world

2 workers, 2 customers shot to death at New York pharmacy

52 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2011 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

52 Comments
Login to comment

tragic. RIP get those damn guns off your streets

1 ( +1 / -0 )

This made the news because it happened in a rural suburb with very little violent crime. In American inner cities, robbery homicides are a common, everyday occurrence. For this reason, the life expectancy of clerks at late-night businesses, like pawn shops, liquor stores, pharmacies, gas stations, etc. is commensurately lower than the population at large.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I so enjoy living in a country where idiots with guns are not running around at night shooting people. But, I doubt Americans will ever wake up and institute any meaningful gun control measures. The denial runs too deep.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Gun-nuts will argue that all four of those people would have been dead either way if that was the man's intent -- the gun had nothing to do with it. He could have picked up some marshmallows from one of the aisles and used them as weapons, if he were so determined and there's no way they could have fought back, same as they could not against his gun.

Seriously, is anyone surprised by this? No. Saddened, yes, but Americans cannot possibly be as saddened by this as those elsewhere who continuously hear about such stories, for American allow this to happen, plain and simple. The even sadder part is that out of the four dead, probably one or more belongs to a family who has at least a couple of members who are pro-gun. These people will now scream out 'WHY???' or else completely deny it and suggest everyone in the shop should have been carrying gats.

My heart goes out to these poor souls. I hope the gunman is caught and put to justice. Nothing will change on the gun front, of course, except for the fact that the families of those killed might think twice about the 'right to bear arms'.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Waiting for the posts that will say if all 4 "carried" they would be alive now and the perp would be a sieve.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

I say that Zenny. But you cannot be 17 and carry. The other three could have though, and I am sure one of them would have blown the perp down. Pays to own a gun in America. I am trained to shoot. Hobby.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Is this the top story to have happened in the whole world of the world that is not Japan? This appears to be domestic US news.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I am sure one of them would have blown the perp down.

Right, because more guns makes everything safer. Hahaha!

I love that line of reasoning. It's so counter-intuitive.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Stranger.

I agree usually done by a person that never done combat training or never looked down the business end of one pointed at them with intent.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I love living in Japan where I don't have to carry a gun.

Don't get me wrong, I love America too but I always have a lot of guns around me back in the states..

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I hope they catch the murderer, swiftly convict the murderer, sentence the murderer to death by firing squad, and swifly carry out the sentence.

"I love living in Japan where I don't have to carry a gun."

You can't carry a gun unless you're a cop or a yakuza. Everyone else uses knives and trucks to kill.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yup, stories like these make me appreciate living in Japan, where after 10 years, I can still feel safe walking to my local convenience store at night to pick up some ice cream, without having a bulky dangerous thing like a gun holstered under my arm. Heck, there are many places in the U.S. I wouldn't even think of going during the day. I too still love the U.S., but I always have to remember to put up my guard and always think twice about where and when I go certain places.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'm fairly confident we'll never see the follow-up on this one. The perps will be caught , done in by their own stupidity or desperation, and the profile will most likely match the national demographic for predators of this sort. And the MSM will whitewash it all if that is the case.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I am not trying, nor do i want to start some sort of gun debate here (we all know that goes no where). But as for the gun man, where do you think he got the gun? Do you think he legally purchased it? No I am not for every yahoo out there being able to carry a gun either. My point is that he is a murderer/criminal...whether guns are legal or not he's going to get one.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

he's going to get one.

Unless he can't. That's why combinis get robbed by people with knives in Japan.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I so enjoy living in a country where idiots with guns are not running around at night shooting people. But, I doubt Americans will ever wake up and institute any meaningful gun control measures. The denial runs too deep.

@Stranger_in_a_Strange_Land I guess you didn't read the article in the crime section about an idot going around and robbing 80 year old women with a knife in Tokyo. If they use guns or knives there are bad people out there to do bad things.

America does have good gun control measures. I doubt if this person would have been able to buy a gun legitimately due to his past criminal record. I bet he used an illegally purchased gun.

As far as those who say you should have more carry permits, I agree. Looking back at the article I mentioned about the knife welding man who robbed 80 year old women, police believe he cased out the area to find out where the women lived. I amsure that this perp cased out this drug store too. But in both cases, you add the random element of someone possibly having a gun, I imagine that in both cases, the perps may not have chosen to rob.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

good gun control measures.

Good gun control measures means that no one should be able to get a gun illegally. People go on and on that all Americans have the right to bear arms. However, I feel that the right to feel safe in their own country should supersede that right to bear arms. The government does all it can to protect Americans from threats abroad, but should remember that sometimes the greater threat lies among its own citizens who own guns illegally. Arming oneself may protect you from one other perp with a gun, but I sincerely doubt it would protect you from a whole gang with guns locked and loaded on your one gun. That gang would then shoot you dead and take your gun, thus adding more guns to the bad guys' stockpile.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

However, I feel that the right to feel safe in their own country should supersede that right to bear arms.

