Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
By Anjeanette Damon (contact) 
, David McGrath Schwartz
Wednesday, Jan. 23, 2013 | 2 a.m.
About 3 p.m. Saturday, State Sen. Kelvin Atkinson received a chilling telephone call. Assemblyman Steven Brooks, a fellow North Las Vegas Democrat, was driving around in his car with a gun, “and he is looking to harm” the top member of the Assembly, Marilyn Kirkpatrick, Atkinson was told, according to documents obtained by the Sun. Brooks wanted “to do in” Kirkpatrick, Atkinson told police. The phone call set off a furious chain of events Saturday, culminating with Brooks in jail, two lawmakers with stepped-up police protection and a tense, even fearful, pall cast over the legislative process less than two ...
Tovin Lapan contributed to this report.
A fine example of concerned folks doing the right thing and doing it in a timely manner. Friends and family both intervened on behalf of Brooks, Mrs. Kirkpatrick, and the citizens of Nevada. Need we even casually wonder what could have taken place without those decisive actions? Councilman Barlow, State Sen. Kelvin Atkinson, and the family of Mr. Brooks seem to have done nothing less than prevent the assassination of our State Assembly Speaker.
When it comes to politics, nothing is what it seems to be.
One has to believe there are other factors driving Mr. Brook's behavior. The most likely assistant, is drugs. Either legal prescription drugs assign by a physician, or illegal drugs attained by friends or family, or from street vendors (pushers, dealers, etc). Either way, drugs, being abused by the person taking the drugs.
One picture is emerging, the role of Mr. Barlow. What did he know, and when did he know it? What is certain, Mr. Brooks did not become disturbed overnight. Mr. Brooks behavior has been documented over time. Someone knew about this long before the gun incident. More to the point, someone or others knew of Mr. Brook's behavior long before this incident, and most likely were enablers at some point. Mr. Brooks is not alone is what he has become.
You can say this is about the health and well being of a person in need of help and not something political. If an elected official is involve, it's political. The fact that Mr. Brooks behavior went to point of threaten another person, the events going to this point, shows there are other persons in the know in regards to Mr. Brooks as to who he is, and why he is like he is today.
Just another Dumbocrat with a screw loose.
And still no metal detectors in the Legislative Building or State buildings.
I'm surprised that he is still alive after being stopped by metro.
He was stopped and arrested by North Las Vegas Police.
"He works as a management analyst for the city of Las Vegas and was placed on unpaid leave Tuesday, according to a city spokesman."
At least the city is not still paying his salary, but what exactly is a "management analyst"? I'm pretty sure it's just another unnecessary cushy government job.
So who's gun is it? Is it one of those assault type six shooters, with a pistol grip! Was he on psychotropic narcotics?
This is confusing. What exactly did he do wrong? Why was he arrested?
Is it a crime to own a gun? All I see is "The evidence indicates that the threats weren't (of) just a spurious nature because of the fact that they were made through people that we believe trusted that what he said was serious."
What does that mean?
This guy was stopped and he had a gun on him. What was his offense? A threat? What threat? All I read here is this guy complaining about how some other person made his life miserable.
The officer quoted here said that "evidence indicated" a more serious - My question - was that evidence corroborated with the stop and arrest of this man?
He didn't get into a "shootout" as this "evidence" indicated did he?
And I thought these Republicans commenting on here were up in arms about 2nd Amendment rights. Now they are castrating this guy - begging that his salary be cut...for what? What was his offense? The gun? The bullets? What happened to the famed 2nd amendment support?
What about this "But the extent of that anger wasn't clear until Saturday afternoon, when Atkinson answered his phone and received a warning from "a person close to Brooks" that the assemblyman was looking to hurt Kirkpatrick."
Was a threat made? What was said?
So far - all we have is an allegation of this guy wanting to "hurt" someone? Politicians are always looking to hurt someone - it doesn't meant psychical harm - it could be political.
And what about this allegation of a "shootout." Again, I don't see ANYTHING reported by police that would corroborate the allegation that this guy wasn't scared to get into a shootout with police or shoot himself.
In fact, none of those things happened.
So I ask again - why is this guy being treated like a criminal? Last I read on here - I read hundreds of comments by gun totting 2nd Amendment blind bats up in arms against anything to do with gun restrictions/laws, etc.
This is the same guy, who I have on good authority showed up for work with alcohol on his breath and wasn't touched because of some political connections he has. It's amazing the lack of accountabilty on display regularly in our Local, State,and National Governments. It's absurd! I blame voters, and of course our bias media. Then this guy has the stones to use the laziest excuse in the books that being the race card. When in doubt throw out the race card!
GURU - Someone with "political connections" doesn't get arrested because someone said they were told by another person that this person heard the Representative make statements about someone and how miserable he was.
unlv702 (Vegas Dlight) wrote - "All I read here is this guy complaining about how some other person made his life miserable." ..."So I ask again - why is this guy being treated like a criminal?"
Do you not understand the very basic laws concerning arrest in our country?
Read the article again and you'll find that Brooks allegedly made criminal threats - and the Police don't "make reports" in the manner you suggest, unless crimes are witnessed by an officer.
When law enforcement does not directly observe a crime, but they have a crime reported to them, sworn statements from witnesses are taken. If witness and the statements could lead a reasonable person to believe a crime was committed, you can be sure that the officers can and will make an arrest based on probable cause. This is exactly what happened - Some people witnessed what they believed were criminal statements made by Brooks; those people called police; the police investigated the allegations; the police took sworn statements from the witnesses; based on the statements obtained, the police found probable cause for an arrest; they then located and arrested Brooks.
This is how it works.
VD: He was arrested for purportedly being a threat to others, namely a public official. In the course of investigating that threat it looks like he may have been in possession of an unregistered firearm. Last time I checked those were crimes.
Poor performance of past Legislators. Nevada gun laws (and most other legislation) is so full of holes, it's unenforceable. Did you catch Ralston Reports last night? A prosecutor would have to prove INTENT to influence future political activities. Doesn't seem to allow prosecution for threat or physical harm unless intent can also be shown. INTENT is impossible to prove. So why are we paying all the high-salaried LCB staff? Such ineffective wording in BDR's and the resulting legislation.