E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSPolice say Benjamin Colton Barnes left behind a trail of victims, starting with four shot at a house party south of Seattle on Sunday. NBC's Kristen Dahlgren reports.
Updated at 5:20 p.m. ET: Officials confirm that a body found earlier Monday is that of Benjamin Colton Barnes, the suspect in the killing of Mount Rainier National Park Ranger Margaret Anderson. Two weapons were found with the body.
No wounds were found on the body, suggesting he perished from the cold overnight. Barnes, an Iraq War veteran, was wearing just a T-shirt and jeans when his body was found in a river.
Updated at 2:20 p.m. ET: A body was spotted by aircraft in a remote area and there's a strong probability it is Barnes, a sheriff's spokesman says.
"One of the air units and some of the FBI SWAT team members and sheriff’s SWAT team members have found a body," said Pierce County Sheriff's spokesman Ed Troyer. "We have not gotten to it, we are nowhere near it, it’s still buried in the snow."
Updated at 2:05 p.m. ET: A body believed to be that of Barnes has been found, the Washington State Patrol tweets.
Law enforcement authorities discuss the recovery of the body of the man suspected of killing Mount Rainier National Park Ranger Margaret Anderson.
Updated at 1:40 p.m. ET: A Pierce County source says a body thought to be that of Barnes has been found in a ditch, KING5 TV reports.
AP
Park Ranger Margaret Anderson, 34, was fatally shot Sunday.
Updated at 12:25 p.m. ET: Some 200 SWAT officers, police and rangers at Mount Rainier National Park in Washington state were searching Monday for an Iraq War veteran suspected in the killing on Sunday of a ranger. Highlights from a news conference that just wrapped up:
- Rangers are trying to reach two people camping at a remote lake near the area that Benjamin Colton Barnes, 24, fled to so that they can be escorted out;
- Barnes is in an area of deep snow and 6-10 miles from any inhabited area;
- Margaret Anderson, the ranger killed on Sunday, could not be reached by park staff for 90 minutes because the gunman was shooting at them before he fled into the woods;
- An aircraft with heat-sensing capabilities, as well as dogs and trackers in snowshoes are looking for Barnes;
- It's possible that Barnes had sufficient all-weather gear to survive overnight in the park's cold temperatures.
Updated at 11:35 a.m. ET: Barnes possibly suffers from post-traumatic stress following his deployments to Iraq, the mother of his child alleged in court documents.
NBC's Natalie Swaby reports on the tragedy and manhunt at Mount Rainier National Park.
Barnes was involved in a custody dispute in Tacoma in July 2011, during which the toddler's mother sought a temporary restraining order against him, according to the documents. In an affidavit, the woman wrote that Barnes was suicidal and possibly suffered from PTSD after deploying to Iraq in 2007-2008. She said he gets easily irritated, angry and depressed and keeps an arsenal of weapons in his home.
Overnight, dozens of people were evacuated from the visitor's center and a small lodge.
Mount Rainier National Park spokesman Kevin Bacher says Ranger Margaret Anderson was "shot as she was in the car."
Evacuee Dinh Jackson, a mother from Olympia, Wash., who came to Mount Rainier to sled with family and friends Sunday, said officials ordered people to hurry into the lodge after the shooting that killed a park ranger.
Officials had everyone get on their knees and place hands behind their heads as they went through the building, looking at faces to make sure the gunman was not among them, Jackson said.
"That was scary for the kids," she said.
Updated at 9:20 a.m. ET: About 125 people have been evacuated from the visitors center at Mount Rainier as authorities search for a gunman suspected of killing a park ranger.
Pierce County Sheriff's spokesman Ed Troyer says the visitors were transferred from the park overnight in groups of vehicles over the span of a few hours.
He says teams looking for the suspect were assessing new tactical plans that they planned to put into place at daylight. About 150 officers converged on the park after ranger Margaret Anderson was shot to death Sunday morning.
Troyer says Barnes was a "strong person of interest" in the slaying. He's believed to be well armed and have survivalist skills.
Updated at 4:40 a.m. ET: Tourists stranded in Mount Rainier National Park amid the search for a gunman who shot dead a park ranger have begun to leave Paradise Lodge, NBC News reports.
Five cars at a time were leaving with an armed escort. The evacuations were due to continue through the night.
Updated at 11:54 p.m. ET: A Mount Rainier National Park ranger was fatally shot following a New Year's Day traffic stop, and the 368-square-mile park in Washington state was closed as dozens of officers searched for the armed gunman over snowy and rugged terrain.
AP
Benjamin Coulton Barnes is seen in this undated photo provided by the Pierce County Sheriff's Dept.
Pierce County Sheriff's spokesman Ed Troyer said late Sunday afternoon that Benjamin Colton Barnes, a 24-year-old believed to have survivalist skills, was a "strong person of interest" in the slaying of Margaret Anderson.
A parks spokesman said Barnes was an Iraq war veteran. Authorities recovered his vehicle, which had weapons and body armor inside, Troyer said.
Barnes was also a suspect in the early Sunday morning shooting of four people at a house party south of Seattle, police said.
Authorities believed the gunman was still in the woods, with weapons. They asked people to stay away from the park, and for those already inside to leave.
"We do have a very hot and dangerous situation," Troyer said.
Tracks in snow
Troyer said authorities were following tracks in the snow they believe are from the gunman, and crews planned to bring an airplane through the area with heat-seeking capabilities.
"We believe we have a good track on him, but he's way ahead of us," Troyer said.
Kevin Bacher, a spokesman for the park, said about 125 people would spend Sunday night in the visitor center basement along with five law enforcement officers protecting the facility.
He said crews had considered removing them in armored vehicles, but decided not to take any risk. There was enough food at the center, but Bacher said diapers were running in short supply.
The park would remain closed Monday, officials announced late Sunday.
Jason Simpson, 29, of Kent, said his parents were still trapped at the visitor's center after traveling to the mountain for a day hike. His parents were able to make a call explaining their situation, and Simpson drove to the park entrance to wait.
"It's very distressing," Simpson said.
Sgt. Cindi West, King County Sheriff's spokesperson, said late Sunday that Barnes was connected to an early-morning shooting at a New Year's house party in Skyway, Wash., south of Seattle that left four people injured, two critically. That incident happened about 3 a.m., and stemmed from an argument over a gun.
West said three people fled the scene. Two were located, and West said authorities were trying to find Barnes and had been in contact with his family, trying to have them convince him to "come to the police and tell his side of the story" in the Skyway shooting.
At Mount Rainier around 10:20 a.m. Sunday, the gunman sped past a checkpoint, park spokesman Kevin Bacher said. One ranger began following him while Anderson eventually blocked the road to stop the driver.
Before fleeing, the gunman fired shots at both Anderson and the ranger that trailed him, but only Anderson was hit, Bacher said.
Ed Troyer / AP
In this pool photo provided by the Pierce Co. Sheriff's Dept., a police officer examines a car on a road at Mount Rainier National Park, Jan. 1. The car is believed to have been driven by Benjamin Colton Barnes, who officials say is a person of interest in the fatal shooting of a park ranger at the park Sunday morning.
Park superintendent Randy King said Anderson was a mother of two young daughters. She had served as a park ranger for about four years.
King said Anderson's husband also was working as a ranger elsewhere in the park at the time of the shooting.
"It's just a huge tragedy — for the family, the park and the park service," he said.
Adam Norton, a neighbor of Anderson's in the small town of Eatonville, Wash., said the ranger's family moved in about a year ago. He said they were not around much, but when they were Norton would see Anderson outside with her girls.
"They just seemed like the perfect family," he said.
The town of about 3,000 residents, which is a logging community near Rainier, is very close knit, he said.
"It's really sad right now," Norton said. "We take care of each other."
The shooting occurred on an unseasonably sunny and mild day. The park, which offers miles of wooded trails and spectacular vistas from which to see 14,410-foot Mount Rainier, draws between 1.5 million and 2 million visitors each year.
The Longmire station served as headquarters when the national park was established in 1899. Park headquarters have moved but the site still contains a museum, a hotel, restaurant and gift shop, which are open year-round.
Anderson was just the eighth national park ranger to be shot dead in the park system's history, the website Officer Down Memorial Page stated. A ninth was killed in a vehicle pursuit.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Leave a Comment:
Not much to go on here... I'll reserve judgment until more facts become available.
Oh, where's the fun in that?
String him up! Hang 'em from the nearest tree available! Castrate him and feed his balls to a wolf! Cut off his hands! Ban all guns everywhere! Quick! Let's all make snap emotional judgments bereft of logic, reason and the due process of law!
Whew! That was cathartic. (Not.)
Police are asking people to stay out of the area and avoid any armed bears running with picanic baskets.
Guns don't kill, but bullets do.
People without guns but with itchy trigger fingers kill people.
It's the trigger fingers that kill people.
it's the itches that kill people, not the NRA.
Okay, everybody start blaming guns and bullets before we even know what really happened.
@WMG-21, lol. Am I feeling a lot of "pent-up demand"?? Come on. New Year's Day. We're all tired of soft news. Give us something to sink our teeth into, right?
The jilted boyfriend did it. No, no, the cuckolded husband did it. One or the other, you choose.
You people posting stupid comments here need to get a life! This is a tragedy and a young woman lost her life, two young children lost their mother and a husband lost his wife and best friend! SHAME ON YOU ALL FOR MAKING THIS ANYTHING ELSE!!!!!
My wife and I go there every August for a wonderful hiking trip. Mount Rainier National Park is one of the last great treasures in our country and the people that manage and protect it should not have to endure the stupidity of the rest of the world! What is wrong with our society that things like this happen? MAKES ME SICK!!!!!!!!!
I know that area intimitly. Its going to be almost impossible to find him. He can survive for weeks and months in that old growth forest (even if he is not carrying food and water with him)
I wholeheartedly agree with Kevin in Texas! Mt. Rainier is an awesome place, and people who make stupid comments are just demeaning and disrespecting that young woman as well as her family. The human race is truly sinking to new lows. More than likely the disrespectful comments are coming from young people who have been pampered and sheltered their entire lives, and have no real life experience!
TO, devilsmarta-s , Yes the ranger shot the beligerant man twice in the back of the neck as he was running away. The ranger got a 1 year sentence and 5yrs of probation. One would assume he lost his state job.
That's why guns in national parks are a bad idea.
hey boo boo I think the ranger stole my picinic basket...
If he was using a rifle as the article said the gun was NOT legal for him to have in the park. The only guns legal to have in a National park are concealed carry weapons (pistols) IF you have a valid permit and the state the park is in allows concealed carry.
There is a war going on. A war between ignorant heavily armed poachers with no regard for life and those who actually care and have reasons to live and let live. State parks are being treated like toilets for hill billies. Eco tourism is the cash maker of the future. No one wants to see the remnants of the fox who is allowed to tend the hen house. Right now its a disaster! There are millions of jobs that could be created in this country through functional non private forest management. Who knows if it was one of the sherifs buddies she caught poaching?
hey jon......take your stupidity somewhere else and go F__K yourself!!!
While it's true we don't have all the information yet, it's not unreasonable that people are responding to this incident as possibly another one in which better gun control, and less ideology on the part of the NRA and its members, could save lives. IF this turns out to be another paranoid "sovereign" citizen or right-wing extremist, will those of you who insist on your right to keep assault weapons legal denounce him/her. (Yes, I know this was not apparently an assault weapon- but many crimes do involve them.) Or, will many of you have the typical right-wing knee jerk reaction you accuse gun control supporters of all the time? If we want all the information, then let's find out how many guns are sold illegally by "gun rights advocates" at gun shows, and privately, - because they can make a good profit and they see themselves as somehow the last line against dictatorship. As if hunters could stop a true military assault.
Re: The asinine, duisrespectful, ignorant and demeaning postings made by the ignorant few...
This was a Mother and a Wife who was brutally MURDERED!
What if this was someone you knew, your wife, or other loved one? Would you post the same crap? In all likelihood, you would.
Prayers and condolences to the family and friends of this wonderful lady.
I pray that this murder, coward and idiot gets located and 'taken care' of...REAL SOON!
To Scales67 The gun in the national park didn't do the shooting the person with the gun did the shooting.; I would assume in this case it probably didn't have anything to do with guns being allowed or not being allowed in the park.
Perhaps they should just ban people from the park as a person did the killing, that makes as much sense as blaming the gun for killing the park ranger.
So sad we have nuts out there, and the nuts will always do what nuts do with or with guns.
Oh, yeah, the 1st and 2nd Amendement played out once again at its finest. I suppose the NRA will now schedule a convention nearby where this Ranger was killed just like they did less than a week after the Columbine massacre, right next to the HS. Charles Heston proclaiming, "Over our dead bodies!"
A bunch of wackos, all of them!
usa1967: everybody start blaming guns and bullets before we even know what really happened.
We know what happened. The ranger was shot. A bullet was placed into a firearm, and was emptied into said ranger's now-dead body.
Should we blame penguins or Burger King? Nah, guns and bullets. Pinhead.
Mike K we can and we will vietnam war ring a bell dont underestimate the so called under dog
Once again the disrespect for the loss of a human life and the feelings of the victim's friends and family abound in the post made by ignorant fools!!!
This sad state of affairs is a direct reflection of the mentally deficient selfish trash who continually seek attention at the expense of broken hearts.
This is not a Saturday Night Live skit folks but real people, real life, real pain.
This type of careless thinking (if there are any brains involved) brings shame to our country and reinforces the opinions many foreign cultures have of our once great nation.
Shame on all you scum-bags who are joking about this young woman's death and for making light of a tragic situation, SHAME, SHAME, SHAME!!!!
My thoughts and prayers go out to all effected, and may justice be served to the individual responsible for this Ranger's death!
realitycheck-3009300:
Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. or STFU.
Go shameshameshame someone you're qualified to shameshameshame. That may include you, it certainly doesn't include anyone else here.
You seem to be familiar with the general attitudes around here. You obviously don't like them. SO LEAVE. Go be patronizing elsewhere. Maybe there you can find someone to pretend to be superior to.
Eugene, you have serious issues. There has been much nastiness in this thread and reality is right.
"Routine traffic stop" doesn't say what "crime" he supposedly committed for a roadblock to be set up. Seat belt violation? Or maybe one of those clearly unconstitutional (regardless of what the corrupt courts say) "stop 'em all and illegally search and seize" checkpoints. I think I'll reserve judgment on this situation until I know more.
