1 dead, 2 injured in shooting at Costco in California

[groundloop]

Source: CBS News

One person was killed and two others were injured when a gunman opened fire inside a Costco store in Southern California, authorities said. The suspected gunman was taken into custody and hospitalized. Police have not identified him.

Witnesses said the gunfire started when two men got into an argument at the store in Corona, which is located about 50 miles east of Los Angeles. The gunfire sent shoppers racing for the exits and ducking for cover.

The Corona Police Department said officers arrived at the scene around 7:45 p.m. local time on Friday. They said an off-duty officer from another agency was injured in the shooting.

"If I saw any kids or women, everyone was grabbing them and making sure they were OK first before anything else," one worker said. "Employees were looking after each other. Making sure we had a silent headcount as we were running out, as best as we can."

Read more: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/corona-costco-shooting-deadly-suspected-gunman-injured-not-identified-2019-06-15/

---

Yawn..... just another day in America. We'll all forget about this before we go to bed tonight.

WHEN THE HELL IS SOMETHING GOING TO BE DONE ???????????

[Botany]

1. And the beat goes on and the beat goes on

Locations of mass shootings in America in 2015




It is the guns people.

[Roy Rolling]

3. Important Graphic

All of those shootings, ZERO open-carry heroes saving the day.

Where's all the heroes?

[X_Digger]

49. That's a silly question. If it was stopped, it wouldn't appear on that graphic.

If it was stopped *after* the person shot a bunch of people, then the response would be, "well it didn't stop them, now did it?"

[Lonestarblue]

6. It's guns and deliberate stoking of anger and hatred.

Why has the US become such an angry country, where road rage results in killings, where a laid-off worker gets even by shooting his co-workers, where a teenager can enter a school and kill more than a dozen classmates? Yes, these people are unbalanced to start with, but the constant blame placed on others because your life is not perfect is exacerbated by the media and the internet. Without guns, they would be far less dangerous.

[Botany]

8. I have hunted and owned a FEW guns for years but in the end the problem is with all the guns,

the toxic thinking that I have to own a gun to protect "my freedoms," and the meme that
more guns are solution to the gun problem*. Japan got rid of almost all guns in private
possession after WW II and they have something like < 10 to 15 gun murders per year.

* kind of like bringing in more rats and fleas would have helped with the bubonic plague.

[PufPuf23]

20. A picture is worth many words at times. Thank you. nt

[democratisphere]

2. Soon we will be required to pass through a metal detector and

and have a pat down to go shopping.

[dalton99a]

4. Emergency doors wouldn't open, shoppers said

https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/15/us/corona-costco-shooting/index.html

'Emergency' doors wouldn't open, shoppers said

Some people were also injured trying to flee the store, Edwards said.

Naveed Navi and Rochelle Flores were shopping for items for a barbecue when gunshots rang out, they told CNN affiliate KTLA.

They heard four shots and tried to escape through emergency doors, but they wouldn't open, the pair told the station.

"It's not very fun when you're scared and you're running for your life and you're trying to open a door that says 'emergency' and they don't open," Flores told the station. "Everybody was freaking out. People were falling over each other."

She described chaos and confusion as shoppers tried to flee through the front entrance. CNN could not immediately reach Costco officials.

[KY_EnviroGuy]

25. The Fire Marshal will be visiting this store....

with citation pad in hand........

[Aristus]

5. Yeah, those guns sure are making us all more polite to one another.

Just as the NRA said they would...

[Archae]

7. What exactly CAN be done?

have the cops or some federal agency like the ATF going door-to-door ransacking houses looking for the "wrong" guns?

The penalties for felons and crazies buying and getting guns, also selling to them should be increased.

In Milwaukee we had a felon who walked up to car his ex-girlfriend was in, with an AK-47, and he started shooting.
Killed the guy his ex was with.
How he got the gun in the first place is unknown.

But he fled, and was finally caught in California.

[Auggie]

9. I like the idea of bullet control

Seriously. Of course they'll be a blackmarket. But it will make obtaining bullets a lot harder.

[marybourg]

21. Unfortunately, making bullets at home is very easy,

and millions of people have the equipment to do so in quantity.

[Dave Starsky]

31. And you have just demonstrated the core stupidity of our problem.

This ridiculous "all-or-nothing" mentality that we can't do anything unless it solves the problem completely.

In this case, we're supposed to accept that some random unbalanced kid, pissed off over being rejected by a girl, is going to earnestly take up bullet-crafting in his mom's basement so he can shoot up his school.

