Saturday, November 24, 2012

Virginia Man Arrested for Triple Shooting

Local news reports

Chesterfield police say a woman and two boys have been shot at a townhouse and a 35-year-old man was arrested a short time later.

Lt. Randy Horowitz says officers heard gunfire upon arriving at the scene Thursday night. The suspect fled but was quickly arrested.

Michael Derrick Williams of Chesterfield was charged with three counts each of malicious wounding and felony use of a firearm, and one count each of burglary and shooting into an occupied dwelling. 

The boys, ages 11 and 16, were in critical condition at VCU Medical Center. Horowitz says the woman had less serious injuries. Their identities weren't immediately released.

Williams was held without bond in the Chesterfield County Jail. It wasn't immediately known whether he had an attorney.
Did you notice he was not a felon in possession of a gun? That means that up until yesterday he was a lawful gun owner, just like so many, completely unfit to own guns but in possession of one nonetheless.

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

11 comments:

  1. we're proud of our freedoms....then we die!
    tom webber

    ReplyDelete
  2. Owning a gun is ipso facto proof the unfitness to own a gun. It's the 21st century "Catch-22".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Owning a gun is ipso facto proof the unfitness to own a gun"
      Prove it

      Delete
  3. Mikeb, why won't you listen? Just because the brief news article didn't say that he's a felon doesn't mean that he was a lawful gun owner. Given his actions, I'd guess that he has a record of previous crimes.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Last time you used this reasoning you turned out to be wrong. Your "legal" gun owner happened to have an illegal sawed off shotgun. So your procedure for determining legal gun owners seems to be lacking in QA.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If he had been convicted of a felony in a court of law for the illegal shotgun, then he would have been a criminal gun owner. Otherwise, being innocent until PROVEN guilty, he was one of you guys. That's why I invented the third category, hidden criminals.

      Delete
    2. Wait, wait, wait… So someone who owns illegal guns- something that is a felony under federal law to posses- is still a legal gun owner in your mind (at least until he gets caught).

      So basically everyone is a legal heroin user until they get caught as well.

      Delete
    3. Unless you want to dispense with "innocent until proven guilty" and due process, yes.

      Delete
    4. You are not exactly waiting for due process to run its course before calling someone a criminal. So everytime you post about a gun owner gone bad you need to wait until conviction to be consistent. Deal?

      Delete
    5. Regardless, you are still missing my point. How can someone be a legal heroin owner when the product is illegal to own? Yes they are entitled to due process before being convicted, but that doesn't make owing an illegal item lawful, which is the word you keep using.

      Delete
    6. You're the one missing the point, conveniently. That point is, gun owners are not divided into two distinct groups, good and bad. There's more to it than that. There are the hidden criminals.

      Delete