Police say gunman kills three in Idaho shooting spree

[Miles Archer]

Source: Reuters

(Reuters) - A 29-year-old man killed three people and critically wounded another during a shooting spree in the northern Idaho city of Moscow on Saturday which ended when the gunman crashed his vehicle during a high-speed chase with police, authorities said.

The shootings occurred in rapid succession in downtown Moscow just after 2:30 p.m. local time when a caller reported to police that a gunman had shot two people at a local business.

Police later identified the shooter as John Lee, 29, of Moscow. Lee is believed to have first killed his mother at her home before driving to an office building and shooting and killing his landlord, and wounding another man who was in the landlord's office, said Moscow Police Chief David Duke.

Lee then drove to a restaurant and asked to see the manager, before shooting and killing the 47-year-old woman, Duke said.

Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/01/11/us-usa-idaho-shootings-idUSKBN0KK03L20150111?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&utm_source=twitter

[brewens]

1. I'm going to both of those hospitals next week to do blood drives. Regardless of how many

units were transfused over this incident, it will result in a big response. We will be slammed and we'll be ready. It's just too freakin' bad I know this from experience. They had a bad situation with a shooter in Moscow just a couple of years ago.

[Liberal_in_LA]

49. k&r

[tblue]

2. I hate guns.

I just don't understand.

[GGJohn]

3. Fine, don't own any.

Very simple solution.

[xocet]

4. Way to celebrate murder! You can redeem your points with Wayne at the next conclave. n/t

[Duckhunter935]

7. who is celebrating, that is just sick

show how he was or apologize.

[xocet]

15. Every gun homicide is a 2nd Amendment celebration.

Chiming in sarcastically while ignoring the other poster's main point can be taken as veiled support for the gun culture that refuses sensible regulation and virtually ensures a wide distribution of guns - even to those who are not the sainted "responsible" gun owners. That the proponents of gun culture still effectively believe in constant human sacrifice as opposed to sensible regulation of said culture is what is sick.

GGJohn's sarcastic comment is quite in the spirit of the NRA's behavior immediately after Columbine.

Hence, no apology is necessary.

[Duckhunter935]

16. what "refuses sensible regulation"?

most if not all firearms owners here support sensible regulations that will work and not based on cosmetics and fear.

[GGJohn]

17. There was nothing sarcastic about my comment.

I said that tblue is free to not own any. It's a very simple solution.

[JonLP24]

64. There was something

A poster says "I hate guns" in response to a tragedy involving guns tblue doesn't own. You telling her don't own guns then coming back saying "It's a very simple solution", a solution to what? tblue hates guns? I find it very unlikely tblue owns guns lets assume tblue doesn't own a gun, tblue doesn't guns but still hates guns. See?

Here you still either pretending, obtuse, something as you were in response to tblue. Playing innocent certainly reeks of dishonesty but have to give that chance first.

[gopiscrap]

57. Exactly

[GGJohn]

11. Wow!!!!

Hyperbole much?

[xocet]

12. Wow!!! Miss the point much? n/t

[GGJohn]

18. The only one missing the point here is you. eom

[xocet]

20. Way to keep the celebration going.... n/t

[GGJohn]

21. Still missing the point, keep going. eom

[samsingh]

55. xocet gets the point. i get the point. you apparently do not.

[GGJohn]

71. No, you don't. eom

[gopiscrap]

61. Bullshit, get rid of them altogether!

[GGJohn]

70. Not going to happen. eom

[Spooky69]

5. Remember kids . . . guns dont kill people

[Skittles]

6. no, gun humping paranoid assholes do

[gopiscrap]

58. Well put

[madokie]

62. Spot on Skittles

Maybe one day I'll wish I had a gun but in my 66 plus years that day hasn't come yet. I laid my weapons down when I left 'nam and never looked back nor regretted that I don't own one today

[Duckhunter935]

8. that is correct

A person pulled the trigger

[beemer27]