When, right now, that kid can walk right into Cabela's and get everything he needs to do that in 15 minutes.

[marybourg]

36. Although I hate ad hominum attacks on this board,

I can’t resist the lure of symmetry by pointing out that YOU have just demonstrated the core stupidity, so often seen on DU, of confusing facts, and those who point out facts with propaganda and advocy for the propaganda.

[groundloop]

11. So are you proposing that we do NOTHING?

Sorry if I misunderstood your post, but that what it sounds like.

Sure, anything we do is going to take time to have an effect because there are so many guns and so much ammo out in the wild right now. But let's not give in to the NRA.

[Archae]

12. As I said...

Increasing the penalties for felons and crazies buying and owning guns is a start.

The "gun show loophole" needs to be closed.

[Initech]

10. Damn this one hits way too close to home.

[ucralum]

16. Definitely...

I was there on Monday.

[Opel_Justwax]

13. Unless the second amendment is repealed or replaced guns will stay with us

WHEN THE HELL IS SOMETHING GOING TO BE DONE ???????????

[Jedi Guy]

22. Don't hold your breath waiting for the Second Amendment to be repealed.

It's simply not going to happen. Even if there was enough support in both houses of Congress, it then has to be ratified by 3/4 of the states. Looking at the electoral map from 2016, Hillary won 20 states plus DC. Some states are purple, or red trending towards purple, but 37 (or 38, unsure if it rounds up or down if the result isn't an even number) states voting to repeal the Second Amendment? As things stand currently, not a chance.

Part of the problem is that so many gun owners/advocates/enthusiasts set their feet against any gun control legislation because they allege that the left's goal is an incremental march to a total ban. While that's not part of the Democratic platform, all that matters is that they believe it is. As long as they believe that, they'll continue to fight tooth and nail against gun control legislation.

Another part of the problem is the "I haven't done anything wrong, so why am I being punished?" mentality among those same people. No one enjoys suffering punishment because someone else did something wrong.

I honestly don't know what the solution to the problem is, but I do know it's not going to be a repeal of the Second Amendment. We may reach a point where we can get enough seats in Congress to get a bill to the (Democratic) President's desk, though. That's probably our best hope, but even then, any such legislation will almost surely be challenged and go before the conservative-majority SCOTUS.

[X_Digger]

50. Repealing the second amendment wouldn't make the right go away.

The Bill of Rights grants no rights, therefore repealing them would remove no rights.

Our rights exist independent of the laws protecting them. e.g. the right to travel. You won't find it in the Bill of Rights, but it's a right nonetheless.

If you did repeal it, the right would go from being explicitly protected to being implicitly protected via the ninth.

Then, there's also explicit protection via various states' constitutions. Repealing the federal amendment would do nothing about the state protections.

[OrwellwasRight]

53. How about not hiring bullies as cops?

That's a start, right?

[Stonepounder]

14. I'm writing to my Senator, Mitch McConnell

I am demanding that something be done. We need to immediately pass legislation that anyone carrying a firearm, other than when hunting, be required to wear a placard identifying them as either "Good Guy With Gun" or "Bad Guy With Gun".

That way when the shooting starts everyone will know who to shoot at.

[KY_EnviroGuy]

27. Brilliant solution, Stonepounder.

Our basic problem is this: Some guys that look like good guys are actually bad guys, and some bad looking guys are actually good guys. And, as for the middle of the road-looking guys, you just never know which ones to shoot at - especially ones holding babies.
Your solution will solve that dilemma.... ...Just be sure to make all placards glow in the dark to cover shoot-outs in bars!

Being an honorable Kentucky Colonel, Mitch will get right on it......

[MattInMN]

15. If Alabama can ban all abortions in the face of Rv.W...

...Why can't California pass a law banning all gun posession? Flat out ban them, allow 6 months for residents to dispose of them, and begin confiscation after that. Failure to sell or turn in any gun results in fines/prison. Let the lawsuits begin.

[Judi Lynn]

17. It seems anyone daring to deny right-wing interests invites violence, everywhere.

Moderate people don't threaten to destroy everyone who tries to block their own interests. It's government by the corrupt, in the interests of coercive, prone to total violence if not fully indulged, racists. No one else matters, in the end, apparently.

It would stand to reason California's peaceful citizens should have the right to the same legal tactics as Alabama sexists/supremacists. Giving citizens a generous deadline for gun possession seems easy to accommodate. People driven by hatred don't really intend to do anything which doesn't further their own interests.

Your post makes real sense, if the vicious ones could be compelled to follow the law.

Welcome to D.U.

[Jedi Guy]

23. Except that any such law is laughable because it's clearly unconstitutional.

The Constitution doesn't explicitly spell out a right to abortion, it was interpreted that way in Roe v. Wade. The Constitution does spell out a right for private ownership of firearms, as interpreted in District of Columbia v. Heller.

Also, just because someone is a gun owner does not make them "vicious." People aren't "vicious" just because they don't think like you do. I'd oppose a law totally banning gun ownership in California (or any other state) because it's a direct attack on a right guaranteed by the Constitution. Does that make me "vicious"?

[KY_EnviroGuy]

28. The Constitution's framers just forgot to make it illegal to be mentally ill.

..............

[AncientGeezer]

18. "Why can't California pass a law banning all gun posession? "

They can try....would be found Unconstitutional...and confiscation...you do not want to open that door.....that would be a 9-0 decision against your plan

Abortion under Roe was found legal....but it's not part of the Bill of Rights.

Medical issues are widely left to the States....BoR issues...not so much.

[Jedi Guy]

24. It blows my mind that someone would propose a state passing a law banning a Constitutional right.

And the suggestions of confiscation are equally ludicrous. Do they plan on having BATF agents going door-to-door, tearing homes apart hunting for guns? If the anti-gun control crowd gets riled up over legislation banning high-capacity magazines, do you think they'd meekly stand aside and let the government just take their guns? If so, they're not in touch with reality.

[NickB79]

35. Alabama's ban will be found unconstitutional

As it should, since it violates settled law. In the end, Alabama will simply waste millions in legal fees and be worse off for it.

And that's exactly what would happen to California in a total gun ban scenario.

[YOHABLO]

19. So your trip to go grocery shopping may be your last.

[Hoyt]

26. Wonder which one was "a good guy with a gun."

[NickB79]

34. The shooter was a police officer, apparently

[R B Garr]

29. An off-duty LAPD was the shooter.

There was an altercation and it escalated. The injured were the deceased’s relatives.

I wonder what the fight was about.

I can’t link from my phone, but I think it was Yahoo where I saw this.

[Jedi Guy]

30. CNN has a headline on their website about it now.

Apparently the deputy was shopping with his family and holding his child when the guy attacked him after an argument escalated.

I'd like to see video before passing judgment. If the guy just like, shoved the deputy on the shoulder, I'd say shooting him dead is over the top. If it was a violent assault, though, then I can understand the deputy reacting that way to protect his family.

[JonLP24]

32. What about the bystanders?

It is incredibly dangerous shooting inside a store like that.

[Jedi Guy]

37. No argument here, it was dangerous to do that.

However, if the alternative is to stand there while some rando beats on you and/or your child, I find it difficult to fault the guy for defending himself and his family. It was apparently a verbal altercation/argument, right up until the rando decided to get handsy. At that point, it became a matter of self-defense and defense of others. The lesson here should be, "Keep your hands to yourself."

[JonLP24]

38. Defense of others? What about the two people he shot that weren't involved?

It's ok to randomly shoot people that aren't involved as long as you're "defending" yourself?

[Jedi Guy]

39. They were family members of the one who was shot and killed, from what I read.

The idea that they weren't involved is only a guess on your part. And I never said it was okay to randomly shoot people as long as you're defending yourself, that's a straw man argument you created. Kindly do not put words in my mouth.

Like I said above, I want to see video, or at least a text description of the video, before I pass judgment. I'm allowing for the possibility that this was legitimate self-defense, not issuing a blanket exoneration of the off-duty deputy regardless of the facts.

[JonLP24]

40. I read lots of stories on this. Corona Police never said those two assaulted the officer

Only one person allegedly did. I probably meant to phrase that as a question not putting words in your mouth but that is exactly what he did. He shot his parents too.

[Jedi Guy]

41. Look, I don't know how to say it any more plainly than this, so I'll use bold.

I am withholding judgment until I see video of the shooting or read text that describes it.

I said above that if it was a shove to the shoulder, the cop's reaction is way over the top and he needs to face some consequences for that. On the other hand, if the guy violently assaulted him and the parents appeared to be about to get involved, I find it difficult to fault the cop in those circumstances, particularly since he was holding a young child and his family was nearby.

I'm offering possible scenarios which are nothing more than guesses, and giving my view on each of those scenarios. You seem determined for some reason to place fault on the cop before any details are known.

The fact remains that had Mr. French kept his hands to himself, everyone involved would have made it home safely on Friday evening. In a country where people can carry guns, you're an idiot if you're ready to go hands-on with people because of a verbal argument.

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

[JonLP24]

42. I place fault because two people are in the hospital that didn't need to be

The deceased has Schizophrenia.

“He was schizophrenic and attacked an off duty police officer, not knowing what he was doing. The officer however had the ‘dignity’ to pull out his gun and shoot him and his parents 8 time (sic); killed Kenneth and put his parents in the ICU. I must say that his first intstinct (sic) being to shoot the man, who was MENTALLY ILL is complete bullsh*t! he had no weapon on him. this is bull sh*t. there needs to be more regulations on guns. and that cop, someone who is in law enforcement should know better. really shows the society we live in and how people abuse their power. im disgusted. please keep the French family in your prayers, and fight for change! i do not give a f*ck if having a gun is your ‘constitutional right’ they should not be able to get into the hands of the irresponsible so easily. if you want a gun but are not responsible enough to handle one or do not pass a back ground check that is TOO DAMN BAD. there has to be a change in people abusing their power and in gun control.”

Rick Shureih wrote on Facebook: “My cousin is the person killed. He was mentally disabled! His innocent parents were also shot and are in ICU. Don’t pass judgment if you don’t know the story! Off duty cops are human too and need to show restraint like the rest of us!”

https://heavy.com/news/2019/06/kenneth-french/

[Jedi Guy]

43. Irrelevant. He still assaulted someone over a verbal dispute.

The victim of the assault has a right to defend himself and others, such as his children. If someone has schizophrenia, it doesn't make their blows any less powerful. It's also not as if people with mental illness walk around wearing t-shirts with their disorder(s) printed on them. The cop had no way of knowing he was a schizophrenic.

It remains to be seen if the shooting of Mr. French's parents was in any way justified, as that will be evident from the video footage, if there is any. I suspect there is, since it happened inside the store.

If they were assisting their son in the assault (which I acknowledge is unlikely), then I find it difficult to have much sympathy for them. If, on the other hand, they were attempting to get between Mr. French and the cop, or to pull Mr. French off of the cop, and he shot them anyway, then he needs to face some consequences for that.

Once again, it seems like you think I'm tossing out a blanket exoneration for the cop, which is clearly not the case. I'm simply not tossing out blanket condemnation, which is what you seem to be doing.

[JonLP24]

44. I point out the schizophrenia part

because you said if he simply didn't do this none of this would happen well it may not be that easy especially if there is a misunderstanding caused by the schizophrenia.

I read and understand your posts and I am giving a blanket condemnation for not de-escalating, showing restraint, and shooting two people who Corona police never said assaulted him.

[Jedi Guy]

45. And the schizophrenia part is irrelevant.

The target of the assault has no way of knowing that he is schizophrenic. The target of the assault knows that this person is attacking him while he is holding a young child, whom he must protect.

Regarding blanket exoneration/condemnation, we'll just have to agree to disagree. I allow for the possibility that the shooting was justified (or at least understandable) because there are details of the situation that I do not know, and I'm not going to condemn someone without knowing those details. If you choose to do so, have at it.

[JonLP24]

46. This is why I point out the schizophrenia part

The fact remains that had Mr. French kept his hands to himself, everyone involved would have made it home safely on Friday evening. In a country where people can carry guns, you're an idiot if you're ready to go hands-on with people because of a verbal argument.

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

He has schizophrenia. He has a disability.

I don't think he should have took out a gun to shoot the guy because he was afraid of an ass beating but it is shooting the two other people I have a major problem with it. If he was assaulted by the guy he is probably justified in this pro gun culture but not shooting the parents.

[Jedi Guy]

47. The schizophrenia part is a reason. It is not an excuse or a justification.

And I suspect he feared less for himself than for the child he was holding, regarding the ass beating.

Again, it's hard to say because we know merely the basic facts. Did Mr. French shove the cop on the shoulder? Did he leap on him and violently attack him? We don't know which was the case regarding the initial assault.

Were Mr. French's parents rushing towards the two, intent on breaking it up? Possible, yes. Could the officer have perceived them as additional threats when he was already fighting with someone? Possibly, yes. People can't read minds. We don't know if that was the case.

Were Mr. French's parents right there when the assault took place, and clearly attempting to pull him away from the cop? Possibly, yes. We don't know if that was the case.

In one of those scenarios, I can understand the officer perceiving Mr. French's parents as additional assailants and reacting accordingly. In the other, where they were clearly attempting to stop the assault, I can't see any justification for shooting people actively attempting to stop the assailant.

