Snohomish County Sheriff’s Office investigating death of burglary suspect shot by Esperance homeowner

Snohomish County Sheriff’s deputies are investigating a shooting in the Esperance neighborhood of unincorporated Edmonds  Tuesday night in which a homeowner allegedly killed a burglar.

The incident occurred at approximately 8:10 p.m., when deputies responded to a report of a shooting in the 8900 block of 225th Place Southwest. “Preliminary information indicates a subject broke into a residence at that location and was shot by the homeowner.  The subject died at the scene,” a news release from the Sheriff’s office said.

Detectives from the Sheriff’s Office Major Crimes Unit have been called out to investigate the shooting, and no additional information was available Tuesday night. Identification of the alleged burglar will be made by the Snohomish County Medical Examiner’s Office.

  1. I can already hear my conservative friends using this to defend gun rights and the second amendment.

    Oh boy.

  2. So John, a better headline for your idealogy would have been: “Homeowner killed by intruder. Sheriff’s Office has no suspects and is appealing to public for help.”

    Liberalism truly is a mental disorder.

  3. John,

    Why shouldn’t this sort of thing be used to defend gun rights? I’m curious about what is so “Oh boy” about this article?

  4. Here we go, all the liberals are going to get all excited! Sorry, this gun owner decided to not be a victim. Sorry, he was prepared to make a split second decision to protect himself instead of waiting for the police to arrive. I see nothing wrong with his actions. If somebody was kicking in my front door they would be greeted with a .45 handgun aimed at their face. People need to take care of themselves. Quit relying on a false sense of security that the police are going to save you in a crisis. Let the liberals live in that bubble, arm yourself and survive.

  5. I think all of you have mental disorders for pigeon holing liberals and conservatives. I am a LIBERAL (I am a proponent of Gay Marriage, Obamacare, Abortion and birth control, and a life long Democrat).

    I am not against gun ownership. However, I do think it should be regulated so that not every crazy person or 16 year old boy can just buy one at their local Walmart without a back ground check or other similar precautions, and that conceal carry permits should be given with great discretion. And, yes, as a LIBERAL, if someone came after me or my family, I would use a weapon against them. Anyone who says they wouldn’t is a liar.

  6. This is the only time i have been able to say i agree with Pria. I am NOT a LIBERAL, but i do see issues with some people who legally have firearms. In this case it was a great defensive action to protect the homeowners property and or life.

  7. I agree with Priya about the fact that “every crazy person or 16 year old boy” should not be able to purchase a weapon, I think we should probably all be able to agree on that?

    But this discussion started with John D.’s sarcastic expression about this case being used to defend gun rights. I’m not sure where the sarcasm comes from, seeing as how (as John Scott pointed out) the homeowner is safe because they exercised their rights as an American citizen to protect themselves.

    Can anyone help me understand why this scenario should NOT be used to defend gun rights/2nd amendment?

  8. You may not kill someone who threatens only your property and possessions.

    You may only kill someone in self-defense when the circumstances exist to believe that your life is in imminent danger.

    The first reports of this incident stated that the burglar was still outside the house and trying to gain entry when the shots were fired. If that is indeed the case, the homeowner will likely – and justly – face criminal charges.

    Had the burglar entered the home, and threatened the health or life of the residents inside, then – and only then – is the use of deadly force by private citizens justified.

    At this early point, there simply isn’t enough information to reach any conclusions about whether or not this shooting was justified and/or legal.

  9. This type of thing is exactly why I own a gun and am learning to SAFELY use it. The average person does not have a chance against some meth head or crack head that is high and decided your home is going to be their next target. What about all the home invasions going on? Do you even get a chance to dial 911? I think not. Protect yourselves and your family! Ladies especially…learn for yourselves! It might be the best thing you ever do to protect yourself and your kids!