Gotcha. And do you feel that the right to not have to listen to idiots, should supersede their right to freedom of speech? I mean, as long as you're saying we shouldn't this, then you might as well question the rest of the rights guaranteed by the constitution. How about religion, thats a popular one, under consistent assault these days...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Well almost

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Mistake above...sorry. Well almost everyone here seems to be on the same page about one point...that this guy did not legally obtain the gun he used. So what good are tighter gun control measures going to do? He got it illegally. Gun control measures help only so much. (Just like here in Japan, only certain civilians can own guns, they have to be registered each year, and the ammo they have is checked and replaced for the same amount of new each year.) But if a criminal here wants a gun bad enough he is going to get one.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Do not forget "the right to bear arms" in the US is not just about protection. When I was still living in the states I shot both competitively and hunted. So those sports/hobbies should be taken away from me and thousands of others because this world has wackos that rob and murder. The criminals that obtain guns illegally should be able to break into someones house and rob and maybe kill them because this person has no way to protect themselves? Some people will say.."you don't need to protect yourself, just wait for them to leave then call the police." Ok so some drug addict or out right murderer, kills your spouse and children and leaves you crippled for the rest of your life. Call the police....good luck with that. Me crippled, my wife and kids gone....just roll me off the nearest bridge please.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Japan and the US are two totally different worlds so when people compare a combini store here getting robbed at knifepoint and a drugstore in the US getting robbed at gunpoint (funny no one has even mentioned thart the perp also, stole drugs...possibly strung out?) there is no compairison. Also don't forget when you read these type of stories that you are not getting the full story. A lot of people in the US tend to fight back, causing the perp to do something stupid. Here in Japan we all know generally someone being robbed tends to be compliant and give the perp what ever they want, so most of the time they remain safe. (but, that seems to be changing too.)

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

The drug/gang wars that are spilling over into the US from Mexico and Colombia will tighter gun control stop or help that? What about the people living in those border states? The anti gun advocates say things like these criminals have been getting thier guns from the US.....mind you these are anti gun advocates. Both CBS and CNN did studies WITH Mexican authorities and found that less than 1/3rd of the guns confiscated were from the US. Most were actually stolen or sold black market from South American militaries. (well no kidding you can't buty a rocket launcher or fully auto AK-47 from the local gun shop). Point is these are all criminals we are talking about, this guy could have went in and stabbed all of those people, I mean look at his competition that night. And worse yet people on certain drugs...it can take several trained officers to take that person down without using deadly force. So would tighter gun control have prevented this? Please tell me how.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

I guess you didn't read the article in the crime section about an idot

No, I read that one. So...?

America does have good gun control measures.

No, it doesn't.

then you might as well question the rest of the rights guaranteed by the constitution.

The United States Constitution is not a universal declaration of human rights. It is a document written by a very specific group of rebels in a very particular context who had no idea of the sheer idiocy of the people who would follow after them.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

In any case, in any country, with any amount of denial, a "perp" with a knife = less dangerous than a "perp" with a gun.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

@Jimney

So what good are tighter gun control measures going to do?

Fewer guns in circulation equals fewer guns to steal equals fewer guns stolen by bad guys equals a safer society, this is to be judged by degree obviously.

But if a criminal here wants a gun bad enough he is going to get one.

I think that might be an argument from adverse consequences, I can't remember. Sure, if someone might it his life goal to get a gun, he could probably get one in any country. But, how much effort and skill does and can the average criminal expend? The average criminal CANNOT get guns here. That's why combinis are robbed with knives, as I said. You are right about America and Japan being not very good comparisons. Japan is less violent, period, I think. Even if America had fewer guns, it would still be more dangerous and violent overall. But, despite that, guns do make it easier to kill. They facilitate the killing. I am definitely pro-hunting and target shooting, etc...but I think it's better if there are fewer firearms floating around.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

*makes ...... This damn laptop.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Alot of gun (weapons) problem in the U.S. are drug related. It is out of control and there is no way for law enforcement to decrease the number of crimes committed by guns. In the inner cities of high crime areas, many gangs are involved in turf war, and killings takes place. It is common for police to look the other way and they look the killings as one less problem. The jails are overcrowed and there are too many ex-convicts who are released early. They are strolling on the streets with nothing good do. The budget problem on all the states are starting to have more impact on the quality of life for hard working people in the U.S.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

When I was a kid around six on up to a teen I would travel everywhere on the trains and bus's with my friends and brothers and sister while growing up here in Japan , I can say I never had any problems, My parents felt that living here in Japan was the best place to be we were safe and secure. What I'm trying to say is that this is the safest place to live and yeah there are a few wacko's here and there but not like in the states, I have been to the states and find it a scarry place and in different places espically in the Capitol of Washington DC it has one of the highest crime rates. I have been told that 80 million people in the USA own guns some own hundreds.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

In any case, in any country, with any amount of denial, a "perp" with a knife = less dangerous than a "perp" with a gun.

