Armed with a handgun, Lupoe evidently roamed room to room starting as early as Monday evening, fatally shooting his wife and five young children -- including two sets of twins.
Early Tuesday, Lupoe faxed a bitter, rambling two-page letter to a local television station blaming his employer for his actions.
Both articles make reference to the fact that this isn't the first such incident, and sadly it might not be the last. So dismal is the economy for so many, that inevitably these things happen. As evidence of this chilling theory, the LA Times mentions the very similar case which took place in Chatsworth a few months ago, which we discussed at that time. Here's part of what I said then.
Do you think he would have killed his entire family of six people with a kitchen knife if he'd had no gun? I say the availability of the gun was a factor, and although I don't preach banning guns as a solution, I would suggest that gun proponents by their philosophy alone are, if not responsible for this, at least involved in it somehow.I say the same thing today, except change the number of dead to seven.
This is an illustration of the other kind of "flow." The one often mentioned in the media is about guns moving from the U.S. to Mexico or guns moving from the legitimate gun owners to the criminal world. But this other kind of "flow" is about people. Some percentage of law abiding gun owners, for various reasons, go bad. There are closet criminals who just haven't been caught yet; there are various kinds of people unfit to have guns, drinking alcoholics, using drug addicts, untreated depressives, who with the right provocation go bad; there are the anger guys who sooner or later lose it at a traffic light. And then there are guys like these two in California who lose their job and blow the whole family away.
Gun availability plays a big part in all this. The reason I focus on the gun is because compared to kitchen knives and tire irons and baseball bats, a gun is very efficient and its availability increases the carnage.
One big question remains: how common is all this? Are we talking about the famous less than 1%? What do you think? Don't you agree that the more people who have guns, the more incidents of this nature we'll have? To me, that seems undeniable. Wouldn't you also agree that if we cut the number of guns down, we would also cut down on the numbers of these tragedies? Also undeniable, I say.
What's your opinion?