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.
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.
“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.
If he regularly shot pictures of women or something sure but owning a lot of guns or buying ammo in bulk isn’t really any indication of domestic violence. The son even said there wasn’t a history of violence. It seems like the heavy drinking or arguments have more correlation than anything.
Media outlets often cite things like how many guns someone has to freak out people who don’t know about guns. All the dude needed to fuck up was a single handgun and a single bullet. If he was drunk he shouldn’t have even been carrying. And being drunk isn’t really a good argument for why someone got violent.
owning a lot of guns or buying ammo in bulk isn’t really any indication of domestic violence
Good thing there isn’t a known correlation between gun ownership and higher rates of domestic homicide, right? That would totally destroy your argument. How embarrassing that would be.
A lot of domestic violence involving a gun doesn’t mean that most gun owners are abusive.
It actually does, which you would know if you even glanced at the sources I provided.
A woman is five times more likely to be murdered when her abuser has access to a gun.
That is a different statement. It’s saying abusers can be more dangerous with a weapon. It does not follow that people who own a weapon are somehow more likely to be an abuser.
To make that argument it would need to say something about what percentage of gun owners commit abuse or some kind violent crime.
You can find higher rates of domestic violence among cops for instance so maybe you could argue cops are more likely to be abusers.
Yeah because having so many guns you literally have a gun on your ankle while also being a belligerent drunk doesn’t prime you more for murder the next time you “lose it”.
Guns make murder literally child’s play. If he wasn’t such an ammo sexual he may have slapped his wife and gotten beaten up by his son and landed in the drunk tank, but because a gun was easier and more available his first round of reported domestic violence was lethal.
Wrong.
“copy and pastes previous comment”
Okay.
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”
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.
If you switch Pokemon cards to gallons of fuel it’d be more like the headline here.
But I know you’re purposely missing the point anyway.
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
It’s not a random stat like Pokemon cards. You’re being obtuse. It would be more like “Woman with extensive collection of flares, matches, and gasoline burns down house” and “man who owned numerous police scanners and maps of escape routes evades police.”
The “actual situation” is that he had a collection of 47 weapons that enable murder and he murdered someone with one of them. Your analogies are absurd.
I recall some recent study that said most mass shooters follow a predictable pattern of buying guns, then amassing guns and ammo.
Nobody needs 26,000 rounds. There is no problem that any American can legitimately solve with 26,000 rounds. It’s a threat to everyone.
Removed by mod
I don’t have that right. The Constitution gives it to the federal government, it’s called general welfare, it’s called police powers. Article I stuff.
The 10th Amendment grants all police powers to the states unless enumerated otherwise in the Constitution (such as is the case with interstate commerce). And states may not enact laws that supercede federal laws per the Supremacy Clause. This is important when applied to arms as they are protected by the 2A in the Constitution, which is the highest law in the land.
As for general welfare, that’s targeted at federal spending. A common place where it applies is that it empowers the federal government to grant crop subsidies to farmers.
That’s why when someone commits a crime like murder it’s under state jurisdiction. Unless that particular case occurred on federal land or involved cross state travel, then that would become a federal case.
Ammunition prices fluctuate drastically with global and national events. In 2021 when COVID hit 9mm cost roughly 70 cents a round. Today it’s around 19 cents a round. There’s a buy cheap stack deep philosophy practiced when buying ammo.
A competition shooter or someone attending a class can easily shoot 1,000 rounds over a weekend. Buying in large volume when prices are low means that weekend costs $190 not $700.
Get a new hobby? One that doesn’t threaten everyone around you, maybe? Maybe one that’s just overall cheaper.
I have zero problem with hunting, target shooting, collecting. One poster here says they have 4,000 rounds; shoots trap every weekend, buys them on sale. Fine.
This dude had 26,000. That is a compulsion. He thought amassing ammo would solve something for him. Would provide him something he lacked. Probably something subconscious. Some deep-seated fear.
As to the rest of us, it solves nothing legitimate, certainly nothing the Second Amendment was directed toward.
What harm can practically be done by one man with 26,000 that couldn’t be done with 4,000 or half that? If we stick with the 9mm metrics 4,000 rounds would weigh just past 100lb (45 kilos) @ 115g rds. 26,000 rounds of it would be 3-4x the weight of the average man at about 650lbs (294 kilos).
That volume only benefits consistent use over weeks/months/years, something fortunately not found in the cases where people abuse firearms to harm others.
What if you have to wage a war against emu’s?
You’ll be swarmed. Only the Samurai survive that war.
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.
Which she likely would’ve survived?
Exactly
IIRC California requires background checks every 6 months to order ammo, and it can only be shipped to licensed ammo dealers, which charge a fee, and then picked up in person. It makes sense for California gun owners to buy bullets in bulk quantities.
But 47 weapons at home is excessive IMO.
deleted by creator
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.
