Two Florida deputies trying to arrest a man wanted in a domestic violence case were shot and killed Saturday by the suspect, who died in a shootout after a car chase into the next county.Deputies Burt Lopez and Warren York traded gunshots with the suspect at about 1 p.m. at the Shoal River Gun Club in Crestview, Florida, said Okaloosa County Sheriff's office spokeswoman Nicole Wagner.
Joshua Cartwright, 28, had been involved in a domestic violence incident earlier in the day in Fort Walton Beach, Florida. It wasn't his first run-in with the law.
The sketchy details leave one wondering what was a guy wanted by the police doing at a gun club, especially if this "wasn't his first run-in with the law." Does this give us a glimpse into the gun world that we normally aren't allowed? Could it be that the gun community, although it is comprised largely of law-abiding citizens, also houses and protects a large demographic of borderline criminals, wife beaters and violent offenders, you know, the ones for whom it's not "their first run-in with the law?" Are these the guys who keep making the news?
The main question that comes to mind is why do the "good guys" try so hard to deny the "bad guys" exist in significant numbers, and when that fails, why do they insist they have nothing to do with the law breakers? Isn't the connection clear between lenient gun laws, the resultant increase in gun availability and these tragic incidents?
The police came for Joshua Cartwright because of domestic violence earlier in the day. They came TO HIS GUN CLUB. Isn't there something wrong with that? If you don't know what I mean, I'll try to explain.
My blog-friend Mud_Rake wrote a brilliant post the other day in which he explored the idea that men with guns don't learn how to manage conflict resolution normally the way men without guns have to. Joshua was only 28 years old at the time of his death. His being involved in the so-called shooting sports, owning guns, being involved in the gun culture, perhaps exacerbated whatever attempts he'd made at resolving domestic situations without violence. Apparently he wasn't doing too well in this area. Did the gun mentality play a part in that? I'd say it probably did.
What's your opinion? Do you think the gun community is failing to properly police itself? Do you think they themselves should be more proactive in these efforts? Shouldn't it be possible to spot dangerous characters before the tragedy, or is this the price we pay for freedom?
Please leave a comment.
"His being involved in the so-called shooting sports, owning guns, being involved in the gun culture, perhaps exacerbated whatever attempts he'd made at resolving domestic situations without violence. Apparently he wasn't doing too well in this area. Did the gun mentality play a part in that? I'd say it probably did."
ReplyDeleteGiven the number of guns, and the number of situations such as this that occur, I'd say you could never prove that claim.
Not that a silly thing like "proof" would stop you.
Picking an outlier and claiming that rare combination is causation is the pinnacle of unethical analysis.
Could it be that the gun community, although it is comprised largely of law-abiding citizens, also houses and protects a large demographic of borderline criminals, wife beaters and violent offenders...Okay, that comment is just absurd. Do you expect to walk onto a public range and instantly know everyone there? So if you frequent the same grocery store as an armed robber are you protecting him in some way?
ReplyDeleteWhat's your opinion? Do you think the gun community is failing to properly police itself? Do you think they themselves should be more proactive in these efforts? Shouldn't it be possible to spot dangerous characters before the tragedy, or is this the price we pay for freedom?What exactly are you suggesting? That because I own a gun, I should instantly know who all the criminals are? Is the gun so magical now that it imparts omnipotence on the wielder? Good grief. Cops all have guns so why don't they know who the criminals are?
You will find far more percentage of domestic abuse and wife beaters in the police ranks. So much so that there are web sites dedicated to enumerating the occurrences of domestic abuse among police officers. Further, when federal law was amended in 1996 to block those guilty of domestic violence from possessing a gun, police departments, unions and agencies country-wide were angry that the new law did not have a provision to exempt police officers.
This man was a criminal. He was barred from multiple federal and state laws from possessing a gun yet because he was a criminal and broke the law, gun owners should have used their spider-sense, detected him and destroyed him or something?
This whole argument is the biggest stretch you have made yet.
The Florida deputy shooting can be an example of the post traumatic stress soldiers suffer from after serving extended tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. These 12 to 15 month deployments take their toll on families in the military and has led to an increased number of suicides and domestic violence. Maybe if the senior Bush administration officials who made the decision to invade and occupy two countries with a minimal military force had served in the military and were deployed like these soldiers were, than maybe this incident could have been avoided. Instead of placing the burden of the “wars” in Iraq and Afghanistan on a very small percentage of the population in America, (less than .5 percent) American leaders should have asked more Americans to sacrifice to get the job done, instead of telling them to go to the mall and support the economy.
ReplyDeleteUntil the issue of the way American leaders treat the All Volunteer Force (AVF) of the American armed forces, we will continue to see more and more of these tragedies.
MikeB,
ReplyDeleteHere is a possibility; maybe it was the aggressive nature of the police confrontation that cause the murders?
The police report shows that he didn't start firing UNTIL AFTER the police tasered him. Maybe they were power hungry.....you often seem to be defending the other criminals who are tasered by the police....why not this guy?
"the idea that men with guns don't learn how to manage conflict resolution normally the way men without guns have to."