  10. Most of you are blissfully ignorant of the law. As a police officer, let me educate you. According to RCW 9A.16.050 (which you should all read before posting comments such as Doug’s, which are highly absent of any factual knowledge):

    1. Homicide is justifiable to defend against ANY felony….against property or person. If someone is attempting to break into your abode, lethal force is fully justified. You do not have to wait for them to come into your house or cross the door threshold.
    2. Liberals, you are mentally deranged. Priya’s comments concerning a 16-y.o. boy or a “crazy person” being able to go into a Walmart and buying a gun are just plain ridiculous. You have to be 21 years of age to purchase a handgun in almost every state in the US, including WA (no state allows anyone under 18 to purchase). 18 years to buy a rifle/shotgun. There is a 5-day waiting period while the merchant has a federal ATF check done on the purchaser nationwide….many states are 10 days. All concealed carry permit applicants go through a rigorous criminal history check, state and nationwide, before a permit is issued or renewed, which generally takes 1-6 months depending on which state you live in. This alone is a violation of the 2nd Amendment, but it is a fact.

    This homeowner was fully justified in his actions and is probably wrestling with the fact that he just took a person’s life. No easy task to do, albeit a necessary one in this situation.

  11. Doug is right, that is what Washington state law says.

    Even then, if you’re threatened with bodily harm inside your own home you can only use the “necessary force” needed to stop yourself or your family from being harmed. But, if you find someone who is illegally on your property you can also use the force necessary to hold them until the police arrive.

    However, you can’t shoot them until they do endanger you or your family. Even if they’re in your house making off with your TV you can’t shoot them.

    That never seemed fair to me. If somebody has broken into my house and is stealing my property I ought to at least be able to shoot them in the kneecaps. Also, I think most people would feel very threatened — even terrified — to wake up and find somebody who had broken into their house. Even if they’re just standing there I can easily see why somebody would shoot first and ask questions later.

    To have a law that says you can break into somebody’s house and steal their property and they won’t be able to stop you unless they’re a Seahawks linebacker doesn’t make sense.

  12. Without edits:

    RCW 9A.16.050
    Homicide — By other person — When justifiable.

    Homicide is also justifiable when committed either:

    (1) In the lawful defense of the slayer, or his or her husband, wife, parent, child, brother, or sister, or of any other person in his or her presence or company, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design on the part of the person slain to commit a felony or to do some great personal injury to the slayer or to any such person, and there is imminent danger of such design being accomplished; or

    (2) In the actual resistance of an attempt to commit a felony upon the slayer, in his or her presence, or upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he or she is.

    [2011 c 336 § 354; 1975 1st ex.s. c 260 § 9A.16.050.]

    You can believe that the home owner was not right in their use of force, but the above would indicate that their actions were legal. I would venture to guess that the individual that killed the intruder will have their own personal issues to deal with.

  13. Bonnar,

    That’s not how 16-y.o. boys and crazy people acquire guns and ammo. They get them by breaking into careless gun owners homes and vehicles. Or they buy them from the same guy selling black market drugs. Would you like fries with that burger? = Would you like a gun with that meth?

  14. Sorry Kurt, you are gravely wrong on the law. And for the record, “shooting someone in the kneecaps” constitutes deadly force. The law is not confusing, that is why I noted the exact RCW, which I will now cut and paste since you clearly didn’t read it. You DO NOT have to wait until you feel you feel you are in danger. If they are committing a felony against you or your property, you have every right to use deadly force. Attempting to break into your home constitutes Attempted Burglary, a class B felony.

    RCW 9A.16.050
    Homicide — By other person — When justifiable.
    Homicide is also justifiable when committed either:

    (1) In the lawful defense of the slayer, or his or her husband, wife, parent, child, brother, or sister, or of any other person in his or her presence or company, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design on the part of the person slain to commit a felony or to do some great personal injury to the slayer or to any such person, and there is imminent danger of such design being accomplished; or

    (2) In the actual resistance of an attempt to commit a felony upon the slayer, in his or her presence, or upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he or she is.

