Police: Man mistakes wife for intruder, shoots her
YAKIMA, Wash. (AP) - A man mistook his pregnant wife for an intruder at their Terrace Heights home and shot her, leaving her in critical condition, Yakima County authorities said.
Investigators don't suspect criminal intent and that the woman's husband is cooperating, said Yakima County Sheriff's office chief civil deputy Robert Udell.
The 27-year-old woman is eight weeks pregnant. She was shot once early Friday morning in the couple's bedroom. She is in the hospital in critical but stable condition, Udell said in a statement.
The Yakima Herald-Republic reported that there no major updates Sunday.
The couple's names were not released. Udell said they were waiting to notify the woman's family to release her name. Her husband is in his 20s.
According to entries in the sheriff's online activity log, the woman's husband initially reported an intruder was in the residence and then stated he had accidentally shot his wife. That call came in before 6 a.m. Friday.
"Male saying, 'I can't believe I did this,'" a dispatcher reported.
Investigators don't suspect criminal intent and that the woman's husband is cooperating, said Yakima County Sheriff's office chief civil deputy Robert Udell.
The 27-year-old woman is eight weeks pregnant. She was shot once early Friday morning in the couple's bedroom. She is in the hospital in critical but stable condition, Udell said in a statement.
The Yakima Herald-Republic reported that there no major updates Sunday.
The couple's names were not released. Udell said they were waiting to notify the woman's family to release her name. Her husband is in his 20s.
According to entries in the sheriff's online activity log, the woman's husband initially reported an intruder was in the residence and then stated he had accidentally shot his wife. That call came in before 6 a.m. Friday.
"Male saying, 'I can't believe I did this,'" a dispatcher reported.
ya cant fix stupid.....
Yea, right...that's about all I can say. Â She's pregnant and he thinks it's an intruder...lock him up and throw away the key
Has anyone hear an update on how the wife is doing? Would like to know she pulled through fine.
I hope his wife survives... Then, I hope he survives..... that is why you use a light along with the gun.... you iluminate the subject, and the other aspect is knowing who is supposed to be in the house.. and make sure it isn't one of those people..Â
I hope this family will be okay after this incident...
Well thank goodness he had a gun to defend himself from...never mind...
Idiots with guns, what could go wrong
I thought Oscar already used this excuse? Â Couldn't come up with one of his own for why he shot his wife? Â
So scared of your own shadow that you'd shoot your own wife. Classy.
Hopefully this woman will recover from her wound. How tragic.Â
Hope she's ok. She should get a divorce. More info needed. This seems awfully coincidental imo. Maybe he found out the kid isn't his? No one accidentally shoots their wife.
@VoiceofReason Your post is nonsensical. You suggest more information yet still make assumptions based off zero information provided in the story? Doesnt sound like a voice of reason at all.
@DarkRenegade @VoiceofReason Trying to put together how someone could shoot their wife on accident. When there's no info, you have to use reason, since like i said, no one shoots their f'ing wife on accident.
I thought Oscar Pistorious lived in South Africa, not Yakima??
The question is....did he or did he not have his prosthetic legs on at the time?
....but really, prayers and well wishes for this woman and baby, what an awful thing to have happened.Â
Aaaah yes, another responsible gun owner just protecting his home and family...
@what? I don't like your comments, but I value your reliability.
@Komo Dragon @what? Another free thinker. Keep drinking the kool aid.
@Komo Dragon @what? INdeed. I like reading people who think it actually helps their cause to make this statement. Imagine if everyone used the same logic. We would have:
Drunk drivers: Â "Aaaah yes, another responsible car owner just out for a drive..."
etc.
Guns are AWESOME!
They will keep your family safe
@sunnysandiego only in the hands of someone responsible.  Â
@sunnysandiego Beats waiting for the police to come collect your body.
Bravo, all! More people are concerned whether their viewpoint is right than if this poor woman, and her baby, will be okay.Â
@Hadrian Perhaps best if these genes were not passed on....
Our Vice President says you should just shoot at shadows and through the door. He smart.
