E-mail Story
Print Story
There are 43 comments - Display All Comments
nolan1
Dodge Center, mn
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 12:15:08 AM
I will be first, and then comments will be disallowed. Shooter gets probation, victim and friends comes back next Friday or Saturday for revenge. And so goes the end of 2009. And probably the first few months of 2010. But Whiskey Bones is too loud, and westfire is closed. Bout time to threaten their license? Nope, too much money on their side. C’mon council, gonna treat all as equal? If you don’t, you should prepare for big problems. The math has whiskey bones looking pretty good at this point. Truth is Aquarius should have gone down alongside west-fire if you want to compare like instances. Read fast this post won’t get read by many!
jtd
Rochester, mn
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 5:35:04 AM
It’s only going to get worse before it gets better-if it ever will. Happy holidays Rochester and to all the wanne be thugs that come here from out of town.
Bubba
Rochester, mn
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 6:37:03 AM
I ran the shooter who was arrested through the public access to records site and he has a rap sheet a mile long. Including about 2 dozen driving after revocation. How does that happen? Also how does a 19 year old spend time a bar? I think Aquarius should be the next one to close but that will never happen.
firedup
rochester, mn
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 8:29:51 AM
The police should be using these places like Aquarius like rat traps. Just like drugs, It’s an addiction for these guys, they can’t stay away. I bet if they had undercover cops hanging out they would capture a dozen criminals every weekend.
MantorGir
l
Mantorville, MN
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 10:15:12 AM
I don’t understand when it became “okay” to do these kinds of things. What happens to these young people, that they just wake up one morning and think …hmmm I think its okay to shoot my gun into a crowd of people. When did that become okay and how do we change it back? The person with an actual solution to this problem should be President of the U.S.
Monica
Minneapoils, MN
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 10:27:08 AM
This is simply collateral for lax gun laws. If we want to keep our god-given “freedoms”, then we will have to hear about these sorts of things pretty often.
Enough_Ch
ange
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 10:40:31 AM
Monica - maybe you cannot read but the gun was stolen. If criminals don’t obey the law (hence this is why they are criminals) what type of gun laws do you recommend to eliminate situations like this? What lax gun law allowed this stolen gun to be used on Sunday? Please reply because this law abiding gun owner is very interested in your answer.
MINNshoot
er
SE, MN
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 10:55:16 AM
I am also interested in Monica’s response.
heyho
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 10:59:13 AM
Although violence like this is a complicated subject, I do agree with Monica about the need for better gun laws. Yes, the Constitution does allow citizens to bear arms, however, what kinds of arms were available when the Constitution was founded? Somehow I do not think the Constitution founders would be in favor of the proliferation of handguns and assault weapons.
When the Mexican drug cartels get their weapons from the United States, I think that points out a huge problem with our gun laws.
Monica
Minneapoils, MN
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 11:06:36 AM
@enough:
No argument that the gun was stolen. It was likely stolen from someone who had the gun legally.
My point is that our country is awash with guns and that people should not be shocked when something like this happens. Or when a person (sometimes a legal gun carrier) goes on a shooting rampage at a public building.
As I stated before, this is just collateral for our freedom to buy guns; that’s not necessarily an anti-gun statement. It’s just the way it is.
MINNshoot
er
SE, MN
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 11:10:34 AM
While I disagree with your opinion, I respect it. I would bring up Chicago, New York, Washington DC, and California as examples. They have the strictest gun law in the nation. Yet violent gun crime is high. Before you begin to blame other areas of the Country with supplying guns to those areas, listen to my point. More gun laws don’t solve the problem. I agree that the problem is complex. I don’t believe we need any more gun laws. What we need is to hold these criminals accountable. With the rights given to us by our Founding Fathers comes responsibility. The problem is no one wants to be responsible anymore.
MINNshoot
er
SE, MN
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 11:12:50 AM
Monica, my second response was to heyho. I happen to agree with your 2nd response.
