My next door neighbor got shot!
If you think there is less violence in small towns, think again. Brenda, my next door neighbor in my four plex had taken in her son. The son was a wierd ass kid who spooked me from day one. He also started having very loud arguments with his Mom from day one.
I guess he wasn't happy about getting to live rent free with all his meals provided by his hard working Mom who has a demanding job cleaning and sterilizing operating rooms at the local hospital.
Well, last night they had the loudest argument yet. Then I heard some sounds that I thought were late 4th of July fireworkers, and everything next door went dead quiet - until the ambulance and the police showed up.
It turns out that the "firecrackers" were the sounds of the boy shooting Brenda. He shot her in the back and then tried to shoot her in the head, but lucky for Brenda, the gun misfired, and she was able to crawl to the phone and dial 911. She is now in the hospital up in Grand Junction, Colorado.
And I thought I had gotten away from all that big city violence by moving to a town of 10,000 souls. Whatever is this world coming to? :thepain:
You can't get away from violence without getting away from people...
and animals...
and carnivorous plants.
The best you can do is try to keep yourself safe... I hope you will. :thumb:
Troubled kids SUCK !!!!!
I hope he is in Jail and stays there for a Good Long time !!!
thoughts and prayers for you And Yer neighbor !!
It's sad and startling when something like that happens so close to home.
Our neighbor too.
But it is going to happen more and more often here in the US.
But it is going to happen more and more often here in the US.
Why do you think that, Lamplighter?
the coming new world of the 2nd Amendment, of course
Oh - how awful!!
Keep us updated on her, Sam. How terrible for her!!
the coming new world of the 2nd Amendment, of course
Hmmmm... To the best of my recollection, the second amendment has been around for a while. I don't see why it would cause a sudden increase in the rate of domestic violence now.
That damn kid would have probably hit Brenda in the head with a rock if a gun had not been available.
As a matter of fact, the courts have just issued a ruling affirming that its a felony for a person convicted of domestic violence to own a gun.
Somehow, I'd bet that this incident was just a new high in violent behavior by junior. I doubt if he'd be very impressed by the court's ruling making it illegal for him to own a firearm. :eyebrow:
The debate over guns is like religion... it can divide the best of friends.
I suspect the general public and both sides believe the recent SC decision will change (increase) gun ownership throughout the US.
But people differ on whether that's a good thing or not.
I think it's a simple extrapolation that the higher the prevalence of guns, the higher the number incidents of gun violence will occur.
A link to Harvard's research center on prevalence and incidents is
hereThe US has always promoted efficiency.
I think it's a simple extrapolation that the higher the prevalence of guns, the higher the number incidents of gun violence will occur.
A link to Harvard's research center on prevalence and incidents is here
That is the logical assumption I would make as well. I recall reading something that concluded just the opposite. Damned if I can find it now though.
John Lott, More Guns, Less Crime
The US has always promoted efficiency.
lol
A link to Harvard's research center on prevalence and incidents is here
Interesting overview. Thank you. I have always felt that if someone is compelled to violence then s/he would simply resort to whatever is handy - be it a knife, a rock, or a gun. Your link makes me feel that I may have to rethink this stance.
However, I remain a firm believer in the right to bear arms. And there are countries where the link between weapons ownership and violence are not especially related. Switzerland, for one. And I'm sure there are others.
And there are countries where the link between weapons ownership and violence are not especially related. Switzerland, for one.
Because in countries where that relationship exists, the 'gun control' that politics so fear is required in places such as Switzerland. In Switzerland gun ownership is heavily regulated that includes constant military training, guns that are always traceable, and consequences for using a gun without that training.
You kill a lot less people when all you have is rocks.
Nice point, Mr tw.
Oh, in a regular battle or something, I'd much rather be on the side which has guns, rather than the side which has rocks.
My bias comes from a terrifying incident in my own life when an ex-boyfriend went psycho on me and tried to strangle me with his bare hands. That boy didn't need a gun - no siree. I almost ate the big cookie that time.
Although, then again if he'd had a gun I might not be here for sure. I can see both sides of the question, I guess.
I feel so sorry for Brenda. She must have been absolutely terrified. And I wonder if she'll ever be able to work again after her injury. I feel scared just having been the next door neighbor. :eek:
How awful Sam... I feel bad for both of you. I'm trying to decide if it would be more/less traumatic to be attacked by a random stranger instead... I guess it doesn't matter.
