« In stark contrast... |
The Teddy Bear Twins »
Posted by TOM FRANCIS on March 26 at 12:43 PM
That’s the name of the shooter, according to Seattle Weekly….and the Seattle Times.
SCOOPED, you all.
March 26, 2006 1:15 PM
Yes, and grownups about it. Credited, etc.
Dan Savage |
March 26, 2006 1:43 PM
and so the gun control argument comes full circle. gun enthusiasts talk about how guns are for hunters and for self-defense, as if rural folks are wholesome and crime only happens in cities. now it turns out that this fuck's familiarity with weapons did not have psychopathic origins, unless you see rural america as morally rotten and hunting as sadistic. how do we know that people with these kinds of weapons won't someday snap? answer: we don't. how do we prepare for such snaps? either by arming our whole society in self-defense, take unconscionable risks by doing nothing, or making most guns unavailable. ergo: gun control/ prohibition NOW.
March 26, 2006 1:44 PM
Not sure who Jake is, but it wasn't Dawdy or me. We appreciate the credited post. Thanks, RA, Weekly.
March 26, 2006 1:49 PM
actually the seattle times has up a ton of info on their site about the shooter. they talk to neighbors, employers... musch more in depth then the weakly. i think the weakly got their info from the times , anyways.
March 26, 2006 2:07 PM
Oh brother, here we go. How long will it take for Seattle's scenesters to link this shooting to Iraq?
Look: The problem isn't ravers and their piercings, or Montana yahoos and their guns. But mix a culture that doesn't make character judgements, the desensitizing effects of "undead" counterculture, and a criminal justice system that doesn't lock-up a guy that commited a felony in Whitefish, and you're going to have a problem where these roads cross.
What happened is a tragedy, for the kids involved, and a country where kids are given too much autonomy and not enough responsibility for the world they are creating for themselves.
March 26, 2006 2:16 PM
Jake here - not connected to Weekly, just following all this and very surprised about the timid media and stonewalling cops. Took a couple of Journ. classes in college - avid news hound.
Still many questions, most missed.
Weekly put it well - he very deliberately went about killing. Puts Al Capone to shame. Rushing up stairs for targets, blasting away at the bathroom door hoping to kill. A blood lust frenzy that no movie could out do.
Unless the twins carried those guns around all the time - could they be that stupid - he brought them with him, early or late.
Premeditation? The NOW is Manson like- it is a message of great import I think.
No mention so far that I have sorted out if he was druggie - but from Apt. managers, seems unlikely. Old guys don't say they were nice guys if they are drugggies of import.
Slow cop stuff, no reason. Taints the process, like a FEMA response - oh, will take a few days to use the phone.
We have our bureauacry to work on things - it is just the biggest crime in the city in 20 years.
The Montana connection might be the link. Who raised these guys, what home politics, etc.
I thought the Stranger was going to get the killers name last night.
Roses to KOMO, Weekly and Stranger.
KING 5 has simply repeated the same story for 24 hours. God - what a lame local news effort.
Long live a free and informed and independant press.
March 26, 2006 2:16 PM
No,HMA, other way around - Weekly was first (I went from there to Times site and they didn't have it; they later posted similar info..) Noticed also Weekly took pains to say the shooting wasn't directly related to rave..
March 26, 2006 2:28 PM
yes thanks for the credit guys. and no hma we didn't get it from the times. geez.
and the stranger's stuff has been very good.
March 26, 2006 2:30 PM
Hey, Jake -- is the reason you didn't follow up on journalism your inability to express your thoughts in English? Pure sensationalism. Maybe you should call Art Bell.
March 26, 2006 2:48 PM
Yeah, blame the guns. So typical and so played out.
Guns also PROTECT people from bad guys.
Remember, the bad guys don't give a crap about gun laws. They will get guns however they have to. Good citizens have a right to protect themselves and their family. As shown after Katrina, the government isn't always going to come save you. You have to be prepared to protect yourself if necessary.
March 26, 2006 2:54 PM
Well said Erica.
A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be the constant companion of your walks.
--- Thomas Jefferson
March 26, 2006 2:59 PM
Great. A gun nut murders a bunch of people and now wee ahve to hear other gun nuts whining about being oppressed. They have no fucking shame.
The Baron |
March 26, 2006 3:06 PM
Concealed weapons permits, folks. They are easily obtained provided you can pass a backround check (or maybe more, I'm not sure). I advise anyone who feels compelled to keep a firearm to protect themselves to get properly trained on how to use it, and store it safely.
March 26, 2006 3:35 PM
I strongly urge all you gun nuts, when YOUR time comes to go bonkers, to reverse the usual order of things in your murder-suicide, and get the suicide part out of the way first. You'll save the rest of us a ton of grief that way.
March 26, 2006 3:48 PM
I think the Down With Guns people don't realize that this guy was just crazy, and even if he had no access to guns, he would've found other means to lash out at these people. Let's not use Kyle Huff to push a fucking agenda, kthx.
This person didn't flip out just because he had a gun, he just flipped out and the guns enabled his murderous insanity. If not for the guns, something else would have.
You're looking for something to blame, when in reality the only SOMEONE to blame is Kyle Huff, and we may never know his rationale for doling what he did. Banning guns does not solve the problem.
March 26, 2006 4:42 PM
People freak out. It is called mental illness. If they have access to guns when it happens it ends much worse.
If a 6 foot 4, 250 pound teddy bear freaks, that guy can do some damage. But if he is only working with his hands or swinging a chair he will do less damage than with an automatic and a sawed off.
