ditto
 

Ditto most of that. The parcel in question is still in the family, and yes there have been family disputes over it's sale as it was intended to always be in the family. The volatility of those disputes has always originated on the other side, not from Ward and Ginny.

I've known Ward, Ginny and their kids for almost as long as MarkinNH has, and they are wonderful people. I would not hesitate for a moment to let my children hang out up there.

Most handguns are expensive, high quality design, high quality steel, precision made mechanisms that are capable of repeatedly firing hundreds and even thousands of rounds, and get treated accordingly by their owners. Therefore, it is highly unlikely that the butt of a handgun handle would ever get used as a hammer, or that the barrel would get used as a prybar. Basically, a handgun gets used for its' one and only intended purpose and that is to fire a bullet. And yes, it is much more likely "to have a gun and not need one, than to need one and not have one" which strongly alludes to having a handgun for self defense without ever firing a round, which is still based on the gun's single purpose which is to fire a round.

A knife is indeed a very different type of a weapon, because by its' design a knife can be used for a number of non-weapon uses such as slicing an apple, scraping an old state inspection sticker off a windshield, or opening up the top on a can of tuna fish if you had no can opener.

Here's a simple question for you? If you needed to remove a state inspection sticker from a windshield would you ever use your Colt 45 as a scraper tool? Sure, it is probably possible to find a corner edge on a handgun to work as a scraper but would you ever honestly be doing that?
.................

Growing up in Massachusetts, I learned to differentiate between the concept of self-protection when inside one's dwelling, ie house, apartment, condo, etc, and self-protection when on one's land. It is my view that the justice system in both Massachusetts and New Hampshire take a dim view on showing a hand gun when out on one's land, but do indeed take a much less negative view on showing or pointing a handgun when inside one's dwelling as a defensive action.

As I see by reading through all these posts it does not appear that this concept of differentiating the use of a handgun when inside your house as opposed to outside on the land has been discussed. That was always a primary issue in Massachusetts to be considered when thinking about the legal system and the appropriate law and how it thought along the issue of self-defense for inside and for outside. In Massachusetts, I'm pretty sure it makes a big difference.

..................

"You watch zombie movies, do you?" ... Argie's Wife

Yes, I'm a long time, big fan of zombie movies! And back in 1974 I got to play the lead role in a little seen movie: "The Cockroach that Ate Cincinnati." Thanks for asking.......such a memory! .. :rolleye2:

:offtopic:
The song The Cockroach That Ate Cincinnati was released in 1974
........

The movie The Cockroach That Ate Cincinnati was released in 1996
95 min - Comedy | Sci-Fi

Storyline
The Cockroach That Ate Cincinnati is about rock & roll, hero worship, hallucinations, drugs, madness, myth, rebellion and the search for individual integrity in a world on the brink of cultural and physical self-destruction. Written by Michael McNamara

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0115919/

*** sigh ***

Poor Ward Bird is not the only one who got a crazy sentence. Did you hear about the 27 year old guy in NJ (I think it was) who had 2 legal guns in his car and is spending 7 years in prison. How do these judges come up with these sentences. Yet the Supreme Court just ruled that an illegal who used his own name but another's ss number to get a job didn't do anything wrong. Could it be it is politically incorrect to blame an illegal for anything??? Give me a break. (Not to go off topic but just to show how unfair things are sometimes.)

I am not saying he should have received 3 years
 

I guess I like many of you I only know the story about what happened from other people who claim to know what happened. The version I heard was the Bird was recovering from hernia surgery and not something more serious. I am told he is a large man and hernia surgery or not I very, very much doubt that this woman posed any type of threat to Bird. Finally, I have no idea what type of gun he had but many guns do not have a safety, regardless I do not find it credible that he removed the gun to check the safety.
I am not a believer in mandatory sentencing however Bird flat out was wrong to remove his gun with the implied threat of deadly force when there was no reason whatsoever for him to believe his life was in and danger.
So, before you all bash me I am not saying he should have received 3 years in prison but on the other hand does anyone want people “waving” a gun just because someone ignoramus trespassed on your property?

When people have an injury and have the pain of healing and recovery it can easily alter their usual good judgement as to how they react to other people. Basically, sometimes people just get cranky and do something dopey.

All things considered, based on his life history, a much more just sentence would be to let Ward go free. No shots fired, no harm done, no big deal, everybody has a temper and sometimes their temper may show its' bad side especially when recovering from a medical operation.

