Another Gun-Facilitated Murder-Suicide

[CO Liberal]

This time in California - Wayne

* * * * * * * * * *

Names released in apparent murder-suicide

By Chris Durant The Times-Standard

McKINLEYVILLE -- The names of two people found dead in their mobile home by their cleaning lady Tuesday have been released by the Humboldt County Coroner's Office.

Richard Lynn Swanstrom, 61, and Dollie Mae Johnson, 63, were both found dead in a trailer in the Ocean West Mobile Home Park around 2:30 p.m. The Humboldt County Sheriff's Department is investigating the case as a murder-suicide.

The Coroner's Office said the cause of death for each was a single gunshot wound to the head.

<more>

http://www.times-standard.com/Stories/0,1413,127%257E2896%257E1639850,00.html

[Java]

1. So? A Gun was used would it have made any difference if a knife was used?

A Gun is just an inanimate object. A tool.

[trotsky]

4. You have a chance of outrunning someone with a knife.

Against a bullet, your chances are considerably reduced.

[MrBenchley]

2. A Disgraceful Epidemic in America

"For all murder-suicides:

* 38.9 percent involved a handgun,
* 6.5 percent involved a rifle,
* 7.5 percent involved a shotgun,
* 34.1 percent involved a firearm which was not identified more specifically than "a gun," and,
* 7.5 percent involved more than one weapon, but one of the weapons was a firearm.

All major murder-suicide studies in the United States completed since 1950 have shown that firearms are by far the most common method of committing homicide, with the offender choosing the firearm for suicide as well. Estimates range from firearms being used in 80 percent to 94 percent of cases..."

http://www.vpc.org/studies/amertrend.htm

[RoeBear]

3. Of course...

...it's being investigated as a murder suicide but this could very well be a death pact the couple had (terminal illness, other spouse didn't want to live on). Odds are this will never be updated if it was.

[Fescue4u]

5. You seem more concerned about the gun than the death.

Frankly I find it very sad that someone would choose to end their life and take anothers. The tool they used is insignificant.

I just don't understand why gun control zealots focus on the tools, rather than the tragedy.

[CO Liberal]

6. They're Completely Inteertwined

You cannot separate the gun from the tragedy - the gun was the tool that made the tragedy possible.

[Fescue4u]

7. So guns make tragedys possible huh?

Shakespear would be suprised....

And so would the thousands of Japanese would commit suicide every year without benefit of guns.

And so would the man I saw 10 years ago jump in front of train to commit suicide.

[CO Liberal]

8. It Made THIS PARTICULAR TRAGEDY Possible

OK????

[RoeBear]

9. Conversly, are you saying...

...that this crime (if it was one) would have been impossible without the gun?

[CO Liberal]

10. The Gun Made It Easier

True, you can kill someone else with a knife, axe, or baseball bat, but I think it's harder to commit suicide that way.

[RoeBear]

13. 1% easier?

Come on CO, you're smart enough to realize that a determined person is going to find the means to carry out their plan.

[CO Liberal]

14. Someone Trying to Commit Murder-Suicide With a Baseball Bat...

....would have to be VERY determined.

:-)

[Fescue4u]

22. Im willing to place a large bet, that this man was determined.

Undetermined people do not kill and then committ suicide.

[iverglas]

33. sad, sad

That people with so little knowledge of anything feel so entitled to share it.

People "determined" to commit suicide, firmly resolved and setting out on a quest to find the means. Yup, there are lots of them in the morgue.

Do none of you feel any responsibility to the human species to try to contribute something truthful, meaningful, worthwhile, to the discourse and reflection about us?

Are other people's lives really just instrumentalities to be used so that you can get your own way?

Speculation about these lives and deaths, such as I see here, churns my tummy. It doesn't even qualify as speculation, to be accurate. It's just plain imposition of your ends on them as means to those ends.

The odds are that the man was an alcoholic abuser, and the woman an alcoholic with a history of abuse from childhood. The odds are that their entire relationship, and lives, were marked by violence. The odds are that these deaths were an impulsive act, made possible by the emotions and substances that clouded both their judgments, that made her less able to behave less self-destructively than she probably did, and him less able to repress his violent and abusive impulses ... and made possible by his access to the means with which to act on those impulses and achieve the momentary goal that he had set.

The odds are that "determination" was about the least significant contributing factor in these deaths that you can imagine, that they arose out of the precise opposite of determination: out of reduced and impaired intellectual capacity and impulse control, out of despair, out of rage, out of the easiness, *not* despite the difficulty, of doing what was done.

I know what those odds are because I've actually studied, for pay, these very situations, just for starters. I do think that anyone with a grain of sense, a minimum of curiosity, and a shred of integrity either already knows or could easily determine what those odds are for him/herself.