  15. Paul Spehar,

    So, we should then repeal the 2nd Amendment and no one can own a gun, right? That is what you are saying, correct? Because of course all the criminals with guns would certainly not want to run afoul of the law by possessing an illegal gun, correct? Oh wait, felons can’t purchase or own guns….oops. In your world, the homeowner would be dead.

    And by the way, I was responding to Prival’s comments which you apparently didn’t read. She specifically said the following: “I do think it should be regulated so that not every crazy person or 16 year old boy can just buy one at their local Walmart without a back ground check or other similar precautions, and that conceal carry permits should be given with great discretion.”

    You sir, are changing the argument because you don’t know the facts and are simply putting forth a knee-jerk reaction. A common trait of the ill-informed liberal. You are, however, correct in that felons acquire guns through burglaries. Maybe we should make residential burglary a crime too. Oh, wait. I know, let’s ban home ownership!

  16. Bonnar,

    You got me. I am a common ill-informed liberal. We don’t have a huge issue with illegal firearms in this country. Let’s deregulate and it will all work itself out as long as we stick to the 2nd amendment.

    Let’s jump to more black and white reactions to an issue. A knee-jerk reaction. A common trait of the ill-informed liber-tarian? conservative?
    “we should then repeal the 2nd Amendment” “Maybe we should make residential burglary a crime too. Oh, wait. I know, let’s ban home ownership!”

    No, it’s not an issue answered with a Yes or No. We need to continually re-examine the current gun control laws and close all identified loopholes that led to the mess we are in.

    I did read Priya’s comment. You responded to her with the letter of the law as it pertains to purchasing firearms. I was pointing out that the current gun control laws is filled with gaping loopholes allowing folks to acquire firearms.

  17. I have no problem with homeowers shooting a burglar entering their home. I don’t think the homeowner should have to wait till the burglar gets in the house. If the burglar is trying to break down the door, I have no problem with the homeowner shooting through the door.

    In my opinion, burglars have no right to any duty of care from the homeowner. In fact, the burglar bears all the responsibilty for his own injury or death.

    If two burglars rob a house, and one gets shot by the homeowner, the other burglar should be charged with homicide since the surviving burglar contributed to the situation that led to death of his fellow burglar. The homeowner should earn the title “hero.”

  18. Paul, arguing with a liberal is like talking to a child…all emotion and a complete absence of logic. I know you think you are way smarter than the founding fathers and the Constitution is irrelevant (as our current President does), but it is still the law of the land. We don’t need more gun laws…the books are filled with them. What we need is enforcement of them, but the prisons are overcrowded and most gun crimes get a slap on the wrist. While the mainstream media loves to champion the term “loophole” when it comes to guns, there really isn’t a problem there. When there is freedom, some will abuse that. The answer is not to outlaw guns, which is what you really want, isn’t it? Regulation/registration and more stringent gun control is in direct opposition to what the founding fathers outlined.

    A simple fact is that the more the populace is armed, the less crime there is. This article is a perfect example of that.

  19. Bonnar,

    The founding fathers had no idea how things would end up in the future. It’s not a matter of being smarter than they were at that time, it’s a matter of being smart enough to realize that the situations have changed.

    I have some bad news for you. There will be more gun laws and the current ones will be continually re-examined and fortified. Books are never filled – now we have databases for laws. I have no interest in outlawing all guns – just some of the more egregious types. I am very interested in reducing gun related deaths. When is the last time you had to bring all your registered guns and ammo in for a check in and license renewal? The loopholes are not fictional. The loopholes happen after the purchase waiting periods are over. The loophole is related to the human nature of the gun owners.

  20. The homeowner did the right thing and followed the law. Just because they have not entered the home but are attempting to is still a felony and you still have just cause to defend yourself. By the time they make entry they could already have a weapon you didn’t see ready. I have my CPL and hope I never have to be in a situation where I need to use deadly force, and am thankful for each day I don’t have to. But it’s better to be prepared for those scenarios in the event they do happen. Rather than fall victim to them. I’d rather be judged by 12 of my peers than carried by 6.