It is incredibly unfair that Ward is stuck away in a prison cell for what may or may not have happened considering there is no personal injuries here.......no bruises, no blood, no marks, no scrapes, NO NOTHING!

And, let's not forget the big impact of the huge legal expense for Ward to get to this place legally. Hiring a defense attorney is very expensive, with all payments up-front, and having this whole event drag out from 2006 must be very difficult.

The whole Carrol County legal process here is a BIG STINKER!

Had I been sitting on that jury, and I usually like to disagree with people, I would have held out as one vs eleven, and not been swayed just to get the trial over and done with. It just takes one out of eleven to get a 'no decision' aka a 'hung jury' which ends the trial with no finding of guilt and may lead to a second new trial.

The surgery he was recovering from was for a Ruptured Abdominal Aorta !
There is No proof that he "pulled the gun out" to imply a threat. Only the womans say so, that he waved it in her face.
You obviously no Very Little about firearms ! Short of revolvers, Most All modern firearms have safety's. I find it quite credible that he removed the gun from the holster to check the safety as he reentered his house. It would have been a conscious act of a responsible gun owner. I own and actively carry and I frequently check the status of my weapons safety.
There is also No proof that he "waved a gun" again, only this womans say so. His word against hers.
Read the letters on this website from people who know Ward Bird, http://freewardbird.org/
there is even one letter that will give you some history of what kind of person this Christine Harris really is and there is also the recent post from "sa meredith" who has personal knowledge of this woman.
Do some research and reading up on this woman and decide for yourself if you think she was really a credible person who was being honest and truthful with her testimony or is it possible she would have said anything to cover her a$$ and make everybody believe she was a poor innocent victim.

Fire a bullet is an acceptable answer. At least you didn't say kill. However, I have many guns that not a single bullet has been fired from the muzzle and I don't intend to do so ever. They are collector issue guns. They will appreciate in value much more if they are not used for what you call, their one and only purpose. So, these firearms are non-weapons, imo.

Sorry for getting off topic. I believe Ward Bird was wrongly convicted and pray for his release.

Perfect Summation
 

I don't know how to sum it up any better than this!

Lesson Learned
 

I will add one further comment- never, ever make a statement to the Police without legal counsel.

NEVER!!

Yes, some how I missed that post and I highly agree with you and DickR. Thank you for quoting him.
Several times I have told myself to just stay away from this thread, that I have said all I can and I am doing nothing more then arguing and repeating myself. Next thing I know, I am here running my mouth and posting again. :)

couple thoughts
 

Couple of final thoughts for me...(in case you missed it, check out the link in post 156)
I'm curious, after reading about Bird's day in court, why the Harris woman's previous indiscretions with the law, and her history of mental instability, were not allowed to be entered. They are indeed so relevant. Here is a woman, who I know to very abrasive and confrontational, who has refused, in the past, to comply with an officer of the law, that had a search warrant in hand.
That smacked a tow truck driver trying to remove her two illegal cars from her trailor.
Who thought living in a trailor with 50 dogs was an "OK" thing.
Who has a history of acting, let's say..."a little off".
Bird probably realized pretty quickly her elevator didn't go all the way up, and wondered what her deal was.
Further more...and this is compete speculation...I seriously question her ability to enter into any finacial agreement to buy property.
So..adding everything together...perhaps she went there with some sort of agenda. Seems like simply math in the court of common sense.

It's not allowed sa meredith.

Don't talk to police
 

Excellent advice VB. Take the time to view the attached if you want to know why.

Part 1:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc

Part 2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08fZQWjDVKE

Go to the laconia citz. for today's letters to the editor.

Letter from Gorden Blise re. Ward Bird.

He has had dealings with Chirstin (the combat-en) Harris

Here it is for the less inclined:

Editor, The Citizen:

I have been following the recent events concerning the terrible travesty of justice concerning Moulntonborough resident Ward Bird. While I do not know Mr. Bird and have never met him, I feel I must speak out on his behalf.

From what I have read Mr. Bird has always been an outstanding citizen of our Lakes Region Community, a hard working man, who takes care of his family, pays his taxes, a man who can be trusted and always tries to do the right thing. He is now sitting in jail for exercising his constitutional right to protect his home and property against an intruder.

