world

Gunman kills 5, then himself in southern California rampage

59 Comments

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

© Copyright 2018 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

59 Comments
Login to comment

Your gun problem is out of control. It's become like a religion and woe betide the blasphemer who speaks out against it.

It is a killing problem. The USA has laws against killing. Access to firearms has been available for hundreds of years in the USA, but only recently have the mentally ill been using firearms against others fairly often. I consider anyone who would shoot another human to be mentally ill, outside a war or law enforcement action.

Religion and superstitions are a different problem. I don't see any political solution for them in any country, even China.

The USA has lots of problems. I'm not certain it is the "best country in the world", but that's because I've traveled to other places with much worse problems and some with much better environments, depending on what you consider "better." "Best" is highly subjective.

The Bill of Rights (1st ten amendments to the US Constitution) is really the core of individual rights for people inside the USA, so you can understand why we might be highly protective about it.

There was an update about this crime spree. Recently divorced, killed his ex-wife. The connection to the others appears to be very specific. He didn't kill innocent by-standers. There's someone with a very similar name listed as living in Texas, about the same age, with a similar appearance. Also, he used a .50 caliber handgun, which is HUGE.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Guns don't kill people, people do," is the often quoted cliche. It's undeniably true. People kill people. But people in their right minds don't. And a shockingly huge percentage of perpetrators of mass shootings are on psychiatric drugs at the time of the shooting or in the middle of mental "treatment."

There really needs to be a thorough investigation into the actual effects of psychiatric drugs and the effectiveness of psychiatric treatment.

It doesn't seem to be working, does it?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Anyway, as tragic as this shooting is, we Americans will die for our amendment rights.

You Americans do die for your rights - at a massively higher rate than those countries which have sensible gun laws.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Europeans are quick to display their anti-American sentiments any other time--calling us yanks, imperialists, gluttons, and on and on and on. But when ever there's a shooting they love us.

Personally, I have no truck with any imperialists. Don't care which empire they espouse its greatness to us proles, it won't wash.

Criticising the chaos and endless murders, inequalities and (gasp) even your President doesn't make anyone anti-American.

Every country has its bad side and it's a right of freedoms to be able to decry such ills.

When representatives of a country broadcast how great their country is, don't be sore if others disagree.

Your gun problem is out of control. It's become like a religion and woe betide the blasphemer who speaks out against it.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

The whole "right to bear arms" argument is a joke from its premise - as if citizens can take on the army - to its implementation: an RPG is an arm, but try carrying one of those around even in Texas.

In the largely improbable case of a civil uprising in the US, it’s highly unlikely that the military will open the show with air strikes, tanks and artillery; destroying the very infrastructure and population that they intend to control. The policy of any war with the intention of gaining control of territories or populations generally dictates that destruction of infrastructures and human loss must be kept to a minimum, and governmental functions should be kept intact.

The Army, Navy, Marines Airforce, Police, etc... are also made up of US citizens. Any given percentage of them would probably be sympathetic of the resistance. Then add the stress and moral ambiguities of fighting a door-to-door town-to-town urban war on your own countrymen. How long could you maintain morale and loyalty?

I’m not saying that arming the populace is the best way of preventing an oppressive dictatorship, but you can see that it is effective.

RPG in Texas.... if you have the right permits, by all means do so. People might even compliment you on your weapon as long as you do not act in a threatening manner.

In fact, with the right permits, you can own just about anything. Just look at the multitude of YouTube videos of civilians shooting anti-aircraft guns, tanks, grenade launchers, and yes; RPGs.

Private (civilian) military organizations own attack helicopters and armored assault vehicles, and would probably own fighter jets if they needed them.

However, I do believe that guns should be controlled like cars. Universal nation-wide standardized licensing.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I dunno how people up on here can still go on about guns after a shooting. It's with such a regularity nowadays that until there's meaningful gun control then this will continue as is.You got more chance of Putin acknowledging the election's interference than gun reform,because Americans just love guns and violence.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Canada needs to build a wall...

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

I wonder how many people are killed Vs how many people are born in America each day.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Five people shot and killed with a gun, and people are claiming it's not a mass shooting.

How do you reason with people who deny reality?

0 ( +4 / -4 )

This clearly isn't a mass shooting.

The definition of mass shooting is squishy but I believe there is a federal law which defines it is as a killing with at least three deaths, excluding the perpetrator. Although this could be classed as more of a spree killing. Sounds like the first part was targeted, like the vast majority of women killed by a husband, boyfriend or ex, then maybe he started shooting others who got in the way. A bit tangled sounding.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

2nd amendment supporter=Trump supporter=NRA supporter.

Yes

I'm those things as well, right?

Yes

I don't understand why a Trump 2ANRA person who hates government run healthcare would want to live in Japan.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

a citizenry without guns is easier to subjugate to socialism and then communism.

Then why live in Japan? If I were a Trump NRA2A person I would avoid Japan like the plague. In Japan the government has all the guns. That has to be scary for Trump NRA2A people

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

The progressive agenda explains also why Europeans tend to be the most vocal about American's right to bear arms. This, despite the fact that some European countries are more violent than the USA. 

It's just so funny reading this on JT boards from a person living in Japan - a country with no guns.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

This appears, just as guess, to be a love scandal. The husband seems to have caught his wife cheating. I don't know. Does it make it right? No. But it does highlight the emotional instability of those that will quickly shout another "mass" shooting. This clearly isn't a mass shooting.

Nevertheless it's a shooting, another opportunity for the progressives to hijack and try to score political points against the second amendment.

In fact, the second amendment is a huge check on the progressive agenda. Hence they hate it so much.

The progressive agenda explains also why Europeans tend to be the most vocal about American's right to bear arms. This, despite the fact that some European countries are more violent than the USA. I think there was a recent study that said homicides in the U.K. are off the charts. Sure, they'll tell you they're just concerned about their fellow human beings, but that's a farce. Europeans are quick to display their anti-American sentiments any other time--calling us yanks, imperialists, gluttons, and on and on and on. But when ever there's a shooting they love us.

Anyway, as tragic as this shooting is, we Americans will die for our amendment rights.

And of course, we don't have to worry about an attack from the British; but we do have to worry about the violent attacks and political agenda of the ever increasing tyrannical left.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

How many MASS SHOOTINGS in America in 2018?? Nobody knows -- too many to count! What an unbelievably VIOLENT country! What an unbelievably VIOLENT people! Parents: DO NOT send your children there!

1 ( +5 / -4 )

When you live in a society with hundreds of millions of guns and easy access to them, mass shootings are a regular part of life.

There's nothing out of the ordinary about these incidents at all.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Wait, how come this didn't show up in my FB news feed? Oh, I see, only 5 victims, and no school/kids involved, hardly news anymore, thats why.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

like the man in China or Japan

Is this particular man from China or from Japan?

as much as the drug traffickers...

...who will use ladders, shovels, and slingshots making Trump's 100ft. wall a joke.

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

But America is under constant threat of invasion

Actually, America has been under actual invasion for 40+ yrs from people illegally crossing our borders. I'm not really all that worried 20-100 about the economic refugees as much as the drug traffickers and human traffickers crossing the border.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zaYpnkn8Hc

https://www.usatoday.com/border-wall/story/us-ranchers-deal-with-migrants-border-crossers-mexico/559702001/ if you prefer to read

Life is very different in the southwestern USA than in Japan.

"If someone tries to kill you, you try to kill him back."

1 ( +5 / -4 )

If I put a gun into your hands or on top of the table...

...you will be arrested.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

This is America.

RIP to the victims.

And to the many, many, many more to follow before this country gets its act together.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Crazy people find a way. It isn't about any specific type of weapon.

The guy had a plan and used a tool to accomplish it. The tool is much less important than that the man was crazy and wanted to harm those specific people. I'd bet he felt "wronged" by them.

He could have done something like the man in China or Japan to kill these people. They'd still be dead.

Crazy people find a way.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

It is beyond the pale to suggest that the strict firearm laws in California are ineffective when firearms can easily flow in from border states. Less focus on agriculture at university and more on logic, literacy, and critical thinking.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

The whole "right to bear arms" argument is a joke from its premise - as if citizens can take on the army - to its implementation: an RPG is an arm, but try carrying one of those around even in Texas

Nowadays, citizens have no chance of taking on the military. However, that does nothing to change the intent behind the Second Amendment. You know the context of when it was drafted. We can discern when it became archaic because the government became too powerful.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

"See, if only the wife had a gun..........."