    All gun control does is make it more difficult for law abiding citizens to legally acquire guns. What we have in place right now works. Criminals will always be able to get guns through backdoor channels and the black market. The background checks required by law currently more than aptly control legal possession. Criminals don’t care about that, for a criminal there’s always other ways of getting them.

    Look at DC they banned possession for decades and right after it took effect their murder rate from guns skyrocketed. Why? Because criminals don’t care about the law and don’t follow the normal processes for getting a gun and knew the people there were defenseless. Same thing happened recently in Australia. DC however a few years ago started allowing private law abiding citizens, who went through all the now standard background checks, the ability to own handguns at home (they still don’t allow concealed carry last I recall) and their murder rate started dropping again. In the 90’s when more and more states created laws allowing concealed carry their violent crime rates dropped.

    With over 300 million legally privately owned firearms in the US by 70+ million citizens, if the people that legally owned firearms were the ones causing the problems we’d have a lot more gun violence than we do. The laws against criminal possession and providing criminals with firearms already exist. The courts just need to enforce them and provide the harsh punishments that are already there for those who violate them. We don’t need more gun control we need the courts to do their job, and the ATF to work on finding the black market distributors instead of getting involved in scandals. Not making it more difficult for people who follow the law to get firearms.

  21. And Paul your last response was while I was typing mine so I did not see it until after I posted. New gun legislature based on CRIMINAL gun violence statistics is not the answer. The criminals do not give a damn about the laws. If they did they wouldn’t be criminals now would they? Less than 5% of all gun violence in America is caused by legally owned firearms.

    The majority of new legislature for gun control is based on criminal gun violence acts using illegally obtained guns. But it doesn’t effect them it effects the law abiding citizen who uses them for self defense against the criminals who would do them harm. The assault weapons ban would for example, ban my AR-15 which I use in practical shooting competitions and leagues. I have it as part of a collection not as a weapon to go rob a bank with or go on a killing spree, because I’m not a CRIMINAL.

    How many times do we need to beat the decaying dead horse that new legislation only harms lawful gun owners not the criminals it’s targeting?!

  22. I find the homeowners actions quite justified and I’m hopeful word will spread to all prospective burglars in the area to think twice before you commit your crime. Your life may be taken.

  23. Mr. Rossiter:

    If you are in fact a police officer, you should be trained to read and review facts before reaching conclusions. You clearly did not do that with regard to my comments. I clearing said:

    (1) I have no problem with private gun ownership;
    (2) I would require strict regulations for gun ownership. The examples I provided above were simply examples of situations why regulation is required. The reasons I provided were not inclusive any anyway or completely descriptive in any way, they were just examples.

    You say “Paul, arguing with a liberal is like talking to a child…all emotion and a complete absence of logic.” Where is the logic in that statement. It seems purely emotional to me?!

  24. I am glad the robber is not out there anymore. Edmonds has been struggling for a long time with break ins ….brazen and bold robbers that just go right into people’s homes…. I haven’t even been sleeping very well because of how much it is happening…..and when and if I ever see a cop in my neighborhood, he’s on a motorcycle pointing a radar at my car as I drive to my house. I am sad that somebody had to get shot, but I certainly wouldn’t expect any home owner to stand around pondering the merits of the right to bear arms when a crook barges into his home and threatens their life or their property. Gun law or no gun law, liberal or conservative, it simply makes no sense to be a sitting duck to the villains of the world.