@Stranger: Tell that to those who we have read on this forum who have been killed by stabbings. Remember the maniac in Akihabra? He killed seven(3 more than this case) with a knife. If they are not so dangerous, why didn't a regular person like yourself stop him.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Moderator: Back on topic please.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

He killed seven(3 more than this case) with a knife.

Don't see the logic. Are you trying to imply that he would have killed fewer victims with an automatic rifle? Wouldn't you rather have to deal with somebody armed with a knife, rather than with an Uzi?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Alphaape, thanks for the example. It's the atypical example than pro-gun people always bring up and I was expecting it.

Doesn't change the fact that it's much easier to kill with a gun than with a knife, both physically and psychologically.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Pro-gun" is the language "progressives" use to try and weaken the pro-liberty sentiment still alive in the US.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Guns don't equal liberty.

Rather, pro-gun is a polite term used to refer to people who live in fear, either of their own countrymen or of their government, and fantasize that having lots of guns around makes them safer.

This leads them to self-servingly misinterpret the U.S. consitution and try to convince everyone else that owning a gun is a basic human right.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Rather, pro-gun is a polite term used to refer to people who live in fear, either of their own countrymen or of their government, and fantasize that having lots of guns around makes them safer.

Wow, progun means living in fear eh? Thought it meant defending the rights and liberties handed down by our founding fathers. Heh, was I ever wrong...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Thought it meant defending the rights and liberties handed down by our founding fathers.

What rights would you be defending, and from whom? And you are going to defend them with guns? You are going to shoot someone in defense of your rights? Fascinating, please elaborate.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Simply put, toss the "gun rights" out the window. If a criminal wants to get a gun they'll most likely get a gun from any smuggler/criminal organization they want. No waiting period and no background check and the first place they'll be getting one anyways.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What rights would you be defending, and from whom? And you are going to defend them with guns? You are going to shoot someone in defense of your rights? Fascinating, please elaborate.

Isn't that obvious? Pro-gun should make it more then obvious what right are being defended. As for defending those rights with guns, lets hope it never comes to that. So long as others aren't pointing guns at the 'pro-gun' people, in their desperate attempt to take those individuals guns away, theres no reason why it should.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Isn't that obvious?

Not at all. You said, "the rights and liberties handed down by our founding fathers". What rights? Right to own guns? I don't actually think the US constitution says you have a right to own guns. I believe it says militias have the right to bear arms.

Also, I find it rather amusing how the pro-gun people worship the constitution and the "founding fathers"like some kind of cult/religion. Times change and the things that served society back then don't necessarily apply now. It really does remind me of religion, people following rules that were set forth back when the world was a different place instead of thinking to update them a little, or just writing some new rules. I think a new amendment to the constitution is well overdue.

I predict America will just become more and more dangerous. The middle class will slowly disappear and the rich will live in well guarded communities while the rest of the populace will blindly play out the tragic roles of victim/victimizer. And, the only thing that will give the people any sense of social connectivity will be the many wars America gets itself into.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The United States ranks #1 in the world in regards to private ownership of firearms. Something like 90 guns per 100 citizens. At the same time they rate #8 in the rate of firearm related murders per capita.

Following the election of Barack Obama in 2008 there was a major surge in firearms sales in the US so those ownership numbers may be even greater. The strange thing is that the murder rate has been on a steady decline for at least the last 20 years and there was a significant drop between 2008 and 2010. These numbers come from the FBI as well as the United Nations and many other organizations that have been keeping track. If you look at the issue with a clear eye and don’t let the dogma get the better of you there is a very clear trend here.

The more guns in the hands of Americans equals’ lower crime rates, including murder. For the vast majority of Americans, life in the US has gotten safer and continues in that direction. It’s just that they have been led to believe otherwise.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@Kuya

I think you may be confusing correlation with causation. Just because two things are sequential in time doesn't mean the first thing caused the second. The crime rates could have dropped for any number of reasons.

As for your #1 to #8 comparison, obviously gun ownership isn't the only factor involved in firearm related murders. Can you show me an example where a country banned guns and the crime/murder rates immediately went up? I would be very interested to see that.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Moderator: Readers, please focus your comments on what is in the story and do not veer off on comparisons with other countries.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You can very easily find people who will argue the point of causation vs. correlation; with their opinions being determined by which sacred cow they rode in on. It’s true that just because two things happen sequentially doesn’t mean that one caused the other, but….. it could have. Depends on what you want to believe.