9. Mental Problems

Anyone who would kill their own mother is a nutjob. This guy went off the deep end, and decided to "pay back" a few people that he thought had done him wrong. This guy should not have had any kind of weapon. The problem is, how do we identify who should or should not be trusted with an object capable of injury. This could be a firearm, knife, automobile, or any inanimate object that can be used to cause harm. We live in a free society, and do not take the word of just one person that someone else is too nutty to be trusted. Before the authorities can curtail basic rights, there must be some kind of proof that it is necessary, and the person accused must have a fair chance to answer the charges. None of us would have it any other way. There are people that I would not trust with a car, but it is not my place to take their driving rights away. These decisions must go through the proper steps. And everyone should be judged on the same standards. If someone has a better way, let us know. Until then, there will be a few who slip through the cracks and cause harm.

[Demit]

10. We could work to change the culture. This gun-loving, gun-adoring culture.

We changed the culture to make cigarette smoking unacceptable, we could do it with guns.

[hack89]

13. Or we could have decent health care for all. Nt

[Demit]

14. Why or?

[Duckhunter935]

19. yes do both

just do not force your choice about weapons on me

[Demit]

23. No forcing. Just looks of disgust when anyone parades their adoration of guns around.

Showing distaste at the worship of guns. Not wanting to be in the same room, as was done with cigarette smokers. That sort of thing.

[Duckhunter935]

25. well that is not what most

on the controller side want and most RKBA do not agree with open carry.

[hack89]

22. Personally I would go for the violent criminal culture

if I wanted to reduce gun deaths. We know the demographics of gun violence very well. Why don't we focus on the specific groups that are responsible for the killing? It would be a much easier task and will not alienate the vast majority of gun owners whose support you need to pass the laws you want.

[Demit]

24. No, the whole culture of gun worship.

Who said anything about passing laws? Not me. My idea is to make the adoration and worship of guns socially unacceptable. The way smoking is now.

[Duckhunter935]

26. most firearms owners

do not worship guns. I think they are more like me. A gun is not a toy and if used responsibly can be fun to shoot safely and used as a tool for hunting or for personal protection. Cigarettes have no purpose at all do they?

[Demit]

30. Well if you don't worship guns then you won't be affected by

the change in societal attitude.

And cigarettes can be fun if smoked safely. You might not like them, if you're not a cigarette smoker, but of course they have a purpose.

[Duckhunter935]

32. what crap is that

cigarettes can not be smoked safely and the secondhand smoke also causes injury and death. A firearm has to have a trigger pulled and be pointed at an individual for any harm, a cigarette does not. A better comparison would be an explosive device as it does not discriminate and those are already illegal.

[Demit]

36. Triggers have to be pulled? What about all those stories of guns going off

accidentally? Of being dropped and going off accidentally? Apparently there were no triggers pulled in those cases.

And of course you can smoke cigarettes safely, if you smoke very little. The effect is cumulative. Same with secondhand smoke. But the fact that you speak so passionately about cigarette smoking shows me that you have indeed internalized the societal distaste for cigarette smoking. You might not support outlawing it, but you certainly don't want to be around it. You don't want to be around people who do it.

So it is possible to change society's distaste for gun worship.

[Duckhunter935]

44. most cases yes the triggers have been pulled

Reaching in a purse, trigger pulled by clothing and just by accident and the gun owner did not want to admit it. That is why I do not care for the Glock type safety, it is on the trigger with no other mechanical safety. Most guns in the last 30 years or so have to pass drop tests so they do not fire if dropped. Remington Model 700 rifles are the only ones I know of that have safety problems and can fire without pulling the trigger.

Effective January 1, 2001, no handgun may be manufactured within California, imported into California for sale, lent, given, kept for sale, or offered/exposed for sale unless that handgun model has passed firing, safety, and drop tests and is certified for sale in California by the Department of Justice. Private party transfers, curio/relic handguns, certain single-action revolvers, and pawn/consignment returns are exempt from this requirement.