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.
All toasters toast differently too.
I mean yeah, if someone had 50 different toasters that apply different patterns we wouldn’t bat an eye at it because that’s a hobby.
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.
That’s so sad.
This is the only comment in this entire post that makes any sense. Thank you.
How does someone with a murder charge get bail?
Because it’s a judge, white and had money
Its west coast. They let people out for multiple murder charges.
Source: was west coast and got tired of seeing mass murderers being released to our society only to do it again.
Don’t be a moron. He’s out on bail for the same reason police get it, if you put and judge or cop in prison they get murdered. If they aren’t guilty that’s a huge fucking risk, it’s the same for pretty much anyome but not everyone plays for the same team.
He has no more wives, so he isn’t considered dangerous.
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.
I think the point was that he was obsessed with guns.
I also like firearms. And I am a normal european 9to5 guy with a job in health care. Over here being interested in firearms means nothing, it’s not different from, let’s say, owning a horse ;)
Do you own 47 of them along with 26,000 rounds of ammo and would you ever kill your wife?
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.
Yes you got the point. I’ve heard that in Israel you can have one gun. When you leave the shooting range you must buy 50 bullets. If you go back and have less than 50 bullets, they need you to justify why that’s the case, or they refer it to police or something. I know something like this would not fly in America, but maybe it’s a regime we could work our way towards
Yeah, it’s pretty easy to tell that you haven’t been around guns much. 50 rounds isn’t much and isn’t reasonable for any purpose from hobby to sport usage or even proficiency for someone who uses them professionally. The amount of ammo I shoot on any given range trip? Varies from 20 to hundreds and hundreds of rounds; it depends on the day, weather and dozens of other factors. Even the concept of only being able to buy a single box the day of is hugely problematic. For the most common calibers like 9mm prices over the past decade have varied from less than $ .30 a round to over $2.00 per round, if you could even get it. There have been periods of months to years where getting a single box every 3 months was difficult/near impossible. I have one rifle that is a family heirloom that I haven’t found ammunition in stock for over a decade and have never shot it since inheriting it.
The ammunition market is 100 times more volatile than a cardboard box soaked in gasoline holding 100lbs of gunpowder. Having a few thousand rounds doesn’t mean you’re planning anything bad, it’s a drop in the bycket to sustain occasional shooting for 6 months despite never ending supply issues that have been going on for years. If I see ammo at a fair price I buy as much of it as I can. On any given day I might be able to shoot half of the guns I own if I so desire due to the availability of ammo, and that includes the stuff I make on my own in my garage.
I’ve been around guns. I know 50 rounds is practically nothing. I was shocked when my friend explained the law there to me. Just providing an alternative perspective
Limiting ammunition isn’t effective, Limiting magazine capacity on the other hand. I live in Europe where firearms are heavily regulated, yet they don’t care about the amount of ammunition. In fact, you always get a 30% discount if you buy bulk and bulk means per 1000 for quality and per 1400 for surplus. If you have 6 different calibers it adds up quickly. That’s how much they care. There is a limit on the weight of total gunpowder before you need a fireworks storage permit though… there are a lot of gun owners in Europe, but we don’t practice in schools and shopping malls, I don’t know what is wrong with America
I also don’t know what is wrong, but as a citizen here, I’d like to try anything and everything to prevent mass murder. I don’t see how limiting ammunition wouldn’t work towards that goal
Remember the shooting in Las Vegas?
So since the need for guns is a well regulated militia, per the second amendment, everyone should get to have 1 or 2 guns. No need for more
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?
Well he is from Cali, so yes. NY reload due to mag capacity issues.
You know, I’ll bet if anyone who wasn’t a federal judge did this they’d be denied bail.
He’s a California superior court judge, not a federal judge. Either way, probably not much of a flight risk.
What a fucking piece of shit. Hope he gets fucked up in prison.
And to think that he was responsible for deciding the fate of others. SMH.
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?
deleted by creator
So, you want to discriminate people on a state level based on their political views?
deleted by creator
Every act of racism, misogyny, homophobia, xenophobia and antisemitism comes from conservatives.
What kind of a sick warped reality do you live in? Or did you smoke some bad granola?
I’m black and I don’t exactly see any representation on here for people of color
Let me guess. Conservative?
Orange County. Lots of guns. Fairly safe bet.
47… the cheapest one was probably 500$ or so. This is fetish. What the hell are you going to do with them all? I can think of 3 or 4 models I need and the rest of my stockpile just needs to be ammo for them.
Need?
To elaborate… Need as in some kind of self defense scenario or even as a survivalist. There are 4 firearms I would probably want to have, each having a specific purpose. But that is it. Having 47 is like a cat lady or something. To me it is weird and unnecessary.
This is America, I have no problem with people owning guns. I support gun restrictions and the banning of automatic assault rifles as well. That is common sense to me.
