It is going to jury soon. http://www.startribune.com/stories/467/5616664.html another article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/16/AR2005091600342.html Reading the articles a few things stand out. 1. Vangs lack of remorse even though admitting he killed people who didnt deserve to die. 2. Some who he killed he claims deserved it for their "disrespect". 3. Mothers statement of "All of this could have been prevented if we could only learn to respect one another." I do not see how Vang will be found not guilty on any count. That aside. It seems the disrespect falls on Vang rather than the owners of the property. He killed six people over words, including shooting one in the back as they fled. He reloaded his weapon so he could shoot more. Hmong are getting a bad reputation in this region for their lack of hunting ethics and lack of respect for other persons property. Its so bad that the local papers will not publish the names of hmongs when they are charged with hunting/fishing violations, due to pressure from the Asian community leaders screaming racism. Of course, then everyone assumes "oh another hmong did it" when a violation is reported without a name given. A friend of mine cut down an apple tree (St Paul Minnesota) in her yard due to the fact she couldnt keep the hmongs from taking the apples while she was away at work. The first year she lived there, she gave them permission to take some and they cleaned the tree out. The second year she said "not yet, I want to get mine first" and they took the apples anyways before she got hers. The third year, she said "no you cant", and they cleaned the tree out when she wasnt home. So she cut the tree down. And then she was insulted by the kids (called bitch, and undecipherable hmong words) and they threatened to call the cops for her cutting down the tree. If they did call the cops, it wouldnt matter because the tree was clearly on her property. What a waste of police time if they did. How does a community/state deal with these issues when it seems all that is being done is finger pointing or claims of "racism" in regards to responsiblity when anyone tries to do anything to resolve the issue?
I definately can understand the guys fear because of being outnumbured.....but this was definately uncalled for. He should have just walked away and ignored the behavior of the racist pigs. But who knows what was going thru his mind at the time. He should get life in prison simply because he was not strong enough to walk away. Step by step, case by case....fairness.
And while that's going on, the residents should have to put up with all of the crime without doing anything to try to stop it? ..just take it slow and easy, watching all of the crime happening right in front of them, case by case?? Baron Max
If he had shot the one who had shot at him first, then maybe he could claim self defence. But to shoot everyone else as well? And all but one of them unarmed? And four of them were shot in the back? How could he or his lawyers think that he could win with self defence for that? He can claim racial prejudice all he likes. It still does not take away from the fact that he shot and killed unarmed people, many of them in the back. He was an armed trespasser. While yes he was racially abused and he may have feared for his life because of those racial slurs, he still should not have gone to the point of shooting them. So he shot at them because they used racial slurs against him? And he claimed that to be in self defence? As I said above, he might have gotten away with the self defence argument for shooting the person who shot at him, however two survivors of this tragic incident claimed that: I guess that kind of blows his self defence argument out of the water. And even he claimed he started shooting because of the racial slurs. To kill six people, all but one unarmed, because of racial slurs? As Reighn said, he should have taken a step back and walked away... especially in light that he was trespassing on their land with a weapon. But he did not and that makes him a murderer. I found this to be interesting:
] I heard on some conservative radio that he was a moslem terrorist? is that true? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
OK, we are in agreement that Vang was not justified in murdering these people. Here you make a statement about the people who owned the property as "racist pigs". Vang claims terms such as chink and gook were used. I did see the defense attorney using the term "mud duck" on tv. Mud duck is a common reference to people from Minnesota. So is flat lander. Stupid F*ing Mudducks... I heard that term used by the locals when describing some incident involving tourists getting in trouble (such as falling off cliffs, or getting in fights in bars). But that term is not racist. This was printed in another article, from one of the survivors "Crotteau may have called Vang a 'Hmong asshole'." Asshole is a term used to describe people generally, not a racist term. Calling a Hmong a "Hmong asshole" is not a racist statement in itself (and considering the outcome, probably an understatement of Vangs character). Crotteau was on his own property. Not in a work environment, not on the job, nor in any of the environments covered under anti-discrimination laws. As I understand it, Crotteau did not break any laws concerning discrimination making this statement to Vang. Could it be possible that Vang embellished the incident of "racism" to try to justify his actions? OK, now where is this from the Hmong community themselves? http://www.startribune.com/stories/462/5619784.html Again and again, people in the Hmong community speak out in defense of this mans actions. And every article printed with each Hmong person defending this mans actions is read by both the white and Hmong community. Why cant the Hmong community stand up as a group and denounce this mans actions completely. There is no excuse for killing 6 people (attempted 8) because one man allegedly says "gook" (on his own property). Why cant they admit there is a problem of respect for hunting / fishing rules and regulations including trespassing, in portions of the Hmong community that need to be addressed firmly. If Vang had respected the property lines (the land was clearly marked private by newspaper accounts quoting the sheriffs office) this tragedy would have been avoided.