The list of handguns that pass this test are too long to list

http://certguns.doj.ca.gov/safeguns_resp.asp

and no you can not smoke cigarettes safely, I do not care how little you smoke. I will soon lose a good friend who had previous cancer and part of his lung removed and now it is back in the other lung and brain. Smoking any amount is not good for you.

[hack89]

27. Is drug and gang violence due to gun worship

or due to money and power worship? How many of their guns are even legal?

The fundamental flaw in your argument is that gun violence has been steadily falling for 20 years - we have cut our murder rate in half. You are not going to be able to point at legal gun own and pin the blame for criminal violence on them. Americans are smarter than that.

[Demit]

28. You want to talk about drug & gun violence. I don't.

I want to talk about changing the attitude that having a lot of guns at home is cool. That carrying guns around is cool. I want people to stop thinking that posing their children with guns for Christmas cards is cool. I want them to stop thinking that taking their children to gun ranges for family vacations is cool.

I'm not even making an argument to have a flaw in. You want me to be making an argument so that you can find a flaw in it, so you can change the subject to what you want it to be. There's no flaw in wanting to change the attitude that guns are anything remotely cool.

[hack89]

29. So reducing gun deaths is not your real focus?

you just don't like guns.

[Demit]

33. I think reducing gun worship will reduce the number of guns.

Which will reduce gun deaths.

[hack89]

35. If you understood the demographics of gun violence

you would not be making such a statement. Criminals will always have guns.

Besides - gun deaths went down as gun ownership went up so why do you think there is a direct correlation? There are so few gun deaths relative to the number of gun owners that most Americans will ignore your attempts to demonize gun ownership - the fact you would have to lie about gun violence would undermine your efforts.

[Demit]

37. I don't want to demonize gun ownership.

I want to make gun worship, the adoration and exaltation of guns, distasteful to people.

Look, I suggest you start your own post about criminals and guns. That's not what I'm talking about, therefore I can't be lying about it. I want people to stop glorifying guns. I want people in society to express their distaste for people who do.

[hack89]

40. If we are not talking about the people that are actually killing people

then what you are calling for is merely another front in the culture wars - "I don't like guns and the type of people that really like them."

Unless you can show that the adoration of guns has led to increased gun violence (you can't) then all you have is a personal and somewhat irrational dislike of guns. Not the firmest foundation for a social movement.

[Duckhunter935]

34. I know the answer

and it would be a ban if the poster could ever get it passed.

[Demit]

38. You're frustrated, aren't you?

You say you know what I think, even though I've spent the last hour telling you exactly what I think, and repeating it too!

But somehow you need there to be only two ways of looking at the subject of guns, hating them to the extent of wanting them banned, or loving them so much you won't hear a word said against them. My dislike for the sacredness of guns just doesn't compute for you two, so you have to make up a hidden agenda.

No hidden agenda. I just want people in general society to start showing distaste for the worship of guns.

[Duckhunter935]

39. well please give me the same respect

Firearms owners are not all gun worshipers either. That seems to be the point you are pushing.

[Demit]

42. The point I am pushing is for people to discourage gun worship.

I never once said I think all gun owners worship guns. So stop saying so.

If you don't think guns are sacred, would you join me in saying that simple thing?

[Duckhunter935]

43. Sure sounds like it in your posts

never once do you say some, or minority of gun owners. The way I see it you are talking all gun owners unless you positively add that small disclaimer.

[Demit]

47. Okay. I don't believe all gun owners are gun worshippers.

Now will you join me in saying that it is distasteful when people worship guns?

[Duckhunter935]

48. It is but I have never seen it

[samsingh]

56. i think you're completely correct in what needs to be done.

[gopiscrap]

59. If you own a gun you're part of the problem!

[JonLP24]

65. We know the demographics?

So you would rather profile, investigate, people that fit those demographics rather than alienate gun owners who don't commit gun violence?

