Oak Park drive-by shooting kills young man

Police are investigating the deadly drive-by shooting of a young man in Oak Park, but haven’t released a suspect or vehicle description, and have no known motive. 

The incident occurred Thursday on the 3100 block of 39th Street at 12:44 p.m., Sacramento Police Department Spokesman Doug Morse said. The victim – identified as 19-year-old Anthony Navarro – was shot multiple times while on foot near the suspect vehicle, and died later at the hospital, police say. 

Police had detained several people who may have been witnesses, at Martin Luther King and 7th Avenue, and a large number of officers – including some from the gang unit – were on scene. Several shell casings could be seen on the ground. 

"They have some witnesses they’re talking to, and as soon as they get done with those interviews, hopefully we’ll have a better idea of what happened," Morse said. 

There was also a disturbance at the UC Davis Medical Center, which police were dispatched to, which may have been related to the victim’s death. 

Oak Park, one of Sacramento’s largest neighborhoods, has been undergoing a revitalization recently, and Thursday’s incident serves as a reminder of how much work remains, said Oak Park Neighborhood Association President Michael Boyd. 

Boyd was surprised and taken aback when he learned of the news Thursday, and said fatal shootings aren’t very common in the area. "It’s quite shocking, actually," he said. "This is not something we’re accustomed to, nor something we want or will tolerate, but stuff happens in a modern society, doesn’t it." 

The SPD request anyone with information pertaining to this crime to contact the dispatch center at (916) 264-5471 or Crime Alert at (916) 443-HELP (4357) or text in a tip to 274637 (CRIMES). Enter SACTIP followed by the tip information. Callers can remain anonymous and may be eligible for a reward of up to $1,000.

Editor’s note: The “News Digest” goes out every Tuesday morning and highlights our best stories, photos and videos from the week prior. Sign me up.

Conversation Express your views, debate, and be heard with those in your area closest to the issue. RSS Feed

January 17, 2013 | 2:34 PM

Seems like most murders are caused by guns. Yeah the NRA is right. Guns don’t kill people, people do…. er.. that is people with guns do. And let’s always blame gangs and drug. Even though gangs and drugs are just as prevalent in places where murder-by-gun is simply unacceptable, not because they have tougher sentencing but tougher gun control. You know, commie-fascistic states like Australia, United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Germany, France, Japan, and so one. Oh and be sure to never, ever blame the gun manufacturers who fund the NRA.

January 17, 2013 | 3:18 PM

My wife was visiting family in the U.K when the riots were going on by the so-called “hooded youths.”

There were crowds outside her parents’ buildings, and they were afraid of them coming in and hurting them. They couldn’t go outside for over a day because they could see what the punks were doing to people they didn’t like.

Her father, a former Royal Marine, isn’t allowed to own a gun and was powerless to stop a crowd had they decided to break in (which was happening elsewhere).

Taking guns away isn’t the answer. Addressing the reasons for the violence is. My wife is home without me sometimes, and I’m glad to know she has a .40-calibre handgun and knows how to use iut. If someone came in and wanted to rape her or something, she can stop him.

January 17, 2013 | 3:38 PM

Except that the NRA is funded by the dues of millions of individual members, many of whom are your neighbors. Doesn’t that make you wet your pants.

But hey, don’t let history get in the way of your conspiracy theory. Your gun ban would work as well as the ones in Chicago and DC, after all:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324081704578235460300469292.html?mod=hp_opinion

But leaving the decent people helpless and more dependent on the pols, while the criminals get free reign, is a feature, not a bug, to certain pols.

January 17, 2013 | 4:01 PM

Mark,
I appreciate your viewpoint. But as a legal, law-abiding gun owner, I don’t really see how restricting my constitutional rights will prevent gang drive-by’s.

January 17, 2013 | 4:15 PM

Wow, a jump to the gun control debate in record time.

January 17, 2013 | 4:31 PM

I don’t wet my pants and I don’t need guns to feel safe. I’m an grown up. People always cry ” what about the decent law abiding people?” What about them? Guns do not make them safer. How many people do you hear about that fend off would be attackers with their guns? It’s all a big delusion.

