A domestic dispute triggered a deadly Sunday night rampage south of Seattle in which a gunman killed his girlfriend, two bystanders and a neighbor before being shot dead by police.
Federal Way, Wash., police said the gunman — armed with a .40-caliber semiautomatic handgun and a pistol-grip shotgun — apparently was eliminating witnesses after he shot his 25-year-old girlfriend in the head at their Pinewood Village apartment about 9:30 p.m. PT.
The killer next shot two men, one 23 and the other 46, in the parking lot. One died beside a car, the other was wounded and then "executed" a few yards away.
Police Chief Brian Wilson said the gunman then apparently heard a 62-year-old neighbor yell for someone to call 911, so he blasted open the man's door with a shotgun and killed him with a second blast.
Officers arrived amid gunfire and spotted the suspect in a stairwell, ordering him to drop his weapon. He refused, so police shot and wounded him, causing him to drop the shotgun. The suspect ran to the parking lot but fell to the ground near one of the men he had killed.
In all, eight officers fired their weapons.
Police killed the gunman when he reached for a handgun. He has not been officially identified, but sources told KOMO-TV he is 28-year-old Dennis Clark.
Wilson said the gunman had a concealed-carry permit and was the registered owner of at least two firearms, including the handgun he is alleged to have used to kill his girlfriend and the two men in the parking lot. Federal agents are investigating the history of the shotgun.
Proper gun control might very well have prevented this. I'm not talking about the watered-down versions of what passes for gun control in Washington DC, I'm talking about real gun control.
This man's unfitness to own guns responsibly was known to the police. "May issue" for gun licensing would very likely have prevented him from owning guns. Then when the domestic violence incident exploded, he might have done a lot less damage.
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
May issue is not allowed for any other type of permitting--that level of executive discretion has been found unconstitutional in so many contexts that you would think that people would start beating that dead horse.
ReplyDeleteMike, you need to realize that every time you beat this "May Issue" drum, all the rest of us can think of is every other group that has been slapped down by the supreme court for allowing discretion in permitting, starting with racist sheriffs refusing to give permits to civil rights demonstrations.
Keeping that in mind, perhaps you'll understand why we have to resist the urge to fling obscenities in your direction each time you demand that we submit our rights to the whims of the local fuzz.
This is also very tragic.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, this should not be surprising -- we already know that about 1 or 2 people with concealed handgun carry licenses in every state will murder someone every year.
This does not warrant infringing on the rights of citizens who have broken now laws. If 1 or 2 bicyclists per state ran into someone and killed them every year, does that mean we should ban riding bicycles in public? After all, no one needs to ride a bicycle. People can walk, jog, or drive.
This is why we need to take threats more seriously. The police won't do anything at present over a threat. Jerks need to realize that when they shoot their mouths off about hurting people, they will get a visit from law enforcement and may spend some time locked up. When we tolerate minor violence, we encourage much more dangerous behavior.
ReplyDeleteAnd before Mikeb goes on about how I'm favoring limits on free speech, I have always said that making threats is not covered by the First Amendment. Committing an act of violence against an innocent person with your mouth is no more protected by the Constitution than any other kind of criminal act.
I really can't remember your being so tough on gun-rights folks who make threats. Haven't we posted a few of those? And weren't you more tolerant with them?
DeleteI can recall some harsh language such as insults, questions regarding parentage, and general wishes for misfortune for people and the horses they rode in on--things that have come from both sides at various times here, but the only thing I can recall that resembled a threat was E.N.'s laughable, repeated promise to reserve a place in the Gulag for Greg and to put Greg and me both in the electric chair. (Apparently I get to go straight there--do not pass gulag, do not collect a shovel...)
DeleteThat's the only threat I can remember, and I wouldn't even say that it rises to the level of a true threat, just insult comedy.
Anyone who threatens innocent people is worthy of the same thing. Besides, you make enough comments.
Delete