You don't see how this is truly bizarre?

[hack89]

66. A tiny fraction of the population is responsible for violent crime

Gun violence is not a universal phenomenon - violent crime is concentrated in certain areas. That holds true for even large cities where 90% of the violence is concentrated in a few neighborhoods.

We don't have profile people to tailor laws and policies to fix the problem. But we do have to understand the problem to a greater depth than "guns are bad".

[JonLP24]

67. We know who the demographics are

you say focus on them, specific groups. For the sake of discussion say focus means the same thing for demographics & gun owners. I'm very curious as to the criteria used and it seems others are in anti-gun tunnel vision they didn't catch it but I'm sure you could agree it isn't 100% of demographics or "specific groups" that are responsible, someone would be alienated right just as if focus was at gun owners who also aren't 100% responsible put you make a point we need the gun owners votes. I'm sure demographics help Democrats win elections more than potentionally alienated gun owners. Just leave the gun owners alone, go after the demographics seemed odd.

As to violent crime in certain areas, I agree much larger problem "guns are bad" isn't going to solve but focus on the "demographics" as if the demographics already aren't focused and are already alienated.

Guns specifically, it does help to focus on gun supply, where do they come from, how? Say theft is the where. From who how? Gun owners & gun shops? Well... there is something that could help with that but don't want to alienate gun owners & gun shop owners. In any case, it does pay to pay attention where and how the guns. Demand is key too, ironically it is the demographics in those concentrated areas that need a gun for protection than gun owners that don't live in those areas.

[hack89]

68. Most gun owners will accept new gun laws

UBCs and cracking down on illegal gun trafficking are good examples.

When the conversation turns to gun bans or registration is where the conversation jumps the rails. Or focusing on issues like legal concealed carry which are irrelevant to gun violence.

I didn't say ignore gun owners. I said don't lump all gun owners into a single group. There are gun owners like criminal gangs that should not be ignored. That problem is not going to be fixed if your solution is to disarm the law abiding legal gun owner who represents no threat to society.

[JonLP24]

69. I knew what you were saying

I didn't believe you did say ignore gun owners, no focus on demographics & specific groups in certain areas where violent crime is concentrated. I assumed the implication in the word focus (based on context) but ignore gun owners wasn't it. I took it as a dragnet style approach(not necessarily that, just the implication) to solve a problem by going after a group "gun owners" who we can all agree, not all gun owners commit crimes with guns but instead apply it to "demographics" which would alienate the people in those demographics that don't commit gun violence which alienate people which also had irony in to solve gun violence don't alienate gun owners, focus on demographics instead.

I wasn't talking solutions, just chipping away what was behind demographics which is a group defined by whatever it is, gun owners is a demographic for example, so you had an odd way of saying don't lump gun owners together.

Solutions depend on the problem. If someone had a problem or wanted to make it illegal for anyone owning guns, doesn't matter who, then disarming law abiding legal gun owner works. There is always a threat though, maybe 0.0001% - whatever but the odds are there. The law abiding legal gun owner who then commits a crime with his legally owned gun, that person was certainly a threat to society.

I didn't catch the problem or what it is in a thread with subthreads all over but this is to a story in Moscow, Idaho. If a problem relates to preventing something that happened in Moscow, I don't think focusing on demographics is going to help stop another Moscow in a place like Moscow.

[former9thward]

45. Yeah, that really worked in France.

[Skittles]

50. shall we compare France gun deaths and American gun deaths?

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/01/08/conservative-media-mindlessly-criticize-strict/202065

[former9thward]

51. Compare away.

But every time there is a mass shooting in the U.S. people blame our supposed lax guns laws. But when it happens elsewhere they go silent.

[Skittles]

52. no one says stricter control would prevent all gun humping nutcases

that's NRA / repuke black and white thinking

[former9thward]

53. Good, I expect to see you posting that the next time there is a mass shooting.

NOT.