January 17, 2013 | 4:35 PM

curmudgeon–about half of the NRA’s funding comes from members. A lot does come from gun manufacturers. I’m not sure if you imagine them to be a benevolent organization free of conflict of interest, but I think it’s safe to say they have an interest in higher gun sales. http://factcheck.org/2013/01/do-assault-weapons-sales-pay-nra-salaries/

January 17, 2013 | 4:35 PM

George, I find it very hard to understand why your father in law is not allowed to own a fire-arm in the UK: I also have a friend who is a recently retired royal marine, and look forward to shooting his shotguns when I visit him in a few months. Can you point me to which gun laws you are referring to, maybe via a link?

Curmudgeon, welcome back.

January 17, 2013 | 4:53 PM

Julian – I don’t want to do that at work, but I’ll fill you in from memory. Handguns are verboten, and other guns usually need to be stored at shooting ranges or clubs (oftentimes in police possession).

It’s been years since I’ve lived there, so I can’t give you today’s specifics, but it’s to the point where the bomb squad was called out when a shop owner found a .22 round outside his front door a few years ago.

You can own a front-stuffer (that’s a musket like my forefathers subjugated you yanks with a few hundred years ago), but even if you put a bayonet on it, it will make a flash and bang and some smoke, you’ll miss and the baddie will laugh at you and do what he likes.

The CCTV cameras everywhere and the DNA database are also reasons I’m glad I don’t call it home anymore.

But I am sad it’s come to that.

January 17, 2013 | 5:11 PM

Hey Mark
Congrats on not wetting your pants. I totally respect your decision not to own a firearm.

But what issue do you have with sane, non-criminal adults exercising their constitutional right to own a firearm? Honestly, that should be the last thing in the world you should be concerned about.

Actually I don’t see how my constitutional rights and how I choose to legally exercise them are anybody else’s business, including the government. So this is a bit of bizarre conversation to even consider that I shouldn’t have something because someone else is “uncomfortable” with it.

January 17, 2013 | 5:22 PM

Cogmeyer – no one has suggested that your guns be taken away – either here or by presidential decree.

Your constitutional rights become of concern to other people when the interpretation of them and the exercising of them impinges on other people’s constitutional rights. It isn’t a really difficult concept to understand.

January 17, 2013 | 10:41 PM

Julian
Mark’s initial comment is essentially that “guns DO kill people”. And his second comment states that gun ownership is a pointless and “delusional” act. Mark is clearly suggesting that people shouldn’t own guns. But neither of said anything about the mechanism on how that would occur, you brought taking guns away to the discussion yourself. But thanks for omnisciently quelling all my fears.

To your second point, how does my legal, law-abiding, sane and safe gun ownership impinge on someone else’s constitutional right? You say it isn’t difficult to understand so please spell it out.

cca
Avatar of cca
January 18, 2013 | 11:39 AM

Cogmeyer, you said: “To your second point, how does my legal, law-abiding, sane and safe gun ownership impinge on someone else’s constitutional right?”

Answer: When that legal, law-abiding, sane and safe gun ownership turns into not so legal, not so safe accidental shooting of someone or when someone totally loses it and kills another. Keep in mind I’m not speaking of you specifically, but we’ve all heard stories of love triangles gone bad, folks killing spouses, things like that. Or perhaps an example from San Diego on New Year’s a few years back when a Navy officer went balistic and killed a woman, her brother, and an acquaintance because the woman he had a crush on that evening didn’t reciprocate and had met a man she was interested in earlier that evening–that being the acquaintance mentioned above.

January 17, 2013 | 3:37 PM

Minivans are totally gangster.

January 17, 2013 | 4:00 PM

Tragic as the Oak Park shooting, and every shooting in this country are – and with no disrespect to the memory of this and all victims of gun violence – the fact that the conversation goes immediately to gun laws and rights is a further indication that we are finally having a discussion that NEEDS to be had

January 17, 2013 | 4:04 PM

It’s been that way since I moved here from the U.K. Unfortunately, we had that discussion there, and all it ended up doing was disarming the people who wouldn’t commit crimes with them.

Yes, guns are often stolen from legal owners to commit crimes – like Sandy Hook – but the discussion on guns is too knee-jerk and too deep-seeded.

We have been killing each other since the dawn of time. I don’t think we will ever stop, sad as that is.

January 17, 2013 | 5:28 PM

But interestingly, the UK always has had lower rates of violent crime and murder than the US, even before the Brits had their guns taken away Similarly, Canadians have access to guns similar to the US but also has a far lower violent crime and murder rate.

