Z4 driver shot and killed another driver over road rage

[johanness]

Originally Posted by Aries326

So much for the argument that concealed weapons make for less crime.

I'm with you, but that's opening a can of worms on the forums. I fully believe 75% of OT to be gun-crazed lunatics

[Nate4641]

Originally Posted by johanness

I'm with you, but that's opening a can of worms on the forums. I fully believe 75% of OT to be gun-crazed lunatics

Are you saying 75% of OT are gun crazed and therefore lunatics, or of the gun crazed 75% are lunatics?

[David70]

As with anything, one incident (either way) doesn't prove anything, try looking at the big picture (regardless of which side you believe is correct).

Based on this event I would say we should be proactive and arrest the owners of all Z4 roadsters (Not sure if all Z4's or just a certain model).

[Finnegan]

Looked at this guy's webpage last night, and a few other things. I hate to say it, but I think we're lucky this is all the damage he did. Very intelligent, but there was something seriously wrong with him even as far back as his early teens.

[chickdr]

Originally Posted by Aries326

So much for the argument that concealed weapons make for less crime.

Huh? How does one incident make your statement even remotely valid?

[Twisted Six]

Originally Posted by Finnegan

Looked at this guy's webpage last night, and a few other things. I hate to say it, but I think we're lucky this is all the damage he did. Very intelligent, but there was something seriously wrong with him even as far back as his early teens.

Very disappointing that he was a CCW permit carrier and acted outside the baseline behavior so blatantly.

I'm all in for tough legislation changed to interview current CCW & registered gun owners and remove any doubt if a person has a short fuse or anger/rage/superiority issues.

Whatever happened to the good ol' days of a fist fight to release anger or deal with an asshole ? The guy he shot and killed might have driven poorly and deserved some version of verbal rape.....but no one deserves to be shot at for being caught in a poor driving moment.

Even if I was assaulted by an enraged drivers attacks with his car while on the road, I'm clearly not going to assume he wants me dead or injured. I'm going to do my best to simply remove myself from the incident and prepare for additional assault.

If the situation increases to violence with vehicles stopped, I'm still not going to brandish a firearm. I'm going to once again, try to avoid the nut. I mean every dog has its day. I'm a martial artist in two disciplines and also a gun owner.....but I'm no machismo-ist. I have nothing to prove.

This shooter had something in his mind to prove. If he were my friend and I'd noted all this info about him, I would have made the suggestion for him to realize his condition and get help. The more difficult part would be to turn in a complaint of his mindset to a local department that doesn't exist.

We need a Dept. of Gun safety and Control. If your peers feel your unstable whether it be temporary or permanent....you need to be interviewed and your weapons removed until your able to pass their mental tests and deemed stable.

How the 'strike-out' for permanent ban of weapons for you is voted on is another portion of the protocol.

As a registered gun owner with training and family concerns, I do not want anyone including myself possessing a weapon that can take life with the ease of the click of a trigger if my own peers feel I am a mental unstable risk.

People fall in and out of health, both physically and mentally. We should recognize this and move forward with personal responsibility. If we have friends or acquaintances that are careless in their personal gun storage....they should be turned into the proper newly formed Dept. Of Gun Safety.

If they are a loner with no family or friends to act as responsible references to gun ownership, special visitations should be scheduled for them to continue said ownership within reason.

Much like Child Services dept I'd assume. But the interview process should be done by 2 officers who are on a constant rotation so as not to buddy up on opinions. I can see the interview questions to be direct and based on discovery for known mental issues or directives.

Government overthrow or general paranoia to be considered carefully before denial issued. A bigger threat might be anyone in the household using psych medications or history of medications leading to instability history with their meds.

Am I nuts for thinking like this ?

[thekurgan]

Originally Posted by Twisted Six

Very disappointing that he was a CCW permit carrier and acted outside the baseline behavior so blatantly.