Hell, I've thought about forcing any officer trying to issue me a seat belt ticket to shoot me on the spot. If I forced them to do it in front of my kids, it may motivate THEM to fight and die for freedom too! I spent 18 years of honorable service in the US Army swearing to defend the constitution from enemies foreign and domestic. I'll be damned if I am going to stand idly by while the government I worked for rapes every personal liberty I have as preserved (or at least it ATTEMPTED to do so) by the Constitution I swore to defend. Maybe it's time we force the anal retentive megalomaniacs to expose themselves as the perverted little tyrants they are over the supposedly trivial crap. Let's face it, a million forms of micro tyranny is just plain tyranny.
So if your stopped by the police you get to shot them?
Eugene Sax..........................you are merely another stupid liberal. Guns and bullets don't do anything, PEOPLE do things like KILL people. PINHEAD!!
eugene saxe:
From the looks of things YOU are the one that should go packin'. I'm not being self righteous---- just observing facts. If you would take time to read all the posts you will find I am not alone in my disdain for those who would joke about this tragedy. My comments are not personal rather just a distaste for thoughtless words of vanity and poking fun at someones death, if the shoe fits............
Your post indicates an ulterior motive, evidently something I said pushed your panic button and made you feel threatened, I'm no psychic but if I were a betting man I'd wager it was the comment about prayer, poor little eugene! Don't hate me I'm not the one forking out conviction, that's between you and someone else.
Obviously you are bothered by the mention of something you don't believe in or agree with. Your hatred of what's right in the eyes of the majority of normal folks and their compassion for the surviving family members indicates your ignorance or lack of feeling for those afflicted by the loss of a loved one.
How sad that you would twist what I said to bring attention to yourself, you must be under the influence of something you can't control, you have my sympathies.
While my words may have been too strong for your stomach, I make not apologies for my original post as the apathetic bad humor about a persons death turned mine!
Yawn.
Look. I can randomly bold crap too. FYI, it impresses no one. It IS, of course, yet another way you've chosen to attention-whore. And it ruins the whole purpose of having variable fonts. I guess if you have nothing intelligent to add...Hey, there's italics too!
But I digress...Holy crap, bold italics! You should try it.
I'm sorry someone's dead. That's still no reason for you to come and pass judgment over all...especially since "passing judgment" isn't your job. And if you're going to come here and be all high-and-mighty spouting holier-than-thous, expect to be called on it.
Trust me, your words = water on duck's back. I became bored with online moralizers ages ago. Honestly, the trolls are more entertaining. At least they're not boring, self-righteous "LOOK AT ME"s.
Have a good night.Olias of Sunhillow, you obviously thought Bowling for Columbine was a documentary. It was not! It was just Michael Moore twisting facts in his attempt to show how messed up we are. Here are the facts: First, it was Charlton Heston (your mistake, not Moore's). Second, Columbine occurred April 20, 1999, in Colorado and Heston's speech was May 20, 2000, in North Carolina. Third, the actual quote is "from my cold, dead hands!" Fourth, there was a NRA convention that occurred in Denver, 11 days after Columbine. It was actually scheduled more than a year in advance. The convention couldn't be completely cancelled but in deference to what happened in Columbine, they cancelled all of the fun type stuff and just had the voting meeting, for elected offices and that sort of thing. The NRA's handling of the issue actually drew praise from some liberal newspapers and NBC News. Finally, the conference in Denver was about 15 miles away from Columbine High School.
You have every right to shoot your mouth off (no pun intended) just the same as I do, but please check your facts before you do.
LMAO Eugene. Have you not figured out that self righteous ego maniacs can't see themselves through the same critical eyes as they see others, or in the way rest of humanity sees them. I spent 18 years in the US Army. NOTHING was sacred! We used to stay up all night talking trash on everybody and everything. I had a blast. Way too many people of all races, religions, creeds, ethnicity, etc, etc, etc, take themselves WAY too seriously.
Let's face it, the chances that someone related too, or even remotely personally connected to the victim will read the tripe on this thread are slim to non existent. Some people have a little too much humor. Others have no sense of humor at all. Personally, I tend to take the stance "no harm - no foul" to off color, rude, or stupid comments from BOTH sides (when I'm not LMAO that is). But that's just me .......
I can't believe this many posts collapsed...this is no Laughing matter a family has been destroyed This is no Rambo..May God Bless Them.
Wow! Once again. Some of you people are truly twisted and sick. And D_Loominator, I can only seriously hope you were trying to be sarcastic. You would actually want to shot a cop, in front of your children, because you were not wearing a seat belt? And the article I (actually) read, said that he was a suspect or person of interest in a New Years Eve party shooting of 4 people and the authorities had pleaded with his family to tell him to go to the police to give his version of the events(meaning, to me at least, that he was the shooter, and they needed to question him before charging him with the shooting.) Do you also realize that your serving in the Military is a Civil Service as is serving as a Peace Officer? You people making jokes about a Forest Ranger being killed on the job, Hope and Pray, that the same fate never visits you or your Mother, Sister, Wife, Mother of your Children, then you need to pray for your very own heartless soul.
D Loominator, I don't care if you were trying to joke - your comments are idiotic and only prove the only time you know how to handle a weapon is when you are in your jammies behind your computer. Your guns are shootin' rabbit turds.
My bottom line is my thoughts and prayers are with this fallen officer's family and co-workers and I hope they catch this loser quickly, before he has a chance to injure or kill anyone else.
This is your judgement on reserve? LOL. Your bias is showing & clouding your "reserved" judgement. Reading the whole article might aide in your comprehension or lack thereof:
The authorities there aren't stupid. They'll get him. Conditions in the Northwest Cascade range deteriorate at the drop of a hat so this "survivalist" will be up against sub zero degree weather soon. Hopefully it will end peacefully and he'll freeze to death up there.
What goes around comes around.
I've said this before -- and oh! the flames -- but I'm an old lady who lives alone near the edge of the wood, and I've seen a thing or two. (Never mind. I don't expect 1 out of 20 to get the reference.)
Lakewood, Wash.: “Family Blames Iraq After Son Kills Wife.” Pierre, S.D.: “Soldier Charged With Murder Testifies About Postwar Stress.” Colorado Springs: “Iraq War Vets Suspected in Two Slayings, Crime Ring.” On and on it goes.
Chickens. Coming home to roost.
Wow, MSNBC just had to toss in the note about Obama allowing guns in National Parks. Big deal. What everyone is losing sight over is that this was a Suspect in a shooting in King County (Metro Seattle) who was sought for questioning. This could have happened anywhere. And guess what? Criminal Suspects have been known to carry firearms and shoot Law Enforcement Officers as well as citizens. They will do so regardless of what laws are in place.
This incident has NOTHING to do with the ability of law abiding citizens carrying at the National Park.
My thoughts go out to the fallen Ranger and her family. She may very well be the first LEO killed in the line of duty for 2012....sad.
Law enforcement worst nightmare, a trained solider, combat veteran, survivalist, heavily armed in a large National park, with many places to hide, who has killed one officer and may be involved in other shootings, if this is the correct person ,as his photo and body markings show, he will not let himself be taken alive, and he will attempt to take out as many as possible before they get to him.
It is going to be a bad situation for all involved, something caused this ex-soilder to snap.
I have, as of yet, not heard of one "law abiding citizen" in one of these states (and I live in one) where any idiot can carry a gun without a permit that has used it to stop an armed criminal. In fact when gabby gifford was shot there were armed men in the area who hid in the grocery store while an unarmed woman tackled jared while he was trying to change clips.
What I have seen from these macho rambos who think they need to carry a gun into Ace Hardware is they pull it and flash it more on unarmed people who humiliated them than they do on armed criminals. I simply asked one neanderthal "whatcha need a gun in ace hardware for gumby" and his reply was "for @!$%#s like you" as he put his hand on the hilt in a threatening manner.
The only time in my life I have had a loaded pistol pulled on me was when a drunk gun rights advocate saw mw dancing with his wife. And most shootings in this state are by law abiding nra members who were drunk and jealous.
I know you cant get rid of guns, there are to many men who get off on the perceived power it gives them, but what we need to do is give a psychological evaluation to people before allowing them to carry a gun. That would probably do away with over half the wingnuts who carry them now. If y0ou see a group of gun nuts together, without brining up the gun control issue simply ask them what they would do if they cam home and caught their wife screwing another man. 99% of the time they will say "i'd shoot them both". Is that why you want the right to carry a gun? in case you are humiliated in ace hardware by a bigger man? or in case someone is dancing or sleeping with your wife? I thought you were resposible gun owners who would never let their emotions affect their ability to think clearly?
The FACT is most shootings in the US are not done by CRIMINALS, most shootings are done by "responsible citizens" who simply LOST IT.
I believe that jerri""" Maybe our service men and women after returning home from many rough years protecting and serving the environment of peace should continue serving, literally in our peaceful and free home land and be readjusted into our society with the help of our Military..PS they deserve it.
DOUGCOE22...: NRA members shooting people, come on now; if this is the person they believe is the shooter; do you think for one second, he cares about getting a psychological evaluation before he goes on a rampage with a gun;I was required to carry for many years during my career in government, I carried a weapon not to shoot others, but to keep from getting shot myself, ( thank God, I never had to fire it); as I said up above, this is a real nightmare for law enforcement officers, his body markers tell a story about this person, this situation is a real dangerous problem .
DougCo-I agree with you. The majority of the concealed carry folks are simply grown up bullies who want to throw their weight around. They are scarier than the criminals, because at least you know where to avoid the criminals. Furthermore, what happens if you, for example, have a car accident with one of these concealed carriers on a deserted road, and they have a hissy fit and shoot you? The gun is handy, and it makes using it that much easier. Then all they have to say is that they were threatened by you and they will get off free. I don't like carrying loaded weapons, but I surely am thinking of applying for a concealed carry permit just to protect myself from these people.
I agree with the psychologicala testing, although I'm sure those are easy to fake. Pretty much everybody knows the correct answers to those.
I think this has nothing to do with guns, but more to do with many returning from a war with P.T.S.D. I think it would be much better to screen all vet's for P.T.S.D. before they even get back to there loved ones. The U.S. government trained them to kill & they did just that! Now most will come home and be ok. but there WILL be some that just can't readjust. What is the U.S. government going to do for them? The returning troops are going to need all the help they can get, to get there lives back together. If they ever do. This is just part of the price tag of war!
Lou77... andDougCo, both of you are clueless about the type of person who has been trained and licensce to carry a concealed weapon.
Most are intelligent men and women who are taking advantage of the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution and have their own reasons for seeking that responsibilty. As for myself, I live in a remote area, but not so remote that something like this could happen to me. At least I will be prepared if some looney bird wants to make trouble.
Do you have any proof to substantiate your comments? Every life threatening situation involves hundreds of quick decisions before a gun owner would draw and fire.... the only training you two seem to have is watching TV shows or Dirty Harry movies... real life is much different!
I hope you two wienies are never put in a life threatening situation! If that happens, I'm pretty sure that you'd be wishing one of us was around.. to save your liberal butts!
This "chicken coming home to roost" has committed NO CRIMES and considers it chicken$h*t to use anti-war/political rhetoric to try and blame these acts of violence on military combat service.
The fact is the military is a microcosm of society and society has its' psychos too. I hope this loser wasn't enlisted to meet a recruiting number/quota and I hope he didn't commit any acts of violence against innocent Iraqis.
If you can open your mind a little and take a second look at his photo, he is obviously a gang-banger and it was only a matter of time before something tragic occurred because of his poor life choices
Where do you get your facts, DougCoe? There are more criminal shootings and accidental shootings (mostly by children using guns not properly locked up) than 'responsible citizens' who "lost it"! This is the trouble with unmonitered blogs like this one, any loser can spout false or unreliable information if it suits his 'agenda'!
Time for a little common sense on gun control. Even if a ban on, say, handguns was instituted, criminals and radical crazy people wouldn't give up their guns. Such a ban would probably reduce crime in about 20 years after enough guns get confiscated, lost or damaged but it wouldn't make much difference in the short term.
Would crime rise because honest, responsible citizens would no longer have guns? Perhaps a little in the short term, but I doubt it would skyrocket.
Just my opinion.
OMG another "christian" terrorist!!! We are no longer safe in our own backyards... how can this be?! More TSA please, please!!!
@Bryan and JoMan - Thank you for your barely coherent ad hominem logical fallacies. You really helped me look more cogent. Now, do you have an INTELLIGENT arguments free of logical fallacy for the viewers at home? Or are you content to psychologically and emotionally regurgitate in public?
By the way, I rarely jest on threads like this. When my children are out of college in a year and a half, I shall do everything in my power to assemble just a couple hundred men as willing to die for their children's future as I am. Then, I expect I shall either die or spend the remainder of my life in prison fighting the rape of natural rights, the mortgaging of my children's future, and the general socialist insanity along with the corporate raiding in the USA. I have already spent 2 years in jail for the heinous crime of contempt of court. You will not silence this truth by cajoling and name calling. And I am yet to be dissuaded by intelligent argument - not because I am closed minded, but because there IS no intelligent argument for the insanity which is now gripping the USSA. In fact, the only way to stop me is to shoot me off of the rock of principle which I stand on. I would rather be dead than live in Hillary's village, or under the tyranny of YOUR seat belt laws et al. Have a good socialist delusion.
xrayspex
It's a volunteer army. An invasion of a country that had done nothing to us. Who else would go?
Who else would go? I would (an honorably discharged Navy veteran with a record of distinguished service record), because I wanted the challenge in mid-life (beats the insurance payments on a sports car) and because I figured I could help get our young adults over there and back (which I did).
An invasion of a country that had done nothing to us. I disagreed with the decision to overthrow Saddam for strategic reasons (it took our eyes off the completion of our business in Afghanistan) as well as the fact Iraq was not a clear and present danger to the U.S. in 2002 (when the use of force was given Bi-Partisan authorization) but I wouldn't call clear ties to the World Trade Center bombing and attempting to assassinate a former President (both in 1993) nothing !!
And what were you in comtempt of court in the first place, arguing over a ticket for not wearing your seat belt? You must have said alot of really nasty things to get two years instead of two days and an increased fine. It's bad enough police have to risk their life over drunk drivers, drug dealers and warranted criminals, they have to deal with loose cannons with a persecution complex during a routine traffic stop. Even worse when they have a weapon on them and is a combat vet who hasn't adjusted to civilian life, which is the theme of this article.
Nice...that war in Iraq really messed up the weak. Warp the kids minds into warfare. Kill, Kill,Kill. Then come back and try to be normal. yeah right.
Comment # 1 restored for clarity.
Poor guy, I feel for him. It is not his fault that he was sent to the war by the US Government and had problems afterwards.