Sam, that shit is scary. Prolly the good news is in terms of randomness, that's all the closer you'll get.
Because in countries where that relationship exists, the 'gun control' that politics so fears is required in places such as Switzerland. In Switzerland your gun ownership is heavily regulated that includes constant military training and consequences for using a gun without that training.
Because in countries where that relationship exists, the 'gun control' that politics so fear is required in places such as Switzerland. In Switzerland gun ownership is heavily regulated that includes constant military training, guns that are always traceable, and consequences for using a gun without that training.
Good point(s)?
Because in countries where that relationship exists, the 'gun control' that politics so fear is required in places such as Switzerland. In Switzerland gun ownership is heavily regulated that includes constant military training, guns that are always traceable, and consequences for using a gun without that training.
Good point(s)?
I for one don't feel these are good points. It is relatively easy to purchase a rifle in Switzerland and shooting clubs abound.
From Wikipedia on Swiss gun laws:
After turning 18, any individual can buy singleshot or semiautomatic long arms (breech-loading or muzzle-loading) without a permit (so-called "free arms"). Likewise, members of a recognized rifle association do not need a buying permit for purchasing antique repeaters, and hunters do not need one for buying typical hunting rifles.
Most types of ammunition are available for commercial sale, including full metal jacket bullet calibres for military-issue weapons; hollow point rounds are only permitted for hunters. Ammunition sales are registered only at the point of sale by recording the buyer's name in a bound book.
I for one don't feel these are good points.
I was referring to the two posts which are virtually identical.
I'll have to go look for the article that I read earlier this week countering the "less guns less violent crime" theory.
Sam, I am so sorry for you. At least the son is in custody and will hopefully never see the light of day again, if not worse.
For now . . .
Switzerland practices universal conscription, which requires that all able-bodied male citizens keep fully-automatic firearms at home in case of a call-up. Every male between the ages of 20 and 34 is considered a candidate for conscription into the military, and following a brief period of active duty will commonly be enrolled in the militia until age or an inability to serve ends his service obligation.[34]
In an extensive series of studies of large, nationally representative samples of crime incidents, criminologist Gary Kleck found that crime victims who defend themselves with guns are less likely to be injured or lose property than victims who either did not resist, or resisted without guns. This was so, even though the victims using guns typically faced more dangerous circumstances than other victims. The findings applied to both robberies and assaults.[82] Other research on rape indicated that although victims rarely resisted with guns, those using other weapons were less likely to be raped, and no more likely to suffer other injuries besides rape itself, than victims who did not resist, or resisted without weapons.[83] There is no evidence that victim use of a gun for self-protection provokes offenders into attacking the defending victim or results in the offender taking the gun away and using it against the victim.[84]
Kleck has also shown, in his own national survey, and in other surveys with smaller sample sizes, that the numbers of defensive uses of guns by crime victims each year are probably substantially larger than the largest estimates of the number of crimes committed of offenders using guns.[85] Thus, defensive gun use by victims is both effective and, relative to criminal uses, frequent. In a largely approving review of Kleck's book Point Blank (1991) in the journal Political Psychology, Joseph F. Sheley argues that Kleck sidesteps the larger political problem of the role of gun culture in contributing to the spread and effect of violence in the United States.[86]
The economist John Lott, in his book More Guns, Less Crime, states that laws which make it easier for law-abiding citizens to get a permit to carry a gun in public places, cause reductions in crime. Lott's results suggest that allowing law-abiding citizens to carry concealed firearms deters crime because potential criminals do not know who may or may not be carrying a firearm. Lott's data came from the FBI's crime statistics from all 3,054 US counties.[87]
Critics, mostly gun-control advocates, have asserted that Lott's county-based crime data were largely meaningless because they did not reflect actual rates of crime in all the counties that Lott studied, but rather the number of crimes occurring in whatever local jurisdictions (towns and cities) that happened to report their crime statistics to state authorities. Thus, some of the supposed crime drops that Lott attributed to the new carry laws could merely have been the result of fewer local police forces reporting crime statistics. Lott answered their assertions by publishing his study and noting that this fact was taken into account by using the same police agencies that reported their statistics both before and after the new concealed carry laws took effect.
