Michigan Man Under Restraining Order Used Stolen Rental Gun to Murder His Girlfriend, Commit Suicide

comments

  1. avatar Kenneth G Maiden says:

    Well, who would have thought? No matter how many INFRINGEMENT type laws are hung over the heads of GOOD LEGAL LAW-ABIDING AMERICAN CITIZENS, criminals and nut jobs will find a way. Lets guess, “gun rentals” will now be banned. Hell, maybe car rentals should be as well, huh TYRANTS?

    1. avatar 2004done says:

      Kenneth G Maiden: “This can easily be fixed, if the first 40,000 laws didn’t do anything, then certainly #40,001 will fix the entire problem forever, or until #40,002, 40,003, 40004 & 40,005 get election-year-passed. And banning cars won’t work, it’s in the Constitution, under “Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness,” [I do Declare Independently, and you can see it on CNN, or Geraldo, or any other leftist broadcast (or shouldn’t it be leftist womancast?]

      1. avatar Flinch says:

        Simple. NICS for Rentals.

        Problem solved. Next!

        1. avatar DJ says:

          That’s Dumb.

    2. avatar Southern Cross says:

      Same thing happened in Australia more than a few years a go. A mentally ill woman lied on a form, stole a rental gun from a range, and used the gun to murder her father.

      I would think a range that had rental guns would have better inventory management processes to prevent such thefts.

      1. avatar Chip in Florida says:

        “…I would think a range that had rental guns would have better inventory management processes to prevent such thefts.”

        Most do. It’s called a copy of your credit card when you check in. Then when they find out you didn’t return what you rented your card gets charged for the purchase of said firearm.

        At least that is how my range does it.

        1. avatar neiowa says:

          That doesn’t sound very bright. Gun is stolen so they complete an illegal sale/transfer?

      2. avatar Kyle says:

        As long as we continue to hold the tool responsible for the crime, we’ll chase down an endless rathole of ‘what if’ possibilities.

  2. avatar Just the Facts says:

    Total Firearms are idiots. I can give 5 different ways to maintain inventory control. That being said, I don’t think they still would have been able to stop him as he just walked out and then went directly to the ex. But come on, what the hell are they doing at that counter.

    And just as a side note, this shows that the protection order did work and gave an opportunity to alert law enforcement of his actions. A protection order is a TOOL like a alarm, you cannot expect it to work just by itself.

    1. avatar GaPharmD says:

      Protection order worked???

      Lets ask Mrs. Duncan what she thinks…..oh….wait…..

      1. avatar Just the Facts says:

        Protection order did work. Don’t let the name fool you, the “protection order” will not protect anyone by itself. What is does do is provide tools to the police to provide some level of security. It actually provided an alarm to the police of his intentions.

        Now if you want to argue about the inadequate response of the police, well I would have to agree with you.

        1. avatar Fu manchu says:

          EXACTLY, The police failed AGAIN!
          lets pass another law affecting hundred’s of thousands of gun owners who did and will continue to do nothing wrong.
          (when seconds count, the police are no where around)

        2. avatar anonymoose says:

          Protection orders provide as much protection as a GFZ sign.

        3. avatar Trrash says:

          I refer you to Gonzalez vs Castlerock. Supreme Court, police have no obligation to provide any level of protection to an individual.

    2. avatar LarryinTX says:

      To look at it another way, the protective order functioned as advertised (helped the woman not at all), the NICS check functioned as advertised (sale denied), no one enforced the laws regarding possession by prohibited persons (as is true 99% of the time), and as many of us have stated repeatedly, DID NOT PREVENT THE KILLER FROM OBTAINING A GUN, and never will. When he attempted to buy a firearm, he should have been jailed for 5 years, that would have saved two lives. Since she was not in control of that, common sense should have told the woman to tool up before even attempting a protection order. That might have saved one life. Background checks are useless, other than as a step toward confiscation, which was their intent.

      1. avatar Just the Facts says:

        “When he attempted to buy a firearm, he should have been jailed for 5 years. Background checks are useless, other than as a step toward confiscation, which was their intent.”

        Sound more like your argument is the LE can be very incompetent , not that background checks are useless.

        The incompetency of law enforcement is not one thing I will ever argue against. My opinion is that this is one case that proved “background checks” can work, but only if you have competent law enforcement who can follow up.