@Vikoriya
We have an all-volunteer military. No one made him join up. His reported age is also 24-- that means that he enlisted while the war was being waged. He knew what he was getting into.
D_loominator. They may have attacked you personally, but only AFTER they provided you with evidence from the Article that THEY clearly read, proving your comments very wrong. You don't seem to have read the article (Not a fallacy, just making an observation based on your previous comments), you also seem to be extremely biased against law enforcement (also not attacking you, just making an observation). It really says something about your character and your knowledge of the law when you believe it is unlawful for a police officer to ticket you for not wearing a seatbelt. Its a law. If you weren't wearing it, then the police officer would be abandoning his duty by NOT ticketing you. And how hard is it to put on a seatbelt in the first place?
You can criticize the police all you want, the FACT is...if they weren't around, we'd be nothing more than an anarchist nation.
As for the story, there were roadblocks set up in an effort to find a suspected gunman. Seems legit to me? No?
BTW, save the "I served in the army for 18 years" lecture. It seems to be the only thing you go to in an attempt to "prove" your opinion. I am currently a member of the U.S. Navy. My Brother is a Marine currently fighting in Afghanistan, My father was a Sailor during the Cold War, his father a Sailor in the Pacific theatre of WWII. My Mother's Grandfather served 28 years in the Army, and his father fought in the Trenches during WWI.
...so do us ALL a favor and quit the condescending crap.
As for the Guns...
I'm am independent. AKA not aligned with ANY political party...but I must say...what is it with Liberals never taking any blame upon themselves. "Oh the only reason the Economy is messed up is because of Bush!" Yea Obama did NOTHING wrong and was ENTIRELY productive during his presidency.
"Oh Guns are bad its not the persons fault that they killed 12 people!." Yea because humans are completely perfect and can NEVER be responsible for their mistakes. And I'm sure that the crazy columbine gunners wouldn't have killed their classmates without guns. I'm sure they wouldn't even think about making some sort of improvised explosive or some other type of weapon.
Seriously get real
Regardless of reserving your judgement, a man has been shot. Rangers are generally not armed. Thus, a dangerous man is on the loose.
"Rangers are generally not armed?" What country are you from? Every park ranger I've ever seen always have an agency-issue sidearm--as well as a hand-cuffs pouch and more tools for law enforcement in their truck--including 'long rifles.'
That is an absolute lie. You have no idea the difference between a park ranger and a Federal or State Law enforcement officer or game warden. Before you make blanket statements do a little research, step out from behind your Walmart camping supplies and your urban outdoor education.
Allowing guns in national parks is just another proof of the latest stupidity in our country.
This person really is an idiot.....speaking as a Park Ranger you fool, we are not given agency-issued sidearms! Stop speaking out of your ass when you don't know what you're referring to.
Well guys any park ive been too the rangers have been armed also. State city local or federal. In fact even job listings for park rangers mention that you need to take peace officers classes and be able to carry a gun. In ohio where i live ive even seen the rangers performing traffic stops (the local park rangers city and state). They also take part when the local police do the random checkpoints.
There are two different types of Rangers in the NPS... Naturalists, who are not armed, and Law Enforcement Rangers who are. Serious crimes in NPS areas are handled by the National Park Police and the FBI.
Been to plenty of parks and NPS sites VERY few rangers are armed. Some are, as are police officers. That's because they are police officers. THE GUY SHOT A COP! My god what is wrong with you people?
I decided against becoming a ranger because of all the alone time spent in the parks...NOT because of the woods and the animals and all the other stuff you find...THAT would be fantastic...but the people you run into.
I am in no way police material...much less someone who would have to be alone.
National Geographic did an episode once on what a person goes through to become conservation police. It was very enlightening, and very scary.
Both rangers and conservation police have a lot of s**t on them...they should be commended just like all police.
I hope this one is ok.
Remember a few years back when the ban on guns in National Parks was overturned?
...yeah, my point exactly.
Optomyst: Nope. A woman has been shot. Did you read what little info was given?
There is a difference between regular Rangers and law enforcement Rangers. The law enforcement Rangers carry guns.
Not enough information has been released, gun play is usually like a two edged sword. We had a armed state park ranger shoot a man over a camping fee no that long ago. More info to follow?
I am sure it was the ranger that said pay your fee or I'll open fire! (sarcasm) Maybe some drunkass jerk resorted to threats or violence because he felt like escalating a minor issue (paying the fee everyone pay) into a violent situation. Which do you think is more likely? Refusing to obey a park ranger is just like refusing to obey a police officer (because that's EXACTLY what it is). They can legally force you to obey their instructions.
@ Optomyst, if you read the article you would know that the man shot, was in fact a woman park ranger.
Either way it's a tragic loss for her family and friends.
Optomyst it was a woman ranger who was shot.
It was probably one of those gone wild blond females, jealouse over the local pigmy population. Or maybe jelouse over the rangers affairs. We could make a noval out of not knowing a thing and not giving the rangers family respect. I beleive we have a greiving family who would like to here how sorry we are for what happened.
Our prayers are with the family.
THere are conflicting reports whether this is a National park service ranger or a Forest Service Law enforcement officer (often confused and called forest rangers or park rangers). Does anyone know? Im a former NPS law enforcement park ranger. Generally three categories of NPS rangers exists law enforcement, general and interpretation (naturalists). This appears to be a NPS law enforcement park ranger. THey would have the same authority as a police officer, generally speaking.
Late time I checked Margaret was a women's name. It was a female park ranger. Read the article at all?
Late time I checked Margaret was a women's name. It was a female park ranger. Read the article at all?
Why read the article when you can learn everything you need to know from the headline?
As a supporter of firearms use in this country, I'm always saddened to hear of any gun violence, let alone when an officer is shot and killed; it only ruins any chance of the overwhelming majority of gun owners who every day live peacefully within the laws of our society. The prayers of many law abiding citizens go out to her family. Obviously the scum who commited this crime doesn't hold the same regard for our civil society as many of us do. I sincerely hope he or she received the full punishment in accordance with the laws in that jurisdiction. I just wish that all gun owners aren't associated with the low life criminals who tend to ruin it for the rest of us who do obey the law.
@comment 2.9, 2.13, 2.14 and 2.17/18 (double post, that one)
When the article was initially published, all 5 sentences of it at the time, the identity of the ranger was not provided. At the time that Optomyst posted, it simply said that a ranger had been shot. No mention of gender whatsoever. Criticizing him now that the article has been updated is unhelpful.
Does it make you feel better, though? More important or intelligent? Oh, then by all means, go right ahead.
The ban was not overturned. What was overturned was the ban on carrying of concealed weapons (pistols) not firearms in general. According to the article the shooter was using a rifle which IS NOT legal for him to have in the National Park.
As if some homicidal idiot would have obeyed a "ban" on weapons in National parks.
He murdered a woman; he would care little about a "no guns" tin sign. He probably littered in the area as well...............
The early comments was from the first article written about this shooting..ARE YOU PEOPLE NEW to news articles on the net..see the word ***UPDATED*** at the article heading??? Its been update now to say it was a female ranger.
Idiots like this deserve to be hunted down and killed. There is no reason for him/her not to have swift judgement and for the range's family to have the justice they deserve. Never would gun laws affect someone like this. If they desire to take a life they will take a life just like a wild animal.
I know this area very well and have hiked and camped in it for yrs.. Its going to be almost impossible to find him. He can survive in that old growth forest for weeks and months (even if he is not carrying food and water on him)
There are plenty of sick minds on this forum.
Maybe some of the posters here are still drunk from a New Year's Eve party.
Why are there so many comments posted that are attempting to turn this fatality into a joke?
The park ranger was a woman with 2 young children.
Where is the humor in the park ranger, no doubt, senselessly losing her life?
...insensitive idiots.
I guess we can all agree it is time to ban assault rifles and handguns.
I lived in Ashford, which is the town that is at this park entrance. The area is loaded with meth heads and people evading law enforcement due to the fact that the road to Packwood is closed during the winter. Law enforcement has to travel through another county to enforce the law across the river. My heart goes out to everyone affected. The core town people who love the area have been dealing with this for years. It is tragic and sad. The fact is criminals with guns do stupid things, but the rest of the public should not pay for that. There are very scary people in the national forest there too. I always wanted my dog with me, and my gun.
Ok, at Little Sahara State Park Oklahoma. Our Ranger do have Side-Arms, and is not Lawful for Citizen to have Fireworks. Not, sure if Banned Conceal Carry Weapons.In my book I like Police better than Rangers. Sad this has to happen to Lady Ranger. Road Blocks are more Dangerous in ways, than Traffic Stops if only One Ranger present. Sounds like silly that Park try put Road Block in Dangerous ways, any one could pull up not wanting to Talk or whatever and Shoot. I'm mean it Crasy for one person to attempt to Block Roadway anywhere.
gamerk2,
I guess the shooter forgot that there was a ban on guns in a national park... stupid comment...!!
As you can see it is much more of a tragedy if the officer that was killed was a woman (rather than a man). That is because, in the US, women are so much more valuable and important than men.
My condolences to the ranger's family. I hope they catch the perpetrator of this act. No matter how some of us feel personally, this is not an nra issue. It is a law enforcement issue.
Once again the disrespect for the loss of a human life and the feelings of the victim's friends and family abound in the post made by ignorant fools!!!
This sad state of affairs is a direct reflection of the mentally deficient selfish trash who continually seek attention at the expense of broken hearts.
This is not a Saturday Night Live skit folks but real people, real life, real pain.
This type of careless thinking (if there are any brains involved) brings shame to our country and reinforces the opinions many foreign cultures have of our once great nation.
Shame on all you scum-bags who are joking about this young woman's death and for making light of a tragic situation, SHAME, SHAME, SHAME!!!!
My thoughts and prayers go out to all effected, and may justice be served to the individual responsible for this Ranger's death!
Cheyney, I heard of this a few years ago (I live in Lakewood). But I thought the Pierce County and State Police ran them out. If they have yet to do so, contact the Pierce County Police Captain and State Police Captian and record your Phone/e-mail contacts with them. If they refuse to respond, Contact the Political authoritys (and record your contacts). If you are still disatisfied with their actions, contact the Tacoma Tribune with your recordings/e-mail documents.
Keep me updated
When I worked for one of the DOI services (won't say which) we had problems with people growing pot in the land managed by the government. The growers would set up booby traps for the rangers to protect their crop. Everything from spike pits to IED's, some really nasty stuff. I have to wonder if this is related.
Lets say for a minute that guns were not allowed in a State or National Park.....would that stop some nut/poacher/pot grower?
No, it would not.
You folks who think ANOTHER law or regulation will stop criminals are a bit naive
Just what we need, a Rambo wannabee running around the park.
bluepanther20-if you are not police material why did you ponder it in the first place? you seem like a pansy-ass to me
bikerchick-headline doesnt say if victim is a man or a women you dumb bitch!
Right, because those that don't give a rats **** about [anti] gun laws will suddenly obey the laws and cease and desist carrying weapons. dolt!
No, we all CANNOT agree this is time to ban handguns.
"When we outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns"
hopefully they find and kill that little crew-cut punk before he shoots someone else!
yet before this law was even passed, not often, but Park rangers have been shot prior. Thus not to mention a few other things some over look. Being this man is a former soldier, most likely NOT a felon, but doing possibly something not legal refusing to pull over, then shooting a Ranger, should give all the common realisation, if ALL guns were banned, this guy still would have got one.
Just like any criminal, or human being... if there is something we want bad enough, we will get it. If something is banned, how often do you think we will not see it? We ban murder, but see it all the time, and done in several methods. Doesnt stop, nor slow it down when killing someone is a felony now does it? Doesnt stop much less even hinder people buying, selling, and transporting drugs does it? ALL felonies. Stealing robbing, beating, you name it, hasnt done a thing to curb the violence haveing them banned. Against the law. A felony. You think banning a gun is going to actually SAVE someone? the odds imo are maybe slim to none. someone feels you need to die bad enough, i dont think a gun os going to matter 1 iota, other than you die faster, and with less pain than being stabbed or beaten to death. i personally would rather take one between the eyes, than be a veg on a cart, waiting for the doctors and my family to decide when they might want to pull the plug and just be done with it.
people...kill...people. a weapon is just the means of how its done, not IF it is going to be done.
Another name to the list of ex-military wackos.
Can't speak for anyone else here, but personally, if I were in that National Park right now, with that homicidal maniac on the loose, I'd feel much safer being armed than unarmed. I feel the same way about Columbine and Virginia Tech as well.
mike 227 on my computer the story doesn't say anything about being updated. I checked because usually it will tell you & I didn't remember seeing it.
My apologies to all who are hung up on the sex of the Ranger. The original article (which I read thoroughly) did not give the name or the sex of the Ranger. Is that important anyhow? The Ranger is dead. The original article did not even state that this was the case...........only that a Ranger had been shot.
Good grief!!!!!
I don't think it would have mattered if it was illegal to carry a firearm into the park or not... the guy still would have took it in... I don't think it is stupid that it is legal to allow firearms into National Parks... A responsible, law abiding person would not do such a thing. This person is not one of those people.
This had to have been an enforcement type ranger, not a naturalist. Naturalists generally don't do vehicle stops. No matter - the woman was a peace officer, who was murdered while doing her job. I really hope this whacko is caught soon so he can't bring misery to anybody else's family, and hopefully "murder with special circumstances" will prevail and he'll take the long walk to the injection room.
Well, thank goodness, they can't nail that poor killer with an illegal weapons violation, too.
The NRA can sleep peacefully tonight, knowing that it wasn't an illegal gun that killed the Ranger.
GreenTimer But how do we know this gun was not from the current administrations FAST and Furious program.
I was wondering how long it would take you to start spouting your anti gun BS here. Do you even know the definition of an "assault rifle" or are you just going by what the main stream media puts out? I will give you a hint, fully automatic is part of the classification, not semiautomatic. That means if you pull the trigger once, and multiple shots are fired, it is fully automatic, if you pull the trigger and only one shot is fired, it is semiautomatic. See the difference? To own a fully automatic weapon requires a lot of permits and money.
Who gives a rats behind if she was armed or not? I'm pretty sure you shouldn't shoot park rangers armed or otherwise.
If only we had a law that said you can't bring guns into parks. He probably would have seen it and turned his gun in. I'm sure that even though he is bat crap crazy enough to shoot a law enforcement officer, if we would have just some sort of posted sign, or law, that told him he couldn't have a gun in the park he probably wouldn't have gone in there and none of this would have happened. (end of sarcasm)
This guys no Rambo, I don't recall Rambo shooting a women who was the mother of two kids. Hopefully when officers who know what to expect from this coward find him, they'll put him out of our misery. I also hope her family is able to move on and heal from the needless pain this waste of oxygen has inflicted them.
Bob Sasser banned, flame-out.
Whose idea was it to allow guns in national parks ?
I'm sure had it been posted that guns were illegal in the park the shooter wouldn't have brought it in. How fing stupid are you tree-hugging, gun-banning people? Last I knew speeding was illegal. Noone does that do they? Let's ban cars.
Guns were always legal in national parks, we just made it legal to carry concealed (pistols and revolvers).
Which had no affect on this since it was a long gun aka rifle or shotgun.. There is a big difference I hope you know..
The NRA, Tea Partly Congress People, the Supreme Court all think it is a fine idea to carry guns in national parks.
Nobody who has any influence is opposed to guns in national parks... Except a few million people, but people have no influence any more.
A number of international corporations could settle the issue by banning guns, but their lobbyists want to be able to sell more weapons to "Keep The Peace".
In a lot of National parks Mexican drug gangs grow weed in the back country and are highly armed. That's why SOME NPS personnel are armed. Because THEY ARE POLICE OFFICERS!. NPS rangers deal with a highly armed public. Thanks to Bush now they can legally carry concealed weapons. Not that making it legal really meant a lot. This is not about the second amendment. A POLICE OFFICER was gunned down with a long range riflle! By a criminal or someone with a mental problem.
Cory...watch it on the tree-hugger name calling. Some may call me a tree-hugger, but I don't think you should ban guns. The idiots who go hunting where they shouldn't be hunting are the ones that cause all this gun BS for NRA worshipers like you. Plus the fact that someone just SHOT someone else...this means that no matter what rights he may have had, he had NO RIGHT to shoot another human being UNLESS it was self-defense, and I highly doubt that was it.
In other words, just because you CAN, doesn't mean you should carry a loaded weapon, especially if you have no consideration for anyone but yourself. And if you have to carry one, put it away. If you are a responsible gun owner, you don't need to wave it around like you're the next Wyatt Earp.
Personally, if I am hiking in the park, and I should run into you with your guns or rifles or whatever you carry at your side, my hike is ruined. Now I (and anyone else, including those who work there), have to worry about some guy being in the woods at the same time, possibly mulling over the terrible way his wife or his boss or the government in general has screwed him, or maybe he just didn't like the way I looked at him.
***I came back after posting this...this woman ranger was killed.
I hope they catch the @!$%# that did this.
Good point Sam I was about to say the same. Im a deputy sheriff and I support concealed carry. The background checks restrictions etc generally mean that good law abiding people will carry a firearm and they will be in my corner.
Bluepanther, I could only hope to run into you while you are on one of your hikes the park looking for unicorns jumping throug rainbows. Just to know that I was ruining your day as much as your ridiculous commentary has ruined the day of hundres of people who care that a Ranger was killed and don't give a crap about your opinion on gun control. Why don't you move to Syria. They don't let citizens have guns there.
How generally pathetic that someone exercising their constitutionally guaranteed right to bear arms should cause such irreparable damage to your day. I hike frequently and here in the SW it's common enough to come across some people with pistols, rifles and/or shotguns on the trail. A couple of places I hike at actually have designated ranges that are free to use (just clean up after yourself). Never caused me any harm. Led to some interesting conversations, though. Met some good soldiers that way, in fact. Ever think that those people you seem so terrified of are the people that protect your rights? Ask them sometime. You might be pleasantly surprised.
Guns in parks, could it be the two california camping families who lost there siblings to bears 4 years ago, or could it be the Idaho family who's mother was disfigured for life by a mountian lion,a year before the law passed, oh yes the Olympic park bike rider that was attacked by a mountian lion, two years ago. The list goes on, just another one of those things not published by the media. Just like the hundreds of peoples lives that are saved by pistal right to carry citizens every year. I get a monthly report on lives saved due to fire arms,there are seven new ones so far in December 2011, with more under investgation and December is usually a slow month since criminals like to stay inside when it is cold out. Yes some people do not investgate what is being said by the media, instead want to form opinions on hear say. Usually city slickers who are afraid to spend a night alone in the woods, but are comfortable sleeping next door to hundred illegal gun owners who are hoping gun laws pass so they are the only ones with fire arms agianest inocent people.
Can we get back to the issue at hand, an unknown male or female shot and killed a female park official and rather a gun in the park was legal are not makes no deference since these things happened before, remember the mother and daughter shot to death in California's red woods, bodies found stuffed in a car trunk, before the carrying of fire arms was made legal.
I do believe it was the current Administration that allowed firearms in national parks, within the last 12 months, though I bow to more knowledgeable people on that. Obama should not have allowed this, and it is entirely his doing...perhaps in his :bend over mode tryingn to mollify the gun nuts of the right. Hope he's learned you don't compromise or cave in, more like it to the right. This was a tragedy waiting to happen with guns legally allowed in national parks by the general public.
Guys, it is COMPLETELY illegal to have guns inside Mt. Rainier National Park
Oops. I am amazed to leaern that in the past, rifles and "long guns" were allowed in national parks. The only new thing the Obama administration now permits is concealed weapons. Can this be correct? Hell, a lot more criminals who want to look for an opportunity to kill, maim, rape, rob or otherwise create mischief are now going to be able to leagally bring in their CONCEALED weapons. Methinks the park service will have a lot of job openings going unfilled. To be a wildlife enforcer is knowne to be dangersou what with all the idiots running around shooting at anything thatmoves or else drunk and doped, but I'm glad I blithley used to visit Yosemite back in the 1970s and assumed, because I never saw any, that no guns were allowed there among the general tourist population. Even then there were times people were murdered or pushed off a cliff, but why enable it? Is it a big job creator for the gun and firearm manufacturers? Do they pay well? Or are they all in China or Mexico?
frail...what I said was, if you decide to flash your gun because you think it makes you a bad ass and won't put it away when you have no reason to have it out, YOU are the reason some people hate guns. I don't hate them, but I don't think you need to pretend this is some western and you are the lone sheriff...so back off, GI Joe.
WMG...thank you for being nice. If I know there are those out there that are carrying and concealing (isn't that why it's called a carry and conceal permit?), then I have no problems...no reason to be nervous. However, we both know there are those that ARE irresponsible and don't do as they should when it comes to using a firearm, which is why those that are responsible have such a bad time of it with those that hate guns.
You posters are not stating it correctly. This is ANOTHER person killed in a federal park by an armed idiot. It seems to be a rather common event (thanks be to the NRA for supporting idiots carrying guns). In AZ, a senile retired teacher killed a jogger because he (the retired teacher) thought that the jogger was a mugger. He was convicted of manslaughter, but (with help and funding from the NRA) his conviction was overturned on appeal.
Unfortunately - the ones who actually carry guns in the parks are not the average gun owners. They tend to be the idiot types who are AFRAID of everything.
Lil, I've been out here camping and hiking in Mt. Rainier since 1990 and it has always been illegal to have guns inside Mt. Rainier National Park
Kevin-
www.handgunlaw.us/states/washington.pdf
From handgun law.us / Washington State
Scroll down to page 4
Carry In State Parks/State & National Forests/WMA/Road Side Rest Areas
Carry Allowed in these Areas:
State Parks: " > YES<" WAC 352-32-120
State/National Forests: ">YES<"
It is sad when a person is murdered. A mother of 2 young kids working a dangerous job is just thoughtless and stupid. Her husband was a ranger and she left her young children at home for more money......very very sad!!!
The law was recently changed, (during the current administration) and yes, you can carry a firearm in National Parks according to NPS rules.
@bicfj
Please don't pretend you are in the majority when it comes to banning guns from anywhere. Despite the best efforts of liberals in this country, the majority STILL rules.
Obviously you know NOTHING about our gun laws in the US lil debbie. A known criminal cannot pass the background check to get a CCW permit and if they are a felon they cannot legaly purchase, shoot, or even examine a firearm.
As far as rifles and other long guns are concerned, as far as I know they have never been allowed in a National Park.
Mac,
But they can buy a gun at a gun show and do whatever the heck they want with it.
Lil' Debbie
"Hell, a lot more criminals who want to look for an opportunity to kill, maim, rape, rob or otherwise create mischief are now going to be able to leagally bring in their CONCEALED weapons."
Yes criminals are of course concerned about breaking the law, but wait if that's the case how are they criminals?
Pragmatic
If a dealer sells a firearm they have to perform the background check thru the FBI no matter where the sale takes place. Very few individuals can afford to rent the space at a gun show just to sell firearms.
So you think a criminal will make more money robbing people in large national parks like Yosemite and Yellowstone, or in an urban area? You people need to use your heads.
If you are camping/fishing/hiking with lawfully armed citizens who have had hunter safety courses, range training, and CCW training, you couldn't be in safer company.
God help the Ranger ...and the posse!
Support our troops!! (Pun Intended).
What pun?
You're quite the jackass, PJ.
I've seen this movie before and it didn't end well for the cops, somebody want to get Stallone's CO on site.
That's the movies for you. My money's on a whole diffrent ending in this real life situation.
3 Gold Bars - that's quite golden speech coming from you. If anybody is jackass, it has to be the killer of the ranger.
This would be a good opportunity to test the latest technology in thwarting terrorists. You can't hide forever from multi-spectral vision devices. Tied to a Vulcan 20mm gun, the bears could eat the hamburger that would be left.
They don't want to remove the people out of the park for fear? Who the hell do you think he is Rambo?
So at what point do gun-carrying bafoons stop wondering why people want stricter regs whenever there's some "occasional random" incident by a lone crazy-guy. Clearly we've massed produced crazy guys over the last 9 years. Maybe we should make sure they don't have assault rifles? Who else has to get shot in order to protect your right to bring an assault rifle to an Obama health care rally?
So... this young man thinks he's "John Rambo"... there are US Army Rangers and Special Forces in that area, maybe they should at least consider letting them help find him.
Another angry white man, trying to take his country back.
leave it to somebody to play the race card. Why would this thought even enter a rationale person's mind. It probably didn't. Next they will be placing the blame on our President. Recognize it as a solitary, disturbed individual going off the deep end. Asad, sad incident for all involved. Hopefully it can be resolved with no further casualties.
thanks nra!
Mike Davis;
At what point do the "anti-gun, leftist, we know what's best for you" loons realize that there are currently 27,755 gun laws on the books, counting all federal, state, county, municipal and District laws, and prohibition doesn't work? Nor do laws that are not enforced? You can't legislate morality or sanity. This will end one of two ways, with an arrest or the guys death.
"We have mass produced crazy guys over the last 9 years?" So now all our troops are crazy? What? You get that line from your parents? Or maybe, you're one of the douche bags who used to throw crap at the guys coming back from Nam. We were all crazy too, according to the brainwashed followers of Hanoi Jane Fonda, Bill "we didn't kill enough" Ayers and that Ilk. A semi-automatic rifle is NOT an assault rifle. Assault rifles are select fire, you know, like the military and now Cops carry around? More leftist B.S.
Do us a favor, Mike. Don't add to this with mindless political nonsense. Keep your neo-communist opinions on the political blogs. This is going to be bad all around. A park ranger is dead and this disturbed young man soon will be, in all likelihood. I'll be shocked if they bring him back to stand trial and not in a body bag. Don't be a vulture circling the carcases spouting your drivel. Okay? Thanks.
Mike Davis;
At what point do the "anti-gun, leftist, we know what's best for you" loons realize that there are currently 27,755 gun laws on the books, counting all federal, state, county, municipal and District laws, and prohibition doesn't work? Nor do laws that are not enforced? You can't legislate morality or sanity. This will end one of two ways, with an arrest or the guys death.
"We have mass produced crazy guys over the last 9 years?" So now all our troops are crazy? What? You get that line from your parents? Or maybe, you're one of the douche bags who used to throw crap at the guys coming back from Nam. We were all crazy too, according to the brainwashed followers of Hanoi Jane Fonda, Bill "we didn't kill enough" Ayers and that Ilk. A semi-automatic rifle is NOT an assault rifle. Assault rifles are select fire, you know, like the military and now Cops carry around? More leftist B.S.
Do us a favor, Mike. Don't add to this with mindless political nonsense. Keep your neo-communist opinions on the political blogs. This is going to be bad all around. A park ranger is dead and this disturbed young man soon will be, in all likelihood. I'll be shocked if they bring him back to stand trial and not in a body bag. Don't be a vulture circling the carcases spouting your drivel. Okay? Thanks.
1
Sorry about the triple post,,,,Not sure what happened here, I only submitted it once. Hey, MSN, Check your system.
It's just insane how you liberals start chanting about we need more gun laws and how guns should be banned. The same stupid comments over and over and over about guns and never a word about dealing with criminals and more jail time for them. We honest citizens harm NO ONE with our guns unless we are threatened and then we are able to defend ourselves. The "feel good" easy answer for you libs is to demand more anti gun laws but you totally ingnore the real problem.......CRIMINALS!!!!!!
It never ceases to amaze me that morons like Mike Davis think gun regs will stop a guy like this from having a gun.
I hate to say good riddance because I am sure there were tragic events in his life that led up to these events, but NOTHING justifies murder, so good riddance it is.
For those who want to use this incident to further an anti-gun or anti-military agenda, this young man was a gang member whose life revolved around the dead end that is the gangsta lifestyle. All the laws in the world wouldn't have prevented this, because he was an outlaw, a young man whose life choices took him to the end of the road quickly, but sadly, not quickly enough for the families of his victims !!
Nicodemus1946 Blaming everyone else, eh? Including MSNBC and moderates for your own mistakes? Take some responsibility and blame. Your lax gun laws made it possible for an Iraqi vet with PTSD to obtain an arsenal and shoot down a park ranger and mother of 2 children. Yes, we've mass produced young men with PTSD by sending them into Iraqi homes filled with shot-up bodies and blown off limbs. Face reality, bub. And to clarify the wild-eyed right-wing exaggerations: No, not all Iraqi/Afghan vets suffer from war trauma, and no, gun regs won't make it impossible to gain weapons - but they sure could make it difficult and these children might still have had a mom if we'd been more careful and respectful of the power to take a life....or we could just tote our assault rifles to an Arizona Obama rally simply because we can. Yeah, real respectful. Scumbags.