Of course, I understand how anyone with the sense and curiosity, but not the integrity, might refrain from doing the nanobit of investigation and reflection that it would take to determine that ... because it wouldn't be in his/her own interests, as s/he defines them, to do it.

For that purpose, making up disrespectful fairy tales about other people's lives and about human life in general works much better.

.

[Fescue4u]

16. Of course not it didnt

This PARTICULAR tragedy was as possible with a gun as without.

[CO Liberal]

19. But It Was PERFORMED With a Gun

Please do not cloud the issue by trying to bring in different weapons.

[Fescue4u]

21. SO?

All that matters is that two people are dead.

The results shock me far more than the method.

I suppose we should feel better if they were cut and bleed to death slowly?

And any thinking person knows that lack of a gun would not have prevented tihs.

[CO Liberal]

23. You Don't Know That

Someone can outrun a person wielding a different type of weapon better than they can outrun a bullet.

And I resent your implication that I am not a "thinking person".

[Fescue4u]

24. Im not implying that you are not a thinking person.

However your argument is not one that I would try to sell to a thinking person.

Nonetheless, it is SILLY to believe that the only this way tragedy could have occured is with a gun. That is tunnel vision and get us no where.

Im mean really. Who would feel better if these two people died through poison ingestion? I certainly would not.

The means is irrelevant. The end result and what drove these people there IS the issue.

[Spoonman]

11. If you feel so strongly

about this issue, then start screaming about banning cars and alcohol

42,900 people died in car accidents in 2001.

Because, the car was the tool that made these tragedies possible

It is estimated that over 3 million teens between the ages of 14 and 17 in the United States today are problem drinkers.

Currently, nearly 14 million Americans—1 in every 13 adults-abuse alcohol or are alcoholic.

Alcohol contributes to 100,000 deaths annually, making it the third leading cause of preventable mortality in the United States after tobacco and diet/activity patterns.

Because, the alcohol was the tool that made these tragedies possible


You can blame guns all you want, but people pull the trigger, and the problem is with people!

[CO Liberal]

12. And a Big Part Of That Problem......

...is too many of the wrong people are able to pull the trigger.

You are constantly trying to shift the discussion to cars, as if they are the same. OK - you have to be licensed to drive a car on public roads. Are you also in favor of licensing gun ownership?

[Spoonman]

15. OK

license and register guns, and it will NOT make one shits bit of difference to prevent this from happening!

If it does nothing to prevent this type of incident, why impose more restrictions on our rights?

I use cars, because they cause more deaths and they ARE registered, required by law to have insurance, and you have to be licensed to drive them.

Even with these "laws", people still drive drunk, and people still are killed by the negligence of the operator.

People use cars as weapons to run over friends, cheating husbands and strangers!

Although there are fewer intentional homicides from cars than guns, the point being made is simple for most.

Your side claims 90,000 dead and injured each year. Approximately 10,000 are intentional homicides, with 30,000 total fatalities.

Cars kill 42,900 people a year, you do not seem to be screaming for more regulations or bans to reduce this number, and if you were, you would get the same response from car enthusiasts. Automotive manufacturers are not, and never have been liable for the criminal misuse of their products. They have not and never will be required to engineer "safety" features that will prevent the misuse of their products.

Alcohol is an even bigger problem. 100,000 deaths a year and it is a contributing factor in a huge number of accidental deaths, suicides and aggravated assaults resulting in death.

It is highly regulated, more so than cars, but more laws have failed to curtail this "menace" to society.

How many times have you ever gone off on a rant to hold the distilleries accountable for their products misuse?

Distilleries have never been liable for the resulting consequences of the use of their products, and will not ever be required to engineer "safety" features that will prevent the misuse of their products.

I would venture to say that 100,000 deaths annually is what, a little over three times the rate of gun related fatalities?
Sounds to me like it would be a little higher on the list with someone who is truly concerned about the safety of humanity.

Maybe what the RKBA crowd is truly up against is a bunch of people who are afraid of or just do not like guns, not people who care about "safety".

[MrBenchley]

17. Too frigging funny....

"Distilleries have never been liable for the resulting consequences of the use of their products"
Bars and bartenders certainly are...and are liable if they overserve somebody who goes out and kill someone...

As for distilleries: "Working together, the beverage-alcohol industry, federal and state governments, local communities, private organizations and individuals are making progress in encouraging responsible consumption of alcohol and fighting all forms of alcohol abuse. According to government statistics, underage drinking is near its lowest point since 1974, when data was first collected. In addition, the number of teenage drivers involved in fatal drunk-driving accidents, as well as drunk-driving fatalities for all ages, continues to decline. "

http://www.lasvegasweekly.com/2003/06_05/nightlife_bottomsup.html

"Cars kill 42,900 people a year"
Gee, and how many people use cars EVERY day? A hell of a lot more than use guns. Furthermore, almost all of the deaths due to cars are accidental...and there is a constant effort to improve automobile and road safety and cut down on accidents.. By contrast almost all of the deaths by gunfire are DELIBERATE.