        1. avatar Joe R. says:

          That sounds like a guarantee of nothing.

          In which case, cops are there for the clean-up and paperwork, and the courts and DA is there to harass the victor.

        2. avatar Just the Facts says:

          That sounds like a guarantee of nothing.

          Wait you want a guarantee in life? Really? Against a criminal act? It’s called armed security and costs money (you can also provide your own, at a lower price, but not for free)

        3. avatar Fu manchu says:

          ….Instead of following up on the guy’s failed BG check and ERPO the police are harassing speeders on the interstate, empty intersection stop sign rollers, tinted windows and other petty BS stuff.
          They should change their name from “Law Enforcement” to “Traffic Enforcement”
          More useless than tits on a bull.

        4. avatar Joe R. says:

          @ fax the just

          “That sounds like a guarantee of nothing.
          Wait you want a guarantee in life? Really? Against a criminal act? It’s called armed security and costs money (you can also provide your own, at a lower price, but not for free)”

          No, I want our fucking ahole neighbors who needed a job (our government) TO BE COMPELLED TO ADMIT, AND PROFESS PUBLICLY, AND POST CONSPICUOUSLY, THAT THEY CANNOT PROTECT ANYONE ON AN INDIVIDUAL LEVEL. The government cannot even protect its own personnel on an individual level. So let’s quit it with the circle-jerk back-slap crew doing background checks and allow people to protect themselves by whatever means. F it, the smart ones are doing it anyway.

        5. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Calling LE incompetent is a bit silly, those laws are not enforced anywhere in the country, fewer than 50 prosecutions in the entire country in a year. This cop or that one may be incompetent, but I think “conspiracy” is a much more believable explanation to cover ALL of them.

        6. avatar Joe R. says:

          What we got here, Larry in TX, is an inflated balloon.

          You can’t just have ‘one little piece of it’ and expect the rest to stay inflated.

          LADY LIBERTY IS A HEMOPHELIAC.

          Don’t even let her get bruised.

    3. avatar Joe R. says:

      @ Just the F

      The Restraining Order DID work as advertised. It left the victim feeling a false sense of security and she took a fatal one so that we can preserve such nonsense to bolster the false need some people have to preserve their authoritative ‘job’.

    4. avatar Sian says:

      Rent a firearm? Leave your keys and ID at the desk until you turn it in.

      No it won’t stop you from stealing it and driving illegally if you planned ahead and brought an extra carkey, but it will go a ways towards discouragement.

      1. avatar Shawn F says:

        So when I go to the LGS with an indoor range, I have to give up my DL to shoot on the range, and it stays with them until I check out.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Excellent! That’ll sure stop a guy bent on murder and suicide! He wouldn’t DARE drive without his license, right? These laws are useless. What had a chance to save that woman was for her to carry a damn GUN!

        2. avatar Moid62 says:

          That’s exactly what they did, they kept his driver’s license, and he drove off with the gun and left his DL behind at the counter.

  3. avatar Rickster A-15 says:

    If a criminal wants to get a gun and harm someone chances are good that said person will find a way. It is a sad but true fact. Gun crimes are very often accomplished by illegal Gun procurement. Find a way to prevent this from occurring , problem solved. Not going to happen. A steel bar or baseball bat are just as deadly in the wrong hands. Maybe if the girl had owned a legal ccw she may have had a chance to turn the situation in her favor. Unfortunately not the case. Leftards keep on punishing the decent law abiding , while the crimanals keep finding ways to harm them. A case of American Blind Justice. As Arlo Guthrie said.

  4. avatar Swarf says:

    How the hell do you let someone just walk out with one of your rental guns?

    If only my Negligent Fuckwittery law were on the books and enforceable.

    1. avatar Just the Facts says:

      “How the hell do you let someone just walk out with one of your rental guns?”

      Have you ever been to a busy range. There is a reason they keep your credit card/ID as a deposit. But what do you recommend? There is really no way to prevent a “rental theft” if someone is planning on murder / suicide inside of an hour after rental.

      The fact that they did not discover it until the next day is inexcusable, but still has NO impact on the crime that happened.

      1. avatar CZJay says:

        Simply hire someone to handle the rentals and returns. They have to keep an eye on everyone coming in and out of the range and make sure no one who rented a gun can simply walk out.

        Use a panic button to lock the door if someone tries to run out. Make your entry way a two door setup where you need to be buzzed in and out.