@Getov Mylon Â
Well, Sen. Feinstein says it is legal to hunt humans...
@Bornhere I will file that under the, "If Sarah Had Said It" file. Stoopidity of such a stellar nature on the part of Senator Feinstein? Ignored.Â
There is no media bias. Exhibit #28902095052071
@Getov Mylon Â
Too bad we can't all just ignore Feinstein.
@Getov Mylon, @Susabelle  If you're going to quote the Vice Pres. at least get the quote correct. His actual words in response to what he told his wife were: "I Said Jill if there's ever a problem just walk out on the balcony here walk out. Put that double barreled shotgun and fire two blasts.". He was talking about what he told his wife to do at their estate, he didn't say anything about shooting through a door. But nice try twisting his words.
@justmyopinion The Vice President said it in an interview with "Field and Stream," which is different than the episode to which you refer. Nice try though!
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/02/28/biden-advises-shooting-shotgun-through-door
http://www.fieldandstream.com/articles/guns/2013/02/gun-control-joe-biden-interview
Slow Joe's words almost never need twisting. Â He shoots himself in the foot.
@aintno1special @justmyopinion And for the record, I did not "quote" the VP. I paraphrased him.
@aintno1special @justmyopinion Providing documentation for my opinions/posts is part of  my public service. I am sure the requisite retraction from "justmyopinion" will be forthcoming, chop chop.
@Getov Mylon @justmyopinion ...even providing facts!! Mr. Mylon you sir, are going above and beyond.
@Getov Mylon OMG I forgot that, LOL.Â
@Susabelle Good news is, nobody pays any serious attention to what ol' Slow-Joe has to say.Â
One heartbeat away...
@K. Coleman Ol' Joe was chosen for his "gravitas." That's smarty-pants-speak for, "been around long enough to outlive any usefulness (except for writing legislation hepping those Delaware credit-card companies and steering Federal and State Tax Dollars to relatives) as Senator and knows where the bodies are buried."
@Getov Mylon Naww, Obama is smarter than he appears... at least where the VP pick is concerned.  I believe THAT is why he made Biden the VP.  Since 'Ol Joe appears to be dumber than a box of rocks.. even a CRAZY person who wanted to do something stupid to Obama would think twice before making Biden the Commander In Chief!!!   Â
Yeah. Â Riiiight. Â How could you mistake your wife for an intruder? Â If you wake up at 6am, and take the time to grab you gun, would you NOT check on your spouse or gf FIRST? Â Seriously, I have to wonder about these stories. Are there no lights in their house? Â Most couples argue until the early hours, then the violence actually happens then... Hmmmm.
@DT Well, if she survives we may actually find out.
That's what Pistorious or whatever his name is said too. Â Wouldn't most of us feel the other side of the bed to ensure our mate was OK, call out to them, something, before we started shooting?
I wasn't aware part of the Pistorius clan were living in Yakima. Wow. I'll wait for this to unwind, then make more comments.
WTF is up with people shooting at their spouses "accidentally" thinking they are an intruder? Maybe people should walk around with bells on like a cat or something to announce who they are.
Humm, got some beach front property in North Dakota for sale if Yakima law enforcemnet is interested...
A gun in the house is much more likely to shoot a person living in the house than an intruder. I'm not some anti-gun radical, I'm just pointing out the facts.
@Sanctuary "A gun in the house is much more likely to shoot a person living in the house than an intruder. I'm not some anti-gun radical, I'm just pointing out the facts."