Mike;
Your moronic reference aside. Lax guns are are lax because politicians lack the spine to arrest and house criminals. There are currently 27,755 guns laws on the books, counting all federal, State, county, City And the District of Columbia. So tell me, genius, how many more unenforced laws is enough? It has been a crime for a felon, any felon, to be in possession of a firearm since 1934. The proscribed penalty is ten years in club fed. Let's look at reality, shall we. Since WWII we have produced no less than 256 million combat veterans. It could be argued that all have PTSD to one degree or the other. Strange how few have killed anyone outside combat. Far below the level of you "so called" normal civilians. You know, gang bangers, common thugs, drug dealers, the folks you seem to think good citizens. Most of which, if you look at demographics and geographic data, if they vote, would vote Democrat. If guns laws are the answer, why is it statistically, the area's with the most restrictive gun laws are also the area's with the highest crime rates? That would seem an oxymoron.
I'm guessing you have no combat experience, what so ever and your just another who makes generalizations. Not all combat vets have PTSD, not all combat vets are killers. Just as not all civilians are. The automobile kills far more than guns every year. Where's your righteous indignation about cars? Guns and Cars have one thing in common. They a mechanical devises, nothing more. Neither can do anything without an operator. I can start my pickup and leave it idling in the driveway and it will not move until an operator takes the controls. Same thing with a gun, I can load and cock it, lay it on a table and it will kill no one until an operator takes the controls. It's easy to blame the devise, it's much harder to deal with the underlying problems. Typical for a leftist, make laws, but don't address the real issue. Your argument is all smoke and mirrors. Get some substance.
This man was a silent victim of the war in Iraq. There are other wounds when you come back from combat, besides those that require bandages.
IRESPOND;
Indeed. This is not unique to Iraq. Talk to any combat vet that will talk about it. This is not new or exclusive to the current wars. From the Civil war onward, combat haunts those who served.
I totally agree. How many more are out there?
Karen leach;
Read my above post, about 256 million. But, vets aren't the ones you lose sleep over. the gang bangers and other criminal types around the neighborhood are far more of a threat.
He is/was smokin hot
Years ago I would often walk my dog in an east coast National Park where I met a young female park ranger much like Margaret Anderson. We would sometimes -- now and then -- stop and chat for a few moments. My dog and I looked forward to seeing her on our isolated walks.
One day, while we were talking to one another, a uniformed [male] park ranger strode up, pushed his face practically into hers, and shouted "Familiarity breeds contempt!" He then walked away without even looking in my direction. The young woman turned quite red in the face and, turning to me, said: "Not the very best specimen of your species I'm afraid."
After that experience I began to wonder if some of the 'male chauvinist' stories I'd heard -- and always disbelieved and discounted -- might not, at times, be true.
I hope that Margaret Anderson had got all the support from her male counterparts as any female ranger deserved --- and had a right to expect.
Ian, I thank the NRA every day that they've kept the Marxists at bay that serve in our government!
If this killer had all the weird tattoos on his body, while volunteering for the US Military, there should have been some suspicion this guy was a whack job, by the Recruiters.
PTSD---he may have been an out of control Warrior before going to War.
What a sad ending for this young woman, and the people shot at the Party--
Condolences to the Park Ranger's Family---leaving 2 small children without a Mother.
This "man" was not by any stretch of the imagination a victim, but he left a trail of them. Once again, he was an outlaw, a violent predator who would have found a firearm regardless of whether he purchased it legally or not (has it even been established whether his weapon was purchased legally and if it has, how, being a holiday weekend and all?) and his wrong life choices resulted in this tragic ending, not combat service to our nation. His actions and affiliations disgrace all of us who have served our nation's military with honor.
2BCT 1AD OIF 05-06 OIF 08-09
IT IS TRUE that there are other wounds from combat service that one can not see , BUT there is no excuse for what this man did , There is help out there for these emotional problems ,all one needs do is admit they have these problems and go get the help , so having said my piece I am off to the post for a burger ,
America desperately needs a better/ elaborate Mental Health Program..sincerely, there is just too much DAMN STRESS IN AMERICA anymore......
Let's see...the right-wing gun-nuts support an unprovoked, illegal invasion of Iraq which mass-produces young men with PTSD, then tote their assault rifles to an Obama health care rally in Arizona (the same state Rep. Giffords was shot in the head in), then wonder why people want to restrict access to guns when a mom of 2 is killed by a young man who comes back from Iraq after viewing dead, shot-up bodies and blown off limbs??!! Really?!! Fact is, guns are made to kill people!! And guess what!! They kill people!! And the more we have, the more likely they're going to find a way into the hands of psychos! The sad reality of this is that this mom's 2 kids are going to have to pay the price just so some drunk chump who can't find his dinky under his fat beer belly can whip out his big gun to feel like a man. This is disgusting and plain evil. So, yeah, there's people calling for better laws after this. Big f-ing surprise!
Nicodemus1946
You know what's right - you just don't give a $hit. You know they don't have these problems in Europe. Europeans favorite saying is a sarcastic "only in America" when they hear about this crap in their news. You want a debate? How can you debate when you can't even understand that guns are meant to effectively kill people and the more there are available, the easier it is for the wrong people can get them and effectively kill people. Get it? This isn't that complicated. And stop your "substantive" exaggerations. Nobody ever says, "all" vets have PTSD. Jesus, man. You sound like your wife. whoops. Did I insult your fragile sense of masculinity? Well, maybe go play with your guns, little boy.
Mike Davis,
About 25 years ago there was a study done on gun control in the UK and gun deaths, compared to the USA... That study did show that far less people died of gun shots in the UK, but over there people beat and stabbed to death out numbered our shooting deaths...
You see if someone wants someone else dead, they are going to find a way to do it... Personally I'd rather face a gun any day... Also, assault rifles are fully auto, not semi as you and other anti gunners would like every one to believe...
CBurroughs
I disagree with your conclusion. At least if a person has a knife or is trying to beat you to death, you have a chance to get away and bullets are not flying everywhere hitting unintended targets and the person has to kill one at time instead of picking people off like in a shooting gallery. Gun ownership mentality is like alcoholism, it is and addiction for many.
Jennifer,
Have you ever seen someone that has been slashed open? Or someone that has taken a board or bat three or four times to the neck and head? I have, I'll stick to my conclusion... 25 years as a cop and worked in an ER also...
CBurroughs
You were twenty five years a Cop and in and ER and support people walking aroung with semi automatic weapons? I don't believe you. I will take my chances with the bat or knife.
Jennifer,
I really do not care if you believe me or not, well in a way I do care, but not a way to prove it here... I also believe in my freedoms and this country and the Constitution that this nation great... We need to take care of the problem which is the person that pulls the trigger, not the gun...
insert 'made' between 'that this'...
CBurroughs
I think that the issue is not an either or choice, it is both. We need better mental health care for our vets and everyone for that matter and we do not need semi automatic weapons in civilian hands. My husband and I were car jacked years ago at gun point. If I had a gun in the car while they were holding gun to husband's head and attempted to use it, I do not want to think of what might have happened. I was a teller many years ago also and the bank was robbed at gun point twice (one time with semi automatic weapons) Nothing would have stopped the robberies but no one was killed or injured.
@Jennifer:
Semi-Auto = one pull of the trigger discharges one bullet from the barrel of the weapon.
Your statement that
relegates civilian arms to muskets, muzzle-loaders and bolt-action rifles, effectively endorsing the dissolution of our Olympic rifle team, sport shooters of all kinds for that matter, a fairly large cross-section of hunters who prefer quick follow up shots to ensure a humane death for their target, and all modern handguns from the M1911 forward.
I think maybe you meant full-auto weapons? (one squeeze of the trigger = continuous fire until magazine is emptied or pressure on trigger is released).
I seem to be supported in that assertion by your later statement:
So, unless you were robbed by bandits brandishing muskets or a hunting rifle, it is likely that the weapon was semi-auto in one case and full-auto in the other. I'm assuming here, but hey, could be wrong.
In any case, I have absolutely no problem with semi-auto weapons in the hands of civilians. For that matter, I don't have a problem with full-auto weapons in the hands of civilians, provided that they pass the mandatory federal background check and pay the appropriate fees (the whole process takes about 6 months, more than enough time to filter the unqualified). I also support a monitoring system for full-auto weapons of some kind, though I feel that it should be owner-controlled rather than government monitored, making it possible for a civilian to track his gun if it were ever stolen.
I was thinking the same thing John. Optomyst, "generally not armed"? Maybe in some of the stateside parks, but most of the federal park rangers that I know here in the USVI do carry weapons (often concealed.) A friend of mine works for the Fish and Wildlife Division at the Sandy Point Reserve and he definitely carries a weapon......in a fanny pack, even when not in uniform.
Assuming the Ranger is law enforcement, I would expect him/her to be armed. I saw the comment about routine traffic stop, and from what I read, they seem to have expected this guy who did the shooting down in the valley might be headed their way, so it wasn't routine to begin with. The lady who died probably didn't expect to get shot when she set up the road block, but all too often, troopers end up in shooting situations because the criminal has no intention of stopping. The anti-gun comments are out of line, because this is not some day hiker or camper carrying concealed, this is a person already suspected of a violent action elsewhere. I've been up there, Rainier is a huge area. Personally, I wouldn't go into the NW woods without a firearm, there are too many pot farms, etc out in National Forest land for us to be safe, to say nothing of the big cats. I don't live up there anymore, I am out in the midwest, but still carry a gun when out, because even here, mountain lions are around. What we got now up in Rainier is some young idiot who is flamed out mentally for whatever reason, having possibly committed a violent crime down in the valley, who is willing to play Rambo.
Finally, someone using 'reason'... That's what our brains are for. If we're going to generalize, then cars will have to go next. They kill too!
Kathryn;
Your absolutely right and they kill far more, every year.
So we should all carry hand grenades and automatic weapons with armor piercing bullets?
Poor Cleareye, no one was carrying fully automatic weapons or any hand grenades, except maybe FBI SWAT. Almost any rifle round will penetrate armored vests. And if you were smart, if the bad guy was carrying machine guns, hand grenades and other military items you'd show up in a tank! You can own those too, with the right paperwork!
Cleareye, Now you must learn to use your brain to interpret what you see with your 'clear'eye. Don't just look at the object of your disgust, look at the whole picture, if you can. It's called analysis. Good luck to you...
Kathryne,
You cannot compare traffic fatalities with killings by firearms. Cars are designed and built for transporting people from one place to another. That is their purpose. Hand guns and rifles are designed and built to kill people. That is their primary and only purpose. There is no comparison between cars and guns that can be made that makes any sense.
A highly emotional opinion, and utterly incorrect. Firearms are designed for a number of different purposes, not that there is any point in trying to explain that to you.
Most rifles were not built or intended to kill PEOPLE. There are other legal/recreational uses for the all firearms aside from killing people. So why should good law abiding citizens be forced to give up their rights, heritage, andsense of security because there are a few A**holes out there breaking the law. Should we close all the department stores because they cause shoplifters or lets close down banks because of violent hold-ups. It's not my fault as a law abiding gun owning citizen that these nuts are murdering people, and they would find a way to kill people regardless, probably with an illegally procured firearm. If you can't tell by the drug problem in america, it's not to hard for criminals to aquire anything they want, so why punish the good citizens for the mistakes of the minority.
I think those Rangers are armed now a days for that exact reason!!!
In the parks you have much illegal activity. From dope growers,illegals and molesters. It is a good idea to be armed wether you are hiking,visiting whatever. Better safe than sorry. The bears attacks are up as well. Be careful and awares. Tragic news this is.
What about the cities, their are tigers and bears in them too, dressed as people. Like American Express says don't leave home wihout it, an AK47 that is.
If they hadn't been armed, they wouldn't have made the stupid decision to try to stop him and she would still be alive. WE, all of you and me killed this poor woman and killed this poor kid with our cowardice and willful ignorance of what our parasitic elite is doing to us. He will not be the first. His head was completely screwed and he will take the blame for just being a patriotic kid. I think I'm beginning to truly hate you fat, stupid, ignorant a--holes who think you know just because you think you know without studying and thinking and watching what is happening and who it is that is using us and abusing us and stealing our money and, much worse, stealing our kids. G--damn you all!! And g--damn me for caring about this bunch of dumbs--ts that call themselves America, that give themselves airs of being strong and fair and smarter than a skunk when in fact you are alll just a bunch of cowardly, zionist s--t eating morons who aren't worth a pimple on this kids arse and now he's dead and she's dead and you're all just flapping your lips with empty twaddle and empty minds and cannot see, cannot accept your own responsibility here. G--damn you all!! sob
Felonious individuals Hellbent on doing just what they want decided for themselves to carry guns in National Parks. Along with whack-balls and other evil doers. With permission or without. It makes no difference to them. Never did and never will.
Exactly. this has nothing to do with the 2010 law. This is the flaunting of all law. The guy is wanted in another shooting, he fled from one Park Ranger toward another, killed the second, and took off. What gun law was he going to obey, anyway?
Everyone should be allowed to carry. Period. And for this exact reason. Do you think the bad guys care about your carry or conceal laws any??? Are you dumb??? Are you going to search every vechical that enters for guns? No? Then well everyone should be able to carry. At least they have a chance against the bad people that are going to do it anyways.. I dont go anywhere out of state without my compact .45 and yes things like this are why. I never want to use it on someone but in a life or death situation I sure as heck will!!!!!
I have before drawn my weapon on a man trying to enter my car at 3:00am while stopped at a gas station from driving back after a job out of town. He had a knife and thought he was being slick. Cocking the gun alone was enough for the man to thwart all his efforts of getting inside my car. He backed up with his hands in the open and walked away. No shots fired. But had I not had a gun what could have happened? I could have been car jacked or dead. Guns are good, people are bad..
If peoples answer for this is to restrict guns, then you would also have to restrict Vets. This is not about guns. Its about a wacko. Hell look at his tats. Thats a person with no look to the future if there ever was one.
Tiredofsilly;
Wow, way to generalize. So,, all Vets are nuts and should be restricted from owning firearms, is that your contention? Or did you just phrase this badly?
No, he claims that restricting guns would be as arbitrary as restricting veterans. He favors neither.
Correct DarnThatDream. And Nicodemus1946 I may have phrased that poorly.
I was saying, if a lone wacko killing with a gun is a reason to restrict guns, then a lone wacko vet killing would also be a reason to restrict Vets.
I am a vet of 20 years. My point is, wackos are wacko. Not a clinical term perhaps, but true.
This guy wasn't necessarily a "wacko"-- he shot four people, and at the time that he encountered the ranger, he was probably operating under the assumption that all 4 were dead. So in his mind, he had absolutely nothing to lose by killing the ranger and escaping. This person is/was evil, not necessarily wacko. There are actually evil people in the world, and it doesn't require insanity to be evil.