/s

0 ( +4 / -4 )

The whole "right to bear arms" argument is a joke from its premise - as if citizens can take on the army

Except the people that wrote the Constitution had just gone through citizens taking on the army...and they won. So it wasn't a joke, it was reality.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

This kind of stuff is going on throughout California every day. To get a better handle on all the carnage, state officials need to impose very strict gun laws . . . Oh, wait.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

There are more gun of the son in US than son of the gun!

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Yet another case of a person on psychiatric drugs. Psychiatry needs to be investigated.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

The whole "right to bear arms" argument is a joke from its premise - as if citizens can take on the army - to its implementation: an RPG is an arm, but try carrying one of those around even in Texas.

It's all a sick joke. I'm surprised a gun nutter hasn't suggested that, if all mothers driving infants were armed, there would be fewer carjackings.

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

No problem with the second amendment, it was talking about black powder Flint lock rifles. Not military grade weapons or seni auto handguns.

No problem with the 1st Amendment, it was talking about face-to-face talking, newspapers and books. Not radio, TV or internet.

I thank my lucky stars I don't live in the US.

The US population agrees with you and asks that you please stay where you are.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Their concern was the ability to check a tyrannical goveenment. Hence, it's a fundamental right to oen "arms."

The part about a "well trained militia" gets in the gun nutters' way. That said, the Supreme Court sided with them. This doesn't mean their can't be easily enforced "firearm safety" laws.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

The guys in wigs and stockings (nice dog whistle) knew they couldn't predict the future, so used the general category of "arms" in the constitution. It was intentionally broad.

The framers' knew about bows and arrows, slingshots, and spears. This means they knew arms evolve into deadlier iterations given they themselves had muskets.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

So I guess I was wrong the second amendment includes lasers, atomism weapons and light sabres so, thank you I was mistaken. I highly doubt a man or men wearing wigs and stockings could have imagined this far into the future....unless we are not alone

I am laying out the arguments that underpin Second Amendment jurisprudence according to the Supreme Court. Please don't conflate my opinion with what I'm describing.

It's not about "guys wearing wigs and stockings" the framers' "ability to imagine[] this far in the future." Qukye the opposite.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

CTRL^CThoughts and prayersCTRL^V

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

A revolver was a fictional weapon when the constitution was written.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

And so it goes on......

3 ( +7 / -4 )

I thank my lucky stars I don't live in the US.

4 ( +9 / -5 )

you know guns are the problem

If guns are the problem, then how is that 80 million Americans can own one -- and yet still be peaceful, law-abiding citizens?

If guns are the problem, then how did the single worst act of mass murder in U.S. history besides 9/11 get carried out without the use of a gun? I refer to the Oklahoma City bombing in 1993 by Timothy McVeigh.

If guns are the problem, then how come most of America's worst-ever serial killers did NOT use guns to murder their multiple victims?

If I put a gun into your hands or on top of the table in front of you, the gun is not suddenly going to transform you into a homicidal maniac. It's idiotic to think that it will.

The murderer in this story decided to become a murderer first. Then he took a weapon that is supposed to be for self-defense, and used it to commit murder instead.

The gun did not turn him into a murderer. He made the choice to be a murderer first.

-4 ( +6 / -10 )

Stupid men and their stupid guns.

1 ( +7 / -6 )

So I guess I was wrong the second amendment includes lasers, atomism weapons and light sabres so, thank you I was mistaken.

No, the 2nd Amendment features the right to bear arms. Not weapons of mass destruction, and certainly not fictional weapons.

0 ( +7 / -7 )

People with guns kill people.

Actually, most people who own guns do not kill anyone, nor do they commit any other crime.

Roughly 80 million Americans own some time of firearm. The vast majority of them are law-abiding citizens.

Also, people without guns also kill people. Timothy McVeigh did not use a gun when he killed nearly 200 people in 1993. And for the most part, the worst-ever serial killers in U.S. history did not use guns to kill their victims.

So, to just glibly say "people with guns kill people" is an exercise in very shallow thinking. People kill with all sorts of weapons. And most people who own guns do not kill anyone with them.

I'm not an NRA member and I've never owned a gun in my life, and likely never will. But I don't subscribe -- nor will I ever subscribe -- to the idea of blaming inanimate objects for what people choose to do.

