Article quote: "A fellow church-goer said the victim is the grandfather of
Jenning's son."So doesn't this mean that the shooter
just shot his father or father-in-law?Either way, what a
mess.....My prayers go out to the man who was shot and his familiy.
To A Guy with a Brain,It took me some figuring too to figure out their
relationship, except I'd bet it isn't his father in law because he
probably isn't married to his son's mother (ie, to his girlfriend.)
"Police have named Charles Richard Jennings, 35, as a suspect. .... A fellow
church-goer said the victim is the grandfather of Jenning's son."Ahmmmm. I echo another commentator in asking if the means the victim is
the suspect's father?Is the vagueness due to the fact that this
happened on "Father's Day" and describing their relationship
straight up would be insensitive somehow?Very tragic crime but made
more so by the weird reporting.
What a terrible thing to happen, especially in church and especially on
Father's Day. And most especially if the young boy had to witness his
father shoot his gradnfather.Sympathies to all.
The father of his ex-girlfriend, I'm assuming. Women have babies with
losers, and their parents suffer -- in this case, suffer in the extreme. Hope
the loser is locked up for the rest of his life.
That's one scary looking dude. Glad he's off the street.
It may be that that was the quote they were given and that the commentator, who
was afraid of being identified as someone who had spoken to them, didn't
want to elaborate.
Except the article stated: "related to by marriage", so doesn't
that mean they would have to have been married, at some point? :)
clarifications. yes, father-in-law. They are married, not just a boyfriend.
Most of the articles/newscasts have stupid errors and misquotes. The grandson
was not in Mass (thankfully) but their daughter witnessed her husband shoot her
father! Prayers are needed obviously regardless of the errors in reporting.
Now that all the readers have figured out how they were related, let's get
to the true but sad fact of the story. He should NOT have had a gun, maybe a
little regulation could have prevented this guy from shooting his father in law.
Someone tell me why the woman was asleep at noon on FATHER'S DAY?
If guilty he should get 30 years for shooting his father in law in the back of
the head and another 20 for doing it in a time when people will try to use this
as an excuse to take away second amendment rights.
On pg 1, he's Charles Richard Jennings, 35; on pg. 2, he's
"Jenson" with a criminal history.
Dubai Holladay Are you kidding? Assuming you did not say a little regulation in
jest. It is well known there is a law preventing criminals from buying guns.
Also felons are not allowed to possess guns. Seem like a lot of regulation did
not work. Huh? Go figure.Maybe there is in the desert you do not get the news
Utah does not permit the carrying of a concealed weapon in churches. It is a
sad fact that criminals target "safe" zones for shootings so that they
can get away with their crimes. Case in point is the Aurora shooting in
Colorado. The gunman passed several theaters to get to the theater he used
because it is a place that has a sign in the window banning concealed weapons.
Maybe Utah should reconsider their law on where a person can carry a concealed
weapon. After all, there is a church around every corner in Utah.
Second amendment, spelling errors and lousy editing aside, the thing that
catches my attention is that our children and grandchildren (yes I am older than
dirt) live with and marry people who are barely housebroken who lean toward
violence to solve their problems.Much of our social problems seem to
focus on people who cannot govern themselves in society. They do violence to
themselves and others and have no regard for anyone but themselves. They run
with scissors and do not play nice with the other children on the playground.
A free society only works when people are responsible and respectful
of the other people in the society. An angry person with a weapon will not
respect any law. It is sad what was done, and when the motive(s) come out we may
be surprised at the pettiness of the problem as it relates to the act of
Rodney Dangerfield is famous for saying, "I get no respect," and that
certainly applies to God who gets no respect in this permissive out-of-control
culture driven by love of pleasure and everything ungodly. God, Jesus, family,
and religion in general, get no respect, starting with the President who claims
to be Christian but espouses non-Christian anti-God causes. Constitutional
requirement sworn office-holders to enforce the law but Obama refused to protect
the Defense of Marriage Act, and is now his military department is forbidding
military chaplains to pray over dead military in the name of Jesus. So should
there be any surprise at the random violence, even in places of worship?
Albert Maslar CPA,,,,,,,,Very thoughtful comments but in
this case everything you say is quite likely above the mental capacity of
suspect in this case to comprehend. A person would have to read the news and be
politically aware to know what it is that you're talking about.
"....should there be any surprise at the random violence, even in places of
worship?...."______________________________None at all in
a country where citizens are so heavily-armed.See? I can imagine
correlations and refract broad generalizations from the least bit of material as
well as the next guy.
@coloradoblue"It is a sad fact that criminals target "safe"
zones for shootings so that they can get away with their crimes. "Last I checked 10,000 people a year die from gun violence and yet we are
shocked when shootings happen in churches, schools, or other "gun free
zones" because of how rare they are. The math doesn't add up on your