PH: I understand your points, and might agree with them, except that you're speculating just as much as everyone else. The paper ran a large centerpiece spread on the Metro & State front page this morning with photos of the bunker. So some of what I'm mentioning here may be from this newer updated version of story http://www.statesman.com/news/local/off ... 95942.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;Purplehood wrote:Point 1: He did indeed violate building codes. I am sure that digging a 2 to 3 story hole under your house in a residential neighborhood is a violation. In my mind if he was living up on Ruby Ridge with his nearest neighbor being in the next county, it wouldn't be anyones business let alone a code violation.
Point 2: He might have violated hazardous material storage regulations.
Point 3: The Police are storing his weapons while he is unable to enter his residence, and did not confiscate them.
We can all feel free to speculate about the implications of the above points, but as the story currently stands I don't see what the issue really is.
1.
Melissa Martinez, spokeswoman for the city's code compliance department wrote:Martinez said Del Rio, a Vietnam-era veteran, has not been charged with any code violations.
Maybe they're just waiting to file those charges, maybe not. I honestly don't know all of the city of Austin's building codes, nor which codes are grandfathered for older properties, and I work in real estate.
2. Will have to wait and see what TCEQ says
3. Does he have access to these weapons? Can he have a friend who is legally authorized to possess firearms come pick them up from the police station and store them privately for him? Can he pick up he weapons and store them in a public storage unit under lock and key? As I said above, it's awfully nice of APD to offer to store this man's guns for him but if they're charging him with no crime and he asks that the guns be returned to him for storage elsewhere, WILL THEY DO SO?
I agree your assumptions sound reasonable, but what would have also been reasonable is for the reporter to ask questions rather than just regurgitate the police talking points. I agree there is probably more to this, but this is subpar journalism (and I'm being nice in that assessment). If I was this guy's editor (a role I have played in the past) I would NOT have run this story without getting answers (or at least "no comment" on the record from officials about at least this one all-important question (the answer to which will likely lead to more questions that must be answered before running the story):Austin police said Tuesday that Del Rio is not the subject of a criminal investigation. Austin police Cpl. Scott Perry said the department is storing a number of Del Rio's legal firearms while he is unable to re-enter his home. "We didn't confiscate anything," Perry said.
If he hasn't violated codes and he hasn't committed a crime nor is he the subject of an investigation then what gives officials the legal authority to do any of this?
This reporter and this newspaper need to do their jobs MUCH BETTER than this.