A lot of posters on this thread seem pretty certain that the reason some freaked out junkie shot those people in that pharmacy was because the US allows it’s citizens to own firearms. I’m sure that unfortunate event could have happened for any number of reasons other than that.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You can very easily find people who will argue the point of causation vs. correlation

Yes, it's very easy to find pro-gun people who love to make unfounded assertions of causation in this case.

could have happened for any number of reasons other than that.

Well, he did shoot them and easy access to guns seems a very likely contributing factor to him owning one. Your point would have been a bit stronger if you'd said killed instead of "shot".

Guns make it easier to kill people and the benefit of self-defense doesn't seem very credible to me. If the tweaked out junkies of America know that everyone is packing they just have to make sure they draw first.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I believe it says militias have the right to bear arms.

The Supreme court disagreed with your interpretation.

The crime rates could have dropped for any number of reasons.

Ok, and the opposite could be true. There could be a direct correlation. You simply don't know.

Guns make it easier to kill people and the benefit of self-defense doesn't seem very credible to me. If the tweaked out junkies of America know that everyone is packing they just have to make sure they draw first.

Whats that about correlation and causation? You could be right, but then you could be wrong. Why not admit that the one issue may have nothing to do with the other?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The Supreme court disagreed with your interpretation.

Too bad for America.

There could be a direct correlation. You simply don't know.

There is a direct correlation. You must have meant causation, and even if you had typed it correctly the point would still be irrelevant as I'm not the one claiming causation. That would be Kuya.

Whats that about correlation and causation? You could be right, but then you could be wrong. Why not admit that the one issue may have nothing to do with the other?

You lost me there. Are you saying I should admit that a high rate of gun ownership and a high murder rate have nothing to do with each other? I think that's what you meant there.

Obviously there are other factors involved in a country's murder rate than just gun ownership, but all things being equal, throwing a lot of guns into the equation will only make things worse, not better. There is information supporting this assertion available on the internet, but the mods deleted it last time I posted it, because it involved other countries.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If someone, say a firearm ownership advocate, looks at the relevant statistics from the United States they would definitely be inclined to assign high ownership rates as causation for dropping crime numbers. That is the way they see it because that is what they want to believe.

On the other hand someone else, say an anti-ownership advocate, looks at the numbers and is inclined to explore other possible explanations for the falling crime rates while maintaining their position that firearm ownership is a detrimental aspect of life in the United States and no good can come from it. That is the way they see it because that is what they want to believe.

To quote myself from an earlier post; an individual’s position in this debate is dependent on what sacred cow they rode in on or in other words what they want to believe. It is highly unlikely that either side will convince the other that their position is wrong. The dogma on both sides is just too firmly entrenched.

But the fact remains the same, as the private ownership of firearms in the United States increases the rate of all types of crime is going down. Make of that what you will.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This is such a sad, sad news, this young high school girl, Ms.Mejia getting shot to death by some fool with a hand gun, etc..just makes me so sick! May the NRA burn in hell! When will Americans, the NRA ever learn that guns do kill people and people with guns can kill many, many more people?? RIP dead folk out there on Long Island.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So many misinformed people making comments they know very little about. As a New Yorker I am familiar with the gun laws in the city and they are very strict. Gun laws are quite strict in Mexico too and yet you still have shootings everyday. In my neighborhood back in New York growing up I never heard of anyone getting shot. I live in Fukuoka currently and there was a shooting in the area just a few months ago. The saying "When guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns" is very true.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@ CruzControl

Don't get me wrong, I love America too but I always have a lot of guns around me back in the states..

You don't sound like a gun owner to me. You aren't fooling anyone.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The local paper had an extensive article in it about the dramatic increase in pharmacy robberies across the United States. Overwhelmingly the thieves are taking oxycodone painkillers like OxyContin and hydrocodone based drugs like Vicodin and Norco. The thief in the Long Island robbery took Norco.

All of these drugs are highly addictive and have become the second most abused group of substances in the US, after weed. They are also a very lucrative item on the street. Some of these robberies are being committed by drug dealers for re-sale on the street at a high profit, but many are being committed by individuals with severe dependency problems seeking to feed their addiction.

One pattern that has been observed is that a lot of legitimate patients are becoming addicted while in treatment for pain, lose their jobs and their health insurance with them and then turn to whatever means they can to maintain their supply. Addiction can make otherwise perfectly normal people do some really bad things. It also makes addicts the potential victims of those who would profit from their misfortune.

If someone wanted to place blame in this situation it would not be unfair to lay some of it at the feet of the numerous physicians that have taken a liberal view of prescribing these painkillers over the years. America’s health insurance industry is complicit in this situation as well. They have aided and abetted in the creation of thousands of addicts, when there was a profit in it for them, and then cut those addicts loose when the premiums stopped getting paid. American society is paying for it now.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites