Rob Reiner and His Wife Michele Were Killed by Their Son: Sources (Exclusive)

People ^ | December 14, 2025 10:45PM EST | Greg Hanlon

[conservative98]

Rob Reiner and his wife, Michele Singer Reiner, were killed by their son, Nick, who is currently missing, multiple sources confirm to PEOPLE.

[Forward the Light Brigade]

Rest in Peace. They must stand before a greater judge now. The killer must face that same judge soon. I would wish this fate on no one.

[heartwood]

You can’t save someone who won’t be saved.

I knew a woman who, with her husband, was murderedby their schizophrenic son. They had money, resources, they never gave up on him.

What might have helped would be laws mandating hospitalization and treatment.

[nathanbedford]

If you want to know why the war on drugs is lost, start thinking about it the way Adam Smith and Warren Buffett would think about it.

Adam Smith would talk about the law of supply and demand and he tells us that when the demand goes up so does the price; when supply goes down, the price goes up. When the demand is inelastic, that is, when it is the product of an addiction, the price curve is even more radical in its upward thrust when supply is reduced. Therefore, the more the government succeeds in interdicting the supply of addictive drugs, the more it increases the price and thereby increases the incentive to increase supply. The more the government succeeds, the more it must fail.

That is why drug smugglers and dealers are so wonderfully inventive in evading the law and will ever continue to be so unless you want to live in a police state like North Korea.

Without putting words in Warren Buffett's mouth, his criteria for investing in an enterprise are well-known. He wants a company with a unique product and a huge market potential. What better than an addictive drug? He wants company with high barriers to entry against competition. What better barrier than the law and what better barriers than drug enforcement agencies raiding your competition? And if competition becomes too serious, this business model says you simply eliminate it by murdering them.

Buffett would be very intrigued by the idea that costs are extremely low, markup extremely high, and the price is ever supported by the government! By making drugs illegal, the government in effect has enacted price supports. By selling into an inelastic demand of addicts, the market as well as price are virtually guaranteed.

Because the price is high, addicts are incentivized to push the drugs onto others in order to addict them, to create a mini market which funds their own addiction. What a wonderful business model! On the macro level it is a multilevel marketing scheme on steroids, or should I say, powered by addiction, and supported by the government.

Meanwhile, this wonderful marketing scheme generates so much money that corruption is inevitable. Worse, our enemies in the Muslim world and elsewhere have exploited this market to our disadvantage and national security peril. Meanwhile, our only politically correct response is a full throated roar: "do more of the same."

[jonrick46]

Your comment is short, to the point and spot on.

I must add, when you are dealing with a boat going 67 mph; propelled by three or four high powered motors, you don’t pussyfoot around with them. Not when your boat is so slow, it might as well be a sitting duck for a well armed Coke Boat. The best thing is to take that boat out. Blowing up those expensive Coke Boats causes a huge financial loss to the Cartels. When the boat operators are killed, it causes a huge morale cost. When the risk is high for losing ones life, the cost of attracting boat operators is huge. The cost of running each Coke shipment that ends with a boom will cause the Drug Cartels to go bust.

Trump’s war on Fentanyl is having an effect now. It’s drying up the supply to such an extent that less Fentanyl is being put in the pills or mixed with things like cocaine. The overdose deaths are going down!

[fortes fortuna juvat]

Yes I said trivial.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Okay, but to clarify, my comment was not in reference to Reiner per se but to the phrase “for something as relatively trivial as differences of political opinions.” Differences of political opinions have caused deaths of countless millions of people and do so every day.

[jonrick46]

"Therefore, the more the government succeeds in interdicting the supply of addictive drugs, the more it increases the price and thereby increases the incentive to increase supply."

Trump's war on drugs is so effective, maintaining supply by the Drug Cartels is so expensive they are going bankrupt from their losses. The tactics by the war on drugs put the Cartel members more vulnerable for being caught and the loss of revenue of a greater impact when so much supply is being confiscated. In other words, they are fighting a losing battle.

[DCBryan1]

No comment, however:

"I have never wished a man dead, but I have read some obituaries with great pleasure."-Mark Twain

[ConservativeMind]

By that logic the President of the United States may arbitrarily shoot down passenger jets providing they are not in American airspace.

No, he cannot do this unless it was comprised of unlawful combatants. The logic is sound.

We declared war on drugs generations ago and have lost it every year since.

Nathan, what currently illegal drugs do you believe would be healthy for the US and other countries to make legal, if fighting such a “war” is some sort of a problem?

[Mean Daddy]

Yes. One of Al-Anon recommendations is to break all ties with the addicted because until they hit bottom, they’ll always have you to fall back on as a safety net.

My son’s SIL is going through this now. My son and his wife won’t get pulled into her addition but the dad most recently drove 16 hours to get her out of a jam. She’s been in rehab 3-4 times but until SHE wants it, no one can fix her and I’m sure Rob and his wife have probably threw money at his problem but in the end, its up to the addict. Tough love.

[TBP]

As much as I detest Reiner’s politics, this is simply unacceptable. Prayers for everyone.

And Reiner did condemn Charlie Kirk’s murder.

Unlike the left, I do not rejoice in the murder of my political opponents. I just want to beat them politically.

[Vaduz]

The family that does weed together doesn’t always turn out well?.

[healy61]

Carroll O’Connor’s son died of a drug overdose. O’Connor was outspoken about the drug dealer and pushed for the dealer’s prosecution. I would guess O’Connor would have applauded the drug boats being blown to hell.

[dfwgator]

I would guess O’Connor would have applauded the drug boats being blown to hell.

---

Only if a Democrat was doing it.

[nathanbedford]

Nathan, what currently illegal drugs do you believe would be healthy for the US and other countries to make legal, if fighting such a “war” is some sort of a problem?

I I did not declare the war on drugs, more than one president has declared war on drugs, so I did not place the word in quotations as you did. This phony war has had lethal, moral and political consequences.

We are are pursuing the war on drugs to its tragic conclusion even to the threshold of destroying the Bill of Rights, thoroughly corrupting the administration of justice, over populating our prisons, destroying huge portions of succeeding generations, mortally threatening respect for the rule of law, breaking families apart, engorging government, depleting the treasury, and actually making addiction to drugs more widespread.

The idea that taking the profit motive out of drug distribution would not put the cartels out of business is absurd. However, to raise the question as you do whether one is willing to accept open distribution, or very open controlled distribution, of extremely dangerous drugs is legitimate because half measures will not prevail over the drug cartels because they will not eliminate the profit motive.

That means that those of us who advocate the legalization of drugs must be courageous enough to advocate the legalization of the most deadly drugs and the most addictive drugs. It does no good to stand for the legalization of pot only. The profit motive must be withdrawn from the trade and that means the profit motive for all drugs. That implies easy access at reasonable prices (below prices which are profitable for cartels to operate) for adults of extremely dangerous and extremely addictive drugs. There is no way around that.

The situation we have today is similar: we have easy access at reasonable prices (but prices nevertheless inflated because the drug is illegal so the trade is profitable for cartels) by adults or children to extremely dangerous and extremely addictive drugs.

I want the choice. I am a conservative I want the choice vested in me as an individual and not taken away from me and invested in a government. I want the power to choose to be free of drugs and at the same time to be free of the threat of being mugged so that some addict can pay for his habit by robbing me. I want to be free of the threat of home invasion. I want to be able to enjoy free access to the public square. Therefore, I am willing to tolerate others making the wrong choice and addicting themselves because a dangerous, addictive substance is relatively easy and legal to obtain. My belief is that fewer people will make that choice because there is no incentive for addicts to push drugs to fund their own habits. Presumably, addicts will have access to cheap drugs and will have no need to resort to crime or violence to satisfy their habituation. The government chronically makes the wrong choices for us, it deprives us of freedom of choice, it exposes us to violence, it creates a black market and actually supports prices within that market.

I want to end the moral hazard of drug abuse. If an adult citizen of the United States makes a choice to use hazardous drugs let's him alone bear the consequences as much as possible-to the degree that he alone bears the consequences for abusing alcohol. Let not society, by rendering the choice illegal, shift the costs and unanticipated consequences onto those of us who choose not abuse drugs. Let the government stop making me collateral damage in its war on drugs.

The degree to which drugs by their very nature cause collateral damage to family members and other members of society should be reduced because the incidence of drug use falls when there is no financial incentive to push drugs. If not, if the rate of consumption stays the same, we have at least gotten our Bill of Rights back.

[nathanbedford]

Please see my #174.

[T.B. Yoits]

He was probably a very young kid when someone offered him a “harmless” marijuana cigarette. It got him started.

Possibly. But as more addicts tell their story, they were self-medicating, usually related to childhood trauma, and they were going to find their way into drugs and alcohol regardless of who was around them.

[Repealthe17thAmendment]

Therefore, the more the government succeeds in interdicting the supply of addictive drugs, the more it increases the price and thereby increases the incentive to increase supply.

Yes, the war on drugs cannot be fought from a supply-side only approach. But the problem is that one of the most effective demand-side approaches to treating addiction is a spiritual program that cannot be promoted by a government that is prohibited from such things.

I'm not sure what the Reiner family did to try to get their son off drugs, it is an incredibly hard process, and relapse is more common than success. And while many people will scoff or protest appealing to God for help, it can be effective in many cases.

[Persevero]

I think it will reduce the amount of fentanyl in the US by exactly the amount that was on the boat.

I further think that way fewer men will be willing to smuggle it into the US as this continues just like there is a lot less recreational drugs to be had in Singapore.

A nation legitimately controls its imports. Whether it be crappy wheat or weak steel or toxic poisons. If we don’t want it here we stop it coming in.

[nathanbedford]

appealing to God for help, it can be effective in many cases.

Indeed, that appeals to a "higher power" is the very core of twelve-step programs for drugs and alcohol such as Alcoholics Anonymous or Narcotics Anonymous. AA remains the most effective (and evidently free) program for treatment of alcoholism.

One can but wonder whether this tragic self-inflicted attack on the Reiner family by itself might have been avoided if the Reiner family God of the Old Testament had been earnestly beseeched. Sadly, our culture is moving in the other direction.

To return with almost a callous abruptness to the theme of this sub-discussion on this thread, one wonders whether a culture that provided Reiner's son with cheap and ready access to his drugs of choice might have diverted him from murder. On the other hand, his alleged mental illness when compounded by drug abuse might well have put him beyond therapy.

[nathanbedford]

Sadly, generations of failed drug interdiction history prove the contrary. A lesson we might have learned a century ago from prohibition.