  25. Priya,
    All of the regulations that you wrote you would impose are already in effect.
    I am 21, have a concealed pistol license, carry every day, and have bought guns at walmart.
    I did go through a background check at walmart, I did have to be 18 to buy my shotgun (I was 19 at the time), Walmart does no t sell handguns but if they did, you would have to be 21 to purchase them and go through a waiting period unless you have a valid concealed pistol license (that depends on the state but in WA you go through so many background checks getting a CPL they trust you that your not some wacko…..what a strange thought). Even with a CPL you still go through a National Instant Checks System (NICS) background check in case in the 5 years you have had your permit you committed a felony or domestic violence crime.
    The only gun shows that are in this area require you be a member to purchase firearms, members go through a NICS background check, and felons/domestic abusers are declined membership and cannot purchase firearms at gun shows but on by Washington Arms Collectors (the group that puts on most gun shows in Western WA).Most people selling firearms at guns shows are licensed dealers which are required to do background checks and waiting periods anyway for every firearm purchase (no waiting period for long guns tho) just like if you went into their store and said “yes I will take that Glock 22 please”.
    So, there are restrictions, there are background checks(yes even at gun shows), there are waiting periods, there are extensive background checks done on concealed pistol license applicants.
    Now, as others have eluded to, if I were a criminal with evil intent, I could just go to my drug dealer, pick up a stolen gun, commit my violent crime, and never go through a background check. That is already illegal just like dealing drugs is already illegal. Criminals don’t follow laws, you can impose all the laws and all the signs you want to, and a criminal will scoff, walk right past that no guns sign and proceed to rob the unarmed store owner or home owner. Signs and laws are feel good things that do nothing to deter criminals from committing crimes, most major mass killings take place in “gun free zones” because the criminals know they will have no armed resistance, and if they do, its either an on or off duty cop that happened to be there or an armed citizen breaking the law and carrying in a gun free zone. Here are some videos and links that might help open anyones eyes that are interested.

  26. BTW, in case any of your failed to read the follow up story, it appears the police are ruling the shooting a homicide; that is, not justified.

  27. Yes, it is a homicide, a person intentionally caused the death of another person. However it is still under investigation as to if it is justified or not, that is the way a homicide investigation works. It takes weeks, moths and some times years to clear a homicide investigation its not like what you see on NCIS, CSI, or any number of other TV shows, a homicide is not solved in an hour, even the most basic, cut and dry self defense case is thoroughly investigated by the police and the court after them to determine guilt or innocence of the shooter. Here is a great video that you should watch on civilian shooting and aftermath. Its a video by Massad Ayoob, a expert witness, law enforcement officer, and legal expert on self defense. Its an old video but there’s nothing out of date with the material.

  28. Priya, “homicide” means that the burgler was killed by another person. The police are just saying that it wasn’t “suicide” or a heart attack or an accident or whooping cough. EPD has determined that the burgler died as a result of being shot by the homeowner and not something else. From here, their investigation will continue to determine if it was “murder” in the first or second degree, negligent homicide, justifiable homicide or self-defense. In all likelyhood, this will be ruled a justifiable homicide and burglers will steer clear of this house forever.

  29. In what context Darrol? Subsection 2 of the law posted above does not specify that the intrusion/felonious act against the person, or another person, has to be in a place they own, just some place they’re in. So if you were at a friends house watching a movie and a burglar broke into the house it’s still covered under this law. Subsection 1 of the law would be applied if say you’re out walking in Seattle and someone decides to pull a knife or gun on you or someone and try and rob/rape/(insert felony here) them, and you acted in self-defense of yourself or another victim.

  30. Darrol,
    Well, entrapment comes to mind. One must be defending one’s life or property, and it is hard to envision that for one to use lethal force against another when not present at home would qualify.
    One could not make a determination as to what the purpose of the intruder was, or even if it was an intruder rather than say a family member trying to sneak back into the house. Or a child, who isn’t capable of forming criminal intent.
    The story of this homeowner/burglary incident is disturbing. We do not know the facts. The authorities will get them sorted.
    In the meanwhile, we do know that a homeowner shot and killed someone. That is a very difficult thing for that person to have to deal with and live with. That person also had their home invaded. That is a very difficult thing to deal with. Even the burglar, who died, has family who are entitled to their feelings about the man, absent idle “blog talk”.
    It is a terrible situation all around. I would hope that we can give the truly injured parties here (the homeowner, and the burglar’s family, as well as the police who have to deal with it, and the prosecutor who must decide what to do giving the facts) the space to take on the issues they have had set before them.