I'm all in for tough legislation changed to interview current CCW & registered gun owners and remove any doubt if a person has a short fuse or anger/rage/superiority issues.

Whatever happened to the good ol' days of a fist fight to release anger or deal with an asshole ? The guy he shot and killed might have driven poorly and deserved some version of verbal rape.....but no one deserves to be shot at for being caught in a poor driving moment.

Even if I was assaulted by an enraged drivers attacks with his car while on the road, I'm clearly not going to assume he wants me dead or injured. I'm going to do my best to simply remove myself from the incident and prepare for additional assault.

If the situation increases to violence with vehicles stopped, I'm still not going to brandish a firearm. I'm going to once again, try to avoid the nut. I mean every dog has its day. I'm a martial artist in two disciplines and also a gun owner.....but I'm no machismo-ist. I have nothing to prove.

This shooter had something in his mind to prove. If he were my friend and I'd noted all this info about him, I would have made the suggestion for him to realize his condition and get help. The more difficult part would be to turn in a complaint of his mindset to a local department that doesn't exist.

We need a Dept. of Gun safety and Control. If your peers feel your unstable whether it be temporary or permanent....you need to be interviewed and your weapons removed until your able to pass their mental tests and deemed stable.

How the 'strike-out' for permanent ban of weapons for you is voted on is another portion of the protocol.

As a registered gun owner with training and family concerns, I do not want anyone including myself possessing a weapon that can take life with the ease of the click of a trigger if my own peers feel I am a mental unstable risk.

People fall in and out of health, both physically and mentally. We should recognize this and move forward with personal responsibility. If we have friends or acquaintances that are careless in their personal gun storage....they should be turned into the proper newly formed Dept. Of Gun Safety.

If they are a loner with no family or friends to act as responsible references to gun ownership, special visitations should be scheduled for them to continue said ownership within reason.

Much like Child Services dept I'd assume. But the interview process should be done by 2 officers who are on a constant rotation so as not to buddy up on opinions. I can see the interview questions to be direct and based on discovery for known mental issues or directives.

Government overthrow or general paranoia to be considered carefully before denial issued. A bigger threat might be anyone in the household using psych medications or history of medications leading to instability history with their meds.

Am I nuts for thinking like this ?

I like your proposed solution; else the next thing we'll see is an MMPI for every ammo/weapon purchase and that would be ridiculous, but, would probably have weeded out all but the extreme sociopaths and hopefully, this guy.

[Loogey Clapp]

Originally Posted by Twisted Six

Am I nuts for thinking like this ?

I don't think so. I thought it was rather well put. But then again, maybe I could be nuts. Then my opinion wouldn't count.

[gas-can]

I feel like that a lot of this type of gun violence stems from the substandard mental health services that you have in this country. Sure an event like this or that horrid massacre in CT brings the issue to light for a few seconds, but everyone forgets the whole problem after the limelight fades away and the news vans pack up and leave...

I like some of your ideas twisted (especially in regulating gun ownership based on mental status), but the inherent danger of stereotyping itself may bring a whole host of new problems. For example, I myself also love going to the range frequently and also study Muay Thai, and enjoy being alone. Does this mean that I should be targeted b/c of this?

But this also gives rise to the question of how you can gauge someones mental status without stereotyping (when the problem is not very easily apparent)... Perhaps someone on this forum that deals with psychiatry can educate us on this, but is there even a reliable method for identifying psychopaths?


That said, I refuse to give this sorry excuse of a man the label "intelligent". If he was, he wouldn't have attempted this stunt in one of the most identifiable cars on the road.

RIP Mr. Yancy Noll.

gas-can

[David70]

Originally Posted by Twisted Six

Am I nuts for thinking like this ?