As it so happens I know the person who was the cause of this entire injustice. A few weeks before the incident on Mr. Bird's property I met this woman as part of a potential business deal and tried to work with her to meet the goals she was trying to attain. I can tell you for a fact that I quickly found out she was delusional, who was not thinking or acting in any way rational. She became angry and made accusations that were unfounded and absurd and I quickly broke off all dealings with her. After talking with other colleagues in my field I learned that others have had dealings with her before she came to me. They coined her with the nickname "the crazy lady". This incident I had with her occurred just a few weeks before her encounter with Mr. Bird.

As I understand things this woman has since been incarcerated for an animal cruelty conviction. I sincerely hope she is receiving the help she needs for mental health issues as I know she was clearly in need of that kind of assistance.

Also I believe none of these facts about her could be brought out at Mr. Bird's trial and she was portrayed as a poor innocent lady who was lost and had simply wandered onto his property by mistake. I do not believe that is true given what I know about this woman.

We all know that Amendment Two of the Bill of Rights in our Constitution states: "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." But we also know that we are a nation of laws, and to allow everyone to brandish weapons against our fellow citizens at a whim would not be logical. So the states pass laws that regulate how citizens can use weapons under various circumstances. I understand that this is necessary otherwise chaos would reign and we would all be walking around armed all the time feeling we need this protection to defend ourselves. But clearly a man has a right to protect his home, family, and property, against an intruder whose motives are unclear. This is part of the core values of our American way of life.

I am not a lawyer, and I do not know all the specific details of the encounter Mr. Bird had with this woman, but from everything I have read, and what I know, I believe that Mr. Bird was unfairly convicted and incarcerated. After all, while a firearm was shown it was never fired and nobody was hurt in any way.

If a crime was committed, does this punishment fit? I think not.

I am calling on Governor Lynch to look into this matter immediately, and to free Mr. Bird, overturn his conviction, clear his record and bring him home to his family for the Christmas Holliday. Also to look into the laws that led to this man's unjust incarceration and rewrite them to allow the citizens to protect that which is ours, and those that we love.

I call on all the citizens of this great state to call their representatives and demand they put pressure on Governor Lynch to do the right thing. I feel so strongly about this that if he does not move to free Mr. Bird the citizens of this state ought to move for immediate impeachment. We must send a message to our elected officials that we the citizens have right to protect our families, and property and nothing less will be acceptable. LIVE FREE OR DIE.

Gordon Blais

Meredith

Gordon Blais couldn't have stated it any better!! He pretty much summed it all up.

Dan

I'm sorry but I just don't get it.....Why would a realtor who is affiliated with a well respected real-estate agency such as Maxfield Real Estate, Inc. make such slanderous remarks about one of his former clients. Also why would he make statements about what his colleagues think about Harris.

I don't know anything about the Code of Ethics for realtors, but there must be something written about client confidentiality.

I think if I owned Maxfield Real Estate, Inc., Mr. Bais would have some explaining to do.

Sam,

He never identifies himself as a Realtor nor which company he is affiliated with. We don't even know if it is RE deal. He actually goes out of his way to call it a business deal and not a RE deal.

Her whackiness is a matter of public record, so no slander there.

My thought exactly....

He is not listed on Maxfield's site as an agent either. My place has been for sale and the contract just ended. I like honest people that stand up for what they think is right. If he was with Maxfield, I was going to give him my listing.

R2B

Sam,

Thanks!

I'll contact him. I did not see him on their main site.

R2B

You are welcome and good luck. :)

Gawd
 

Does anyone own a Glock? Great gun....no safety.

Where any of you who are so adamant about this at the trial? Better yet where you there? I was not.

I hate to agree with anything FLL has to say but I too would not have convicted Bird.

Sometime about two months ago, the LaDaSun had a photograph and article of the then candidate Jeannie Forester either holding or taking aim or something with her pink colored Glock pistol, and she went on to win the race and become State Senator (elect) Jeannie Forester for the district that includes Meredith and Center Harbor.

http://www.alpharubicon.com/leo/glockpistols.htm 4th paragraph down.