        I seen a gym in Poland (or Ukraine?) where there is a two step processes to enter. You can’t just walk in. Which is also good for protecting people from a terrorist coming in to commit mass murder. There are such setups for banks. I even see a gun shop like that before.

        1. avatar Geoff PR says:

          Buzz-in, buzz-out, and even double versions (a cage with a buzzed exit door) are used by some pawn shops I have frequented.

          Some places are buzz-out only, supposedly to deter someone from killing the shop proprietor…

        2. avatar Sian says:

          That’s a good idea for rental guns inventory control.

      2. avatar 16V says:

        Unless the would-be thief holds you the range employees at gunpoint as he exits, it is a painfully simple technical matter to identify a gun leaving the shop that shouldn’t.

        RFID tags in the gun stock and a frakkin’ cheap sensor. That’s all. Just like at your favorite big box. On your way out of the range, you walk past the counter to return your rented gun. If you don’t, the klaxons wail and the armed employees do their thing.

        CZJay, yes the sally port entry is the ultimate solution.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Agreed, so long as all employees are armed. Skip the dumbassery of some schools who believe metal detectors will keep guns out of the school by magic. Even without metal detectors, Sandy Hook was aware of a man approaching with a gun. The problem was there was no one there with any ability to stop him, or even slow him down. In this case, you KNOW the individual is armed, he has your own gun. Don’t start screwing with him before you draw.

  5. avatar billy-bob says:

    Murder – suicide at Joann Fabrics! Ban cloth! For the children!

    1. avatar 2004done says:

      Billy-Bob: I can’t figure out how he was able to get past the Yellow “Caution Tape,” because that is a lot more effective than the Order-of-Protection Paper.

  6. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

    “a personal protection order”
    Which wasn’t worth the paper it was printed on.

    1. avatar Kendahl says:

      Protection orders do either of two things. If the subject of the order cares about his future prospects, he will obey it to stay out of trouble. If not, the order is strong evidence to support his intended victim’s claim of self defense.

      1. avatar Just the Facts says:

        They also provide a legal way to arrest a person who violates one. Very useful to prevent encounters that can escalate. They do help in that aspect.

  7. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

    This situation also demonstrates that orders of protection or “extreme risk protection orders” can and will be c̶i̶r̶c̶u̶m̶v̶e̶n̶t̶e̶d̶ ̶b̶y̶ ̶a̶ c̶l̶e̶v̶e̶r̶ ̶a̶n̶d̶ ̶d̶e̶t̶e̶r̶m̶i̶n̶e̶d̶ ̶c̶r̶i̶m̶i̶n̶a̶l̶.̶ ̶ very effective at preventing prohibited persons from gaining access to firearms and committing murder, provided we close the gun rental loophole and require background checks for gun rentals, too.

    There, fixed it for you.

    1. avatar Just the Facts says:

      Protection orders provide the authority to arrest an individual if they are too close / come in contact to the named person, provide a legal way to removed firearms from a person’s possession and prevents purchasing a firearm from a FFL.
      That is all they do. Who, other than a “pro gunner” ever claimed that they do anything else?

    2. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Are we going to require background checks before you can steal a gun from the house down the street, or from a LEO, or his car, as well? Remember, he did not use a rental gun, he used a stolen gun.

  8. avatar Leighton Cavendish says:

    “No follow-up was done by law enforcement regarding the failed attempt to purchase a firearm while under court order.”- So the laws are in place. Enforce them…with HARSH and swift penalties.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Sorry, not going to happen. Would not produce the impetus for the *next* set of “common sense” restrictions on our guaranteed freedoms.

      1. avatar Just the Facts says:

        Yikes, you are a conspiracy theorist. Next thing you are going to suggest it that the cops have to protect you.

  9. avatar Kendahl says:

    Ranges have had people rent guns to off themselves on the premises. This guy took it to another level.

    Nebraska sheriffs issue handgun acquisition permits to those who don’t have concealed carry permits. Although it’s not required, the range I use insists on one of them for gun rentals. (So do gun clubs as a condition for membership.) They would not have rented to Olin. They also pay close enough attention to prevent theft. All the staff carry openly.

    Sooner or later, someone will commit murder with a substitute weapon after being denied a firearm. That’s the time to make the point that the only way to prevent murder is to stop the murderer.