The problem is this isn't all what it seems to be on the surface. Â When you account for factors such as defensive use where nobody is killed then things change dramatically. The fact is most encounters involving firearms are of a nature where people are not killed, though often wounding occurs. So, in those stats that only count death, it may be true (though its also misleading). So, if the cases where someone who has a gun in their house defends themselves but no one is killed its not registered and that is what the majority of encounters are. Â The other issue is this "stat", if its the often repeated "study" by the anti-gun prof in CA, is severely flawed. To be more realistic you would need to compare the number of households with firearms to those that have someone in the house killed because of them vs the number of people killed by an intruder to one of those same households. Â So, those < 1000 accidental deaths (all accidental deaths not just at home) and if I remember correctly about twice that of purposeful deaths are compared to the rates of those killed by an intruder what do you get? Â We don't know. Â We don't know because they don't keep those stats. But what we know for sure is that all accidental deaths, home or otherwise plus homicides in the home are less than a third of the gun deaths and with between 50 and 100 million households possessing firearms that makes for a pretty small chance overall. Â So, it might even be true that it is more likely to be killed by your own gun etc but its still the twice nothing is still nothing situation. Overall, being afraid of someone breaking into your house and killing you is not logical. Being afraid of guns in your home is not logical. Being prepared is fine if you do it safely, being paranoid is not. If you are paranoid don't get a gun, get an Rx instead.Â
@Sanctuary 45 times more likely (not even 45% but 45 TIMES more likely that your gun at home will be used against you or a family member in anger, mistake, or suicide.  Women are more likely to be murdered by a spouse if there is a gun in the home, than if not.Â
@DT @Sanctuary Well DT, I think this is about the 10th time you've repeated this bs. I'm wondering, does repeating it more often make you believe it more? Do you think others will believe it if you say it enough times?
@DT @Sanctuary Please cite your source.Â
@nwbackpacker @Susabelle @DT @Sanctuary Keep asking questions and the rate might drop further
@nwbackpacker @Susabelle @DT @Sanctuary Oh for heavens sake! Well I would not doubt that you would be 2 times as likely to have a gun related incident if you owned a gun, just as I dont doubt you are probably much  more likely to be hurt in and automobile accident if you have a car in the family... seriously?
@Susabelle@DT@SanctuaryThe source is possibly this guy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Kellermann
 "While Kellerman has backed away from his previous statement that people are â43 times more likelyâ to be murdered in their own home if they own and keep a gun in their home, he still proposes that the risk is 2.7 times higher."
@Sanctuary  Sorry, you are not pointing out facts; you are repeating a fallacious argument of correlation and causation.
Correct. The automobile doesn't cause the accident, and the firearm doesn't cause the shooting.
@marsneedswomen The false correlation is comparing members of a family in a home with guns that live there 24/7 365 days a year with a visit from an intruder which is a most likely a once in a life time event.Â
And people who drive automobiles are more likely to be involved in automobile accidents.
@Sanctuary okay, take suicide out of the mix and try that one again? Then, take a look at the actual numbers on gun accidents etc... You are more likely to kill yourself and/or injure yourself doing a whole multitude of things that have nothing to do with guns...Do you realize just how many weapons are out there right now not shooting anyone? 300 million I think is the right number but it is going up quickly because none of my local gun stores can keep anything stocked. Just try and find ammo....
@Susabelle @Sanctuary Quite true. If people thought about what is really likely to kill them they would realize guns are way down the list. Worrying about guns is illogical considering how little chance you have of being killed by one. Of course that doesn't get in the way of the anti-gun paranoids.
@SanctuaryAnd the facts are that in countries that have banned guns like the UK and Australia that their violent crime rate and rape rates skyrocketed after the bans.Â
@NW-Economist @Sanctuary Â
To be fair, that doesn't seem to be the case. All we can compare are the murder rates, since other crimes have too much variation in reporting/classification standards.
The England/Wales murder rate is at a 30-year low (now around 0.9 per 100,000 people), as is the Aussie rate (1.0 per 100,000). The US rate is 4.7 per 100,000, just to compare.
So, if it works for them, who are we to gainsay their tactics. But they aren't the US; their experience is simply not applicable here.
@NW-Economist @Whobeke @Sanctuary Â
I gave you the murder rates, which speak for themselves. You can interpret the numbers as you wish. The England/Wales murder numbers are not based on the British Crime Survey; they come directly from the police. After all, why would someone report on a crime survey that he has been murdered?
@Whobeke @NW-Economist @SanctuaryWow, you completely ignored the fact that Australia's authorities thought their gun ban had near zero affect on crimes using firearms. No response to that?