"As for the rumors of a lack of safety, they were based on the fact that Glock handguns were one of, if not the first, semi-automatic handguns designed with no external safety lever. However, there are more safeties on a Glock handgun than there are on any revolver. The Glock handguns all have three safety mechanisms: 1) the trigger safety, 2) the firing pin safety, and c) the drop safety. The only way a Glock handgun will fire is for the trigger to be pulled fully to the rear. The Glock is neither a technically true Single Action, nor a Double Action. Glock calls its action the "Safe Action", which is close to a Double Action. The rumors of a lack of safety also stem from the integration of polymer into the receivers."

The following comes directly from Glocks website !

TRIGGER SYSTEM
The “Safe Action” system is a partly tensioned firing pin lock, which is moved further back by the trigger bar when the trigger is pulled.
When the trigger is pulled, 3 safety features are automatically deactivated one after another. When doing so, the trigger bar is deflected downward by the connector and the firing pin is released under full load. When the trigger is released, all three safety features re-engage and the GLOCK pistol is automatically secured again.


TRIGGER SAFETY
As the first of the three GLOCK “Safe Action” safety features, the trigger safety prevents inadvertent firing by lateral forces on the trigger. Releasing the trigger will automatically reactivate the safety

FIRING PIN SAFETY
The GLOCK firing pin safety is a solid hardened steel pin which, in the secured state, blocks the firing pin channel, rendering the igniting of a chambered cartridge by the firing pin impossible. The firing pin safety is only pushed upward to release the firing pin for firing when the trigger is pulled and the safety is pushed up through the backward movement of the trigger bar. Releasing the trigger will automatically reactivate the firing pin safety

DROP SAFETY
In the line of duty it may happen that a loaded pistol is dropped on the floor. Contrary to conventional pistols, the GLOCK drop safety prevents unintentional firing of a shot through hard impact. When the trigger is pulled, the trigger bar is guided in a precision safety ramp. The trigger bar is deflected from this ramp only in the moment the shot is triggered.

The internet is a Wonderful tool. :)

Please. There is NO SAFETY on a GLOCK that you turn on or off. The "safety’s built into the trigger. Pull the trigger and that is it....bang! <O:p</O:p
<O:p></O:p>
As for guns with true safety I would assume (as I do) with those that have one that I keep the safety on. Why would I take it off unless I was prepared to fire? <O:p</O:p
<O:p></O:p>
Some of you are a bit gullible. Do you really believe that he was convicted beyond all reasonable doubt if he did not brandish the weapon? Cleary some of you know nothing about guns or guns laws but you sure do like to spew your opinions.<O:p></O:p>
<O:p> </O:p>
The argument is not if Bird should or should not be in jail. The argument is over the mandatory sentencing. Should the Judges hands be tied? I do not believe in mandatory sentencing but that is the law. I also believe in people rights to own a gun BUT with that right comes a profound responsibility. Bird it appears breached his responsibility. Superior Court and Supreme Court agreed. <O:p></O:p>

http://www.gunguyonline.com/images/glock23.jpg If you look you will not find a "safety" but you will see a double trigger. One must depress the first trigger to fire................but theyre is nothing to check, turn on or off. So, since we are down this road what was Bird carrying for a gun?

Let me re quote you Exact comment.

You clearly stated that a Glock has no safety ! I believe I have proved otherwise. :)

I also believe that if you read how the multiple internal safety's of a Glock work you will see that you Do indeed turn them off / on through the squeezing and releasing of the trigger. It may not be in the form of the traditional external button or lever but you certainly turn the safety"s Off and On.

ABSOLUTELY !! Where are the witness's or the evidence to back up the Crazy Lady's "say so" ? There doesn't seem to be any proof to back up the Lady's claim. The local police did what they had to at the time, due to the womans claim then that joke of a county attorney bought the Lady's whole cock and bull story and chose to pursue this case when it clearly should have been drooped. This whole mess literally screams of reasonable doubt !

With over 40 years of owning, collecting, reloading, target practicing, skeet and trap shooting, hunting etc. I believe I can comfortably hold my own in most conversations.

It most certainly is ! Just because You believe he belongs in jail doesn't not make it written in stone. The judicial system very clearly failed it's duty's in this particular case. Unfortunately it happens.
You are correct about the argument over the mandatory sentencing. In this particular case the mandatory sentence does not fit the supposed crime. This is why so many people are now pushing to change this particular law.

Slightly off-topic with this...but a very colorfull sidenote.....Is there any chance that someone could post a photo of a pink colored Glock just like what State Senator Jeannie Forester has.....a Glock in designer pink....like wow....can you get bullets in matching pink too?