    1. avatar Just the Facts says:

      What if he had a old carry permit that was not turned in. Does this range call in and see if they are valid?

    2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Kendahl,

      “Sooner or later, someone will commit murder with a substitute weapon after being denied a firearm.”

      Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding, ding!!! We have a winner.

      A person who is determined to murder someone can easily succeed without a firearm.
      All they have to do is purchase some steel flat stock, a file, and a roll of tape at their local hardware store for about $20. Fashioning a wicked sword out of that piece of steel is as simple as wrapping tape around one end for a handle and sharpening the rest with the file. It would take about two hours maximum. (And if the “artisan” has a belt sander, they can fashion that sword in about 15 minutes.)

      This is just one of countless possibilities.

      1. avatar Nanashi says:

        A flail can be done with just a piece of solid, heavy, metal (wood or stone in a pinch), a hole, rope and a handle. Hell, just soap and a sock works well.

        Just some fabric, basic sewing skills and a rock can make a sling, though good luck in CQB.

      2. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Or, you could just *buy* a machete for 6-8 bucks. I am sure all these things have happened many times, we haven’t heard about it because guns were not involved.

  10. avatar Vic Nighthorse says:

    Every time I seen your name I think of the Democrat congressmen John Dingells in MI. I am sorry about that. Kinda like being named Michael Bolton I suppose.

    1. avatar Shallnot BeInfringed says:

      Oh, you mean that no-talent ass clown?

  11. avatar former water walker says:

    Pretty sure I could walk out with a rental gun at Deb’s gun range in Hammond,Indiana. I’m from Illinois and they don’t ask me anything…the other’s no way. Employees actually paying attention works😩

  12. avatar TexasGunGal says:

    Well by offing himself at least he saved taxpayers a lot of money for life in prison, probably without possibility of parole.

    Tragic for ex-girlfriend and all family members, friends.
    The most dangerous time for a woman is when she gets a restraining order. By that time it’s too late
    He could have easily picked another way to murder, but no had to use a handgun. What a coward.
    Hope he was in the Express Lane to Hell.

  13. avatar Clark says:

    Well, the range could have implemented an inventory tag that sounds an alarm when it goes through the doors. Since the rental guns should never leave the premises, there’s no need for an accessible tag deactivator. Most guns have something like accessory rails that ranges could attach stuff to without affecting grip. But I have no idea how expensive that kind of system is. Really, that or background check prior to renting are the only two things that could realistically have made a difference. Though I admit even with an inventory control system, would the police have responded quickly enough to make a difference? Even if an officer was next door, could they have found the guy given even a next door response time is nonzero?

    1. avatar Nanashi says:

      Most (the rental only full autos being the main exception) of the range guns for my nearest store+range are available for sale as used guns (can’t have anything that takes serious time to remove or will leave a mark), and most of them are concealed carry guns (no rail slot, nowhere to tag).

  14. avatar CZJay says:

    Uh oh. Now people are going to be calling for Korea style gun ranges: “chaining” the guns to the shooting booth and supervision.

    When I rented a gun at a gun range, they were ready to shoot you if you tried to use the gun to commit a crime or run out the door with the gun. You have to sign in and show ID. They had the gun display/rental area away from the door and the entry to the range further than that. They could see into the range via windows. They might have had a panic button to lock the front door too. It didn’t feel like I could walk out with the gun.

    I don’t know how some worker could sit there, talk with a guy, let him rent a gun, then not see him walk out without returning the gun. They didn’t even notice they had a gun missing!? That is some negligence right there. You can’t treat your gun rentals like business cards.

    1. avatar Big Bill says:

      “I don’t know how some worker could sit there, talk with a guy, let him rent a gun, then not see him walk out without returning the gun.”

      It’s really easy. That guy is talking to someone else (I seriously doubt this range, or any range, could afford to have a 1:1 ratio of employees assigned to watch each and every person who rents a gun), and just didn’t notice the guy walk out.
      I’ve had to wait behind people to both check in to the range I use, and to check out. Meanwhile, the range people behind the counter are busy checking people in, explaining how the rental guns work, selling targets and ammo, and checking people out.

      “They didn’t even notice they had a gun missing!? That is some negligence right there.”
      I have to agree here. I would think that part of the closing routine would be to at least count the rental guns to see if the count is what it’s supposed to be. If it isn’t, then I would think the next step would be to determine which gun(s) are missing, and use the ID collected would then be immediately given to the police. Obviously, not even this was done.