Both of those scenarios are equally possible, because in neither of them did Mr. French's parents assault the officer, which squares with what the Corona Police have said. Until we know further details, though, we have no way of knowing exactly how the the incident unfolded.

Which, for the millionth time, is why I'm withholding judgment until I know more.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

54. Highly relevant. Police are supposedly trained to recognize mental illness. Some ignore the training

[Jedi Guy]

55. They're not psychiatrists.

Dealing with a person in a mental health crisis while responding to a call and bumping into someone at Costco are not the same thing. In the former officers generally have some idea of what's going on since they've been dispatched to the call and received information from the dispatcher. That isn't the case in the latter.

I'm very curious to see video or read a transcript of video. There are too many possible ways this encounter might have played out, and the exact details are going to determine whether or not the officer was in any way justified.

The nature and intensity of the assault is also a factor. If Mr. French tackled the cop to the ground and was pummeling him, I can understand his reaction. If it was a single punch, or a shove to the chest or shoulder, then using deadly force is wildly out of proportion to the actual threat.

My personal prediction is that when Mr. French attacked the officer, his parents tried to stop the assault and the officer shot them anyway even though they were trying to pull their son away. If that's the case, he needs to spend a long time behind bars.

As I've said before, I'm not ready to issue a blanket condemnation (or exoneration) until I know more.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

57. "Bumping into someone at Costco" is not an attack that needs deadly force. Your example.

"bumping into someone at Costco"

[Jedi Guy]

58. That's not what I meant so I'll clarify.

A random encounter at Costco is not the same thing. I didn't mean "bumping into" as a description of the assault. Given the rest of the post I'd have thought that would be clear, but evidently not...

[LanternWaste]

62. So you fail to see both the irony of, and the the judgement you've already passed in this thread?

Stupid games, indeed.

[Jedi Guy]

63. I wondered when I'd be seeing you, old friend. No shrugging emoji?

And give me a break. I've spelled out numerous times in this thread that I'm not giving a blanket condemnation or exoneration of the officer until I know more about what happened. That's the absolute opposite of passing judgment.

And nothing I've said regarding Mr. French and his attack on the officer is incorrect. A mental disability is a reason one might take an action, but not an excuse for it. The victim of the attack still has the right to defend himself. The question here is whether or not the officer's self-defense was out of proportion to the actual assault. But you knew that, of course.

Stupid games, indeed.

[durablend]

52. That's actually what the wingnuts are saying

"I'll do what it takes to defend my family"

A-OK with shooting up bystanders because we know they could be criminals too...

[NickB79]

56. My total guess is that the two bystanders were behind the man killed

And were hit by accident. Police are notoriously poor shots; that or the bullets passed through the man and hit the people behind him.

[ROB-ROX]

48. The Guy With The GUN Is A Murder

When one person has a weapon and two people are shot and one person is dead the guy with a gun is a MURDER. I think the police will cover up the murder as is normally done. There is no way to even think the person who has a gun is afraid for his life and has the right to kill anyone. This is a moral and ethical LIE if the killer is not executed. The GUY with a gun should be EXECUTED to protect people who can be murdered by a murder........

[customerserviceguy]

51. I'm withholding judgement on this

until the security camera footage is released.

[Jedi Guy]

59. FYI, that's apparently the wrong opinion around here.

He's a cop and he shot people so waiting for more information before judging him to be guilty is wrong, or something.

[sarisataka]

60. That is an unusual position to take

To get all of the information before passing judgment.

The post above is not the only call I have seen for the execution of the cop.

[Jedi Guy]

61. ROB-ROX does that on just about every thread like this, so that's nothing new or surprising.

I just find it disheartening that so many people are willing to jump to a conclusion when only the barest facts of a situation are known. Seems like that's always the case with an officer-involved shooting. Then there are the remarks that all cops are like this, which is broad-brush thinking at its worst. And then people wonder why the left is perceived as being anti-cop.

[sarisataka]

64. There is a section of DU

That are avid fans of the death penalty, especially for police.
I recall a post calling for the Minneapolis officer to be "lynched". Since it was a police officer who happened to be black, it took over a full day for a jury to hide that statement.

[Jedi Guy]

65. Yep, I remember that thread because I responded to your comment about it.

Says a lot that it took that long for the post to be hidden, doesn't it? It's okay as long as it's the "correct" target of the rhetoric.

[customerserviceguy]

66. Innocent until proven guilty

is indeed not the position of a number of people here.