Patriot
Mazeppa, MN
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 11:14:42 AM
Guns save far more lives than they take. Crime and shootings go down dramatically where gun laws are least restrictive.
Guns are a tool used to keep communities safe. Why would we want to restrict safety.
Monica
Minneapoils, MN
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 11:21:12 AM
If this is true, Patriot - why do states with lax gun laws have the highest crime rates?
Also, do you have evidence that guns save more lives than they take?
30,000 people die each year in this country due to gun violence. I would like to know what the “saved” number is.
Birddog
rochester, mn
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 11:28:18 AM
The idea is to blame the law abiding gun owner. It’s all their fault for letting their guns be stolen. The thief is NOT responsible for his actions. People should not be allowed to own guns. They are bad. They were only made to kill people. Remember that the U.S. Constitution only gives people the right to hunt and you should have to go to the government center to pick up a government issued gun and one round of ammunition to hunt with.
People should have to go through extensive background checks and mental evaluations like police officers before they are allowed to touch a gun. After all, we know the police officers never use guns improperly.
Of course if you believe any of that, welcome to the democrat party.
itrike
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 11:33:30 AM
Agreed Nolan!
I’d also like to give my own 2 cents…
Where did we think the gun-toting, knife-wielding patrons that were hanging out at the Westfire were going to go? Are we so naive to think if we eradicate a business we will change the behavior of people who want to harm others and break laws? So we blame the business and not the criminals? You can close the all the bars you want but I could guess the behaviors would still be there. Maybe the Kwik Trip can pick up the slack. How about the parking lots by silver lake? Criminals make the choice to do what they do. It isn’t going to matter what the venue is. Punish the criminals and not the businesses who graciously opened their door to some unknowing trouble. Its unfortunate our city doesn’t know how to handle the turmoil that comes from growth, unemployment, poverty, diversity and other factors that contribute to our growing crime rate. As for Whiskey Bones, I think their neighbors who don’t like noise should be grateful they don’t have to hear gunshots and sirens at night!
Monica
Minneapoils, MN
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 11:37:05 AM
Who’s blaming the gun owners?
Allthough, if I owned a gun I would keep it locked up no one can steal it.
Haag1
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 11:45:59 AM
Birddog, I agree.
I don’t think more laws will do the trick in this case, or others like it.
30K dying yearly from gun violence is definately a large number. How many of these deaths were from law abiding citizens? How many of the guns were stolen, sold on a secondary black market, or shipped in here from another country? Just as there are variables for the 30k, there are variables that cannot be used to find an actual number of people “saved”.
If anyone has bought a gun in the last five years you would know how long it takes from start to finish purchasing a gun due to the current laws (not saying that it is bad).
Monica
Minneapoils, MN
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 11:49:45 AM
Yes, in this state the laws are stricter, Haag. But if I really want a gun to shoot up a place I can visit one of our backwards Southern states and bring it back to Minnesota.
My point is there should be better Federal laws regarding who can buy, where they can bring them, etc.
Leaving it up to the states to decide clearly doesn’t work. This could be a reason so many “bad guys” here in the North have guns. They’re being brought in from lax states.
COSDOC
oklahoma city, ok
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 11:52:32 AM
Cars kill more people than handguns. Ban cars.
Monica
Minneapoils, MN
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 11:54:48 AM
Great idea, COSDOC! I have lived without a car for 6 years and I’m still alive. ;-p
realist
Eyota, mn
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 11:54:49 AM
“If this is true, Patriot - why do states with lax gun laws have the highest crime rates?”
I think you got your statement backwards, Monica. Take a quick peek at the following website:
http://www.statemaster.com/graph/cri_mur_wit_fir-death-rate-per-100-000
I don’t think you want to live in Washington D.C.
Birddog
rochester, mn
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 11:57:22 AM
“Allthough, if I owned a gun I would keep it locked up no one can steal it.”
Very naïve.
Banks have huge vaults. Banks get robbed. Blame the bank?
Whomever
Rural, MN
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 11:59:50 AM
Read “More Guns, Less Crime” by John R. Lott, Jr.
Monica
Minneapoils, MN
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 12:02:49 PM
Those stats are VERY misleading, realist.
You’re comparing a place that’s 100% urban with a population of 500,000 to entire states.
MINNshooter had brought up Chicago, NY, and CA as high gun violence areas, but all of those states are in the bottom 30 for deaths by guns.
On the list the gun-totin’ south and west makes up the lions share of the top 10!
realist
Eyota, mn
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 12:03:27 PM
Just in case you feel up to a little heavier thought on the subject, the following statistical study gives a more thoughtful and accurate correlation between crime rates and percentage of gun ownership in those states.
Basically, what the author is saying is there is absolutely no correlation
between gun ownership rates or gun restrictions and homicides. Criminals still kill, guns or no!
realist
Eyota, mn
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 12:04:11 PM
Just in case you feel up to a little heavier thought on the subject, the following statistical study gives a more thoughtful and accurate correlation between crime rates and percentage of gun ownership in those states.
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=8897
Basically, what the author is saying is there is absolutely no correlation
between gun ownership rates or gun restrictions and homicides. Criminals still kill, guns or no!
stalker
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 12:06:22 PM
Birddog stated, “Banks have huge vaults. Banks get robbed. Blame the bank?”
The banks typically do not lose what is in the vault during a robbery. They lose the money in the teller’s drawer. Nice try.
Birddog
rochester, mn
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 12:18:32 PM
stalker:
“The banks typically do not lose what is in the vault during a robbery. They lose the money in the teller’s drawer. Nice try.”
The bank must take the money out of the vault to do business. The gun owner must take the gun out of a locked storage area to use it.
It is asinine to think a gun owner should be required to have a vault like a bank to store his weapon, and to never take it out for fear someone will steal it.
Monica:
I really wished that I could believe your concern for human life lost, but do you really care about the “..30,000 people who die each year in this country due to gun violence.”?
realist
Eyota, mn
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 12:22:39 PM
“...do you really care about the “..30,000 people who die each year in this country due to gun violence.”?
I don’t really mean to sound callous, but I suspect that a good number of these deaths were people that you’d just as soon not have around anymore (crooks shooting crooks, gang battles, etc.), right?
Haag1
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 12:40:04 PM
Stopping guns from flowing into this state is near impossible, unless you have state border patrols (which will never happen).
It’s just bound to happen (law-breakers bringing in guns) no matter what the state or federal gun laws are.
Taxed2Dea
th
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 12:50:00 PM
The existing gun laws in Minnesota are pretty strict for stealing a firearm. If you read the theft statute, MN 609.52, s.3(1) it states that someone could be imprisoned for 20 years for stealing a firearm. Of course that would never happen, considering a murderer just got sentenced to what will work out to be about 9 years here in Olmsted County. So Monica, my question for you is the problem the gun laws or the liberal judges and prosecutors?
TLS
ROCHESTER, MN
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 12:58:56 PM
To me the real issue here is the trend of our city to be so accepting of the gang type violence that is escalating at an alarming rate! The bail set for this thug is pretty lenient in my opinion, considering that someone could have easily been killed that morning.
Native
Rochester, mn
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 1:04:48 PM
If someone wants to commit a crime, he/she will, with or without a gun. Until we start locking up repeat offenders (of all crimes), things will never change. And don’t give me the argument about lack of jail space. I have solutions for that too.
dewman
Rochester, mn
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 1:21:42 PM
outlaw guns only outlaws have guns, Rochester has it’s head you know where and the only way to hope for change is to get the good old boys out of our government
FrankWHaw
thorne
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 1:43:02 PM
Give it up Monica. That Horse (of meaningful debate re Federally imposed “gun controls“) left the Barn years ago.
Besides, this Packin’ Dude named Heggs was probably just practicin’ for when he can legally qualify for “Conceal & Carry” & forgot to properly elevate his weapon for the standard “Please Disperse” warning shot.
But seriously friends, I’m afraid it’s pretty clear that the NRA Party line now dominates the vast majority of both GOP & Domocratic office holders.
You might as well ask these 2nd-Amendment “soldiers” to surrender their E-D meds, as to give an inch on what should be no-brainer issues like assault weapons bans, cop-killer-bullet restrictions, and criminal background checks (for All weapons sales including gun shows).
Oh, and BTW, I can’t imagine anyone who wouldn’t agree that the Chicago-residing Victim who was shot in this incident should Not be blamed in this case.
To infer otherwise by blaming “liberals” (for being soft on criminals) is just new dishonest innuendo layered on old lies.
Without question, that “liberal” Olmsted judge should throw the book at this local dude who broke multiple laws, and endangered many lives.
But of course it’s still not addressing any core issues which might lessen such incidents in the future.
[Posted from Home]
prohibiti
on_harms
Oronoco, MN
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 2:28:54 PM
I still agree with the first posters, when do we shut down the offending bar. They have been letting this happen (like the Westfire) for many years.
But hey they are in the SE area of town and we can let teh riff raff go there.
Council sink your teeth in to this one you have been neglectin git for far too long, Noise is sort of a pansy excuse anymore.
werefed
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 2:54:00 PM
I am sorry, but was the shooting inside the bar? I have a hard time believing that the bar is responsible for some “riff raff” shooting into a group of people.
Maybe we should have stricter laws on criminals, not the law abiding business men or gun owners.
The local establishments do more for the economy than the criminals do, why don’t we kick all the criminals out of the town?
Perhaps we let them shoot each other, kind of a social Darwinism?
Bubba
Rochester, mn
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 2:58:45 PM
Since 2007 Mr. Heggs has been charged 37 times. Ranging from domestic assault to drugs to fighting to traffic. Why is he still out? He probably missed his target because his hand is sore from being slapped so many times.
Taxed2Dea
th
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 3:16:31 PM
It’s easy to “blame” the establishment folks, but the reality is that Rochester has a criminal element that isn’t going to leave. This criminal element will find a way and a place to party rather it be The Westfire (where security and cooperation were non-existent) to Aquarius (where security is pretty good and they’re mostly cooperative with law enforcement).
If the party isn’t at Aquarius, it will move to Kathy’s, Club Amsterdam, Rookies, Beer Bellys, etc. Like it or not, an inner city element is here to stay in Rochester.
The solution is strict enforcement and prosecution of those who commit the crimes! A very small percentage of people commit a significant number of crimes here in Rochester! That’s reality!
MantorGir
l
Mantorville, MN
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 3:28:14 PM
I agree with taxed2death…
Make people accountable for their own actions...this probably starts at home...teach your children right from wrong, how to make good moral decisions, etc...hopefully what you end up with is a grown adult who wouldn’t ever put themselves in this Predicament. Not that I believe that all blame goes to the parents, but once we were no longer able to discipline (spank) our children without everyone watching this seemed to have an effect on society.
Bear
Rochester, mn
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 3:53:44 PM
Look at the shooter’s criminal past. His rap sheet is a mile long. Can I ask why he was free man? How long before Mr Heggs is out on the streets again?
thinkfirs
t
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/3/2009 at 9:46:08 PM
This city needs to wake up and realize we have a huge problem with thigs going around with guns shooting people!
The last case where the thug(s) were out on bail from a gun assult crime, robbed and killed a man, fled the state, and then plea bargained for under 10 years! Give me a brake.
I guess the only way this city will get serious about violent crimes is when someone in a major medical center or their patient catches a runnaway slug in the chops. Rah-RAh-Bang-Bang Rochester!
