just drew a random name out of a hat. They had A reason to be there, and a judge signed off on it. Malinowski's likely illegal actions of selling multiple guns to multiple criminals used in multiple violent crimes, are what started this. Now does that reason mean he should have been shot? no. which is why I called it questionable at the start, but everyone wants to ignore that so they can make this guy into some George Floyd level martyr who didn't do nuffin.

You're right, we should build a statue!!!

 

[GroverCleveland]

not arguing that, never had. people were trying to put those words in my mouth, but I didn't.

The issue with the execution argument is that Malinowski shot first, and hit an agent. no idea if it was that first shot, or if there was a gun battle. If the ATF had shot first, you would have a point, like with Briana Taylor (who didn't even have a gun).

any intent we think the ATF might have had goes away when they are shot at serving a legal warrant. Doesn't matter if it was an arrest or search, doesn't matter to the way it turned out that it was a no knock, even if we don't like them. By the letter of the law the ATF were in the right. we can argue about the letter or the spirit of the law, but as things currently are they were within the letter of the law. We as the living get to have that argument, to Malinowski its all a moot point.

They broke into his house in the middle of the night. How is he supposed to discern between a home burglary and the ATF? "Excuse me, do you have a warrant to be in my house in the dark?"

Don't really want to argue and my post was to point out that while you said they had "proof" of his illegal activities, it really seems they did not as they were not executing an arrest warrant.

 

[EasternVol]

defending your home doesn't give you carte blanche to do whatever you want to whoever you want.

the ATF probably shouldn't have been there, probably shouldn't have done the no-knock late at night, he probably shouldn't have shot. Its possible for there to be multiple wrongs by both sides. if his lawyer is having to say in court that his now dead client probably broke the law to cause the raid, there is a pretty good chance he did actually break the law to start the mess. both sides messed up and two people were shot for it.

I was taught one of the rules of gun safety was to know what I am shooting at. I misidentify a target I am liable for whatever consequences come my way. that doesn't go away in a case of potential self/home defense.

He knew what he was shooting at: intruders. There's valid fear for one's life when someone breaks in at night. He wasn't wrong to shoot.

 

[MercyPercy]

I'm not shedding tears over this guy but this is what happens with knock warrants. Especially no knock warrants in the middle of the night when family is also in the house. Unless they think someone is kidnapped and in danger in there then what reason is there to go about it how they did? It only invites potentially deadly conflict. We either have the right to defend ourselves in our own home or we don't.

 

[hog88]

I'm not shedding tears over this guy but this is what happens with knock warrants. Especially no knock warrants in the middle of the night when family is also in the house. Unless they think someone is kidnapped and in danger in there then what reason is there to go about it how they did? It only invites potentially deadly conflict. We either have the right to defend ourselves in our own home or we don't.

Well he might have flushed some guns down the toilet if they had waited to be let in.

 

[PEPPERJAX]

I'm not shedding tears over this guy but this is what happens with knock warrants. Especially no knock warrants in the middle of the night when family is also in the house. Unless they think someone is kidnapped and in danger in there then what reason is there to go about it how they did? It only invites potentially deadly conflict. We either have the right to defend ourselves in our own home or we don't.

George Floyd type of statue should be on the table.

 

[LouderVol]

They broke into his house in the middle of the night. How is he supposed to discern between a home burglary and the ATF? "Excuse me, do you have a warrant to be in my house in the dark?"

Don't really want to argue and my post was to point out that while you said they had "proof" of his illegal activities, it really seems they did not as they were not executing an arrest warrant.

they had undercover ATF agents make straw purchases before they got the warrant. seems pretty "proofy" too me.

 

[GroverCleveland]

they had undercover ATF agents make straw purchases before they got the warrant. seems pretty "proofy" too me.

Then why were they executing a search warrant? Sounds pretty "I dunno just yet" to me.

 

[hog88]

they had undercover ATF agents make straw purchases before they got the warrant. seems pretty "proofy" too me.

No, that is potential evidence and far from proof.

Again, this was a kill mission to eliminate a challenge to ATF authority.