How about the fact that major parts of the British government doubt the veracity of the BCS yet you go right on spouting how correct it is? Are you blind?Â
@jlynnhood @Whobeke @NW-Economist @Sanctuary Â
We could compare murder rates in cities of similar size across national boundaries. For example, London's murder rate is around 1.3 per 100,000, while the similarly-sized NYC is around 5.5.Â
@Whobeke @NW-Economist @Sanctuary Context is important with these kind of figures, and is often overlooked in favor of making a point.
@jlynnhood @Whobeke @NW-Economist @Sanctuary That is the problem with ALL of these statistics there is no way to understand the significance of them. While gun purchases have been going up, violent crime including gun homicides has gone down. Does that mean more guns mean less crime? probably not, there is a higher density of guns in these cities and higher homicide rates, does that mean more guns mean more crime? probably not. The problem is that there are so many secondary and even third level conditions that can impact these statistics that there is no way to get a true picture. I mean can we really do an empirical study on the subject? This makes it subjective at best. People like to compare the US to other countries, problem there is that the US has a totally different culture,  Japan has much higher suicide rates than the US, does that mean they are more depressed? I doubt it, just that suicide has less of a stigma attached to it than in the US. What people continually seem to ignore is that violent crime, including gun homicides has been declining in the US and is currently much lower than it was 20-25 years ago, and that is true regardless if you use the CDC figures or the FBI data. I can spin this to support gun control and I could spin it pro gun depending on my views. The reality is, gun ownership at best have a minor impact on crime, other factors seem to play a much larger role, gang and criminal activity, mental health and economic health all have a larger role in gun crime than any of the above.
@Whobeke @NW-Economist @Sanctuary I didn't have time to open all your links, but a question lingers:  Murder rates across the board are shown to be much higher in areas where the population is 250k or more.  The U.S. has more than 200 metropolitan areas with a population of 250k or more, whereas the UK has less than 50.  I think that should also be taken into account for the stats.  Not saying the stats you posted are wrong, but some studies I have read indicate viable reasons for a lower murder rate in the U.K., yet they have a higher violent crime rate.
@NW-Economist@Whobeke@SanctuaryÂ
"These crimes are directly comparable to crimes in the US. "
Nope. I learned that the hard way back when this debate was going on in the early 2000's. Just look up the definition of "assault" across jurisdictions. Then look at studies about reporting rates. For example, what percentage of assaults that take place in ghetto Detroit do you suppose get reported? Â
Instead, we can estimate other crimes by taking the murder rate and assuming that areas with higher murder rates tend to be more lawless in general. Hence, Detroit (and therefore Michigan) probably has a higher rate of non-murder crimes than is reported. But a state with a low murder rate like Vermont probably does not.
Anyway, like I said, what we have are the murder stats. The US murder stats come from the FBI, whose latest report was in 2011:
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/violent-crime/murder
"There were 4.7 murders per 100,000 inhabitants"
England and Wales's stats come from the Office of National Statistics:
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/crime-stats/crime-statistics/period-ending-march-2012/stb-crime-stats-end-march-2012.html#tab-Violence
"The number of homicides recorded by the police in 2011/12 (550) fell by 14 percent compared with 2010/11."
That's a rate of 0.98, which is 4.8 times lower than 4.7.
We have to be honest about what the stats show. Clearly, England and Wales do a much better job of preventing murder than we do in America, and that's just how it goes.
Â
Â
@Whobeke @NW-Economist @SanctuaryThis is the second time you have posted this BS statement: "To be fair, that doesn't seem to be the case. All we can compare are the murder rates, since other crimes have too much variation in reporting/classification standards."
That is NOT true and repeating it over and over doesn't make it true. These crimes are directly comparable to crimes in the US.Â
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=17847
But even if you don't buy that, lets see what these governments are saying about their own gun bans:
"Even Australia's Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research acknowledges that the gun ban had no significant impact on the amount of gun-involved crime."
And in the UK just because the BCS was doctored by anti-gun supporters in government doesn't change the fact that they actually have valid and comparable statistics now as well:Â http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_Survey_for_England_and_Wales#Criticism