Charges are pending against a man accused of fatally shooting his estranged wife's boyfriend at a gas station in Pasadena Sunday afternoon.
The incident occurred around 1 p.m. at a Valero gas station at Burke and Southmore, where the woman's estranged husband and her boyfriend became involved in a confrontation, said Pasadena Police Department spokesman Vance Mitchell, adding that the nature of the dispute is unknown.
At some point during the confrontation, the woman's estranged husband shot and killed her boyfriend before fleeing the scene in his vehicle.
Officers found the suspect's vehicle shortly after the shooting and became involved in a short chase with the man. During the chase, the suspect crashed his vehicle into another car, but kept on driving and was apprehended shortly in a nearby yard.
Since the article leaves so much to the imagination, I guess we'll just have to fill in some of the blanks. But first let's take a moment to enjoy the humor of Police Spokesman Vance Mitchell. He said, "the nature of the dispute is unknown." That's pretty funny, eh?
I'd say our man was a lawful gun owner up until the moment he decided to change sides. Five minutes before that all the other lawful gun owners would have vehemently defended his right to own guns. Five minutes later, they have nothing to do with him.
Why do gun rights people refuse to admit there are many problem cases in their midst? Why has not one pro-gun voice admitted that The Famous 10% theory makes good sense? Is not this story another perfect example of it?
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.