I wish folks would spend more time analyzing why America is such and unhinged, violence prone place and less time looking in my gun safe.

January 17, 2013 | 5:31 PM

At the same time George, the UK does have a much lower gun violence rate. And although part of this is culture, and part law, the UK situation is a lot better than the USA.

Unfortunately it has taken an incident like Sandy Hook to jump start this conversation – and for those that think it is an inappropriate time to discuss it, well they have there right to be silent. You cant of course, ask others to be silent on the issue: Free speech is very much protected in the USA.

Changing gun violence and altering the US gun culture will be a slow process. But just as opinions we’re changed about women’s rights, and the rights of minorities, I believe that public opinion can also be changed on this issue. Lets hope so: The USA is better than this.

January 18, 2013 | 9:52 AM

Julian – That is true, yet I oddly find that I feel safer in the U.S. than the U.K.

I can’t back that up with any data or facts, but that’s just how I feel. I can’t really explain it.

January 17, 2013 | 7:18 PM

Do some these folks writing to support gun rights think whoever did this walked into KMart or WalMart to get their guns… No, they steal them from card caring NRA members.. safe in the knowledge the gun owners will never report the crime and face the ‘embarrassment’.

One solution is to hold the last registered owner of a gun at least civilly liable for any crimes committed with the gun. That is the case if you sell your car and don’t ensure the sale is recorded through DMV, no reason why the theory should not also apply to something whose only purpose is to kill things.

January 17, 2013 | 7:28 PM

I offer my heart, prayers and love to the family, friends, anyone and everyone affected by this tragic death. I do not have to know the victim who died prematurely or his family to mourn his passing. My heart aches for the grief and sorrow you experience. I pray you are lifted and given comfort through your great pain. In the words of Dr King, ‘We are all woven from the same garment; what affects one of us directly affects all of us indirectly” To me, nothing is more important at this moment than your loss and pain. My prayers are with the family.

January 17, 2013 | 7:51 PM

Re: Boyd was surprised and taken aback when he learned of the news Thursday, and said fatal shootings aren’t very common in the area. “It’s quite shocking, actually,” he said. “This is not something we’re accustomed to….”
Is he not accustomed to it because until recently the deaths were swept under the rug? and not high profile enough? I recall a youth being shot and killed on 34th and Temple Park, another on 33rd and 5th avenue, another on MLK and 10th avenue, another on 8th Avenue, a 16yr old on San Jose… 19yr old Jai laid dead on Broadway and 42nd with his sister laying over his body. His blood filling her shirt, he looked in her eyes and said, ‘Please don’t leave me” Then he died, struggling to live, he left her. He took his last breath in his young sisters arms. I recall a mother calling me crying that she moved her children out of Oak Park so her son could live afraid he would die and a month later, as our cries echo from one neighborhood to another the 17yr old was shot and killed.
AND I recall Oak Park getting a weed and seed grant – the majority of the grant went to Law enforcement to weed out the criminal element with a multi jurdisctional task force to attempt to arrest away a problem AND I recall the thoughts towards the insignificant, unacceptable effort of the seed portion. The neighborhood association meeting I attended in Oak Park in regards to the weed and seed grant; they were planning on using it to have neighborhood bar-b-ques. A great deal of thought,effort, money to build an army for suppression and weed out people AND the simple-minded, little effort, little funding portion of the grant was to have a neighborhood bar-b-que as seeding -considered resources, opportunities. Some considered a community lacking resources, employment… were to eat at a bar-b-que to compete with massive, multi-jurdisctional task force suppression. FYI, we’re already having bar-b-ques usually at the car washes that we’re holding to afford a funeral and bury our child.

January 17, 2013 | 8:42 PM

And can you please change the title of this article? A family and friends are mourning. They deserve better than ” …. leaves one dead”. Dang, One what? Heck, Teen or Youth fatally shot in Drive By sounds better than putting the (suspect or crime-Drive by) before the victim (one dead).