I agree with the thought process but believe the application would be difficult (definately expensive). Once I can turn someone over to the authorities to be "checked out" how is this controlled and/or handled? Seems like everyone I know might be a target for me getting back at them by reporting them unstable. Obvious proof like certain medication, laws broken may be easy enough to throw up a flag. Will the current gun owner be even less likely to visit a psychologist or take medication if they know their guns might be taken away? Seems like the group on the edge of mental breakdown will be less likely to seek help.

Much like the problems with Child Services, without proof of a real problem it turns into a simple questioning and then they are gone. In our current state, I really don't know what you do if a friend acts strangly and you have a feeling they may be ready to snap. You can try to help them but if they don't want help you wait to see what happens.

[Twisted Six]

Originally Posted by gas-can

I feel like that a lot of this type of gun violence stems from the substandard mental health services that you have in this country. Sure an event like this or that horrid massacre in CT brings the issue to light for a few seconds, but everyone forgets the whole problem after the limelight fades away and the news vans pack up and leave...

I like some of your ideas twisted (especially in regulating gun ownership based on mental status), but the inherent danger of stereotyping itself may bring a whole host of new problems. For example, I myself also love going to the range frequently and also study Muay Thai, and enjoy being alone. Does this mean that I should be targeted b/c of this?

But this also gives rise to the question of how you can gauge someones mental status without stereotyping (when the problem is not very easily apparent)... Perhaps someone on this forum that deals with psychiatry can educate us on this, but is there even a reliable method for identifying psychopaths?


That said, I refuse to give this sorry excuse of a man the label "intelligent". If he was, he wouldn't have attempted this stunt in one of the most identifiable cars on the road.

RIP Mr. Yancy Noll.

gas-can

Originally Posted by David70

I agree with the thought process but believe the application would be difficult (definately expensive). Once I can turn someone over to the authorities to be "checked out" how is this controlled and/or handled? Seems like everyone I know might be a target for me getting back at them by reporting them unstable. Obvious proof like certain medication, laws broken may be easy enough to throw up a flag. Will the current gun owner be even less likely to visit a psychologist or take medication if they know their guns might be taken away? Seems like the group on the edge of mental breakdown will be less likely to seek help.

Much like the problems with Child Services, without proof of a real problem it turns into a simple questioning and then they are gone. In our current state, I really don't know what you do if a friend acts strangly and you have a feeling they may be ready to snap. You can try to help them but if they don't want help you wait to see what happens.

Originally Posted by thekurgan

I like your proposed solution; else the next thing we'll see is an MMPI for every ammo/weapon purchase and that would be ridiculous, but, would probably have weeded out all but the extreme sociopaths and hopefully, this guy.

All proper points to explore. I'd hope that a committee that heads up the interview process would be made up by Ex-Military leaders involved in training _(they've probably seen all the signs), as well as Psychiatrists specializing in sociopath behavior-(to see the tricky ones) and Ex-law enforcement leaders who've watched their citizens develop over time and snap.

All of this effort will never replace Parents,friends and neighbors PAYING ATTENTION....and even then it can still happen.

As I've said to my friends, if the answer is actually banning rapid capable firing guns.....then the craziest possessed sociopath or snapped nutcase will simply go for the next best thing.....perhaps a home made bomb and kill the whole contents of a building rather than just those he can see and fire on.

I'm still amazed schools don't all have entry proof glass. Hell, the Ct. shooter gained entrance via smashed in glass for crying out loud.

But then again....once we've made the public safe from outside intruders.....it may be impossible for them to escape the building itself........

The more numb our society becomes to attention to detail and surroundings....the harder or less likely ,disturbed people will be to identify and actually help in time....end of story. I'm witnessing young men of all races and raising methods becoming weak and emotional train wrecks more and more. They can no more handle LIFE than testosterone owned teen.

[TAL2GK]

Training is required prior to getting a CCW Permit, but training doesn't appear to be the problem with this case. With further control of guns, however, you aren't taking guns away from criminals, you're taking them away from the rest of us.