And banning guns is no kind of a solution. For one thing, it would be impossible to enforce. There are millions and millions of firearms in the possession of Americans all over the country. Are you under the impression that tens of millions of them would just give them up and hand them over? Not likely. I for one would bury mine in a very safe undisclosed location. And how could anyone prove that someone still actually owned a firearm? Impossible. And a silly non-solution.
We haven't seen anything yet. When these young men and women were sent to a foreign land at an early age, they were sent there to kill. I note that the VA received no extra funding while the war machine received an increase. Why did he kill? He was taught the way to handle things was with a weapon and some can't leave that behind.
There will be more of these incidences.
Maybe Smokey the Bear got really wasted last night and somehow thought he was Dick Cheney.
What a stupid arse reply to a tragedy you complete and utter Foo. A pox on you and YOUR house.
that comment was totally uncalled for!
rodent,
that's not funny..sorry...
OR Maybe he was sent there by Erick Holder, Because he and OBLAMEA are the ones who want GUN CONTROL.
Clearly the work of socialist mexican islamic terrorists.
It might also be one of the "I love my country but fear it's government crowd." Which do you think is more likely?
Hey Devil`s son. The ranger I was talking about shot the beligerant camper twice in the back of the neck while running away. The camper got the hospital the ranger did time, there is always two sides to a story.
Devil's son...more likely some pot grower, poacher or general nut/thug.
MSpielman-The S.M.I.T. disavows any and all association with the aforementioned incident.
It is indeed a relief to hear that the S.M.I.Ts aren't on the loose killing people....
It's likely the shooter falls somewhere between "white supremacist" and "backwater militia". Washington and Oregon have a lot of backwater areas with "disaffected youth", something like Idaho.
So sorry for the Park Ranger, what an awful loss.
This nut case would have brought a gun into the park whether it was legal or not, laws don't stop people like this from doing what they will do anyway.
Tad, if it is illegal to carry a gun in the park, it is possible there exists a checkpoint in which the shooter is examined for banned weapons. Without a checkpoint, there is no possibility and he walks in with the weapon with no resistance. Sure, he may sneak a weapon in anyway, but at least there is the possibility of of the crime's prevention. On top of that, knowing guns are illegal in the park and that there's the possibility of being checked for firearms could possibly prevent the criminal from ever even traveling to the park with a gun in the first place. Saying bans don't stop people in an absolute sense isn't true at all.
Before everyone starts raving about how Janet Napolitano was right and all returning war vets are potential terrorists, look at the photo of this douchebag. He's got gang tattoos all over! I'm kind of wondering why he was allowed into the Army with affiliations like that. Regardless, this is a travesty for her family. She had two small kids...
Maybe the guy joined the Army at 18 and left at 20? He is 24 now, so who knows when he got the tattoos. But yeah, it does appear to be a troubling sign. Still, the military does not ban kids with tattoos, so who knows. I knew kids when I served that were wannabe Rambos, every now and then one of them actually freaks and goes bad.
The truth is, if every one was allowed to carry a gun the shooters would think twice about who they would want to shoot.
The truth is, if every one was allowed to carry a gun the shooters would think twice about who they would want to shoot. This $h*tbag shot a Federal law enforcement officer, do you really think he'd think twice about shooting a civilian, armed or not??
Spielman,
I know you were being sarcastic. We can all read tatoos enough to know who this guy is. Why we would train such an obvious white supremist skinhead aryan brotherhood pervert to be a better killer is beyond me.
Those are gang tattoos? I thought he was just trying to be "man of the year" on The Ugliest Tattoos" website.
The tatoos look like some prison aryan brotherhood stuff. Looks like this guy had obviously given up on ever trying to get gainful employment. But if the tatoos were an indication of how he felt inside he was one warped dude. Looks like a lot of this might have happened to him after leaving the service because in the photo with the guns I didn't notice them.
If fewer people carried guns, fewer people would be able to start shooting regardless of their inclination at the moment. The bad guys are going to shoot first. The "law abiding citizen" with a gun will be dead before they have the chance to shoot.
Gun laws would have made no difference in this situation unless the guns themselves were tightly controlled and even then, under current law, this individual probably had no red flags to prohibit his purchase of a gun.
That is a false argument. It suggests there is prior intent. That may not be the case and legally bringing in the weapon constituted a potential danger to others at a party with an armed (and apparently angry) person had easy access to a weapon. Had it been illegal, perhaps the gun would have "stayed home" and the tragedy might have been averted, or ended in a non-lethal "fistfight".
"Guns don't kill people. People with guns kill people."
We can all sit here and argue the pros and cons of gun legislation, that's all fine and good, but how can any legislation be taken seriously when we've had the 'Fast and Furious' debacle recently? How come no one on the left is whining about the Border Patrol agent murdered with a gun that was sent there illegally by our own gov't.? A mother is dead....leaving her small children, husband, family and friends with an immense loss...and alot of folks on here are doing nothing but reciting the same old song. "Blah blah blah...ban guns...blah, blah, blah....NRA....blah, blah, blah....if we ban guns then there will be no more crime". Absolutely sickening. Condolences to the family, loved ones and friends.
If it was in California I would bet the house on a marijuana crop being discovered thanks to our neighboring Mexican drug cartels.
But in Washington, in the winter? Very curious to see what happened. I would assume a hunting accident but I have no idea if anything's in season right now.
Maybe...but it's still the indiviual who shot her...it's the person who held the gun up and took aim and fired.
Everyone has a choice...this POS did...and I hope he or she pays for it dearly...
No hunting season open, maybe a poucher?
Noazrk, There are numerous Grow Houses and Meth Labs around Ranier National Park. This was not a hunting accident.
They don't grow pot in Washington?????
not inside a park full of snow!
omg - we have it over here in our parks and refuges on this side of the mountains.
It's a true shame when military vets go bad. Unfortunately its usually the ones you never expect (eye witness to that). Whatever the reason this guy knows what is available to hunt him down and his carcass may be found by a hiker come spring. There is nothing but sorrow for this Ranger and her family, a brave trooper who lost her life to defend us from a lunatic.
noazrk
"If it was in California I would bet the house on a marijuana crop being discovered thanks to our neighboring Mexican drug cartels.
But in Washington, in the winter? Very curious to see what happened. I would assume a hunting accident but I have no idea if any thing's in season right now."
Did you even read the article you idiot? Or did you just read the headline and run to the vine to post your comment. Remember that the whole world sees this and now everyone knows how much of an idiot you are. Read the fu(k!ng article, then comment. Gods help us all.
What kind of coward shoots someone with a long rifle? That means the victim didn't even see his shooter. That is no better than shooting someone in the back.
What kind of coward buys a gun in the first place?
Hey moron, plenty of citizens have guns. Because you have a gun, your a coward? Your home planet of moronian is calling.
No chuckler it is cowards that are afraid of guns! Tell me what you would rather have in the woods when a 500lb. grisly is charging you? What would you rather have when someone kicks in your front door to rob you only to turn around and deside that he wants your wife,daughter,or your mother???Tell me this does not happen everyday? Guns are safe only when you take a safety course and know how to use it .If you are too afraid then Please Leave Them Alone!
Chuckler, your question is offensive and ignorant. Were it not for people carrying guns Hitler and the Nazis would not have been stopped. But then based on your stupid comment you are probably an Anti semite as well.
KRedcorn - I will preface my statement by saying I think people should be able to own guns, however when you pro gunners make the statement that the anti gunners are afraid of guns you defeat you long running mantra that "Guns don't kill people; people kill people". The anti gunners are not afraid of guns they are afraid of the people carrying the guns. Why? because you can't judge a book by it's cover. Who amongst us can tell by looking at an individual with a gun what he/she intends to do with it. In your own home there is no problem, out in public is another story.
Who buys a gun? Almost everyone has become a little nervous in this country. Black friday this year had the most requests for background checks for gun purchases ever. Chuckler didnt` get a Glock in yer stocking? Those felony convictions must suck.
And always remember,"When seconds count, the police are only minutes away".
That is why my wife and I have a CHL.
What in hell is a CHL? Just askin for enlightenment.
Concealed Handgun License
Thank you all for inadvertently answering my question...(and collapsing my comment to punctuate my point.....)
What kind of coward DOESNT buy a gun? What kind depends on others for their protection?
See, we can play that game too...plus our side is enshrined in the Constitution.
LOL! Nice try.......but no cigar.........(sucks to be as paranoid as you...........)
Chucky It would suck to be you without a firearm if someone decided to break your door down for drugs or money or a ride. And I do smokes cigars. Thanks. And I do carry and have protected my family with a shotgun. Unless you have been in that situation you don't know what the HELL you are talking about.
Hey Betty- The Military trains these people called snipers. He may thought he was doing his job while on drugs. I hope they catch him and kill him.
Lets just hope that when L.E. find him they do the "right" thing and not waste tax payer money.
Cool. You anti-gunners go about your lives and I'll carry my CHL and handgun. And when we are faced with some whackjob in a park or a robbery or whatever we'll see who fares better. I'm betting shooting back is a much better defense than screaming for mommy and wetting your pants, but I could be wrong...
Those who would trade freedom for security will have neither. I believe Ben Franklin said that, although I am not totally sure (it is late at night and I am not thinking clearly). Since I do not fully trust in the police (the Supreme Court has ruled they have no obligation to respond to your situation), I place my own freedom and security squarely within my own abilities. Therefore, I own and carry a firearm. It is not my job when out in public to defend you should you be attacked if I am nearby, although it is possible that I will. I would appreciate those who don't want someone around who carries concealed to wear a button on their clothing that lets me know to keep my distance so that I don't offend you. Of course, that also helps in case of a criminal attack on you, I will know to call the police rather than interfere and possibly save your life.
3 gold bars,
Just curious, how often does this happen to you?
Happening just once and saving my life or my family's is worth carrying a firearm and being called paranoid. Whether or not it actually ever happens; well I'd rather be prepared than to be a fool or dead.
I'm not against gun ownership. But I think it would come off as less paranoid if people just said it was a hobby with the potential to save your life one day. The perspective from the anti-gun people is that there is very little that separates needing a gun to protect yourself from those who would do you harm and needing a gun to protect yourself from the people who are putting floride in your drinking water.
Sorry, still not afraid enough to buy a gun.......(good luck with your phobias though......)
hey chuck ya ought to get a weapon...don't be naive....if nothing else a shot gun ...makes a excellent snake killer...
Every situation is a little different, but I always wonder why my "conservative" friends (and they are ALWAYS conservative) always fear for their lives. In 50 years I've not needed or wanted a firearm, either on my person, in a collection or for show. Their argument always includes "fear of the government", "liberals", and whatever else which compels them to have a CHL.
Perhaps you have a good reason but in one of my CHL's stories two "friends" were together - drinking - one decided he was unhappy with a comment made at a party and headed to the car for a handgun under his seat - the other stopped him.
That's the kind of thing which flashes through my mind whenever CHL's say "it's for defense" - defense of what - Each other?
Sorry, your paranoia shouldn't make me less safe.
My comment confirmed by this CHL. I would be curious how many times the author was actually in danger and likely to be killed in a "home intrusion" which he fears. The comment suggests he's been in a situation where he's been in a home intrusion. When would be interesting, and what the circumstances are. My guess, if the story is true, the intrusion would be perpetrated by "one of his former friends - in which case - avoid those kinds of friends. Otherwise, he too, doesn't "know what he is talking about".
You see, it's this kind of talk that scares people like me about CHL's and many gun owners in general. Hunters, in general, no. But people who spew their paranoia, and - for the record - act boorish, loud, and angry - worry me far more than the potential of any home invasion.
If you are a responsible gun owner with children in the house, your guns are locked away where the kids can't get them. Are locked away guns useful in a home intrusion? I'm asking a serious question here. My guns are locked away in a safe in the basement, but I keep them as a hobby, not because I worry somebody will break into my home.
Wow, I'm not even scared enough of snakes to have to buy a gun. Guess gunowners just don't have balls..........(except for musket owners, of course.......)
wish you the best...and hope you never need one...owning one might make you grow a pair...to sqeeze the trigger...if you hit a gun tote'n thug with your purse...good luck with that to...
plain bob,
It isn't always a good idea to engage a gun wielding thug especially when they get the jump on you and already have their gun pointed at you. Your gun won't do you a lot of good then. I've never heard anybody get mugged by a guy who said "give me your wallet" and THEN pulled out a gun.
i was referring to a home invasion...i rather have a gun than a purse...to defend myself and my family...
chucky, a firearm is a tool. i cant say i've ever felt i needed mine other than when hiking and i ran across a cougar (and not the good kind ;) ) not all gun owners are as paranoid as you make them out to be. its not fear that makes me own a gun, its preparedness. i own many different tools that i never have had to use -jumper cables, tire chains, a spare tire, a tire iron, flares, a compass- but i own them because there are situations where i might need them. its as simple as that. if you honestly cant think of a situation where owning a gun might come in useful then dont get one. its easy. but just because you cant think of one, doesnt mean that others cant.
LOL! A firearm is a tool? What, do you loosen bolts with it? Open cans with it?
A firearm is a weapon, from its inception, design, marketing and production. Nothing more, nothing less...(or do you really keep yours in your tool box, is yours hanging on the wall in your workshop next to your hammer?)
Yes chucktard, a firearm is a tool. Now get back under your bridge, troll.
Chuckler,
I'll tell you the type of cowards who buy guns... News in Oklahoma; a 22 year old woman with a baby living by themselves, the mother took a shotgun and killed a knife wielding intruder in her living room after he kicked in the front door... The other assailant got away... Yep, what a coward she was, should of not been armed, should have let those nice guys have their way with her and just do whatever... This happened about a week ago... By the way you are an A$$!
I will agree that gunowners are tools..........
2nd mendment in action.
gaad bless duh nra
ugh
wrong...the 2nd Amendment doesnt give a criminal the right to shoot a park ranger.
Gramps WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!! The 2nd Amendment allows us to defend ourselves against enemy (Foreign and DOMESTIC) especially this current socialist admin. that doesn't believe in the Constitution. ugh
Yes sirreee, we all know that gun prohibitions don't stop outlaws from carrying guns. Shucks, outlawing murder doesn't stop people from murdering, now does it? And all these Megan laws and such don't seem to stop child abuse, now do they?
Why do we have any laws at all if people are still gonna do bad things. Punishing them afterwards doesn't stop crime.
It's just a darn crime that we have laws!! All laws do is create crime. No laws. no crime.
Greentimer Read 1NewDay's Post - That is more intelligent than YOU will ever know.
