Woman killed in shootout mentally ill

Status
Not open for further replies.
bikemutt

bikemutt

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2010
Messages
4,479
Location
Vancouver, WA
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2016766204_piercecountyshooting15m.html

I find this story simply amazing: here is a person who was unequivocally barred from firearms possession. We start with a prior domestic violence conviction (no guns for you), being mentally ill (no guns for you), and being charged in October of this year with unlawful firearms possession (really, we mean it, no guns for you). Her entire family has restraining orders on her because she is violently mentally ill.

How on earth does someone who has gone this far down the road of self-destruction still manage to possess a gun?

I'm not in favor of interfering in anyone's private life but really, this one begged for something to be done. At least the torment her familiy has endured for years has now concluded.
 
Yeah pass another law that will take care of the problem. Like the guy who had been arrested 20 times for all kinds of bad things to only go back out and rape another woman....... but this time he chose wrong and she popped him. Case closed.

IMO our judicial systems at times fails to live up to it's intended purpose.
 
Wrong question, in my humble opinion...

To me, it isn't a question of gun control, but of medical help for the ill.


Not, "Where did she get a gun?"
but
"Why didn't her loving family get help for her condition?"



Personally, I don't believe that the Government is solely responsible for helping mental patients.
First the patient's loving family expresses its love by getting help.
If they cannot succeed, there are Health Districts that can assist.
In the article it seems to criticize the prosecutor and criminal court for not commiting her.
But that court was addressing a misdemeanor complaint, not her medical condition.
I don't know what her family did to get treatment for her,
but I don't think a family should sit and do nothing,
waiting for a prosecutor to help. That's not his job.



Not every mental patient can get in control, and
not every mental patient can be cured,
but all can be treated.
The vast majority of mentally health patients can get in control,
then they are harmless to themselves and others.


To me, that's the first step. Not gun control, but medical help.


My sincere apologies if that rubs anyone on THR the wrong way,
and my sincere apologies to the dead woman's family if they did try to help her.
 
And...

The more I think about it, I'm absolutely certain:

I don't want prosecutors taking the lead in declaring insanity.
They aren't qualified. They don't know anything about it.

I did overseas duty in a country where prosecutors sent defendants to
insane asylums for life for things like the sale of marijuana.
"You have to be crazy to sell illegal drugs, if he's crazy we'll commit him."
They did that to save themselves time and effort.
By commiting to asylum, they assure life sentence without trial.
Our country doesn't work like that.
 
I agree Ants, and it does sound as if the family tried to get her help.

Consider though, they all had no-contact orders against this person. I don't know if it's possible to completely ingratiate oneself to one's entire family to the point where they don't give a damn about the person any longer, if so, maybe she did just that.

What I'm wrestling with is how, after being charged on October 11 for "unlawful possession of a firearm, felony harassment, domestic violence and two counts of violation of a domestic-violence court order.", was she released back out in society and then, after presumably failing to appear in court "was being sought on an arrest warrant"?

Seems safe to assume her family didn't post bail, I seriously doubt personal recognizance was considered.

Something is seriously wrong with the criminal justice system in Pierce County.

This one is pure fodder for the gun control crowd.
 
To me, that's the first step. Not gun control, but medical help
Click to expand...
Apparently the family here tried to get her civilly committed (involuntarily placed in a mental hospital), but the judge didn't go for it.

Guess what? We've got an imperfect world. A "crazy" person wants to hurt someone, doesn't want to cooperate with family or laws, and refuses to say, "Yes, your Honor, I should be committed."

Three choices (maybe more, but these are the ones I see): make it easier for such a person to be committed against her will (big civil rights problem); pass more antigun laws (big civil rights problem and might be ineffective still); or let her shoot at people, including police, and pay the price.

Shooting folks is not great medical help; but if a person won't agree to medical help and gets violent, what're the other choices?
 
Last edited:
You can try and try
but what do you do when your family member is a CRAZED PSYCHO who is set on KILLING YOU?

you get the restraining order, you do the legal BS, you carry a gun, because YOU KNOW what they are capable of, and call the cops, and call the cops and call the cops and call the cop and call the cop and call the cops
from the article:
but prosecutors "claimed she wasn't crazy," and the judge released her
Click to expand...

NOW ANTS
tell me how the 'loving' family is supposed to help someone like that?
she was an abuser, a user, and most likely reacted violently every time the family TRIED to get her help. Yeah, you know you only try so many times for someone before you get the message. Domestic battery, that means she kicked the *stuffing* out of a family member.
 
Last edited:
What I'm wrestling with is how, after being charged on October 11 for "unlawful possession of a firearm, felony harassment, domestic violence and two counts of violation of a domestic-violence court order.", was she released back out in society and then, after presumably failing to appear in court "was being sought on an arrest warrant"?
Click to expand...
My take is that she wasn't released. I think the charges were filed and an arrest warrant issued, and she hadn't been picked up yet.
 