I'm a proud gun owner and think that the majority of the control the government is trying to implement is misguided and won't solve the problem. I'm glad they caught this nut job and hopefully he is locked up for a long time.

[David70]

Originally Posted by Twisted Six

All of this effort will never replace Parents,friends and neighbors PAYING ATTENTION....and even then it can still happen.

As I've said to my friends, if the answer is actually banning rapid capable firing guns.....then the craziest possessed sociopath or snapped nutcase will simply go for the next best thing.....perhaps a home made bomb and kill the whole contents of a building rather than just those he can see and fire on.

I'm still amazed schools don't all have entry proof glass. Hell, the Ct. shooter gained entrance via smashed in glass for crying out loud.

But then again....once we've made the public safe from outside intruders.....it may be impossible for them to escape the building itself........

Even if your best friend (who you know has legally purchased 20 assault rifles) says he is going to do something terrible, I don't think there is much you can do besides talk reason to him and tell everyone he knows.

Once they made it illegal to purchase the ingredients to make bombs I think the odds of getting blown up went way down. I would like to see the same with assault rifles and high capacity magazines. Are these really being purchased for self protection or hunting?

I am against a gun ban but limits seem reasonable.

The idea of securing the school will only work if you turn it into a prison. School across the street from me has 50 kids in the playground all day long (kids are rotating out, not same kids). Less secure the facility the less useful the guard (which I also think is a bad idea).

[thekurgan]

Originally Posted by David70

Even if your best friend (who you know has legally purchased 20 assault rifles) says he is going to do something terrible, I don't think there is much you can do besides talk reason to him and tell everyone he knows.

Once they made it illegal to purchase the ingredients to make bombs I think the odds of getting blown up went way down. I would like to see the same with assault rifles and high capacity magazines. Are these really being purchased for self protection or hunting?

I am against a gun ban but limits seem reasonable.

The idea of securing the school will only work if you turn it into a prison. School across the street from me has 50 kids in the playground all day long (kids are rotating out, not same kids). Less secure the facility the less useful the guard (which I also think is a bad idea).

Me as well, but I think the NRA is going to have to give something up this round (no pun intended), whether it's ammo restrictions or psych exams for purchasing weapons.

[SD ///M4]

I'll have to admit that I've been somewhat fascinated by this incident and have been following it for several reasons. First, I drive the same car, which is a Z4 M Roadster. Second, I've had a gun pulled on and pointed at me in a "road rage" incident. Third, it's yet another example of how, apparently even with gun controls in place (he had to apply for his concealed weapon permit), this wasn't enough to keep an innocent person from being killed. And of course, this incident occurred between two recent mass killings by killers with an arsenal of weapons, just like this killer.

The gun was pulled on me in Detroit, probably in the late 70's, when I was entering a freeway on-ramp onto NB I-75. In spite of it being a two-lane entrance ramp, this other driver came from behind and cut me off for no reason going at least 10 MPH faster. I did what I usually did, blasted my horn and then prominently showed him my middle finger. He was now in the right lane ahead of me and I was in the left lane. I-75 and this entrance ramp were both under construction at the time and the entry ramp merged into one lane before it merged onto I-75. It was rush hour, traffic was completely congested and backed up at the bottom of the ramp and on the freeway, and there were at least half a dozen construction workers at the intersection of the ramp. I pulled up to the stopped car in front of me and this guy is now on my right. He starts honking his horn, I'm not going to look over at him, but he keeps honking his horn. Then I noticed all of the construction workers have stopped and are looking up and the guy in front of me is staring into his mirror. I look in my rear-view mirror and the cars behind us have stopped about a car length back and everyone's eyes are as big as dinner plates. I finally look over at this guy and he's got his left arm straight out the window with a hand gun in his left hand, pointing directly at me. I had no where to go, nor did he, since were both stuck on an entrance ramp in the middle of traffic, and there were at least a dozen witnesses, so it seemed pretty unlikely that he was actually going to shoot me. I took my hands off the wheel, smiled at him and motioned for him to go ahead of me. He pulled the gun back into the car and refused to go in front of me, possibly thinking that I would then be able to see his license plate, so I drove down the now-clear ramp and onto the freeway and got the hell out of there.