  15. avatar DrDKW says:

    If there’s already an NCIS system in place, using it for gun rentals makes sense. Otherwise, as 16V said, just put an RFID chip behind the grip, like WalMart and other stores have done for years in packages of small, easily stolen items, like camera memory cards and DVDs.
    Of course, the gun-grabbers will still want to pile on all sorts of draconian regulations anyway!

    DrDKW

    1. avatar Big Bill says:

      RFID chips are wonderful. If they work properly.
      I see containers for wallets for sale that protect your wallet or passport from RFID theft. I easily imagine such a bag being made very easily that would protect the thief from being caught because the gun equipped with an RFID chip is inside the bag.
      Maybe I’m the only one who has the imagination to think of such a thing, but I seriously doubt it.

      1. avatar Sian says:

        You don’t have to tell the customers that your rental guns have RFID tags that will cause screamers to go off if they pass the unavoidable nondescript-looking post on their way out without turning it in first.

        1. avatar Big Bill says:

          Those bollards are pretty easily recognized everywhere they are used. They need to be close to the chip to activate them, and tend to stand out. There’s not many reasons to have posts right inside the doors.
          But if I can figure out how to foil them, so can a thief.

  16. avatar MLee says:

    Court orders, laws, protection orders, extreme risk orders don’t mean sh– If you are in danger, the only thing that’s going to save your stupid ass is a gun IN YOUR HAND, when you need it and BE ABLE AND WILLING TO USE IT.

  17. avatar Soylent Green says:

    The point here is not about the rental firearm policy.

    What is important is that the man was very dangerous and was left to wander about after being investigated and hospitalized. Those people and their function, failed us. He could have as easily run her down in the parking lot, beat her to death with a bat or his fist, or set fire to her, with the same outcome.

    It’s not about guns; it’s about the complete inability of “agencies” to determine the extent of the violence these people are capable of, even when they are directly brought to their attention. This is what needs fixing. I’m not claiming it’s an easy task, but every time we blame the object, the root cause gets no attention.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      All those “agencies” have no authority to infringe on your freedoms because they somehow decide you may do something. Called “prior restraint” and very, very bad idea. You have to DO something before all those wonderful agencies can do shit for you. If you’re like me, you’d rather survive that “something”, and the answer to that concept is CARRY.

  18. avatar Wiregrass says:

    This failure of a GVRO to actually prevent a murderer from achieving his goals won’t be seen by the leftists as an example of the futility of such laws, but rather it will reinforce their belief that all guns are inherently evil and their resolve in pursuit of their true goal of removing them from society. Again ignoring the futility.

  19. avatar Kap says:

    going to be tough, when zip guns are used, everyone buying pipe, wood, clothespins and or nails will be suspect and have too pass a back ground checks along with strict Ammo checks! Charcoal will also be heavily watched for abuse along with rust and sugar! Basically will like alcohol prohibition lots of people getting snuffed for a constitutional right called freedom of choice! then Anarchy as the people of the gun will rebel and use those instruments for personnel protection from the Chaos resulting from these Anti- American Super Rich

  20. avatar Michigan Mom says:

    Multiple problems here.

    First, Mr. Olin was released from the hospital after it was specifically determined by a doctor that he was a danger to himself and/or others.

    Second, no law requiring Dicker and Deal to report the attempted sale of a firearm by someone who is restricted from purchasing one.

    Third that it is completely 100% legal for someone who is restricted from owning or even possessing a firearm, to actually possess a firearm.

    Four, that someone can walk out of a gun shop with a gun and no one notices. Not at the time, not at all–they NEVER notice. They notice his i.d. is still there and attempt to call Mr. Olin–twice–to say “hey buddy, you left your i.d. here, please come get it” yet it never occurs to anyone (four employees were interviewed) to check to see if the firearm was returned. Additionally, two undercover reporters visited the gun shop a week or so later and they were still just as lax as they were before this incident. Total Firearms has also had problems in the past (accidentally renting a firearm to a felon on parole for a firearm violation, using his prison inmate i.d. card) and it’s only a matter of time before this place is shut down for good.

    While it’s true that someone who is bent on obtaining a firearm to kill someone will find a way to do just that, we need to not make it so damn easy for them.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email