Well... it never says if this is a handgun or not. If it wasn't, then it could be extremely easy for her to get her hands on. Something small and concealable (sawed off shotgun?) could have been used. And its fairly simple to purchase a shotgun. After doing so sawing off the barrel makes it easy to hide.

If it was a handgun it was no doubt an illegal weapon.
 
I don't know what her family did to get treatment for her, but I don't think a family should sit and do nothing, waiting for a prosecutor to help. That's not his job.
Click to expand...


I can tell you first hand as a parent who has had to deal with civil commitment procedures in WA State countless times over the last twenty years attempting to get medical help for my schizophrenic son, that it is the most heartbreakingly frustrating exercise in futility devised by man.

I read the comments from the family with a different perspective than most of you possibly could, and understood immediately what they have undoubtedly been through for decades trying to get treatment for their loved one (which works very well in most cases if you can get it).

Surprisingly, even if the person presents a clear danger to themselves or others (despite what the law says), it can be darn near impossible to get them committed for even a few days - never mind the two or three weeks required to bring someone back to any semblance of mental stability.

If you do manage to pull off THAT miracle, you will discover that the patient does not believe (using their disordered brain to asses their situation) that there is a thing wrong with them. They will likely blame you for all of their problems, since you are the one that had them "wrongly" committed and treated with the anti-psychotic drugs that they do not (in their mind) have any need for.

Now you have a very resentful relative who soon will stop taking their meds and fully relapse.

Wash, rinse, repeat.


LoosedHorse gets closer to defining the choices...

Three choices (mabe more, but these are the ones I see): make it easier for such a person to be committed against her will (big civil rights problem); pass more antigun laws (big civil rights problem and might be ineffective still); or let her shoot at people, including police, and pay the price.
Click to expand...


Perhaps the biggest problem is that, even with more effective commitment laws - there are not nearly enough available beds for the need now. So mental health professionals end up acting as gate-keepers with the task of keeping as many patients OUT of the hospital as possible.


On a gun-related note: The headline on one our news outlets exclaimed that the women (who was shooting at the time) was "gunned down" by deputies. Something about that just sticks in my craw. We have had quite a number of police shootings in the last year around here. The press and public are always quick to make it look as thought the LEOs have nothing better to do then look for people to "gun down" - a term that is inflammatory to me.

The fact is, those poor deputies were involved in a no-win situation created by all of the legal and health issues outlined above. They had absolutely no choice but to neutralize the threat. And I would say that even if it had been my son.
 
Sadly the place that the most distured are the most stable

JAIL
seen it, unfortunately, because they get their pills, every day, on time, they get the supervision, medical and otherwise. And they MUST take their pill, even when they are 'fine'

BUT
most will describe the local Psychiatric Hospital with colorful words like
Hell
The Devil Place
Brain Thieves
or my favorite (this was from a few disturbed individual)
"the devil lives in the basement, and he eats your soul"

These people had already been convicted of crimes ranging from drug use/possession to murdering their infant son during a psychotic episode.
 
To add to what Rainbowbob said about bed shortage, there is a cost saving move underfoot right now to release even more "low risk" offenders, including sex offenders. If this comes to pass, I can't imagine Washington State becoming a safer place for anyone.

OLYMPIA — For the fourth year in a row, Gov. Chris Gregoire on Thursday outlined more than $1.5 billion in state cuts to health care, social services, prisons and education.

The latest round would increase public-school class sizes, eliminate subsidized health care for the working poor and release hundreds of inmates early.

"These are pretty much the very shocking things we've been trying to avoid for the last three years," Senate Ways and Means Chairman Ed Murray, D-Seattle, said of the governor's proposal.

"There are no choices left," he added.
Click to expand...
 
"These are pretty much the very shocking things we've been trying to avoid for the last three years...There are no choices left," he added.
Click to expand...

And yet this same state has $2+ Billion to waste on tearing down a safe, useful, free, and scenic elevated roadway and replace it with an idiotic tolled tunnel.

It is a matter of priorities and common sense. But the pols "sense" tells them they need the unions in the bag to continue in power. And the unions *LOVE* big dig projects.
 
I think rainbowbob pretty much covered it-nothing like experience to cut through all the 'Net chatter.

Trying to get help for relatives through mental health services is not a co-operative experience-you'll spend a lot of time trying to fight the (broken) system rather than working with them.

I don't know if it's out of control patients' rights laws (caring relatives are tossed outta the loop), budget cuts, marching orders, turf wars, judges confused by mental illness, dealing with egos out of control, or all of the above.

Until some/all of the above are corrected, this will continue to be one of society's problems.
 
I don't know if it's out of control patients' rights laws (caring relatives are tossed outta the loop), budget cuts, marching orders, turf wars, judges confused by mental illness, dealing with egos out of control, or all of the above.
Click to expand...