1 ( +7 / -6 )

So I guess I was wrong the second amendment includes lasers, atomism weapons and light sabres so, thank you I was mistaken. I highly doubt a man or men wearing wigs and stockings could have imagined this far into the future....unless we are not alone.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

sounds like a jealous lover and he shot the other bloke involved, then his wife then himself.

My thoughts exactly. But we don’t know yet. But I see we are looking at this the same way: why? The how is obvious.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

HOW was the first person shot? Then his wife? The others?

I repeat my question: why was the first person shot? etc.

You’re entitled to your opinion and question but don’t hijack mine.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

No problem with the second amendment, it was talking about black powder Flint lock rifles

Actually, it was talking about arms. The framers of the constitution understood that progress occurs, so didn't specifically refer to the exact type of weapons when writing the Second Amendment.

5 ( +8 / -3 )

No problem with the second amendment, it was talking about black powder Flint lock rifles. Not military grade weapons or seni auto handguns. As Charlton Heston said "you can have my gun when you prise it from my cold dead fingers"....sorry done that.

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

The answer to firearm violence is obviously more firearms. Of course, there will be certain posters along shortly to display their ignorance whilst screeching about the Second Amendment.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

This is becoming so common now that I'm no longer surprised to read reports. Shocked and angry yes, but not surprised. Aggressive or unstable people + firearms = mass shootings.

Ban the public from obtaining and owning handguns and assault rifles and THEN you might start to see the number of deaths coming down. Until you take radical action nothing will change.

1 ( +6 / -5 )

sounds like a jealous lover and he shot the other bloke involved, then his wife then himself.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Why was the first person shot? Then his wife? The others? No one knows.

HOW was the first person shot? Then his wife? The others?

With a gun. Everyone knows, some just don't want to accept the reality.

People with guns kill people. You can't get rid of the people (though the US tries hard, with a higher incarceration rate per capita than anywhere else), which leads to Plan B; get rid of the guns.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

When exactly is the time for talk of gun reform? Because as soon as there is a momentary pause between massacres it's just enough time for a sentence at best. My grief is distant, but no less valid. My point also no less valid. The latest bizarre wall stopping any discussion is this quasi claim the shooter had mental conditions. OK then, what the hell were they doing with a gun? Remember Los Vegas? What happened to banning Bump Stocks? I'm a gun owner in three countries and have jumped through ever smaller hoops.

And as a hunter never, never needed a hand gun nor an assault rifle. All that has to happen in all three countries for me to be banned from ownership is a family member or friend, neighbor to contact police and they take my weapons away and in two countries a mandatory psychological course. I can't just go buy a gun on a whim. And I can't steal one as they are so rear to find. But America is under constant threat of invasion so I guess should N-weapons fail Jim Bob and his buddies will save the day.

1 ( +6 / -5 )

Very little known at this point. Why was the first person shot? Then his wife? The others? No one knows.

Nothing at all appears random here. The shooter seems to have had a list. Probably.

As usual, this site qualifies as “the fastest with the leastest”. Just enough for anti-gun people to make their quips.

-2 ( +5 / -7 )

In a similar line of thought of Cleo expect to hear:

This is not the time to talk about gun reform.  This is the time to send our thoughts and prayers to the families of this tragedy.

One month later, rinse and repeat.

Oh!  And let's not forget: guns don't kill people, people kill people.  Very important to remember that bit.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

Thoughts and prayers, thoughts and prayers.

Nothing else will happen.

It's hardly news anymore, except as a statistic.

How many mass killings is that this year?

1 ( +5 / -4 )

Obviously, these are not random shootings...

You think? Seriously, why do these madmen (and yes it's men the major of the time) feel compelled to shoot-up the whole world whenever they get upset? This type of rage is usually bottled-up until the point of explosion. Historically the warning signs were ignored by those who could have changed this, and were wrote off as a man who was just going through a temporary bad spell of luck.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

I'd mutter "Bakersfield" if it were not so common anywhere - even California, with its relatively strict gun laws. We'll see what type of gun it was and where/how he got it, but frankly, with Nevada just next door, there's not much California can do.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Gun reform anyone....

6 ( +11 / -5 )

How many mass killings is that this year? Dang if only everyone would get with the program and tool up. Apparently if everyone had a gun these things wouldn't happen...believe that.

6 ( +11 / -5 )

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