In the case of the Seattle shooting, something apparently happened between these two drivers prior to the victim arriving and stopping at a light in the right lane, with traffic in front of him and behind him. Apparently the left lane was open, which allowed the killer to drive up to the victim, stop, shoot at him five times hitting him three times in the head, and then speed away, through the red light. (The tire marks he left at the scene, along with broken glass, and a spent shell casing, is what led him to replace the tires on his car.)

So it's interesting to me to see these first two reasons come together, over 30 years later, only the M Roadster driver is the one with the gun and he chose to pull the trigger, not once but five times.

Morale of my story: Never, ever, engage someone who is driving like a jerk. Don't honk at them in anger, and certainly don't give someone the finger. In the Seattle case, maybe the victim flipped off the killer, and maybe he didn't. Maybe the killer just had "anger management" issues and shot the victim because he thought he was a bad driver or didn't like his car (a Subaru) and this enraged him. We'll probably never know, because the victim can't speak and the killer will most likely not take the stand in his trial, if it actually goes to trial. He may just take a plea bargain to avoid the death penalty, but in this particular gun climate, the prosecutor may just decide to press for a trial and the death penalty.

It's interesting that even though the killer is described as having an arsenal of weapons, it was a single, legal hand gun, carried legally with a concealed weapon permit, that resulted in this killing. If the killer didn't have a concealed weapon permit, the chances of him having a gun in his car was arguably less. This is what alarms me about all the people with concealed weapon permits that insist on "open carry" because it's their "right". If a gun isn't present then the chances of someone getting shot are zero. And I say this with the experience of someone who almost did get shot.

[Jstic]

Strange thing is that the shooter was apparently an extremely intelligent individual, somewhat of a child prodigy. For someone that intelligent, his attempts to cover up his crime were pretty feeble. And he then gets his wife involved and she is also arrested for attempting to cover up the crime. She tells the detective that just by coincidence, the day after the murder, their car which was exactly the same as the one described in the crime, had the very same passenger side window smashed out in Portland, Oregon. Talk about bad luck!!

It's sad that Washington does not have the death penalty, this guy is a prime candidate. It is also sad that someone with "anger management" issues is ever even considered a candidate for a gun permit, and eligible to legally purchase any weapon, including including a sling shot. He was chastised in court by the judge for not taking the matter seriously.

[SD ///M4]

Originally Posted by Jstic

Strange thing is that the shooter was apparently an extremely intelligent individual, somewhat of a child prodigy. For someone that intelligent, his attempts to cover up his crime were pretty feeble. And he then gets his wife involved and she is also arrested for attempting to cover up the crime. She tells the detective that just by coincidence, the day after the murder, their car which was exactly the same as the one described in the crime, had the very same passenger side window smashed out in Portland, Oregon. Talk about bad luck!!

It's sad that Washington does not have the death penalty, this guy is a prime candidate. It is also sad that someone with "anger management" issues is ever even considered a candidate for a gun permit, and eligible to legally purchase any weapon, including including a sling shot. He was chastised in court by the judge for not taking the matter seriously.

Some other things that didn't show a lot of intelligence or thought was the fact that the paint and masking tape that he used to repaint his car, along with his old tires were found behind a business that he owned. A slide for 9mm pistol was concealed in a plastic container, wrapped in paper towels and placed on a shelf in the back of the shop. If you were going to dump or conceal evidence, why would you do it on your property?

