Gun Kills Five Children In Washington State


Does anyone elese think that we have a problem with guns in America?

A Washington state man killed his five children in a mobile home park near Tacoma and then took his own life with the same gun in his car, police said Saturday.

The children’s bodies were found by Pierce County sheriff’s deputies after King County authorities asked them to check the mobile home in Graham, The Tacoma News-Tribune reported. The father’s body was found early Saturday near the Muckleshoot Casino in Auburn, about 10 miles north of Graham.

Four of the children’s bodies were in their beds and the fifth was in the bathroom of the family’s mobile home. The oldest child was 16 and the youngest, the only boy, 7.

29 thoughts on “Gun Kills Five Children In Washington State

  1. Michael J. Cheaney

    Its not a gun problem.

    Its a problem of these suicidal jackasses not having enough affordable life insurance.

    See if these people had large life insurance policies, they could just KILL THEMSELVES and the family would still have money to live off of.

    WE MUST HAVE GOVERNMENT PAID FOR LIFE INSURANCE FOR ALL!!!!

  2. Thank you for asking, and starting a discussion here on the ways to foster more logical gun control measures in the nation.

    For starters I would require Brady criminal background checks on all gun sales. Every one of them, and that also means that these dreadful gun shows would also require to shape up and abide under strict new laws. At once I would limit the bulk sale of guns that feed illegal gun trafficking, do the same with ammo sales. And of course the military-style assault weapons with high capacity ammunition magazines would be illegal. I woudl also ban the manufacture of guns that are only aimed for killing people in a cheap fashion, what is commonly called ‘Saturday night specials’. I would limit the number of guns and type of guns that anyone could buy and own.

  3. Michael J. Cheaney

    I am a 2nd Amendment pro gun kinda guy but:

    First off Brady and the other gun laws on books only address LEGAL gun sales, and do nothing to address the sales between private parties, or the Illegal gun sales between gang bangers in the City of Milwaukee.

    There really is no easy solution. Because like it or not it all comes down to one thing.

    HUMAN COMPLIANCE. And if the person doesn’t think their going to get caught they WILL NOT comply (traffic laws spring to mind)

    If Congress was really serious they would go with this option:

    IMMEDIATELY Ban the Manufacture, sale, importation, exportation, transportation or USE of any firearm.

    While it does nothing short term it does at least help long term by ensuring that no new guns are produced on American soil.

  4. Maggie

    I think we have a problems with phsychos in America. Anything can be used as a weapon to kill someone. Yes, guns are convenient; however if someone really wanted to kill someone and a gun was not available, I guarantee you they would find another source. Look at the mother who drowned her three little boys. She was obviously mentally ill, she did not use a gun. A gun is just a weapon of choice, but it does not pull it’s own trigger, it takes an idiot behind the gun to kill someone.

  5. Mike

    Deke, no offense. But, you apparently don’t know too much about guns or you haven’t thought this through very carefully if you do.

    +++For starters I would require Brady criminal background checks on all gun sales. Every one of them, and that also means that these dreadful gun shows would also require to shape up and abide under strict new laws. +++
    I don’t know what state you live in, but mine requires tons of paperwork and waiting periods for purchase and concealed carry. BTW, criminals don’t care about background checks or CCW permits.

    +++At once I would limit the bulk sale of guns that feed illegal gun trafficking, do the same with ammo sales. +++
    Who is buying bulk guns? Police departments? The military? Haven’t seen a cartel member walking out of Cabelas lately with 50 guns in a shopping cart. What is bulk? Law abiding gun owners can easily shoot a couple hundred rounds in a single range session. Is that bulk?

    +++And of course the military-style assault weapons with high capacity ammunition magazines would be illegal. +++
    Do you know what an assualt weapon is? Fully automatic. Assault style? Semi-automatic. No different than many deer or varmint rifles that hold a magazine. Except you can hang a light or laser off of it. What about the assault style weapons in the hands of personal owners? Are you going to send folks around to confiscate? High capacity mags? So if I own a 5 shot revolver are you going to limit the number of speedloaders I can own?

    +++I would also ban the manufacture of guns that are only aimed for killing people in a cheap fashion, what is commonly called ‘Saturday night specials’. +++
    Again, the only people that buy guns specifically to proactively kill are criminals. Don’t lump law abiding gun owners into this group. Millions of law abiding gun owners enjoy target shooting on a weekly basis and the price of the gun isn’t relevant.

    +++I would limit the number of guns and type of guns that anyone could buy and own.+++
    Again, I can only shoot a single gun at a time. And criminals don’t care about gun limits.

    Please note that I say all this in the spirit of civil discourse.

    1. Thanks for the comments, as I do appreciate them.

      Unless I wrong the background check does not apply to all sellers at such gun shows. So let us say you are a person who is not a commerical seller at a show but makes a transaction to sell a gun. In roughly 50% of the states a background check need not be obtained for that sale. That is but one of the problems with such shows. There needs to be a tough uniform standard for such shows. Crossing a state line is too easy so in order to sidestep tougher laws.

      When I speak of bulk buying I mean that no one should be able to buy more than a certain number of guns or ammo in a set period of time. What that number would be can be argued, but there is no need for anyone to have a large array of weapons. I also might add that any ammo that can be labeled as the ‘cop killer’ ammo which is designed to shred the tissue of a person and spread the destruction over a wide section of the internal organs should not be allowed to be manufactured or sold. I stand with law enforcement on this one all the way.

