A man shot and wounded his girlfriend, killed her 14-year-old daughter and then took his own life at a home in Maple Falls.
Whatcom County Sheriff Bill Elfo did not immediately identify the man. However, The Bellingham Herald says others have identified him as the homeowner, 41-year-old Sean D. Wilson, a Whatcom County planning commissioner.
The sheriff said the woman ran to a neighbor's house to call 911 at 3:19 a.m. Thursday. When deputies arrived at the home about 20 miles northeast of Bellingham they found the bodies of the man and Felicity Boonstra, a student at Mount Baker Junior High. Her mother Rebecca Boonstra was taken to St. Joseph Hospital in Bellingham and is expected to survive.
Elfo said deputies have been to the home at least once before, in March 2008, for domestic violence.
According to The Herald, a few minutes before the shooting was reported, the girl posted on her Facebook page that it was the third night in a row of yelling and fighting in her home.
"I just want to leave this house and be with my (real) dad," she wrote.
I realize we have to have due process and all that, but don't you think something has to be done to prevent people like this from owning guns? It's the same argument against prohibiting people on the terror watch list, but public safety cries out for a solution.
Domestic abusers should not have guns, period. If we wait for them to commit serious enough crimes to be prohibited it's often too late for the family.
No guns for suspected terrorists and no guns for suspected spouse abusers.
The way it is now, in places where there are more guns, more women get killed. Just look at the stats.
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
"No guns for suspected terrorists and no guns for suspected spouse abusers."
ReplyDeleteThe problem is that everyone can be a suspect. All it takes is the right paperwork.
The biggest problem with the Terrorist watchlist is "reasonable doubt". From what I've read it has less than 30% accuracy, and there's about 1600 names added daily. How long before every American is a "suspected terrorist"?
ReplyDeleteYou don't really want that world, do you?
"The biggest problem with the Terrorist watchlist is "reasonable doubt". "
ReplyDeleteThis is kind of funny coming from gunloons who say they have to carry guns everywhere even though their risk of being a crime victim is practically neglible.
The coolest thing about arguing with gunloons is the fact their arguments aren't consistent.
--JadeGold
"This is kind of funny coming from gunloons who say they have to carry guns everywhere even though their risk of being a crime victim is practically negligible."
ReplyDeleteJade, do you lock your doors at night? Why would you. The risk of being selected for burglary are practically negligible.
Do you have a fire extinguisher? Smoke detector? Fire insurance? Why? The risk of your house catching fire is practically negligible.
"The coolest thing about arguing with gunloons is the fact their arguments aren't consistent."
ReplyDeleteIt's about as consistent as your assumption that most black people themselves with the NAACP, but not Al Sharpton.
Hmmm, FWM is willing to lock his doors, have a smoke detector, and fire extinguisher, yet is willing to do squat when it comes to addressing the issue of illegal firearms.
ReplyDeleteMe thinks there is some hypocracy here. Or as JADEGOLD said: "The coolest thing about arguing with gunloons is the fact their arguments aren't consistent."
NotJadeGold
No 2nd Amendment rights for those who are not convicted -- not indicted -- just "suspected"?
ReplyDeleteWhy stop there? How about denying OTHER constitutional rights to "suspects"?
"Hmmm, FWM is willing to lock his doors, have a smoke detector, and fire extinguisher, yet is willing to do squat when it comes to addressing the issue of illegal firearms."
ReplyDeleteThere is no such thing (at least in the free parts of the country) as an illegal firearm.
FishyJay said, "No 2nd Amendment rights for those who are not convicted -- not indicted -- just "suspected"?
ReplyDeleteWhy stop there? How about denying OTHER constitutional rights to "suspects"?"
Now that would be going too far. In fact denying suspected people of rights is already going too far, but since it's become necessary it needs to be managed properly to keep the abuse to a minimum.
What NotJadeGold called hypocrisy, I don't know, for me it may be just a different line beyond which you decide to take precautions. I go for the seat belts and fire extinguishers, but I draw the line before owning guns and taking precautions against meteorite strikes. I also don't wear a surgical mask when I go out. These last three things require a bit of paranoia, in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteWhy stop there? How about denying OTHER constitutional rights to "suspects"?
ReplyDeleteMikeb: "Now that would be going too far. In fact denying suspected people of rights is already going too far, but since it's become necessary it needs to be managed properly to keep the abuse to a minimum."
In other words: "I am not against denying constitutional rights to suspects, as long as it' me who gets to pick WHICH rights."
Why did you delete my comment MikeB?
ReplyDeleteWhy do you not respect the Constitutional Rights of Americans. Due Process? Presumption of Innocence?
Would you like your free speech rights suspended based on being merely "suspected" of libel or slander?
Mike W: "Why did you delete my comment MikeB?"
ReplyDeleteDid MikeB really delete a comment?
I have run 100% here so far (which is rare). At HuffPo, I sometimea succeed in posting only 50% of the tries. When that happens, I usually assume (ahem) that my post so devastatingly refuted an anti-gunowner commenter that the leftwing "moderator" could not stand to allow it.
Or, maybe it's some sort of black hole in cyberspace.
No Hypocrisy here. And please point out one time that I have been inconsistent in any of my posts? Can you name one? Didn't think so.
ReplyDeleteI don't own any "illegal" firearms Jade. Not one. I'm not quite sure how many I own since every time I think I have them counted, I find or remember one. But I know that none of them are "illegal" guns.
I've made sure I don't have any "illegal guns" Jade. What have you done?
Oh, and I don't lock my doors at night, I don't need to. I do have 10 smoke detectors all wired so if one detects they all go off.
"Now that would be going too far. In fact denying suspected people of rights is already going too far, but since it's become necessary it needs to be managed properly to keep the abuse to a minimum."
ReplyDeleteAll denials of rights are necessary if you leave it up to the tyrants and their sympathizers.
FishyJay said, "Did MikeB really delete a comment?
ReplyDeleteI have run 100% here so far (which is rare)."
You're not the only one who's run 100% around here either, even though you usually disagree with me. As I said to Sevesteen, it says more about you than it does about me.
Hypocracy:
ReplyDeleteYou accept preventative measures for things other than firearms. Any attempt to try and prevent access to firearms is deemed an infringement of a right.
I guess if criminals have certain rights, then the right to armed self-defense with a firearm must also be one of them.
Jade,
ReplyDeleteI'm not a hypocrite. I have made sure that every single one of my guns are not illegal.
I've done far more to fight illegal guns than you have. I have made sure that scores of guns are not illegal. All you have to show are some internet ramblings and a reputation for being a troll.
Why don't you put up or shut up and acquire some legal guns so that they won't be illegal guns?