Saturday, December 28, 2013

Louisiana Shooting Rampage - Not a Gun-Free Zone


Ben Freeman


The Guardian

A south Louisiana man attacked his former in-laws, his current wife, and the head of a hospital where he had worked, killing three before killing himself, authorities said.

The shootings happened at four locations in two parishes about 45 miles south-west of New Orleans on Thursday. The first report came about 6.40pm, when Lafourche parish councilman Louis Phillip Gouaux — who was shot in the throat — called 911 from his home in Lockport, Houma, Louisiana, the Courier newspaper reported.
The suspect, Ben Freeman, 38, was the ex-husband of Gouaux's daughter Jeanne, Lafourche parish sheriff's office spokesman, Brennan Matherne, said in a news release.
Gouaux's wife, Susan "Pixie" Gouaux, was dead when deputies arrived, Matherne said. Louis Phillip Gouaux and his daughter, Andrea Gouaux, were injured and taken to University Hospital in New Orleans. Both were in critical but stable condition, Matherne said.
About 20 minutes later in Raceland, Ochsner St Anne general hospital administrator Milton Bourgeois was shot and killed at close range at his home, Matherne said. His wife, Ann Bourgeois, was shot and taken to the New Orleans hospital, where she was listed in stable condition.
Raceland police said Bourgeois was shot at close range and his wife was shot in the leg.

20 comments:

  1. And this wasn't a mass shooting by a stranger seeking to get his name in the news. But it is a good argument for having a gun available in one's home.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, this was just a shooting rampage. And I'm sure the dead and wounded were unarmed and unable to protect themselves, this being Louisiana and all.

      Delete
  2. This is so rare, that a need for a gun because of it, is ridiculous. Crime is way down, yet guns and carrying guns, is way up. That doesn't add up, or make sense. It's the irrational fear, and pro gun advocates I've seen interviewed are full of fear and anger. Just the kind of person I do not want to have a gun.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How cute that you think that. As long as you believe in strawmen, you make it easier for gun rights to win.

      Delete
    2. Sally, you're exactly right.

      Delete
    3. What straw man Greg?

      Delete
    4. Your belief about who we gun rights advocates are.

      Delete
    5. That's not a straw man, it's an obvious question given the low crime rate, but increased gun sales. What's your opinion for that seemingly odd stat? If there is no fear and crime is low, why the increased purchases of guns? It doesn't follow normal human reactions.

      Delete
    6. If I understand your point correctly, Sally, we're on the same page. The gun rights kooks are in many cases truly paranoid and insecure men who believe guns are the answer to an imaginary problem. And many of them got that way because they're so easily influenced by the NRA and other tough-talking con-artists on the pro-gun side. They're gullible dupes.

      Delete
    7. As I said, keep on with your attitudes. Smug elitism sells so well in America.

      Delete
    8. You are the one with the smug attitude. You care nothing for innocent life lost to guns. Not smug, criminal thinking.

      Delete
    9. That's right, Greg. You're the one who reduces unnecessary child deaths to tiny fractions in a cold-hearted attempt to argue that they're a small price to pay for your convenience. Besides, I'm not selling anything.

      Delete
    10. Mikeb, you're pushing massive violations of our rights on the false promise of something getting better. I'm not cold-hearted. I simply know that what you demand won't do any good. If you were to call for mandatory prayer after a shooting, at least that would make some people feel better, even though it would also be a violation of rights.

      Delete
    11. How do you know something won't work, if you refuse to try it?

      Delete
    12. 1. I look at Prohibition and the War on Drugs and see that efforts at control don't work too well here.

      2. I'm unwilling to try a massive violation of our rights on the promise that something might get better, especially when there are other things that are reducing our crime rates right now.

      Delete
    13. "I simply know that what you demand won't do any good."

      Mandatory safe storage of guns wouldn't do any good? None? Is that your position, really?

      Delete
    14. That is his position, and he has stated it many times.

      "Mikeb, you're pushing massive violations of our rights on the false promise of something getting better."

      A gun safe is pushing MASSIVE violations of your rights?
      HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

      Delete
    15. Yes, Mikeb, it would do no good. Responsible people already keep their guns away from unsupervised children, and irresponsible people don't follow the law.

      Delete
    16. Most people try to follow the law, which is why the law has worked well in changing other dangerous behavior. You are a criminal, I don't expect you to understand that.

      Delete
    17. Greg, some libertarian-minded folks said the same thing about the seat belt law. But, contrary to your simplistic observation, many gun owners need the motivation of a law before they do the right thing.

      Delete