I have seen no information reported indicating that he is muslim. The family has made references to God in the media, but no particular religion was mentioned as far as I have seen.
If he was not committing some sort of action like taking hostages, or bombing, or murdering people in order to influence the policies of a government then he wasn't a terrorist, he was just a murder. I don't know, did he write a manifesto sometime between trespassing on these people's land and killing them?
Sawyer County Chief Deputy Tim Zeigle described the murder scene by saying: "Vang was chasing after them and killing them. He hunted them down." Vang hunted these people down one by one, and shot some of them multiple times. Joey Crotteau was shot in the back and side four times by Vang. The vicious Vang showed absolutely no emotion as the verdicts were read. He did however, make a statement in which he claimed one of the hunters used profanity and racial slurs. Apparently, that was all the excuse this monster needed to open fire on a group of white people. Though Vang's soul-less defense attorney Steven Kohn was successful in selecting a jury from liberal Dane County, instead of the location where the murders took place--even the liberal jury could not abide one of the most vicious crimes in U.S. history. Make no mistake, had a white man been chasing down a group of unarmed Asians, picking them off one by one--the news coverage would trump that of the Natalee Holloway case. The FBI would also consider the massacre to be a 'hate crime.' However, it is never considered to be hateful nor racist when the murder victims are white. Contact your Congressman and Senators and urge them to pursue federal charges against Vang. The civilized amongst us must not only demand an end to this racist double standard, but never forget the 'Wisconsin Six' who were murdered by the cowardly racist Vang! http://www.americandaily.com/article/9313
Yeah, I know whatcha mean. I, too, would have much preferred for the guy to bludgeon him to death with a hammer. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! - N
Well, then we'd ban hammers! Just curious ....how many crimes are committed in the USA with knives versus guns? Baron Max
More Americans were killed by guns than by war in the 20th Century. More Americans were killed with guns in the 18-year period between 1979 and 1997 (651,697), than were killed in battle in all wars since 1775 (650,858). And while a sharp drop in gun homicides has contributed to a decline in overall gun deaths since 1993, the 90's will likely exceed the death toll of the 1980s (327,173) and end up being the deadliest decade of the century. By the end of the 1990s, an estimated 350,000 Americans will have been killed in non-military-related firearm incidents during the decade. Handgun Control 12/30/99 (Press release from CDC data) Every day 79 people are killed by firearms in America. In 1999 a total of 28,874 persons died from firearm injuries in the United States, down nearly 6 percent from the 30,625 deaths in 1998. couldnt find much about knives.
come on!its not even top 20 worthy.i guess the reason that it isnt called a hate crime if its against white people is because people dont need anymore encouragement to be racist.
Thanks, Kenworth, ....I'm so very handy with google (other than getting lock in porno sites!!). But just for some proper perspective ....how many people were killed in car accidents and accidents around the home in the same periods? Hey, and how many people were killed in "recreational" activities? Without some perspective, statistics can be misleading. Baron Max
In 1999 10,117 homicides were committed with guns according to this site: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/tables/weaponstab.htm I would have to assume then, the numbers you posted include suicide, accidental and murder in the statistics.
A standard responce from the fatuous gun nut. Have you ever tried to kill multiple people with something like a claw hammer? You have to get right up to them, you have to be able to manage the ones you are not hitting while you consentrait on killing one and then move on to the next. Its logisticaly impossible to go on the kind of killing spree like this man did with a gun if all you have is a hammer. How many angry rednecks do you really think you could beat to death with a blunt object VS with a projectile weapon?