  31. Diane:

    As always, the voice of reason. Thank you for reminding us that everyone here had/has a family. Some quick research shows that the alleged a intruder has two small children.

  32. John, read my previous comment about what a homicide is.

    Thats not a loophole, its called a private sale. Just like if I wanted to sell you a car I could sell it to you in a parking lot, in my house, or anywhere else because it is my property. As someone who has bought guns just like that, most of the sellers require a valid concealed pistol license and will take down your name and information in a bill of sale in case you are a nut job. Also criminals will buy a gun from anyone. most do not go to online forums to buy weapons. They go to their drug dealer and black market deals, and like it or not no law will stop a criminal from getting a gun. If laws stopped criminals from getting guns LA, Washington DC, Chicago, and New Jersey would be the safest streets in the country because they have very restrictive gun laws. But they are the opposite, they are some of the worst states for ciminal gun violence because the only people armed there are the cops, criminals and the few people that go through the crazy system in those backward protectionist societies that can get a permit just to buy a gun not carry, just buy.
    This report is so filled with inaccuracies it would take a book to respond so I will respond with highlights.
    1. A .50 caliber gun can’t bring down a helicopter. Even in the hands of a skilled military sniper or hunter, hitting a target moving at hundreds of miles per hour in the sky is almost impossible and definitely some street thug that couldn’t empty urine out of a boot with directions on the heel couldn’t either. This is a common anti rights crowd half truth. A 50 caliber rifle is powerful no doubt about it, but they are also expensive even on the street. A 50. caliber rifle ranges anywhere from 1500 for a cheap rifle to 5000 or more for a top of the line gun and ammos almost impossible to find and even more expensive if you can find it. .50 caliber rifles are also not the gun of choice for the drug cartels that would be an AK 47 because they are cheap, they work, and for the cost of 1 .50 caliber gun you can get 20 AKs with cheaper more plentiful ammo.
    2. out of 34 people klilled every day,includes gang and drug related killings that make up 80%, then theres police and self defense shootings included to and gun accidents which are at record lows this year. when you factor it out if you arrested just 8,000 repeat violent criminal gang members that where wanted in connections with at least 2 other murders that would bring that number down.
    3. The “police grade pistol” they bought is a Glock. I own one, most people I know own at least one. They are completely legal for civilian purchase and theres a reason, they are drop dead reliable. Also all the guns they were showing where legal semi automatic firearms. Google ATF fast and furious if you want to see real gun running. And that was done BY OUR GOVERNMENT GIVING GUNS TO DRUG CARTELS THAT WHERE THEN USED IN MEXICO AND THE us TO MURDER AMERICAN AND MEXICAN CITIZENS!
    4.If the Canadian didn’t buy a gun, he could have easily bought a knife, or just grabbed a brick and bashed that girls head in. Criminals will find a way to commit crime regardless of the laws. Look at England, they banned guns, coincidentally they have low gun deaths, but if guns are banned and bans work, that should be 0. But aside from still having gun deaths, their violent crime rate is10 times higher than the US crime rate, they have gone to the point of banning buying more than 1 citrus fruit because they could use citrus fruit as a weapon by spraying juice in people eyes. Thats insane!
    5. the gun shown at minute 3:29 is not an assault weapon, its a semi automatic rifle, it also wasn’t converted to take AK 47 rounds, it is an SKS made 3 years before the AK47 and it was the first rifle to take the 7.62×39 round that is used in the SKS and the AK47. The definition or an asault rifle is that it is full auto. Calling that and assault rifle is like calling a Dodge charger a race car because they use them in Nascar. Its not the same thing. Its a buzz word plain and simple that the anti rights people are drilling down peoples throats and trying to make them afraid of these guns. It is a tool, just like a hammer, I can buy a hammer and build a school, or I can buy a hammer and crunch skulls. The hells angles biker gang loves hammers and does use them to crack skulls open. They are legal for anyone to own, theres no background check, its legal to carry without a permit open or concealed so why not ban hammers since people might use them to murder? If you watched the links I have posted before you would see criminals use everything from rolling pins to drain cleaner to torture and kill and no law will stop that.
    6. Hollow point bullets are made to stop a threat, or drop hunting game. They are made to penetrate less that traditional full metal jacket rounds that could go right through someone when a hollow point will usually stay in the body and stop people. I can almost guarantee that the homeowner in this case was using hollow points. they get the job done without going to far and possibly hurting people behind the suspect you are shooting. That simple.
    7. when one seller brings his son. Kid proof your guns and gun proof your kids. When I was 5 my dad showed me his unloaded carry gun and had me bring one of my toy guns and showed me the differences, he also said I can see the gun any time I wanted as long as he or my mom was there to make sure it was safe. He also taught me the 10 universal safety rules before he even brought out his real gun and had me show him on a toy gun first. Training your children how to handle guns is not a bad thing, if they do run into unsafe gun handling or find a gun laying on the ground, its good that they know what to do instead of being idiots and getting hurt because you teach your child nothing about guns except stay away from them.
    8.Michael Bloomberg and everyone he hired to do his “undercover sting”should be arrested because they did actually buy the guns out of state and committed a crime doing so. He broke his own laws and isn’t being charged for it. He also hates guns, but his armed guard detail is so important to him, he canceled the NYC 4th of July fireworks to pay his guards. He doesn’t like guns, he just likes having his own personal army and crappy fiscal responsibility.
    Thats all I am going to say, even though it is pretty much a book, I doubt you will even read it.