He also apparently always kept his car in the driveway (?) but after the murder the neighbors said that they hadn't seen his car. Police went to the residence several times after receiving a tip which gave them his address but no one ever answered. Since there was a surveillance camera police surmised that it was being monitored and the door wasn't being answered. They staked out the residence for two weeks until they saw his wife drive her Benz out of the garage and were able to spot his M Roadster in the garage at which time they got a search warrant, which also allowed them to search her purse. Inside the purse they found Home Depot receipts for the masking tape, steel wool, gray primer paint, black paint (he also painted his wheels) and new tires! Why would she still be carrying around these receipts? She was a dentist, so she must have been reasonably intelligent. When interviewed she also said that she was not aware of the murder, which took place 1/2 mile from where they lived.

As far as driving to Portland to have the window replaced, a radio interview I listened to said that the police were stopping every Z4 in the area for some time after the murder. Somehow he was able to drive to Portland and back without getting spotted or stopped.

Before my last post I Googled to see if Washington state had the death penalty and Wikipedia, among other sources, indicated that it did, enacted in 1849. As of last August, seven people were on death row in Washington state.

However, even though he has been charged with first degree murder, according to a newspaper report that was filed this afternoon, he is only facing up to 31 years, which includes a "firearm sentencing enhancement". Not sure why a first degree murder charge wouldn't carry the death penalty in a death penalty state, but it could be because it wasn't premeditated or he didn't lie in wait.

[chickdr]

Originally Posted by SD Z4MR

I'll have to admit that I've been somewhat fascinated by this incident and have been following it for several reasons. First, I drive the same car, which is a Z4 M Roadster. Second, I've had a gun pulled on and pointed at me in a "road rage" incident. Third, it's yet another example of how, apparently even with gun controls in place (he had to apply for his concealed weapon permit), this wasn't enough to keep an innocent person from being killed. And of course, this incident occurred between two recent mass killings by killers with an arsenal of weapons, just like this killer.

The gun was pulled on me in Detroit, probably in the late 70's, when I was entering a freeway on-ramp onto NB I-75. In spite of it being a two-lane entrance ramp, this other driver came from behind and cut me off for no reason going at least 10 MPH faster. I did what I usually did, blasted my horn and then prominently showed him my middle finger. He was now in the right lane ahead of me and I was in the left lane. I-75 and this entrance ramp were both under construction at the time and the entry ramp merged into one lane before it merged onto I-75. It was rush hour, traffic was completely congested and backed up at the bottom of the ramp and on the freeway, and there were at least half a dozen construction workers at the intersection of the ramp. I pulled up to the stopped car in front of me and this guy is now on my right. He starts honking his horn, I'm not going to look over at him, but he keeps honking his horn. Then I noticed all of the construction workers have stopped and are looking up and the guy in front of me is staring into his mirror. I look in my rear-view mirror and the cars behind us have stopped about a car length back and everyone's eyes are as big as dinner plates. I finally look over at this guy and he's got his left arm straight out the window with a hand gun in his left hand, pointing directly at me. I had no where to go, nor did he, since were both stuck on an entrance ramp in the middle of traffic, and there were at least a dozen witnesses, so it seemed pretty unlikely that he was actually going to shoot me. I took my hands off the wheel, smiled at him and motioned for him to go ahead of me. He pulled the gun back into the car and refused to go in front of me, possibly thinking that I would then be able to see his license plate, so I drove down the now-clear ramp and onto the freeway and got the hell out of there.

In the case of the Seattle shooting, something apparently happened between these two drivers prior to the victim arriving and stopping at a light in the right lane, with traffic in front of him and behind him. Apparently the left lane was open, which allowed the killer to drive up to the victim, stop, shoot at him five times hitting him three times in the head, and then speed away, through the red light. (The tire marks he left at the scene, along with broken glass, and a spent shell casing, is what led him to replace the tires on his car.)

So it's interesting to me to see these first two reasons come together, over 30 years later, only the M Roadster driver is the one with the gun and he chose to pull the trigger, not once but five times.