You answered your own question with these two: "...out of control patients' rights laws (caring relatives are tossed outta the loop), [and] budget cuts [or more acurately budget priorities].
 
Rainbow Bob,
I'm sure you have had the lectures
there ARE ways to 'help' 'resistive' or 'Non-Compliant' patients
BUT most involve lengthy court battles were the 'disabled' individual is privy to free legal defense as you are forced to prove to a judge that the person is incompetent and unable to care for themselves. You are going to fight a family member, you are going to get them legally declared to be similar to a child, and YOU will be responsible for them, with some state interference.

All this still doesn't make them take their meds, and doesn't mean the will accept your help. In the end it means just that you can commit them, but even then they are privy to legal proceeding that while not 'adversarial' still will pit you against your family member.

OH, and if they can string 3 words together, most likely you won't win
 
ColtPythonElite said:
She could have easily scored the gun on the used market.
Click to expand...
Ugh, ColyPythonElite, I'd hoped no one would mention that. Sadly, it's mostly true. Not having seen this person in action, just using my imagination, I don't know how "easy" it would have been for her to get one on the used market. And of course my concept of the used gun market is probably worlds apart from the "other" used gun market. In my world we ask to see ID and carry permits from buyers whom we don't know, I suppose there's a "no questions asked" market as well.
 
Sadly, it's mostly true. Not having seen this person in action, just using my imagination, I don't know how "easy" it would have been for her to get one on the used market.
Click to expand...

If you look at the FBI Crime stats you will find that very few criminals get their guns on the new or used markets.

Most studies from FBI and others show numbers roughly aligned such:

a flea market or gun show for fewer than 2%
a retail store or pawnshop for about 12%
family, friends, a street buy, or an illegal source for 80%
Click to expand...
 
I'm sure you have had the lectures
Click to expand...

Had the lectures? Heck, I've given the lectures.

There ARE ways to 'help' 'resistive' or 'Non-Compliant' patients
Click to expand...


I received a grant (as a lay person, no less) to study the efficacy of an intervention of my own invention I refer to as "Video-Self Observation". This was based on an event wherein my son was able to observe himself (once stable) acting out his psychotic delusions on a video I'd made previously. The idea was to get past the denial of symptoms so common with these illnesses. Although it was initially successful for my son and others, it did not prevent eventual relapses. As part of the investigation, I observed many hours of the videotaped psychotic behaviors of consenting patients at Stanford Medical Center. I've seen a lot more of this than the average bear.


BUT most involve lengthy court battles were the 'disabled' individual is privy to free legal defense as you are forced to prove to a judge that the person is incompetent and unable to care for themselves. You are going to fight a family member, you are going to get them legally declared to be similar to a child, and YOU will be responsible for them, with some state interference.

All this still doesn't make them take their meds, and doesn't mean the will accept your help. In the end it means just that you can commit them, but even then they are privy to legal proceeding that while not 'adversarial' still will pit you against your family member.

Oh, and if they can string 3 words together, most likely you won't win.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you've "been there, done that" as well. I would only disagree with two points:

1.) "You will be responsible for them"...Actually, if the person is an adult, you will NOT be allowed to be responsible for them unless and only to the degree the patient allows it.

2.) "...while not adversarial..." It is, in fact, as adversarial a process as I have ever been involved in. Imagine being a witness for the state in which you must tell a judge the most embarrassing and personal anecdotes you can think of, in the presence of the patient and his defense attorney, in order to attempt to convince the court that your own loved one is a danger to himself and others, subject of course to cross examination by the defense and contradictory testimony by your loved one.
 
NOW ANTS
tell me how the 'loving' family is supposed to help someone like that?
Click to expand...
You do everything like RainbowBob talks about (thank you, Bob).
You do everything you can.
Knowing there is no guarantee for success.
Nothing in life has a guaranteed outcome.
But you try anyway.

If a family goes through everything like Bob's family,
and the stricken son/daughter/mother/cousin still falls to a violent death...

We just cannot sit there and shake our heads saying,
"The prosecutor didn't do his job."

Humanity is much, much more complex than expecting a prosecutor to solve the problem.
Nor a judge.
Nor a government.

Nor even gun control.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
History of mental illness doesn't prevent gun buys
Replies
8
Views
766
mec
M
D
  • Locked
Guns in the hands of the mentally ill
2
Replies
31
Views
1K
Ellie
E
R
  • Locked
Does Asperger's syndrome count as "Mental Illness"?
2 3
Replies
73
Views
5K
Frog48
F
J
  • Locked
MSNBC: Mental health and guns
Replies
3
Views
397
SteveS
S
D
  • Locked
Woman committed to a mental hospital gets a permit to buy a handgun.
Replies
19
Views
1K
goalie
G
Back
Top