The efficacy of gun control legislation at reducing the availability of guns has been challenged by, among others, the testimony of criminals that they do not obey gun control laws, and by the lack of evidence of any efficacy of such laws in reducing violent crime. The most thorough analysis of the impact of gun control laws, by Kleck, covered 18 major types of gun control and every major type of violent crime or violence (including suicide), and found that gun laws generally had no significant effect on violent crime rates or suicide rates.
Yep. We are in agreement on this issue, Classic. (Lets not risk discussing it on the politics forum, though. Might break the spell!) ;)
I think tw might have been thinking of Germany's gun laws which are fairly strict:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Germany
Current laws
After 1945, the Allied Forces commanded the complete disarming of Germany. Even German police officers were initially not allowed to carry firearms. Private ownership of firearms was not allowed until after 1956[8]. The legal status returned essentially to that of the Law on Firearms and Ammunition of 1928. The regulation of the matter was thoroughly revised in 1972, when the new Federal Weapons Act (Bundeswaffengesetz) became effective.
In Germany the possession of any firearm with a fire energy exceeding 7.5 Joule requires a valid firearms ownership license for any particular weapon. The current Federal Weapons Act adopts a two-tiered approach to firearms licensing.
A firearms ownership license (Waffenbesitzkarte) must be obtained before a weapon can be purchased. Owners of multiple firearms need separate ownership licenses for every single firearm they own. It entitles owners to purchase firearms and handle them on their own property and any private property with property owner consent. On public premises, a licensed firearm must be transported unloaded and in a stable, fully enclosing, locked container. A weapons ownership license does not entitle the owner to shoot the weapon or carry it on public premises without the prescribed container. Firearms ownership licenses are valid three years or less, and owners must obtain mandatory insurance and a means to securely store the weapon on their premises (a weapons locker). Blanket ownership licenses are sometimes issued to arms dealers.
A number of criteria must be met before a firearms ownership license is issued:
age of consent (18 years for rimfire calibers/21 years for higher calibers) (§ 4 WaffG)
trustworthiness (§ 5 WaffG)
personal adequacy (§ 6 WaffG)
expert knowledge (§ 7 WaffG) and
necessity (§ 8 WaffG) (Necessity is automatically assumed present for licensed hunters and owners of a carry permits (Waffenschein)).
Persons who are
convicted felons
have a record of mental disorder or
are deemed unreliable (which includes people with drug or alcohol addiction histories and known violent or aggressive persons)
are barred from obtaining a firearms ownership license.
I don't know how she's doing at this point. The police came and questioned me, but they didn't tell me anything except that she was airlifted to Grand Junction which is like 300 miles away. I couldn't tell the police much either - just that I could hear the two of them arguing. The irony is that I was actually going to call 911 myself, but then all the shouting suddenly stopped, so I thought it was OK. Firecrackers! Boy, was I nieve or what?
Good point(s)?
Don't be a dick.:eyebrow:
So this local guy, church-going man, goes into apartment of wife, a teacher, he is separated from: they were all to go swimming, they had attended marriage counseling. Something happened, and he didn't kill the wife, but his 21 (?) year old stepson. Took his 7 year old son and went on the run. Eventually he dropped the kid at relatives and returned to the area. After a chase he was arrested. At court, film shows him to be pretty lacksadaisacal (hi, have a nice day) in spite of the fact he and his glock put a few rounds in a now-dead and by all reports (my ex plays music at these people's church) a very nice young man. This apartment was above my nephew and nephew's fiancee's apartment.
What the hell is wrong with people? Same things that have been wrong since the beginning of time, same things that will be with us forever. Small town is not immune, never has been...it's just so much less than urban areas (like where I work.)
I hope your neighbor recovers and with time it doesn't seem so scary. Terrible when something happens so close because it does, in a way, happen to you too.
You kill a lot less people when all you have is rocks.
Agreed......but the degradation of society values is also a big factor to be taken into account. Sure there would have been lesser domestic violence I guess had there been guns back in days of just rocks.
(I can't help imagining Alexander standing with an automatic rifle though:rattat:)
Hope that poor lady comes up well.
So this local guy, church-going man, goes into apartment of wife, a teacher, he is separated from: they were all to go swimming, they had attended marriage counseling. Something happened, and he didn't kill the wife, but his 21 (?) year old stepson. Took his 7 year old son and went on the run. Eventually he dropped the kid at relatives and returned to the area. After a chase he was arrested. At court, film shows him to be pretty lacksadaisacal (hi, have a nice day) in spite of the fact he and his glock put a few rounds in a now-dead and by all reports (my ex plays music at these people's church) a very nice young man. This apartment was above my nephew and nephew's fiancee's apartment.