[Skittles]

54. LOL

done here, waste of time

[gopiscrap]

60. No kidding!

[mahatmakanejeeves]

31. I've driven through Moscow.

I saw a story about a domestic dispute incident that occurred there some time back on an over the air TV channel just the other day.

I'm adding a link to the local newspaper:

Three killed in Moscow are identified, shooter in custody

Posted: Saturday, January 10, 2015 3:13 pm | Updated: 7:45 am, Sun Jan 11, 2015.

By Anthony Kuipers, Daily News staff writer

A Moscow man is in custody after allegedly shooting and killing three people in Moscow Saturday afternoon before leading local police on a high speed chase.

Pullman Police, with the assistance of Whitman County Sheriff’s deputies and Washington State Patrol troopers, took 29-year-old John Lee into custody after he led police on a 24-mile pursuit and crashed his vehicle north of Colfax on U.S. Highway 195.

According to Moscow Police, Lee is suspected of killing Moscow businessman David Trail, 76, in the office the apartments he owns at 303 E. Third St. in Moscow. He also allegedly shot and killed Arby’s restaurant manager Belinda Niebuhr, 47, at the restaurant located on Peterson Drive. His third alleged victim, his 61-year-old adoptive mother Terri Grzebielski, was allegedly killed at her home at the 400 block of Veatch Street.

Also injured in the assault was Seattle resident Michael Chin, 39, who was taken to Gritman Medical Center and is listed in critical condition. Chin was also shot in Trail’s office, and was the man who first alerted police of a shooting at 2:31 p.m.
....

Anthony Kuipers can be reached at [phone], or by email to [e-mail].

[Judi Lynn]

41. Police: 5 guns found in car of Idaho shooting-spree suspect

Police: 5 guns found in car of Idaho shooting-spree suspect
By GENE JOHNSON, Associated Press | January 11, 2015 | Updated: January 11, 2015 2:00pm

Investigators found five guns and a laptop computer in the vehicle of a man suspected of killing three people in a shooting spree, a police chief said Sunday, but they hadn't yet uncovered any motive for the rampage.

John Lee, 29, was arrested following a high-speed chase in nearby Washington state after the shootings Saturday. Police believe he opened fire at three locations in the western Idaho city of Moscow, killing his landlord, his adoptive mother and a manager at a restaurant his parents frequented. A Seattle man was also critically injured.

Investigators searched Lee's car and apartment late Saturday night, Moscow Police Chief David Duke said. They found two semi-automatic pistols, a revolver, a shotgun and a rifle in the vehicle, along with a laptop, he said. Ballistics tests were expected to help determine which weapons might have been used in the shootings.

Authorities were seeking a warrant to search the computer, he said.

"There's still nothing to identify a specific motive as to why Mr. Lee took these actions," Duke said.

The first death was that of Lee's adoptive mother, Terri Grzebielski, 61, at her home. Police said Lee then headed to Northwest Mutual life insurance, where he shot his landlord, David Trail, 76, who was a local businessman and the brother of a former state representative, as well as Michael Chin, 39, of Seattle.

More:
http://www.chron.com/news/crime/article/Suspect-arrested-after-3-killed-in-Idaho-shooting-6007762.php

[brentspeak]

46. Idaho has some of the loosest, "anything goes" gun laws in the US

Practically no background check needed, as per the NRA's wishes. A uni-brow neanderthal with blood streaming down his face wearing a t-shirt that reads "I like to kill people" would have no problem buying as many firearms as he'd want.

And so much for the propaganda that "guns save lives".

[JonLP24]

63. Why?

I understand I wouldn't know why this early

The parents, landlord you picture he had a reason for it. After that he drives to Arby's asked to see the manager, he kills her which is the baffling part. A lot of details are missing from that one.

I can figure he also knew the woman at Arby's but he is later trying to elude police (implying he doesn't want to get caught for his crimes) so the Arby's decision is very odd.