459
submitted 1 year ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

A California Superior Court judge arrested last week has now been charged with killing his wife in front of their adult son at their home. Court filings reveal the judge had over 47 weapons and 26,000 rounds of ammunition in his home.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] andrewta@lemmy.world 52 points 1 year ago

How many rounds of ammo he had is not really relevant (unless he used all 26000 rounds of ammo or was in the process of using them).

That he killed the wife in front of the kid… that is relevant.

[-] ivanafterall@kbin.social 49 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

"First things first, I just want to say the fact that the murderer had 47 guns and 26,000 rounds of ammunition sheds no light on his personality or the crime."

Okay.

load more comments (21 replies)
[-] Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world 30 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It's kinda weird that they made this more about how much weaponry he has rather than about his mental health and the actual situation.

Weird take though - I kinda want more news with random stats.

"Woman with over 64000 Pokemon cards burns down house"

"Man who eats 16 slices of pizza that one time evades police"

[-] new_acct_who_dis@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago

I think it's relevant to note that someone mentally unwell enough to kill another person (especially their own spouse) was able to hoard such a large amount of weapons.

I guess the rest of us are just lucky that he only wanted to kill one person, instead of several.

[-] CaptnNMorgan@reddthat.com 8 points 1 year ago

I'm more concerned he was able to become a judge.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] technicalogical@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

There are multiple articles on this situation. This particular article was written because of the somewhat unique weapons cache. Other articles will be written about mental health, without a doubt

[-] agent_flounder@lemmy.one 6 points 1 year ago

It's almost like they want to continue to demonize normal gun owners (yes there are dozens of us left leaning gun owners). I'm kind of fucking sick of it but the rich folks that want us disarmed have enough to keep funding the meessages.

[-] ReluctantMuskrat@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

You're not normal if you have 26000 rounds of ammo. I have 5 guns and don't have 500 rounds. 26000 rounds sounds like someone with a dooms-day mindset preparing for anarchy.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[-] SheeEttin@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Yeah. I think the previous domestic disputes and alcohol abuse are more relevant to the domestic violence. If he didn't have a gun, it would have been a fist.

[-] aesthelete@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Which she likely would've survived?

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (26 replies)
[-] deadtom@lemmy.world 46 points 1 year ago

Wife stopped him from committing suicide and he eventually killed her. This dude deserves to be strapped to a cannon so his chest can be blown out. I can't imagine how their son feels finding out his dad is irredeemable trash who would execute his mother, and basically losing both parents in a night.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Arsenal4ever@lemmy.world 44 points 1 year ago

Take a moment to admire the marketing of the gun manufacturers for a minute. Like, imagine someone having 47 toasters.

Gun Manufacturers and the NRA (same thing) are good at what they do.

[-] Exusia@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That's not really a fair comparison though. They all handle and fire different. This piece of shit is still a piece of shit, but collecting different guns is more akin to "I participate in 10,000 point fights with my choice of Orks or Blueberry Spacemarines" than toasters.

Noone needs that but that's a hobby.

load more comments (11 replies)
[-] nutbiggums@lemmy.ml 14 points 1 year ago

Easy to scare limp dick conservatives

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Son_of_dad@lemmy.world 25 points 1 year ago

How does someone with a murder charge get bail?

[-] BreadKof@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago

Because it's a judge, white and had money

[-] AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

He has no more wives, so he isn't considered dangerous.

load more comments (12 replies)
[-] puppy@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

And to think that he was responsible for deciding the fate of others. SMH.

[-] dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago

You know, I'll bet if anyone who wasn't a federal judge did this they'd be denied bail.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] CoolSouthpaw@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

What a fucking piece of shit. Hope he gets fucked up in prison.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Fallenwout@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I don't mean he is not a piece of shit but

Who cares he has 47 weapons. You only have 2 hands. What you think he is going to do? Strap 30 glocks to his leg?

Who cares he has 26000 rounds. Do you know how heavy ammo is? What you think is he going to do? Walk around with a shopping cart full of ammo? Strap 50 magazines to his chest?

It still amazes me that people fall for this "quantity " argument. It means nothing. Someone is not more dangerous with 500 rifles or 5 rifles.

[-] Hypersapien@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

I think the point was that he was obsessed with guns.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

Well isn't that exactly the point? What possible reason does a murderer need with 47 guns and 26,000 rounds of ammunition? He only has two hands and couldn't conceivably carry a tenth of that at any given time.

There's a few reasons people collect guns. Some people just like guns, and appreciate the craftsmanship and variety of weapons. Like any hobby, it's easy to end up with way more stuff than might seem reasonable to an outside observer.

But this guy was a judge. If he was an avid stamp collector, and had a basement full of stamps, nobody would care that he had an obsessive hobby until he decided to dissolve his wife in a vat of stamp preservative or whatever. 47 might seem like a reasonable number of guns to a lot of folks, but we can all agree that's still more than anyone needs for things like hunting or self defense.

Another reason to collect guns is because you're prepping for... something. Collapse of some sort, or maybe the government is going to start piling up bodies so they can take guns from cold, dead hands. Whatever happens, you're going to need weapons in all calibers, and ammo will become the new currency.

But again, this guy was a State Supreme Court Justice, and not for some podunk state like that one state we're all thinking of. No, he was among the top jurists in Califuckingfornia, a high arbiter of justice and the rule of law in the most populous and prosperous state. If this piece of shit was also a prepper, what in the sam hill is he prepping for?

There are probably other reasons to have a big collection of guns. But given that he murdered his wife, I think we can agree that his specific, violent version of crazy is relevant to the conversation.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] stratoscaster@lemmy.zip 6 points 1 year ago

Yeah I mean to be fair there are tons of gun enthusiasts that also have an insane number of guns and ammo (because they regularly go shooting at a range or something for fun).

It goes to show how sometimes it's not just because they're enthusiasts though but because they're actually nuts. Seeing as this guy was a judge I doubt there would be any way of stopping him from stockpiling that much weaponry.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] steebo_jack@kbin.social 13 points 1 year ago

So much for CA not letting you own guns eh...

That's the fun thing about outrage. It's easy to just make shit up.

"CA gun laws are the tightest and goes against 2A and everyone has to give away their guns!"

And it's really not?

[-] quaddo@reddthat.com 11 points 1 year ago

Random thought that's totally pointless here:

If he took all of his weapons and all of his ammo to a shooting range, and if he prepped to the best of his ability before beginning, how long would it take for him to shoot off all 26,000 rounds, if he tried as hard as he could to fire them off as quickly as possible? By himself, with nobody else helping, just to be clear.

Feel free to throw out best case scenarios.

Shooting is the easy part, you can probably sustain about a round per second. Reloading magazines probably takes 5 times as long, so let's say 10 rounds per minute, 600 per hour. If he's there for 8 hours that's 4,800 per day so he could git 'er done in about a week.

[-] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago

It really depends on what the breakdown is and how many magazines he had and what the breakdownin ammo was. If everything was loaded ans laid out it could be done in a day that's 10-12 hours, if you don't care about keeping guns usable you could probably do it faster. It's all about reload speed and managing heat, endurance would be a factor as well. You can pretty easily attain a 4-6 rounds per second with most guns, world record levels are more like 10 per secondwith a pistol. Bushmaster claims and effective 45 rounds per minute with their ar 15, which would be just under 10 hours.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Hypersapien@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Let me guess. Conservative?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2023
459 points (95.3% liked)

News

23406 readers
1774 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS