Posted on 01/01/2009 7:20:44 AM PST by NYer
NEDERLAND, Colo. – A gunman who broke into a staff meeting at a Colorado ski resort ranting about religion asked the manager what he believed and shot him twice when the victim responded he was Catholic, according to reports published today about the tragedy.
The gunman later was shot and killed by a sheriff's deputy in a firefight alongside a snowy mountain road, authorities confirmed.
The Boulder County coroner identified the gunman as Derik A. Bonestroo, 24, who had been living in Nederland. According to a report in the Boulder Daily Camera, witnesses said Bonestroo burst into the staff meeting yesterday at the Eldora Mountain Resort near here.
Sheriff Joe Pelle said Bonestroo was yelling something about religion to employees when resort General Manager Brian Mahon heard the commotion and came into the room. The Camera said witnesses reported the shooter asked Mahon which religion he believed, and when Mahon said he was Catholic, the shooter fired twice and killed him.
Sheriff's Commander Phil West said, "There are various interpretations about what was said. Witnesses told us (Bonestroo) had been through some emotional crisis."
Mahon, 49, leaves behind a wife and two children. He had worked at Eldora since 1991.
According to a statement from Boulder County Undersheriff Tom Shomaker, deputy John Seifert was on duty in Nederland when the call came in about the shooting. Told the shooter had fled and given a description of the vehicle, Seifer spotted a suspect vehicle on the Peak-to-Peak Highway only a few miles downhill from the ski area. After a short pursuit, the suspect vehicle stopped, the sheriff said.
"The male driver immediately opened fire on the deputy after stopping his vehicle," the sheriff's department statement said.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
I neither know your medical condition nor am qualified to render a diagnosis. A good psychiatrist should be able to and I would demand a second opinion.
If I were to judge I would say that anyone who has in the past engaged in self mutilation, cruelty to animals, violence against others attributed to a psychotic event or attempted suicide should probably not have the right to purchase firearms. Just "being depressed" wouldn't qualify nor would OCD or any number of other disorders. Anyone whose rights are so restricted should have the right to appeal.
> I neither know your medical condition nor am qualified to render a diagnosis.
Depression with Bipolar Disorder, both adequately treated with medication. You cited Bipolar Disorder as one of the mental illnesses that ought to disqualify people from the right to own firearms.
I had asked “what grounds” and I guess I’m still waiting for an answer on that one.
> Just “being depressed” wouldn’t qualify nor would OCD or any number of other disorders.
I’d prefer to see people convicted of violent crime have their rights to own firearms restricted. Similarly those found Not Guilty by reason of insanity. At least there would be demonstrable grounds for doing so (past performance).
> Anyone whose rights are so restricted should have the right to appeal.
That’s mighty generous of you, I must say.
While I understand what you’re trying to say here, most mentally ill people are quite harmless, and some of them you might even think of as “normal”.
Violently mentally ill people are the exception, not the norm.
There are violent mentally ill and there are nonviolent mentally ill. Whichenver you choose you will find that they tend to pick up on the subtext of the culture. Quickly.
There are more violent ones than you think, if you count every out of control psychotic break that occurs.
> ...and some of them you might even think of as “normal”.
I like to think that I am “normal”, for example. Most people do consider me “normal”, and they have difficulty believing that I have Depression and Bipolar Disorder.
I make it a point about telling people about this because so many people have the wrong idea about what mental illness is and what it is like.
Television and the news media are, as usual, unhelpful.
> There are more violent ones than you think, if you count every out of control psychotic break that occurs.
There are quite a few. However, I encounter many more violent drug abusers than violent mentally ill people.
There are quite a few. However, I encounter many more violent drug abusers than violent mentally ill people.
In the business DA’s are considered to be MI.
> In the business DA’s are considered to be MI.
Interesting. I wonder if that is also the case here.
Did you become a dumb-ass with the arrival of the new year or is it a carry-over from 2008
................................
NO We are not related.
Not really. Just those that attack Catholics, Mormons and others.
I guess you should tell a Catholic that.
You need not post the obvious.
Then why did you ask?
I can only hope I have the courage not to deny my faith in the same situation.
This is much too general. How long is the "past"? Are you saying an emotionally stable 83-yr-old who attempted suicide at 13 years old should not have the right to own a self-defense weapon?
Should an 82-yr-old who lives in a neighborhood that has "turned" not be allowed a means of self-defense because she once carved her boyfriend's name into her arm 60 years earlier?
Are you saying that some American citizens have less right to defend themselves than others?
Are some people less valuable? Should these "unworthy" people be sitting ducks for rapists, murderers, arsonists or muggers?
I think this comment is for TASMANIANRED
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.