Hand grenades don't kill people, people kill people. But homocidal people who have access to hand grenades can really make a mess before the cops have time to respond.
You have to draw the line at some point, or else we all have our own thermo-nuclear weapons in the basement to keep our neighborhood safe.
Rain Monkey |
March 26, 2006 4:58 PM
Thanks, RA & Philip. Good scoop, all deserved props. There's a time for playing games, one-upmanship, and prickly competitive score skeeping. This ain't one of 'em.
Dan Savage |
March 26, 2006 5:06 PM
I think the Down With Guns people don't realize that this guy was just crazy, and even if he had no access to guns, he would've found other means to lash out at these people.
Maybe, but if you take guns out of the situation all you've got is a nutcase being wrestled to the ground after stabbing at a few people.
March 26, 2006 5:17 PM
Why the insults - you are not at the Kirkland School for Sewing and Seaming Institute blog. Tis the Stranger blog, direct, bold, to the chase. OK to say fuck, he killed them. Should I have said he used deadly force....reminding one of gun totting gangsters of a bygone era....and all we can do is cry and wonder to the moon....there. Some fake Victorian for you.
Too sensational to say the guy moved deliberately toward the house armed to the teeth and with determination and cunning went room to room seeking victims? That"s facts
I like a fast clipped style for blog stuff - and I have finger problems so don't key board too well. Is that OK with you, can you handle somewone who is not your echo?
Sheeple people afraid of their shadows, and at heart really do value conformity even in a non comformist milieu.
March 26, 2006 5:46 PM
Limiting the kinds of guns and the number of guns that one is allowed to own WOULD help. No one needs a weapon designed purely to kill other humans and no one needs to own a fucking aresenal. Simply put, how about allowing one handgun, one hunting rifle and that's IT...Collectors could have more if they pass heavy background checks and disable the weapon. Possession of unauthorized weapons sends your ass to jail for a long time. (and now the whining begins, 'you're violating my rights to own an assault rifle. how can i fight off the angry muslim hordes when judgement day occurs?')
March 26, 2006 6:41 PM
A few observations -
The militia own guns to do battle with an out of control govt.
So do many other parts of conservative America. The theory goes that at some point, the defenders of the Constitution, true patriots, will fight the Govt. in a sort of second Revolution.
Taking away guns will make that defense impossible.
In theory - for them - we remain free because we are armed. And that freedom is also accorded beause we can shoot back in a show down with Govt troops and agents.
Ruby Ridge confirms the theory for them.
As we all know, what really happens is they shoot each other and their neighbors in rage and anger spasms.
Ask a good Mormon why he has guns. First possible hunting - then to stay free. There will be some answer about defending the Constitution at some possible future time.
Plus the Swiss model is convincing to them. Armed to the teeth, every house, never invaded.
March 26, 2006 7:00 PM
Exactly, Geoff. The second amendment is not about duck hunting, it is to keep in the hands of the people the means of rebellion.
These facts were stated clearly by the Black Panthers in the sixties, and the American Indian Movement in the seventies.
But, but, how do you reconcile the War on Terror, a euphamism for war on armed resistance to global empire, with keeping guns for the purpose of rebellion in the unlikely event of crooked elections.
And given that the Republicans have already shredded the rest of the Constitution, what is so special about the second amendment. Except that the Republican base didn't get all riled up by the revocation of Habius Corpus.
Rain Monkey |
March 26, 2006 7:51 PM
R M - sorry I was just sharing with some of the newbies to that maze call American Gun politics.
I woud approve a plan that outlaws ALL guns - with few exemptions.
Japan style, U K.
Here, the right to bear arms discussion is far more complex the the C Hill twinks admit.
My family has always had a gun or two. No big deal. But I have had some of these uber Patriot folks in my environs in the past.
March 26, 2006 9:29 PM
May I suggest bricking up your bunker from the inside, Rain Monkey.
March 26, 2006 9:40 PM
Great, a loser from Montana shoots up Seattle and kills local kids.
And all you gun owners can do is defend gun ownership.
A bit more perspective would be helpful here. A big fat ass loser without an arsenal in his truck is a lot less lethal to innocent bystanders than the same homocidal loser is with guns.
March 26, 2006 9:51 PM
& innocent, peaceful, energetic, young, potential filled, loving, and life loving people murdered by a "polite man" (with enough fire power to wipeout the E. Precint) and all many can do is reduce the human story to a debate about firearms legality! Please direct your energy to taking flowers up to the house and saying a prayer, or offering comfort and any aid you can think of to the friends, families, co-workers and neighbors of these VICTIMS. IF all you can do is give them a hug, do it!
March 27, 2006 3:16 AM
Great, pretty soon Michael Moore will be making another mockumentary about this incident as a platform for gun control. Look people, it's really pretty simple: DONT invite total strangers to private parties!!!! What happened on saturday is a grim reminder of what can happen!If you choose to do so, then at least one of the hosts or trusted guests should be armed.
March 28, 2006 6:18 PM
Just a thought but what if he did not have a gun and was using a knife instead? He could have gone from room to room making very little noise and taken out most of them and if he was a hunter he very well could have taken most of them out this way. From the way I understand this, probably most of them ran at the sound of the gun shot. Also, I am sure more then one neighbor called to police at the sound of the gun shot. Now that being said I fail to see how gun control could have made this any less lethal.
March 29, 2006 1:21 PM
In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).
All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122