Nope. But it does give him all the tools he needs to do it, and the right wing makes sure these lunatics and all their guns are protected right up until the minute they start mass murdering people. Be proud of the fact that you nut-bags make this happen. Of course, your bravery ends there, because you're all too cowardly to own that.
BikeBoy, thank you for reading my post and thank you for the advice. It took some time, but I did find a posting under the name you referenced, and I read it. The main point seems to be that one needs a gun to protect oneself from other gun toters.
In all seriousness, do you really feel that if some scum gets the drop on you from behind, you can draw faster than he can nail you, or your family? Do you believe that engaging in a gun fight will ensure the safety of you and loved ones more than handing over the wallet?
If you are going to have your hand always on your gun just waiting to blast away at what may befall you, that is your legal priviledge. And don’t fret that your constant surveillance for evil do-ers will cause you to fail to enjoy any of the outdoor sights like the sunset over the lake, or the soaring bald eagle, or the grizzley watching you, or the deer and the antelope playing, ‘cause you can see it all on some PBS Nature TV show when you get safely back home.
I understand that some parks (Sequoia and/or Kings Canyon?) have become havens for gun-toting pot growers, so if you want to test your outdoor gun skills, you might want to visit one of them.
More people are killed in national parks by accidental falls and drownings and lack of water, clothing or stamina than by anything that a gun could protect them from. Those who feel they need a gun to be safe in the national parks, have most likely never slept more than 100 yds from a maintained toilet facility. And I’m sure not talking about hunters, who do indeed understand how to live in the actual wild, who do not carry a gun for protection, and who do no hunting in national parks but may hunt in national forests.
A wilderness adventure is a great teacher of self-reliance and ingenuity, which does not come from the barrel of a gun or rifle. Hunting is a great way to meet nature head-on, but not in national parks.
Always shoot to kill, never to warn and never to wound.
Peace.
In the same way the 1st Amendment gives you the tools to start a riot.
In the same way the 13th Amendment gives you the tools to work instead of being a slave, and, therefore, to evade your taxes.
In the same way the 6th Amendment gives you the tools to get away with it at trial.
The 2nd Amendment protects us from the kind of scum that likes to hurt and intimidate people.
probably some one poaching for bear, I bet the ranger was out taking a crap in the forest and got mistaken for a bear crapping in the woods,lol
You sir are a moron!
Viper623....you seriously just made a joke with regard to a US govt official's death...a murder? Betcha that wouldn't have come out of your mouth had this been a relative of yours. You owe this deceased woman an apology...for real.
viper...
this was a wife and mother, long with being a ranger that was murdered!
I just think we should tether viper out in those very woods rubbed with raw meat. Then hope those same rangers after finding out what he just said, would come and help him... which they probably would because that is the kind of people who take those jobs.
I knew a guy that got searched by National Park Rangers and they found firecrackers in his pocket then tried to charge him with explosive devices.
Why would you be in the forest with firecrackers anyway? Should have been charged...dont you know what a fire can do to a national forest and what it costs US as taxpayers?
good! they stopped the morons from burning the forest down! are all your friends that stupid?
There you have it - the typical "one" and "two" reasons to carry weapons. "To defend ourselves" - and to "defend ourselves" against government we don't like or perceive as evil - that would be all "non-Republicans" - if I dare to guess this guy's affiliation. You start with a false premise that anyone or anything you disagree with is "un-Constitutional" and must be destroyed and then make a sweeping, general statement which simply cannot be substantiated. The NRA could do a lot to stop this crap - but they perpetuate it and make these people more dangerous by feeding their anger and paranoia.
"I have met the enemy..."
The law hasn't been about good sense for a long time
They were not in the woods. THey were on a paved road and in their car driving through a Military Civil War park and pulled over for going a tad over the posted speed limit.It was holiday time and fireworks were being sold everywhere. No possibilities of fire to the woods as they were not setting them off. They were just looking to stick it to them. Anyway, charges were thrown out, even the judge seen it was BS.
Firecrackers ARE explosive devices! What do you do with them?
Wow - what an intellegent thread..........glad you people are home sitting on your couches and not running around in public.
Some of these people are dangerously close to literacy.
thankfully, exactly what you're doing, too.
Govt passed a law allowing firearms in Federal Parks, A Ranger gets shot--Ergo,, now the push will be on to ban all firearms within Federal Parks. Slowly but surley the USA will jon Canada, Great Britton, Austraula and several other countries where only the police and criminals will have firearms. Its coming and the NRA will not be able to stop it. Bye, Bye 2nd ammendment.
That is a tough one, do we watch our crime rate go through the ceiling as Canada and others you mention, do we stay connected to the UN and follow thier one world society. Or do we care, agian I ask how much have you bothered to follow the actual crime stats after a country, like britian, bands guns. Criminals run allot of the country and the media run and hide and refuse to print it. The right to have guns in the park would not have made any deference as we know the facts at this point. Rather or not your wife or child becomes a play thing for illegal, gun bearing, crocks while you hide in a corner and trimble like a coward will that is your decision.
Wouldn't bet my life on it if I was you, You could always go back to mexico where you can't own a gun.
Man I hope not. This has nothing at all to do with the NRA or the 2nd Amendment. The NRA members would vote to have this crook strung up. We are very law abiding and law enforcement loving.
Think how easy it would be to kill a women in the park without a gun. Think about how many guns protect women. Most women raped and killed in the state and national parts weren't armed
Until it comes to church employees raping children.
just about every household in this part of canada has at least three guns.a 22 for rabbits,a shotgun for ducks,and a rifle for deer.
Jose- Bull hockey. and John Canada does not have a high crime rate. Thats must be the U S you are referring to.
Homicide rate in the US is far higher than Great Britain or Canada. And before you guys get on your 2nd amendment high horse, restricting gun ownership in the US will not happen, but you could be assured a much lower homicide rate if they were. I'd really like to know how many people accidentally or intentionally killed by guns were "law abiding" up to the homicide and NRA members in good standing.
A friend of mine was "one of you" super-Republican, NRA guy, who got drunk, had an argument with his wife and shot himself in the head. THAT is the behavior that scares me. Not the "home invasion", not Mexican cartel members, not rapist. I fear you guys and your paranoid obsession with firearms and fear of everyone else. The NRA does nothing to stop this irrational fear.
TPokeys,
Make sure you include the term "per capita" when citing rates. The US is still very high in per capita homicides, higher than Great Britain or Canada. But it is something people will jump down your throat for.
I will start by saying I am liberal and from seattle. Gun laws are as ignorant as drug laws, you ban guns and only criminals have guns. These laws don't work. if drugs were legal it would not be a multi billion dollar industry that people kill over (mexico and the middle east) check out crime rates of countries that have decriminalized drugs, not only do they have lower petty crime but also lower drug abuse. If you think they work you had better ban alcohol becouse 9 out of 10 murders are commited under the influence of alcohol.
My dear wife is a State Park Ranger and they never carry guns. Have been in lots of state and national parks and rangers generally do not carry weapons. I knew this would happen when they lifted the park weapons ban, I pray for this kind soul and the violent world we live in.
State Park Rangers may, or may not carry guns depending on the state they're from. NPS Law Enforcement Rangers do carry guns. Regardless of whether the Ranger was armed or not, it's very sad that that he was shot.
In spite of all the closet Anarchists that like to post here, the fact remains that such an action is an attack on our society and that's a very troubling thing. Few of these idiots would enjoy associating with the kind of person who'd willingly shoot another human.
T.Crowl & Jose G - The ban was on concealed carry not on guns in state/national parks. You have always been allowed to have a gun at: your home, your place of business and your campsite. Since it is awfully hard to conceal a rifle or long gun the ban would not have stopped this from happening.
Deputy Don - It was a "she" that was shot, not a "he".
Like someone posted above there are people using the park system to grow marijuana. Until all the facts come in however...............
My prayers go out to the family.
I feel bad for the family that was left behind. I pray for thier comfort. As for the right to bear arms in a national park, I really have a hard time connecting the two, since I have spent better than 40 years in and out of parks in the US. Most parks are patrolled by game wardens and I beleive this may be part of the confusion. However there are parks that have armed park rangers who are also wardens, they wear both hates, the first two that comes to mind is Hyde park and Pecos National, just out of SantaFe New Mexico. Before the law was passed many hunters carried fire arms through parks to gain access to state hunting areas. I believe also in the listing before of people being hurt in national parks. As far as most park rangers themselves are specialist in the park they work and spend allot of time learning the park so they can inform visiters, campers etc, about the park. A service that is worth much more than they are paid. They are also safety officers, who in form the public when and where danger might be, such as the ice caves in Rainier. They save many from harm, my hate comes off for them. I love the parks of our country and hope this family can find peace in knowing the job she was doing deserves respect higher than these post's indicate.
So, you are saying that a person intent on murder would be stopped by a sign or a policy?
Really?
t.crowl...........Why do you put her in a dangerous job ? My wife stays home and protects our kids. She has a 9mm and 380 at home ready for action but chances are slim.
My wife protects herself with a 45 cal Baby eagle and I use a 12 ga. with slugs or double 00. If that doesn't work my 50. cal Beowolf does the trick. I believe being ready for violence is just human nature. You have criminals out there that will do anything to get what they want right or wrong. I believe a deterrence is a must.. I have never killed anyone but have used my weapons following a breakin. Thank GOD I had a chance to defend my family. Criminals are every where even in State Parks. You are not going to keep weapons from them no matter what laws are on the books. Protecting yourself and being aware will keep you alive. When seconds count a response is only minutes away. BELIEVE IT.
But, they have no problem making sure they are all armed to the teeth, and loaded up with all the tools they need to murder people.
Yeah right! Get a clue DMorgan. Anyone with half a brain (that leaves you definitely out) can construct a workable firearm in his or hers own garage, using such things like pluming pipe. What do you suggest society do, ban all pluming? Maybe the military should of sent him to Iraq with no weapons? Just look at the guy. Who let that obvious nut case out of his cage in the first place? Blaming the 7 pounds of medal for his actions. Is like blaming the spoon for your fat @$$! Until you go after the sick societal problems that plague us as a whole. Nothing is going to ever get better. Stop sounding like the wimpy little liberal loon that you obviously are. Your nothing but a broken record...!
Not all Rangers are Law Enforcement. Some Rangers are there for historical, interpretive, and preservation, while others are, specifically, cops. The Law Enforcement types probably carry sidearms in the daily performance of their duties, I would expect them to.
@ Einstein. Please don't lump liberals in a giant group. I am a liberal and mother of six who never wanted a gun around because of safety concerns for my children. At 45, I own a 9mm with a large supply of hollow point ammo. With four children still home, we have a fingerprint gun safe, but the world has changed in my lifetime. There are some on the extreme left who hate guns and our freedom to own one. I hate guns, but I am no longer afraid to handle one or protect my family if I need to. There are a whole lot of moderate liberals who are armed and willing to defend our rights to stay that way.
This gansta shot a woman with a high powered rifle without mercy. It has nothing to do with the constitution. As a vet with PTSD, I can tell you it's not PTSD either. I hope they plug the coward.
T Crowl;
That's odd. I've visited many state and National parks and the rangers were armed. Either openly or concealed. Your contention is unarmed rangers were making a tariff stop? Really. On a person suspected of an earlier shooting? Come on.
Nice try, Tired of The Bull! I'm to believe your typical tried and old tactics of claiming to be a Liberal. And you back law abiding citizens rights to defend themselves... That would be a first. If that's not just another typical fecal-head liberal lie as usual. Then I would seriously doubt you're a "liberal". You nut jobs are so predictable.
This happened years ago on the east coast but it was a Fish & Game officer. Law enforcement think it was a poacher that he confronted . Sad story and my prayers go out to the family of the ranger. When you think about it they have a scary job to do.
Wow. What a horrible way to start out the new year. I hope the Ranger is ok and makes a full recovery. I also hope they quickly find the shooter and get him off the streets and out of the parks before he hurts anyone else, unless it's to himself. Hmm...a thought just came to me...after these types of criminals (murderers, pedophiles or violent criminals) are caught, we should start putting them in a room and handing them a pistol with one bullet and tell them they are going to prison for life, so if they want to go ahead and take care of things, here they go..... It might help cut down on the overcrowding in jails and prisons while saving taxpayers money. If only it were that easy. <sigh>
The female park ranger was killed. I guess no one reads the articles anymore, just the headlines.
UPS, The ranger is dead, a women with a husband and two children. My heart goes out to them.
Sadly, she has died.
John...If your heart goes out to someone , how can your blood circulate?
Read the stiry,it was a female Park Ranger,shot dead while trying to stop a suspect,who just fled the scene of another shooting in nearby Seattle
Read the stiry,it was a female Park Ranger,shot dead while trying to stop a suspect,who just fled the scene of another shooting in nearby Seattle
The point, wascally wabbit, is that folks don't read the full article. They read, or only understand, what they want to. That is why the discussion about concealed carry problems and other issues that have nothing to do with this story. I read the comments in these articles late at night when I can't sleep, enjoying the idiotic and off the wall comments (and many odd spelling errors). Sadly, I feel drawn to comment on some of the dumber comments. It's like a moth to light - I am irresistably drawn to make my own foolish comments, and I apologize for any of my own spelling errors.
I bet there's a woman involded here somewhere, sounds like a sniping what with a rifle, and a person that knows the area, he's gone. This would make a good movie, agian.
A good movie? Yeah we want to see a deranged lunatic on film showing other fringe lunatics how its done. Go whack your balls.
We don't need more violent movies. There are already thousands of bloody, gory, useless violent movies compliments of Follywood. Youths today are being indoctrinated into this type of gore. Some are more susceptible than others, which is why the rise in shootings.
Further indoctrination is done by denying God. If there is no afterlife, as kids are taught, what do they have to fear? It's a totally different world now since the world, not just the U.S., has denied God's presence.
P.S. The people who state that carrying weapons and shooting at people indiscriminately is their "God-given" right, I would point you to the verse, "...:For all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword". Matthew chap 26 verse 52. Nothing wrong with self-defense, but you people are trigger happy. Furthermore, if you trust in God you will know that when it's your time to die, it's your time to die, and nothing, not even your little (or big) gun, is going to stop that from happening. The whole point is that you are prepared, which means you trust in Jesus as your Savior. "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in Him should not PERISH, but have eternal life". John chapter 3 verse 16.
I KNOW a lot of the "God-given right" rhetoric is by people who are Christians in name only. Often not even Christians. That gives a bad name to real Christians.