What the hell is wrong with people? Same things that have been wrong since the beginning of time, same things that will be with us forever. Small town is not immune, never has been...it's just so much less than urban areas (like where I work.)
I hope your neighbor recovers and with time it doesn't seem so scary. Terrible when something happens so close because it does, in a way, happen to you too.
I'm not sure who killed whom in this narrative, but someone died.
What the hell is wrong with people? Same things that have been wrong since the beginning of time, same things that will be with us forever. Small town is not immune, never has been...it's just so much less than urban areas (like where I work.).
this. domestic violence is universal; don't think it matters how big the town is, or how well armed the participants are. Just people being cruel to one another.
I'm not sure who killed whom in this narrative, but someone died.
I thought the "he didn't kill the wife, but the 21 year old stepson" you know, the one he glocked six or seven times for no reason, the "nice young man" would be a reader's tipoff. Please to let me revise for clarity. What reading level do squirrel's prefer?
this. domestic violence is universal; don't think it matters how big the town is, or how well armed the participants are. Just people being cruel to one another.
Almond!
It's a sad thing, isn't it. :(
I'm not very clear either, Shaw. The person killed was the stepson? Or was the stepson the killer? :confused:
1) Ex husband walks into apartment of 'estranged but working on counseling with' wife.
2) 21 year old stepson there
3) estranged wife and real 7 year old son also there
4) killed the fuck out of the 21 year old stepson
5) took off with the 7 year old son
6) Amber Alert issued
7) 7 year old son dropped with relatives in IN or IL or somewhere
8) Killer returns to area, is chased, is arrested
9) Useless murderer lurves the camera "kthx for the 'rainment, y'all."
10) 21 year old still dead as fuck, riddled with bullet holes.
Re-reading, it wasn't clear. Sorry folks. :blush:
Here's a link:
http://www.whiotv.com/news/24207881/detail.htmlI missed the period and capital letter after "21 y.o stepson" and read it like this:
Something happened, and he didn't kill the wife, but his 21 (?) year old stepson took his 7 year old son and went on the run
yeah, in hindsight it was very poorly written. I've been practicing free-association in my writing but sometimes it gets very messy just like my bedroom floor because I'm so sick of my cats but I love them but please take them away in fact please take me away just like Calgon only with money and a lamborghini.
Two things:
1. Some of you folks have lysdexia.
2. Big city, or, small town, people are just fucked up.
N. More LEGAL guns = less violent crimes. Look at the stats for any state that has had concealed carry laws for more than five years.
Some of you folks have lysdexia.
LOL I actually sat here for a moment and wondered what "lysdexia" is. I guess I've got it.
Dyslexics of the world, untie!
Did you hear about the dyslexic, agnostic, insomniac?
He stayed awake all night wondering if there is a dog.
I'll have to go look for the article that I read earlier this week countering the "less guns less violent crime" theory.
More guns will not universally raise or lower violent crime. It greatly depends on the gun culture of the society.
If very responsible people with common sense carry more guns the number of violent crimes will most likely go down. You do not want to rob someone with a .45. You do not rob a house when they own a shotgun.
On the other hand, if irresponsible people, gang members for example, get hold of guns, the number of violent crimes will most likely rise. They see gun as a power they can abuse and will do just that.
Sorry to hear this happened Sam. Hope she gets better.
I dunno, Pierce: in the American gun culture, a prevalence of weapons owned and carried is without exception associated with a drop in crime, particularly violent crime, generally if perhaps a bit less strongly a drop in property crime as well. It suggests that all crime clusters around certain individuals among whom aberrant behavior abounds. Suppress these and you can start leaving doors unlocked again.
That said, I don't think America contains humans very much different from humans anyplace else. It doesn't require noteworthy extremities of responsibility to be both safe and effective with a personal weapon. The regular portion does the job very well. You don't have to be the Pope to pack heat in a socially-redeeming-value way. For instance, snuffing out gang members behaving with lethal irresponsibility. Shooting back, to fight crime, works so often that one really should think more of it would be even better, particularly in crime-rich neighborhoods.