For Petes sake, It was not a simple drive by that took someones childs life. We can’t solve a complex issue with simple thought. The victim and suspect are “usually” hurting someone just like themselves, usually the same economic and ethnic background. Instead of looking at drive by why are we not looking at what they need, why do some show little value for the life of someone just like themselves, why are they hurting themselves? Why are so many living in economically deprived and neglected envorinments/ communities showing little regard for life and freedom. PERHAPS it is because their life is valued by so few, heck someone child is gone, will be buried 6 feet in the ground and I read so few if any comments regarding the premature loss of another of Sacramento’s youth, the family’s pain, and then to add insult to injury the title of this article perhaps, if more valued their lives the youth would in turn value the life of others like themselves. What is wrong with the youth? Well, appears they’re a reflection of so many others and a product of a neglectful suppression oriented greedy….environment

January 17, 2013 | 9:22 PM

And just so you’re aware, the media has played a role in the ignorance associated with youth violence prevention for years and taking from the needy to give to the greedy. A few years ago, I’d read articles on SacBee when a youth suspect was arrested for homicide. I wondered WHO was the victim?? We weren’t high profile – unless a business was affected or money was needed for suppression. Their was never an article about the victim. In 2005 a bear died and had four paragraphs underneath it their was a 3 line article of a death of a Valley Hi youth. The focus of the media for years was on the suspect and not the person who lost their life and the media provided many articles for Law enforcement and their alleged “new tool in crime fighting tool belt….”

Now, this is what I see when I read the title of your article: Oak Park Drive By Shooting Leaves One Dead- (Listed below in the order you wrote the title)
1) OAK PARK—– You put the district first which calls for District 5 Councilmember to have a knee jerk reaction with suppression– funding for law enforcement
2) DRIVE BY—— which always seems to have many show a little less compasion for the victims and their family suffering. We associate gangs with Drive By, so many will see it gang related– again funding for law enforcement. (perhaps some were in a gang but the crime was often not gang related— sometimes over a girl or another non gang related issue)
3) SHOOTING—- which brings all kinds of topics, posts, comments to occur on gun laws…, more officers…. When those committing the offense usually are not legally getting the guns anyway and many are already getting life or close to life in prison– and again funding for law enforcement
4) LEAVES ONE DEAD—- you did not humanize the VICTIM- he is just one dead. He is not being seen as a victim as worthy of our love. NOW, no funding for prevention– AGAIN funding for law enforcement
Can you now see my concerns????? You could have just as easily wrote, Teen or youth Loses Life in Fatal Shooting (or Drive By Shooting) in Oak Park. I wonder, do you see us? Why are our victims last?? Do you see those of us affected and exposed to the violence or are you also looking at Council and law enforcement and knee jerk reactions, putting band-aids on fractures??

January 17, 2013 | 10:28 PM

Rhonda i understand your sensitivity to how this is being portrayed. But I would suggest that SacPress is reporting this a lot better than the local TV news, whose message will be a blur of flashing lights and police tape that “stay away from gang infested Oak Park”.

I also would suggest that the “no snitch” policy so pervasive in many neighborhoods is equally dehumanizing (and cowardly). Its not all the media’s fault.

Again thanks Rhonda for keeping all the other violence that happens outside of midtown in the forefront of our minds.

January 18, 2013 | 10:50 PM

Cogmeyer, I commented below to your comment in regards snitching… But I can’t rest until I add their is not a “no snitch” policy. Everybody telling on everyone else which has increased the shootings/ killings. And since the crimes of teens and youth are often in the presence of other teens/ youth and CA law can sentence them all for the offense – all can face life- the shootings continue to increase to avoid life imprisonment. We’re not talking about middle aged organized crime lords, We’re talking about teens/ youth ignorantly shooting on impulse Cowardly? When 17yr old Navid was shot he was in a car with his friend. His friend frantically drove trying to find him help as Navid was laying on the passenger seat dying. When 18yr old Christine was shot she was driving the vehicle, her friend on the passenger as the car was wrecking he was crying out for her not to die. When 17yr old Deantwean was shot his two friends were laying over his body yelling don’t die please don’t die. People are not just dying, so many are witnessing death. They haven’t had military training they’re not prepared for seeing death, yet people are dying in their arms. How many middle aged adults have witnessed murder? How many have watched someone they love die with gunshot wounds throughout their body? and having their friends blood pouring onto their clothes as they die in their arms? I can name hundreds of deaths witnessed by hundreds more.

January 18, 2013 | 11:00 PM

And when officers arrive often times they are in psychological frozen state and treated like suspects WHEN they just watched someone die. Their wasn’t a grief counselor to assist them. They were taken and questioned when they just witnessed death. I don’t know if words can come out of my mouth at that moment either. AND having seen someone die it seems to me they’re aware they can die at the hands of that person too. I don’t see them as cowards.