God has given the government authority to keep order by law enforcement, soldiers, etc. Otherwise, keep your guns in your home. I don't want go shopping where there are untrained, possibly erratic persons carrying concealed or open weapons. It's also an invitation for accidental shootings.
Jeeeze, read the article. I tells what happened, and no it wasn't a sniper. If your going to comment take about three minutes out of your life and do more than scan a headline.
The ranger was shot outside the park, approximately 4 miles. She was shot at about 11AM PST but was unable to be rescued until shortly after 1 PM PST because of gunshots in the area. The ranger has died.
i have friends whoa re park rangers and as far as i know ihavent seen t hem with any sidearms, im usally the one with the pickup full of guns lol,but i also go with them to look for the druggies in the natl parks, since they arent armed and i am? makes them feel a lil better, i also think they should be able to defend themselves, then they can shoot back, then it would be fair, but there are some real nuts out there right now, people are ont eh edge about the ecomeny and losing thier houses andno money, never know what motivates people to shoot a unarmed ranger, has to be stupid
In my state, all park rangers have full police powers and are armed. This applies to State Park Rangers and City Park Rangers. In Indianapolis the Park Rangers backup the Metro Police and vice versa.
The State Park Rangers are responsible for enforcing laws and investigating crimes in the parks. This includes traffic laws, felonies, game laws, park rules - everything. They have the normal police training and also learn how to enforce the park rules.
The State Game Wardens are a different class - they are only charged with enforcing fish and game laws, boating safety and such - but they are still armed (they have to be, as the poachers are definitely armed.)
John- I believe we need to catch whoever did this not disarm everyone else. A shot into the air can frighten away dangerous animals, or in the case of this person a shot in the chest can save the life of a citizen under attack and the taxpayers some money. As Waldo said you aren't going to stop guns from getting into the hands of criminals, look at mexico. You want to know who's idea it was, well you got two ways of learning. 1) Surround yourself with people smarter than you. 2) Read.
Really? Is that what this woman's (mother, wife, daughter) life was worth, to save the taxpayers some money? And you're schooling another poster?
Maybe you need to surround yourself with people who are smarter than yourself. Putz!
Kai, I believe what Miner49er meant was when the person who killed the ranger is CAUGHT, THAT person should be shot in the chest to save us the money of having to put them on trial and keep them in jail for life.
I wonder if the weapon was part of fast and furious?
You're correct, bobodean. If that was the intent of the post, then I owe an apology.
To all the jokesters that think this is funny: I've never seen a park ranger act in anything but a professional way, and they are there to interpret and protect the last remaining landscapes. And I also have never seen that they are armed. I'm distressed that a park ranger was injured.
Idiots!!!! Looks like more people need to be carrying guns, so something like this doesn't happen again... God help this ranger recover... vengeance is the greatest healer...
Good point. I guess the message is that the good guys need to carry the weapons, and make it illegal for others. Then it can be policed.
The ranger was FATALLY shot. As in dead. SHE has two kids at home. I guess people are so busy multi tasking they don't bother to read. No offense Lee but your about the 3rd person to say I hope they are /recover etc.I totally agree with other posters that there is absolutely no reason for civilians to carry in a National Park. It is established to protect flora and fauna not humans.
Really: The first time the article went to print, they did not know that the shooting was fatal. These folks posted prior.
Really,
I'm progressive, but I'm a realist too. No reason to carry a gun in a National Park? Sure seems to me that this tragedy presents a real good reason. I am certain that a ban has absolutely no impact on nut cases who would do such a thing as this. Ex-cons aren't allowed to carry weapons, but if they decide to continue their life of crime, they aren't about to hold you up pointing a bible at you. That is the reality of the world, like it or not.
National Parks attract mostly tourists, families and naturalists. But they also offer some things for the less desirable characters in our society. Personally, if I'm armed in a National Park it isn't about protection from wild animals. It's about protection from the undesirable visitors who are sometimes lurking in the parks. The vast majority of people in this country who have concealed carry permits are law abiding citizens. We have had our backgrounds checked and have our prints on file. If we throw a pop can out a window, they can track it back to us. Generally speaking, very few of us are "cowboys" or would be vigilantes. That is not to say, that exceptions don't occur, but as a rule, those exceptions are few and far between.
We don't have all the details of what transpired here, but I think it is a pretty safe assumption that the perpetrator in this case is not a typical law abiding citizen. It is highly unlikely that a weapons ban would have made any difference in this case. People who are brazen enough to kill someone have little regard for rules and regulations. Even prior to lifting the ban, people were allowed to have a unloaded, disassembled weapons in the trunk of their cars. What do you think kept them from taking it out, loading it and using it? In the case of law abiding citizens, it was the law. But for law breakers, it didn't really matter much. In the year prior to lifting the ban, there were 1844 crimes/offenses involving guns in all the National Parks. Seems like a lot in an area that prohibited guns.
But let's be clear, the change does not allow just anybody to carry a weapon. Individuals are still subject to being leaglly allowed to carry a weapon and must still comply with the State and local laws of the area that the park resides in.
Here is what the NPS says:
A change in federal law effective Monday, February 22, allows firearms in many national parks. People who can legally possess firearms under federal and state law can now possess those firearms in the national parks in that state. The new law (Sec. 512 of P.L. 111-24) was passed by Congress and signed last May by the President.
Prior to February 22, firearms have generally been prohibited in national parks – except in some Alaska parks and those parks that allow hunting.
State and local firearms laws vary. Visitors who would like to bring a firearm with them to a national park need to understand and comply with the applicable laws. More than 30 national parks are located in more than one state, so visitors need to know where they are in those parks and which state’s law applies.
“For nearly 100 years, the mission of the National Park Service has been to protect and preserve the parks and to help all visitors enjoy them,” National Park Service Director Jon Jarvis said. “We will administer this law as we do all others – fairly and consistently.”
Federal law continues to prohibit the possession of firearms in designated “federal facilities” in national parks, for example, visitor centers, offices, or maintenance buildings. These places are posted with “firearms prohibited” signs at public entrances. The new law also does not change prohibitions on the use of firearms in national parks and does not change hunting regulations.
Park websites have been updated to include links to state firearms laws to help visitors understand the law and plan accordingly.
Sec. 512 of P.L. 111-24, an amendment to the Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility, and Disclosure Act of 2009, also directs the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to follow state and local firearms laws in national wildlife refuges.
" totally agree with other posters that there is absolutely no reason for civilians to carry in a National Park."
Except to protect ourselves from scum killers who shoot park rangers, or from wild animals...especially when THERE IS NO CELL PHONE RECEPTTION to call for help (that will take an hour to get to you)
First and foremost, this is a tragedy. I grieve for the family who lost their wife and mother. I hope the perp is quickly located and dealt with.
Now, as to the belief that, if only we had outlawed guns, this would never have happened: I understand the impulse, but it arises from emotion, not reason.
Murder is illegal. It still happens. People speed. Prohibition was an abject (and costly) failure.
The idea that you can legislate a problem away is naïve. Yes, in most cases, most people will "obey the law," but some won't. Result: 50 mph in a 35 mph zone, bathtub gin and murder by firearm (or by some other means). In the end, laws govern society only to the extent that society chooses to be governed. Beyond that, laws are just a basis for imposing sanctions (punishment)--after they are ignored/broken--upon those who choose to ignore/break them.
Lest my point not be clear, let me express it explicitly: a total ban on gun ownership in the US, or in Washington, or a total ban on gun possession in Mount Rainier National Park, could not have prevented this tragedy.
1
1newday,
You make a reasonable arguement for carrying in a national park, or anywhere for that matter - shopping, working, walking the dog or attending a religious service. One never knows where evil-doers may be lurking. I have no problem with your desire to carry.
I would like to hear how carrying a weapon would protect you.
Do you really think that if some scum gets the drop on you from behind, you're going to be able to draw a weapon before he nails you? Do you think a gunfight is safer for you and your family is safer than handing over the wallet?
A gun is for killing, and to shoot with any intention other than to kill is only challenging someone with a gun to "bring it on".
Would you plan on ignoring the great outdoors of most national parks, keeping your hand on your gun while surveilling all comers for possible evil intentions? I realize you can see those sunsets, those soaring eagles, those deer and antelope playing and maybe even a grizzly on some PBS Nature TV show, but then why bother visiting the park?
You're either enjoying nature, or you're maintaining vigilance. Can't do both effectively. The gun is either on your person, or back in the car. Can't be both places.
I think to consider a gun a protective device rather than a killing device is to put oneself in danger, by providing a false sense of security. He who would do you harm has already taken the first steps and is thinking about what is next, while you have just been interrupted by him from pointing out the moose to your kids and have to take a fraction of a second to get up to speed. He may be 5 or 6 seconds, and several possible shots, ahead of you.
If you're a bystander, not the target, and you surprise him with your weapon, you better already have a calm steady bead on him and ready to shoot for the head, 'cause he's already in trouble and has less to lose than you.
If the perpetrator isn't armed, then maybe you're in charge with your gun, unless he decides to run or grab somebody.
As I said before, it's your choice and I have no issue with it. Maybe you've had training in weapon handling, in which case, you've already practiced and are prepared for these possibilities. Otherwise, I just throw these questions out for your consideration.
May the National Parks continue to be the crown jewel of America's respect for nature. Peace
@BOBODEAN - You can carry concealed if want to but don't for a minute think your concealed hand gun is going to help you against the assault weapon in this guys military trained hands. He'd pick you off before you knew he was even around.
Well, actually, IamBigfoot51, I can assure you that the typical veteran is not nearly as skilled as many in this post would believe. Most veterans do know how to handle a gun safely, and the Army and Marines do conduct some weapons training, but I was a military weapons instructor, and was often appalled at some of the real lack of skills when troops came to my range for a day of training. Even before I became an instructor, I was on guard duty on an air field, and an Army Ranger chose to challenge me when I started to detain him for being in the wrong area. He was shocked to discover I was actually carrying a loaded firearm on duty. Guess the Army only played at guard duty at the time. As soon as he discovered my rifle was loaded, he settled right down (something about the sound of a round being chambered can calm the most rambunctious soul). I strongly suspect I can outshoot many cops, not that I ever want to have the opportunity. Have you ever really read the details about events in which cops exchange fire with a criminal? Bullets seem to fly with impunity in many events, and the criminal finally gets hit once or twice. The officer, meantime, emptied his pistol, and if he carried a Glock, as I do, he had 15 rounds in the first magazine. And yeah, if someone pointed a rifle at me, I'd try to take him out with my pistol. Also, unlikely the shooter had an assault rifle. Assault rifles have selective fire, meaning multiple shots with a single pull of the trigger. Illegal without a special federal permit, and extremely expensive, much more expensive than your typical $1500 AR type rifle that survivalists like so much.
Kind of hard recovering from death!
My condolences go out to the family of the ranger...what a tragedy..However there are alot of holes in this story..No motive...No explanation on COD..cause of death..and here is a contradicting statement....
"One of the air units and some of the FBI SWAT team members and sheriff's SWAT team members have found a body," said Pierce County Sheriff's spokesman Ed Troyer. "We have not gotten to it, we are nowhere near it, it's still buried in the snow."
Ok sooo...the Feds and swat teams have found a body but are nowhere near it?? WTF?? Can someone tell my why this author decided to write something that makes no sense. We need to wait for all the facts before we rush to any judgement about this Iraq Vet.
Ok sooo...the Feds and swat teams have found a body but are nowhere near it?? WTF?? Can someone tell my why this author decided to write something that makes no sense. We need to wait for all the facts before we rush to any judgement about this Iraq Vet.
If you find something by helicopter, so you can see it, but you can't get to it because it's located say on a ridge or something where it's inaccessible by helicopter, that would fit the criterion that 'makes sense.' Not rocket science.
Sorry for a double post, somehow this ended up in the wrong spot.
GreenTimer,
I can't speak for others, but I can assure you that I am highly skilled in the use of any weapons I carry.
And I can also tell you with confidence, that most responsible gun owners who carry are not out looking for a gunfight. It is not like I carry and walk around looking for trouble. I don't know that I am anymore vigilant than most people, although I do recognize situations that present vulnerability. I think that is just educated common sense. I have no intentions or a misguided belief that I can "outdraw" someone pointing a gun at me. But I do understand that opportunities may present themselves even in such a scenario. The key is knowing your capabilities very well and only using them when you have the appropriate advantage.
What you don't seem to understand is that carrying a weapon does not somehow preclude you from normal behavior or enjoying your environment. It is not like you have some constant awareness that you are armed. In reality, it is not all that different than carrying a handkerchief even though you rarely need it. That handkerchief is in your pocket, but you don't have some constant awareness of it that invades your thinking during normal activities. I will not argue that there probably are some "hotdogs" out there who carry a weapon with a different mentality and not all are highly skilled, but I believe most are not as you would envision. You might be surprised, depending upon where you live, just how many people around you may be legally carrying a weapon. And of course, there are a great deal who are illegally carrying too. Carrying a weapon is not the ultimate defense, and it should not be expected to provide you with added security in all situations, but it very clearly does provide a degree of security you otherwise wouldn't have. But you still need to use common sense. Anyone who deliberately puts themselves in dangerous situations, isn't very smart, armed or not.
No, a pistol on your hip will not help a great deal if someone is sniping at you with an assault rifle. But if I'm hunkered down behind my car and that individual is attempting to close in on me, I'll be glad I have that weapon. He might very well be deterred at 100 feet or so, but will most likely be dead at 30 feet.
Statistically speaking, self defense with a firearm has a pretty positive advantage. But it isn't foolproof. The key is whether or not it gives you an edge over someone who isn't armed. I believe that edge is real, if you have the appropriate skills. In a self defense situation, pointing a gun at someone to scare them or deter them is foolhardy. You point it so you can control where the bullet goes. That is rule #1. Rule #2 is to be able to recognize who has the advantage.
I understand that for a lot of people, a gun might be more of a disadvantage. I'm good with that and I'm not about to try to encourage you to go armed if you fit that category. As you stated, thinking of a gun as a protective device over a killing device is a mistake, and if that is how you view it, you shouldn't carry one. Anyone who desires to carry a weapon needs to consider why and what they think it will provide. They also need proper training and practiced skills. I don't believe we are so far apart in that regard.
I know it is different in different States, but I think for the most part, States that issue carry permits at least attempt to screen out irresponsible persons. I am not someone who advocates no rules or regulations regarding guns, but I think that sometimes restrictions go too far and just put more advantage in the hands of those who don't comply with the laws anyway. I don't think there is any perfect solution, but I also think that if we error, we should error on the side of freedom.