More guns will not universally raise or lower violent crime.
If very responsible people ...
On the other hand, if irresponsible people, ...
Agreed. I think that pretty much goes without saying. However, Lets focus on this
Sorry to hear this happened Sam. Hope she gets better.
and not hijack Sam's thread for a gun debate. Sorry Sam.
Any update?
I think it's a great idea to curb the drift!
Oh me too! He should try out for moderator!
:lol:
However, Lets focus on this
and not hijack Sam's thread for a gun debate. Sorry Sam.
Any update?
Think nothing of it, Classic. Thread drift is one of the joys of the cellar. It sounds like Brenda will be getting out of the hospital and be able to get around with the use of a walker. Haven't heard if her injuries are permanent or not.
I really, really hope that she will continue to press charges against junior because:
a) He should be punished for this - at the very least locked up on a state ward for the criminally insane for a very long time.
b) The last thing I need is for him to get out of jail and kiss and make up with Mom. The walls of these apartments are thin and I don't want to encounter a stray bullet next time around. :eek:
A person has to be a little mental to try and kill their parents. That's fucked. Hopefully she's all right.
I think it's a great idea to curb the drift!
Why do you hate America? :lol:
Welcome to the Cellar, Getgo.
Talked to Brenda today and she is very shaken and happy to be alive. She is stunned that her own son would shoot her.
After hearing more of the story, I was surprised that she was surprised. Turns out Brenda's ex-husband was both verbally and physically abusive. He, himself, would sometimes draw a gun and threaten Brenda (he never shot her tho). This went on for 17 years, all the time junior was growing up that was the role model dear old Dad presented him with.
Then to put the icing on the cake, junior suffered a major head injury in a car wreck when he was 16. He is currently on disability because of the lasting effects of this old injury.
Brenda couldn't support him on her salary and wanted him to leave. But he was perfectly happy getting a free air conditioned apartment complete with crunchies, cable TV, internet, and computer games. No way was he gonna leave. He snapped. He'd rather shoot Mom than leave.
Brenda was in surgery for 14 hours! The bullet barely missed her spinal cord but did go through one of her lungs, her kidney, and her liver. She has a very long recovery ahead of her - both emotionally and physically.
I feel so bad that I just minded my own business when I heard the altercation. I could have saved Brenda much grief if only I'd called 911 when I first heard the fight break out. Its so hard to know what the right thing to do is sometimes. :(
Don't beat yourself up Sam, it's one of those situations where it's tough to decide. If the row wasn't serious, your neighbor might be pissed at you. Besides they probably wouldn't have got there in time anyway.
I don't know, Bruce. In this small town the cops can arrive in as little as 5 minutes. I had a gut instinct that something was very wrong, but didn't follow it. Brenda said she screamed for help, but the walls here are not so thin that you can make out words through them. And I was trying not to be a busy body with my ear against the wall.
But I guess you're right. It doesn't help anything to blame myself at this late date.
Sam, you might have prevented Brenda getting shot by calling the cops or you might not have. Who knows, maybe the cop could have gotten shot as well? You did what you thought was best at the time, and it probably was.
What they said!
Sometimes I think our minds/bodies instinctively take the right path in those kinds of situation. Only hindsight is 20/20. :)
The Digr household use to have neighbors (somewhat) like these. Loud, fighting, females screaming. We called the cops left and right. Nobody likes the cops at their house, and sure enough they moved pretty soon.
Sorry to hear you went through that Sam, and for Brenda too.
Remember, guns don't people, people kill people.
Yeah, knives don't kill people either, apparently.
Sam, neighbors of yours?
[SIZE="1"]from Kentucky.com[/SIZE]
A Mason County woman who was stabbed over the weekend was recovering Tuesday at the University of Kentucky Chandler Hospital.
Mason County Sheriff Patrick Boggs said a relative of Phoebe Coffey, 84, called deputies Saturday morning and asked them to make a welfare check. Boggs said deputies found the woman lying in her driveway about 11:45 a.m. Saturday at her home in Plumville. Coffey was taken to a local hospital before she was transferred to UK Hospital, where she was listed in fair condition Tuesday.
Coffey's son, Larry Coffey, 60, is charged with attempted murder. Larry Coffey is being held at the Mason County jail on a $250,000 cash bond.
Investigators said they think the stabbing occurred Friday night.