It’s a wonder they haven’t taken their own life having the reminisce of death in their eyes. A mother called me when her teenage son was shot. He went blocks from his house to get soda and chips. She heard sirens…. and knew it could not be her son. She waited and waited for him to come home. He didn’t. He was shot in front of the store. She later learned her son was shot and the paramedics had arrived but had to wait on the officers. The officers arrived and immediately began questioning the teen, asking him what gang he was in. He repeatedly said he was not in a gang and wanted his mother and wanted to get to the hospital. But they were trying to identify more gang members…. The paramedics stated they needed to cut his pants. He asked for something to cover his genitals. An officer asked whats the matter afraid someone wants to look at your lil ding dong? Can you imagine being shot, scared and treated this way? I told the mother to debrief that child before he is angry at the world. My point is so much happens that causes so much anger and so many are not getting the professional treatment from having lived in a war zone within our city. I don’t see them as cowards I see them as survivors having lived a life many middle aged adults who have not been in the military at war have never experienced. Nearly every death of a teen has been witnessed by multiple teens and not significantly treated. I look into the eyes of so many and I see pain, sorrow and death – not cowards.

January 17, 2013 | 9:28 PM

Rhonda, my apologies for the headline that may have come across as dehumanizing. It certainly wasn’t my intention. Thanks for sharing your thoughts and concerns, I’ll keep them in mind as I continue reporting on this and other stories. The Sac Press and I welcome your feedback and criticism, and appreciate your insight.

Article Author
January 18, 2013 | 6:13 AM

thank you cogmeyer for your comment as well. I don’t have much time, have to go back to work soon, but I have several things I’d like to point out. I wish people were told the truth. I understand why you’re not because 1) it won’t aid in funding for law enforcement and 2) could aid in funding for prevention which some see as taking away funding for Law enforcement

But who do you think is solving crimes? If litle to no resources goes to funding into keeping us alive why would people think massive resources goes into solving our crimes?? When truth is, the money goes into creating maintaining jobs for law enforcement ( i will give you an example when I have more time)

Sac has a very impressive arrest rate. WHY? Because the people are “snitching” But you’ll be told different so a union can get more officers (dues)

WHY? Do you think their are so many shootings? knee jerk reaction to so many “snitching” and so many assaults in prisons? Those “snitching” whose names are on paperwork for a crime later arrested assaulted in prisons. I know people shot and killed the day their name was on paperwork. I have to go back to work. But I have some additional information I would like to share. And I never said it was the media’s fault, their are lots of contributing factors and we, those of us within a community affected and exposed to violence share in the blame/ fault. Again, thank you

January 18, 2013 | 1:59 PM

Thank you Ms Wilkinson, I appreciate “young man” It helps families take steps towards healing to know the life or death of their child was deemed as worthy of being more than just another ‘one dead” And that is extremely important to me, in fact if nothing else was to be changed that matters most.

Also, I don’t believe it was your intention. I apologize for writing as I did, I am hurt, angry, outraged and fed up. Heck, I believe everything happens for a reason, see the glass as half full verses half empty and perhaps it was just met to be written as it was so I could vent….. Who knows, whatever the reason. we move forward. It means a great deal to me that you, Sac Press, gave us all a voice. I appreciate and respect you and Sac Press for it. Thank you

January 18, 2013 | 8:46 PM

Cogmeyer, Here is 1 example i mentioned i would list. Several years ago, former police chief najera approched city council requesting 6.4 milion dollars for 10 additional officers to be put in schools. I went to city hall to protest it… told it’s temporary to reduce crime… I argued it will become job security they won’t want to lose those positions and you’ll keep feeding them resources, funding…when they come back next budget for the same funding. I sat in disbelief at the council session as the LE presentation was given by then chief Najara and a 16yr old McClatchy student, Roberto’s, death was described as being one of the reasons. The council was mislead with the officer stating he was killed at the school. But the truth was he was shot and killed on a day he was suspended from school, not even at the school. Instead of more officers in schools, the council should of asked what can be done to ensure the teens were in school. Another school shooting mentioned was at Rio Cazadero in valley Hi and the officer failed to tell the council was the 17yr old took the gun to school distraut over a break up with a girlfriend (to hurt himself) a school official took the gun officers arrived and a shooting occured. But it was not the youth it was an officer who mistakenly shot (not seriously injured) the school security/ official. So officers in schools could be dangerous as well. Not one crime listed in the presentation actually occured at the schools during school hours or occured as stated. Our deaths were used to gain funding. I made a 3 min comment and tried to inform the council of the misinformation they were given and tell them the truth having spoke with friends or family members of victims. But they wouldn’t take this mothers word and believed the elaborate misinformation in the presentation used for funding. LE got their 6.4 million. We got less resources in the community.