      As to the assault weapon comment, let me be clear. While working at the Wisconin State Legislature the NRA tried to twist and spin my boss over the same type of language that you employ here in the comment. Not to be snarky here, but be real. Fully automatic weapons of this type should never be in the hands of the average citizen, and I think they are still heavily regulated. The semi-automatic weapons are the ones that I think need stronger enforcment. I want to see some restrictions on the ability to use additional ammo from click on magazine carriers. (My terminology may be a bit rusty but you get my thrust) We do know that there is no rationale to having heavy weaponry, except to use it for purposes that are counter to that which makes for a healthy society.

      I would add that there can be target ranges and such but those weapons should be used and kept on premises, and not allowed to be taken to private homes.

      When I speak of strict gun control, I mean it.

      1. “Unless I wrong the background check does not apply to all sellers at such gun shows. So let us say you are a person who is not a commerical seller at a show but makes a transaction to sell a gun.”

        If you have a table at a gun show, and there are guns on that table (or receivers, which is the “legal” part of the gun), you MUST have an FFL and perform the background checks. NO EXCEPTIONS.

        If you are a private seller (you do not hold an FFL), and you choose to sell one of your guns, and that gun is sold to a prohibited person (someone who would not pass a NCIS check), you have committed a felony. Ignorance of that persons inability to own a firearm is not a defense. If a person is charged with trafficking in arms, what they usually get charged with is either selling a substantial quantity of arms without an FFL (usually across state lines), or transferring an arm to a prohibited person.

        “When I speak of bulk buying I mean that no one should be able to buy more than a certain number of guns or ammo in a set period of time”

        For every firearm you buy from an FFL dealer, an NCIS check is run. If your name gets put through the NCIS system often enough (I think the threshold is 5x/month), the system sends up a flag, and you may very well find yourself chatting with an BATFE agent in short order.

        As for “Assault Weapons”, there are so many Military Pattern weapons out there that what you are proposing would require violating the 4th amendment and offer very little gain in public safety. Explain to me HOW such a ban on Semi-auto military pattern weapons would SIGNIFICANTLY impact public safety, and I’ll consider it. But passing such a law in the hopes that it would stop or reduce the type of events that are already extremely rare is nothing more than a feel good law that impacts only the law abiding. If Russ Feingold can see the futility of such a law, why can’t you?

        As for the dad in the original post (this is local to me), he was a real piece of work, very strict, very controlling, knocked up his wife when she was 13, had at least one encounter with Child Protective Services, and was known as a hardass. There is no gun law or ban that would have saved the lives of those children. He could have used a knife, or a bludgeon, or rope and fire.

  6. mike21

    I love the headline “Gun kills 5 Children….” The freakin gun didn’t kill anyone the idiot holding the gun did the killing. I have owned guns all my life and none of them have killed anyone. They just lay there and do nothing. I sure as heck wouldn’t own so,ething that could kill me all by itself. Why is this a gun issue?? It should be a mental health issue if anything.

    1. Then I suspect you are a backer of universal health care coverage so those such as the man in the story you comment on will have the help he needs. Since it is not the gun, as you state, then I trust you want to help so the triggers of troubled people with deadly weapons are not pulled on innocent kids like in Washington State.

      1. Michael J. Cheaney

        Oh yea Government Run Health Care….the only that would have changed was the location of the shooting.

        It would have been in a Government building instead of a trailer park….

        The State Of Wisconsin can’t keep Foster kids alive…..I can just imagine how well it will do with me!

        “When I speak of strict gun control, I mean it.”

        No because if you did…..you would be right on board with the “solutions” that I outlined before. While it may be a time consuming process, if you were serious you would at the very least give it some thought.

        All you are doing now is trying to put a band-aid on a gushing wound that requires stitches….

      2. No, Mike I disagree. I have given a great deal of thought to this issue, and also worked on the issue in the state legislative process. I have studied the issues, and care about them. I have also seen the absolute BS that the NRA peddles while the families of vicitims look for coffins and plan funerals. They sat in our office and I told their state lobbyist at the time he had blood on his hands. I do not think a staffer had been that blunt with him in some time.

        You and I do not see the issue in the same way. I welcome you back to this blog for further posts on the next shootings. In America it can only be few news cycles away. And that is sad.

  7. Michael J. Cheaney

    Well then answer me this question:

    How do you or would you propose banning or at least restricting ownership of guns, without infringing on the constitutional right to own the guns?

    You also say that we are just a few news cycles away from another incident.

    Sadly I do believe your right…..However what the news usually fails to report is that there also was some underlying mental illness…..

  8. Michael says,

    “Oh yea Government Run Health Care….the only that would have changed was the location of the shooting. It would have been in a Government building instead of a trailer park….”

    “However what the news usually fails to report is that there also was some underlying mental illness…..”

    You want the mentally impaired to have the guns and ammo, but not the required means to insure that they can have the medical attention to address thier concerns. Many of these people have fallen through the cracks of the medical system as it exists in America today, and have no access to the services they require, or the money in many cases to pay for the drugs to make them more able to adjust to social norms.

    But whatever we do please do not take away their Second Amendment rights!

    This sounds like the typical conservative stuff I rail about on this blog daily.

  9. robert

    cut the crap already!

    the NRA cares not about the 5 dead kids as these comments show but only the narrow confines of the darkness that conservatives hold in thier hearts

    five kids age 7-16 are never going to enjoy life but michael gets the boned-up pleasure from toting a gun because he has a small penis and the gun provides a proxy to stroke

    he is so full of bullshit

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s