Police searched Friday for a suspect in a Thanksgiving night rampage that killed four people and wounded one other at a home in Jupiter, Fla.The manhunt centered on Paul Michael Merhige, 35, of Miami, believed to have opened fire on his family and others as they gathered for a Thanksgiving feast.
The dead included two of Merhige's sisters, a man and a 6-year-old girl asleep in her bed when the shooting broke out.
Witnesses told police Merhige left the scene in a blue 4-door Toyota with Florida tags W427JT. the Palm Beach Post said.
"It was a domestic disturbance. That's all we know," Sgt. Scott Pascarella of the Palm Beach County Sheriff's Department said Friday. "What triggered the gunfire, we don't know."
When is the country going to wake up and make the connection between gun availability and these kinds of incidents? How dare the pro-gun crowd continue to shrug their shoulders and insist this has nothing to do with them? It has everything to do with them. When any lunatic who wants to blow his family away can easily get a gun to do it with, that's too little gun control.
Please leave a comment.
Mikeb, your main proposal has been gun registration. Can you tell us how exactly gun registration would specifically have prevented this particular incident?
ReplyDeleteDo you want more than gun registration in response this incident? Then tell us what else you want -- and tell us exactly how that would specifically have prevented this particular incident.
I was armed at a thanksgiving meal at my in-laws where there were 5 carry license holders including the hosts, three convicted felons and one person with a domestic violence conviction whose spouse was one of the people carrying legally.
ReplyDeleteThe one dispute was a sister in law (who is anti-gun, although that is not related to the dispute) with a grudge against one of the felons who decided to yell at him as she was leaving for home. The dispute remained verbal.
I don't normally hang out with felons, but this is a case of not being able to choose family. I'm not sure I'd be as willing to go if I had to hang out with felons while disarmed.
So, mike... What gun law would have prevented thus?
ReplyDeleteAztecRed asks, "So, mike... What gun law would have prevented thus?"
ReplyDeleteThat's exactly the opposite of my trying to pick a news story and say it proves my point about guns. To that, you say it's an anecdotal example, and you're right. Same thing here. Your question seems to imply that since no law would DEFINITELY prevent this, then we should have no laws. That doesn't fly.
If the laws were stricter and the guns better controlled, some of these lunatics would be left unarmed and less damage would happen. That's the story.
Sevesteen,You've definitely got an interesting family. I'll bet you could tell some stories.
ReplyDelete"That doesn't fly."
ReplyDeleteBut it does fly, otherwise you're creating malum prohibitum which is law just for the sake of having a law.
"If the laws were stricter and the guns better controlled, some of these lunatics would be left unarmed and less damage would happen. That's the story."
And that is why asked you what law would have prevented this. You ask for more laws, but you can't demonstrate what or how it will work in the given situation.
Mikeb: "Your question seems to imply that since no law would DEFINITELY prevent this, then we should have no laws."
ReplyDeleteWhat I say is that is is dishonest to use a specific incident to promote gun control laws (as you do here) if those laws cannot be shown as likely to have had a positive effect on that specific incident.
FishyJay, There's nothing dishonest about using an incident from the news to illustrate a point. Everyone knows we're using it as an example and not trying to pass it off as what happens in every single case.
ReplyDeleteThe big question we keep getting back to is do guns do more good than harm as the DGU champions suggest. Or do they do more harm than good, like I say.
Mikeb: "There's nothing dishonest about using an incident from the news to illustrate a point."
ReplyDeleteAND to promote an agenda (which very likely does not affect the particular incident you are using).
That's just a less grandiose version of this:
"America was brutally attacked by enemies on 9/11. Therefore we must take action against America's enemies...like those in Iraq."
Same thing -- just a matter of degree.
Sevesteen,You've definitely got an interesting family. I'll bet you could tell some stories.
ReplyDeleteI've got interesting in-laws. My side of the family is pretty boring, and I don't hang out with the felons on a regular basis-A couple times a year at mother in law's house at most, and then only the ones who aren't back in jail.
The domestic violence isn't a wife-beater--one of my sister in laws got into a dispute with an older (and much larger) sister years ago. Don't know who is right in this case, but the older sister is always in court for something, although usually because she's suing someone.