Morale of my story: Never, ever, engage someone who is driving like a jerk. Don't honk at them in anger, and certainly don't give someone the finger. In the Seattle case, maybe the victim flipped off the killer, and maybe he didn't. Maybe the killer just had "anger management" issues and shot the victim because he thought he was a bad driver or didn't like his car (a Subaru) and this enraged him. We'll probably never know, because the victim can't speak and the killer will most likely not take the stand in his trial, if it actually goes to trial. He may just take a plea bargain to avoid the death penalty, but in this particular gun climate, the prosecutor may just decide to press for a trial and the death penalty.

It's interesting that even though the killer is described as having an arsenal of weapons, it was a single, legal hand gun, carried legally with a concealed weapon permit, that resulted in this killing. If the killer didn't have a concealed weapon permit, the chances of him having a gun in his car was arguably less. This is what alarms me about all the people with concealed weapon permits that insist on "open carry" because it's their "right". If a gun isn't present then the chances of someone getting shot are zero. And I say this with the experience of someone who almost did get shot.

This depends. I have a CCW here in Georgia. I have the right to carry a gun in my car with, or without the CCW. I obtained the CCW "just in case" but can carry quite readily without it as well. Reading this thread concerns me as I am seeing a surprising amount of desire for what sounds like a lot more gun control(even from current CCW holders). To me this type of thing is a VERY slippery slope. Once started I see many more restricting laws coming down the pipe. Twisted suggested psych exams for all CCW holders. Why should I as a current CCW holder be subject to further examination? What have I done to deserve this? I can also see people reporting folks to authorities just because they "saw something" like a guy carrying a gun around his property. The videos I see online with police stopping people carrying guns on their hip on the street and harassing them (IMHO) make me sick. When asked why they are being questioned the police typically say "we received a call from a concerned citizen". Concerned about what? A guy with a holstered gun walking on the sidewalk? Police do this all day long with no problems. Even more troubling is most of the time this type of thing seems to happen in areas where open carry is legal.

I think we have a lot of other things to worry about as well. The gun control issue is in the crosshairs right now, but what about other issues which have been going on since 9/11 like wire taps and other incursions on our personal privacy. We are losing a lot of our freedoms and folks are more concerned with guns than anything else.

[Loogey Clapp]

Originally Posted by chickdr

...Why should I as a current CCW holder be subject to further examination? ...

This is in no way directed at "Chickdr", but your comment reminds me; I see a lot of people driving on the streets that I think need to take a Driver's Licensing examination again. Similar?

[Jstic]

I'll bet that if the court is dumb enough to grant bail, Dinh Bowman will never show up for his trial. He will be on a beach somewhere in SE Asia, laughing about the guy he shot for no good reason. Didn't know Washington had the death penalty, last execution was in 2010. I cannot imagine why this guy isn't facing capital murder.

[SD ///M4]

Originally Posted by chickdr

This depends. I have a CCW here in Georgia. I have the right to carry a gun in my car with, or without the CCW.

Weapons laws vary by state. According to a pamphlet by opencarry.org, in Washington state it is illegal to carry a loaded firearm in a vehicle without a CPL:

"A person may carry a loaded firearm in a vehicle only if they have a valid CPL. Those without a valid CPL may carry a firearm in a vehicle only if the firearm is unloaded and not concealed in any way on the body. (RCW 9.41.050)"

Bowman had a CPL and it was legal for him to carry his loaded 9mm in his car. If he didn't have a CPL this would have been illegal, and arguably, he wouldn't have been carrying his loaded 9mm in his car, being otherwise an apparently law-abiding citizen.

[Tonybest]

Originally Posted by Twisted Six

...

Am I nuts for thinking like this ?

I like your suggestion. And you are not nuts.

Lapierre saying that to fight the bad guys with weapons, you need more good guys with weapons...

Where I live, the fallen victims of gun violence are in great majority criminals themselves. I rarely shed a tear.

Not a lot of innocent children and moviegoers that are targets...