ReplyDeleteIt's actually the opposite Mike. If I'm carrying I have to engage in non-violent conflict resolution far more than if I were not.
It requires me to keep my cool and be polite no matter what pejoratives might be thrown my way.
I too noticed the report of the taser being used and felt this was an example of the shoot first and ask questions later policy of American cops. Then you have the variable of all these ex-military type A personality guys, who are used to being the authority and having power, so when was not being submissive, out comes the taser.
ReplyDeleteIn addition to these facts, you also have the corruption factor in that police force where the former sheriff was recently removed due to criminal behavior in Las Vegas.
We all know cops protect themselves and their buddies "on the job". Instances like domestic violence and drunk driving often go un punished and covered up.
Il Principe,
ReplyDeleteThen you have the variable of all these ex-military type A personality guys, who are used to being the authority and having power, so when was not being submissive, out comes the taserYou seem to have limited or no experience with American military personnel.
EVERY Military personnel is trained to be "submissive" to someone else!!
The military can not function if the people in it are not used to taking orders from someone else. From boot camp to every duty station, every assignment; that fact is reinforced.
Since the news is reporting him as U.S. Army Reserve, let me remind you of the oath every member of the Army takes:
I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.The Uniform Code of Military Justice is very explicit in the requirements to obey civilian authorities, including police.
So, it isn't accurate to say that this guy was used to being in power...Not without recognizing that he was also subject to the control of others.
He BROKE THE LAW, don't blame the military training for that.
I didn't see any evidence that the club was protecting their rogue member--What do you think they did wrong?
ReplyDeleteSevesteen, You're right there was no evidence that the club members were complicit. I went off on a tangent because I figure that kind of thing happens. Isn't there a camaraderie that exists among gun owners which might at times slip over into complicity? I got a kick of what Fat White Man said, asking me if I think "gun owners should have used their spider-sense, detected him and destroyed him or something." I figure in some cases it might not take super-hero skills to detect this kind of thing. I don't believe everyone is as zealous as Weer'd claims to be when it comes to reporting wrongdoers. What do you think?
ReplyDeleteI am mot blaming the military training. as a former us veteran I know what it means to serve and to follow orders. The perp who attacked his wife could not follow orders and he paid the price. The actions by the cops may still have been heavy handed as cops in america tend to use excessive force and act like they are the state. if you lived abroad for awhile you begin to see this more clearly. The latest florida cop shooting seems to be a confrontation between two individuals who wanted to be the big dog.
ReplyDeleteCould it be that the Law Enforcement Community, although it is comprised largely of law-abiding citizens, also houses and protects a large demographic of borderline criminals, wife beaters and violent offenders, you know, the ones for whom it's not "their first run-in with the law?" Are these the guys who keep making the news?There, i fixed it for you. And the answer to both questions, as well as the same question applied to any segment of society, is yes.
ReplyDeleteWhat of it? If someone is not a borderline criminal, why would you propose to take their guns away from them, in the hopes that a borderline criminal will also have their guns taken away? thats collective punishment, something that has been universally decried by most international legal groups.
Rev., Thanks for coming in with a few comments.
ReplyDeleteIn calling someone a "borderline criminal" I'm referring to the rather large gray area which I believe exists. Many, as you know think it's simply black and white. In the gray area there are "borderline criminals" slightly into the bad side of the line just like there are ones on the good side. That's what a gray area is all about, IMO.
MikeB,
ReplyDeleteYou failed to address the point of Rev's comment.
You are engaging in collective punishment.
Another way of looking at borderline criminals is -- LAW ABIDING CITIZEN.
Until they do something wrong, they are following the law.
So, either you want to punish them for something they MIGHT do or you want to punish them for something that someone like them MIGHT DO.
Isn't that against the principles on which this country, and most other countries, was founded?
It's impossible to know how many gun owners there are in America, but estimates commonly claim anywhere from 25-40% of households have at least one gun. Let's take the lowest number and say that it's 25%. Let's also be generous and say that each household is five people, and that only one person per household is a "gun owner". That makes fifteen million gun owners. Let's be more generous and assume that only men can be violent criminals, and that half of gun owners are women. That makes 7.5 million potential criminals. Now say that only 5% of gun owners make use of shooting ranges ("gun club" doesn't necessarily imply a tight fraternity--my range calls itself a "pistol club", but "membership" just means you've had the safety briefing and don't have to go through it again the next time you shoot).
ReplyDeleteThat's 375,000 men who make use of shooting ranges. I absolutely guarnatee that in any demographic, no matter how conscientious and safety conscious its members are, of that size you'll find at least a few dozen people who are capable of cold-blooded murder but can put on a convincing public face.
Basically, though I'm always open to ways we can reasonably improve gun safety, I think you're drawing a much broader conclusion from this seemingly isolated case than is reasonable.
I absolutely guarnatee that in any demographic..
ReplyDelete"Guarnatee", of course, being that famous Picasso painting of a school of manatees being bombed by the Luftwaffe. ;)
Is there a Picasso painting like that? I couldn't find it.
ReplyDeleteI'm kidding. My typo looked to me like a mashup of "Guernica" and "manatee". ;)
ReplyDelete