Let me re quote you Exact comment.

You clearly stated that a Glock has no safety ! I believe I have proved otherwise. :)

I also believe that if you read how the multiple internal safety's of a Glock work you will see that you Do indeed turn them off / on through the squeezing and releasing of the trigger. It may not be in the form of the traditional external button or lever but you certainly turn the safety"s Off and On.

ABSOLUTELY !! Where are the witness's or the evidence to back up the Crazy Lady's "say so" ? There doesn't seem to be any proof to back up the Lady's claim. The local police did what they had to at the time, due to the womans claim then that joke of a county attorney bought the Lady's whole cock and bull story and chose to pursue this case when it clearly should have been drooped. This whole mess literally screams of reasonable doubt !

With over 40 years of owning, collecting, reloading, target practicing, skeet and trap shooting, hunting etc. I believe I can comfortably hold my own in most conversations.

It most certainly is ! It is merely one of the aspects of this whole mess. The judicial system very clearly failed it's duty's in this particular case. Unfortunately it happens. The county attorney bought the Lady's song and dance and turned right around with prejudice and sold it to the jury.
You are correct about the argument over the mandatory sentencing. In this particular case the mandatory sentence does not fit the supposed crime. This is why so many people are now pushing to change this particular law.
I believe that we will just have to agree to disagree on this matter. :)

I guess that is what I find as strange about the NH legal system. In RI certain things are allowed if they pertain to the witness state of mind, that is, the ability tell the truth, make rational decisions and present true factual testimony. Based on what I have read about her background, any 3rd rate defense attorney in RI would have ripped her apart even if 2/3 of her background was not allowed in court.

Today's December 2 www.concordmonitor.com has an editorial, "Clarify the Criminal Threatening Laws," on Ward Bird's arrest for felony threatening that takes a look at the NH law and some of the legal thinking behind it........and a lot of follow up comments.......pretty interesting stuff......which will probably lead to more disagreements over his guilty verdict.

The Court is a strange place. They don't allow a lot of things in testimony, even things that are totally relevant in most people's opinion. They are not allowed for various reasons, many of which I would certainly question.

Let’s say that the jury heard testimony about all the bad things that Harris did in her life time. Would that have made a difference as far as the verdict is concerned?

Maybe and maybe not.

“Maybe” because no one wants the bad guy to win and the good guy to lose.

“ Maybe not” because it appears that Bird admitted to the police that he did have a gun and did something with it during the confrontation with Harris.

IMHO I think if we could read the police report it would help us understand how Bird was convicted of felony criminal threatening.

I think that if it was just a matter of he said she said, Mr. Bird would not be in jail right now.

Below is the link to the video of THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE hearing about the verdict of THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE V. Ward Bird.

Notice how the Supreme Court Justices ask questions about the law/laws that sent Bird to jail. If they couldn’t understand them how did the jury figure them out?????

http://www.courts.nh.gov/pastsession...20090372va.asx

I will stand by my stating that you know nothing about guns or you would not be arguing such a silly point. Glock does not have a safety that I can turn on or off. You are simply arguing semantics. I could not remove a Glock from my holster and check the safety. Period!
No responsible person pulls a gun out of their holster to check the safety. Do you have any idea what type of gun Bird was carrying? Who knows if it even had a safety.
You do not seem to know much of the “story” or history of the family, land for sale etc.
Does Bird belong in jail? Based on the law yes, he does. Do I have sympathy for the guy? Yes, because maybe it is a stupid mistake some of us could have made. Then again you do not simply pull out a gun because someone has trespassed. He was wrong, not MPD, and not the courts and he paid a very high price for it.

Terrific public service of you to find this video/audio and post a working link here.....now if only my 'puter had working audio. Wonder if either the Laconia or Meredith libraries have working audio on their public 'puters?

And, wonder what is the length of this State of NH vs Ward Bird video/audio?

It is 31 minutes long.

Do you have Headphone jacks on your computer?
Go to your favorite walmart store and buy some speakers that hook to your headphone jacks. :)

Have fun!!

I just watched the video of the Supreme Court hearing and realize the stupidity of our law. Over and over it was satated "A non deadly force" yet they ruled it okay. Too bad we can not have people who look at justice being logical and sensible.
I still can not understand why the woman got away with out a trial