[Spoonman]

26. Yes it is too friggen funny

"Bars and bartenders certainly are...and are liable if they overserve somebody who goes out and kill someone..."

If they "overserve" someone, then the drunk goes out and shoots someone, they have ZERO liability.

Who sold that one to you?

Hey, wanna buy a bridge?

Their liability is very limited, and has never been applied to anything outside of the operation of a motor vehicle.

Here I'll post it again.... in vain, because you will not acknowledge the FACT that it's true.

Distilleries have never been liable for the resulting consequences of the use of their products

Your argument that gun manufacturers should be liable for the deliberate/criminal misuse of their product is no different than distilleries should be responsible.

"Working together, the beverage-alcohol industry, federal and state governments, local communities, private organizations and individuals are making progress in encouraging responsible consumption of alcohol"

Yea surrrrre.... thats why they decided to start running ads on television again after a 50-year voluntary ban on television advertising.

http://www.cspinet.org/booze/liquor_branded_summary.htm

“Teens say they don't pay much attention to commercials, but their high un-aided product and brand recall -- including for alcoholic beverages -- indicates that advertisers saturate this audience with advertising.”


Oh such a responsible group, can you say “corrupt liquor industry”?

“there is a constant effort to improve automobile and road safety and cut down on accidents.”

Seeing as cars are another “tool” used in drive-by shootings, would not the same “if there were no cars there would be no drive-by shootings” apply the same as you apply it to guns?

So tell us, when are the automotive manufacturers going to court on their liability for the all the crimes committed using a vehicle?

When are they going to install the anti-drive by shooting safety device, anti-drunk driving device and the anti-getaway car device?

“By contrast almost all of the deaths by gunfire are DELIBERATE.”

More deliberate mistruths by the hoplophobia crowd, not even one third of them are.

[MrBenchley]

29. Well, don't let the facts burden you down spoon....

They sure didn't when you were peddling that hooey about Harris County and Texas being a right to work state....

http://www.ddreform.org/Articles/Towery18.html


Now go snivel about how sad it is that the gun industry is corrupt to someone who gives a crap.

[Spoonman]

30. It would be better stated to say

The facts are too much for you to handle.

They sure didn't when you were peddling that hooey about Harris County and Texas being a right to work state

Did you forget what you said: "Considering Texas is a "right to work" state...."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=10135&mesg_id=10584&page=

Texas is an employer State, thus having a HUGE union labor force, just like I stated!!

Next time don't try to spin it from what you said into what I said! Lies don't spin out into truths.

Now from your own article:

"State legislation requiring taverns to have liquor liability coverage is one of several legal reforms the Towerys are advocating in their developing role as advocates against drunken driving."

Now what did I say, oh yea..

Bars and bartenders liability is very limited, and has never been applied to anything outside of the operation of a motor vehicle.

THANK YOU FOR THE ARTICLE PROVING ME RIGHT!

However, you still dodged the whole point with regards to the fact that distilleries have never been liable for the resulting consequences of the use of their products.

In other words the MANUFACTURES, NOT THE DISTRIBUTORS!!!

Now go snivel about how sad it is that your corrupt gun industry should be liable theory to someone who is stupid enough to buy it.

[CO Liberal]

18. **** shaking head ****

Maybe what the RKBA crowd is truly up against is a bunch of people who are afraid of or just do not like guns, not people who care about "safety".

And maybe what we're up against is a people who care more about their guns than their fellow man........

[Spoonman]

27. Don't shake it too hard

you might get a headache from the echo.

"their fellow man"

Do you see me jumping for joy and posting every shooting victim story I come across?....no, that would be you.

Do you see me reveling in the misfortune of these victims?......no, that would be MrB.

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RoeBear]

20. Correction, and please realize...

...the gun was the 'tool' used, it DID NOT make the tragedy possible.
For God's sake we don't even know if this was actually a crime or not.

[CO Liberal]

25. The Gun Facilitated The Tragedy

No matter how much you pro-gunners try, yo cannot separate the gun from the act of using that gun. They're completely intertwined.

[furrylitldevil]

28. so if a gun is a tool

then how come I don't see anybody trying to hammer a nail in with the butt of a gun? Or cutting a piece of wood? Or anything even remotely associated with any other tool ever invented?

[CO Liberal]

31. Because It's The Wrong Tool For the Job

To quickly drive in a nail, the tool of choice is a hammer.

To quickly cut a piece of wood, the tool of choice is a saw.

To quickly kill someone (or yourself), the tool of choice is a gun.