  33. Also for the 8 purchases they showed, they never tell you how many people refused to sell them a gun or required verification of a clean background. You can also legally buy guns at online gun stores, it gets sent to an FFL dealer in your area and a background check is done.

    1. Just a reminder to those commenting on this story that this incident occurred in unincorporated Edmonds (Esperance) so is under the jurisdiction of the Snohomish County Sheriff’s office. Any comments made here suggesting decisions are being made by Edmonds police are incorrect.

  34. My name is Alicia Padvorac, and I am 28 years old. I live only blocks from where the shooting occurred and drove past the ambulance on Tuesday night on my way home. It is unfortunate when any life is taken; however, I am glad that the life taken was not the home owners.

    I actually have several family members that are criminals (some currently serving time), and, though I would be sad if one of them were killed, I hope that the situation would play out the same way if they were in that situation for the sake of the homeowner. I think a lot of people like to view the world in an idealized way, I know I would prefer to, but you don’t know who the person is that is breaking into your house…I love my neighborhood.

    My only regret is that (of the ones I have known) criminals do not read the news more often… They might think twice about trying to break into a house in Esperance if they did.

  35. Alicia,

    Would you feel the same way if your neighbor’s child was playing with a loaded gun and the gun fired, taking away the child’s life?

  36. John, its called kid proofing your guns and gun proofing your kids. When i was 5 my dad brought out his guns, and brought out my toy guns and showed me the difference. I could see them anytime i wanted as long as i had a parent with me to clear the gun. Its called training. When you make guns taboo and dangerous things your kid should never play with they are going to want to. Might as well train them how to properly handle them and supervise them. I was taking care of my 4 year old niece and had 6 loaded guns in the house. 4 locked in a safe, and 2 on my hip or locked in a gunsafe for quick access at night. She knew i had guns and i showed them to her. She never tried playing with them because she knows what they can do. Responsible gun ownership with children around is more than just putting the gun on top of the closet or hidden where you think they cant find it. Children are spounges that see everything and if you think they don’t know where daddy hides his gun your fooling yourself. Invest in a safe and train your kids.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Real first and last names — as well as city of residence — are required for all commenters.
This is so we can verify your identity before approving your comment.

By commenting here you agree to abide by our Code of Conduct. Please read our code at the bottom of this page before commenting.