Shortly after i went to county supervisors and could not believe when MILLLIONS were requested for 10 motorcycles by then sheriff blanas followed by McGinness who gave a gang presentaiton and stated the motorcycles were needed to patrol gang areas. I spoke at the comment session asking if officers are not riding in gang areas in bullet proof cars WHY would we beleive they’d ride in them at night on the back of motorcycles??? The motorcycle units were used to hide out in non gang infested areas on busy motor traffic streets blocks apart from each other in the day time to come out and chase down folks speeding and issue speeding tickets. But the money was given off the backs of our dead youth on the pretense it would bring down crime and needed for gangs. Everytime someone wanted money to enhance their departments they cried gangs and we loss more resources and ended up with more gangs….And the more identified as gang members the more funding they would need. I have lots of examples I can share of so much misinformation that has been given to the public and council. In fact I’ve learned so much the last 7 years I can’t even begin to tell it all. But at your request I can and will share more information. And to use Boyds words in truth, most of what i can share is quite Shocking but shamefully something too many of us have become accustomed to, something too many others want to tolerate, but stuff happens in a greed led society.

January 18, 2013 | 9:04 PM

And another thing when our juvenile court officials wanted to enhance their departments they requested 30 million dollars stating it was to improve juvenile hall for the teens and families would “feel better” in the nicer building. The 30 million dollar building provides very nice courtrooms for our judges and court personel. I’ve been their many times with many families and not once did any of them “feel better” as they sat in the seats without cushions to wait to walk into the courtroom to see their child be tried as an adult or sent back to stay in the overcrowded living quarters if I’m not mistaken some were sleeping on the floor. The 30 million dollars wasn’t for the teens to empower the teens to rebuild their wayward lives, the money was needed to build nice court chambers.

January 18, 2013 | 9:45 AM

“Mark is clearly suggesting that people shouldn’t own guns.” Nope Mark is not suggesting this. I’m suggesting that we follow that Republikan demigod Ronald Reagan in supporting gun control. It is that simple and nothing more. No one is saying that all guns should be removed from the dead cold hands of law abiding citizens. This country’s obsession with guns is fueled by an unhealthy paranoia and social disconnect. It’s pretty obvious now that a huge chunk of the population is functionally mentally ill – they believe in utter nonsense and have allowed themselves to be used by manipulators on the far right and left, becoming paranoid and unhinged. There’s no point in trying to appeal to their rational thinking. Like a smart religious person they will convince themselves of a lie by twisting logic in a knot. And almost all the gun lovers I have met, screaming about their so-called constitutional right, almost never give a damn about other people’s rights, constitutional or otherwise. It’s all about them. Will gun control stop all gun violence. No. Just as the proliferation of guns hasn’t made us safer. But it might prevent more mass killings. Look we’ve tried it the gun lovers way and look where it’s taken us. Why are we be led around by frighten, paranoid people?

January 18, 2013 | 11:31 AM

An annual report released by California attorney general Kamala Harris called “Firearms Used in the Commission of Crimes” shows that the guns that scare us and the guns that kill us aren’t one in the same. The most recent report details that handguns constitute 90 percent of firearms used in California crimes. What California calls “fully-automatic weapons” comprise less than one percent of firearms used in California crimes, with all guns classified as “assault weapons” under California law constituting just five percent of firearms used in crime.

January 18, 2013 | 10:17 AM

By-the-way, I see gun regulation as moderate measures taken to avoid the draconian measures that the paranoid class are so worried about. In other words, the gun lovers are shooting themselves in the foot by fighting against common sense gun regulations.

But something else is going on here. There are some Americans who delight in social unrest. Some of these are not interested in being ‘law-abiding citizens’ Some are criminals, others are making money on it, and then there is a group of racists and religious fanatics who are arming themselves to “take back the country”. Why do we imagine such things can only happen in foreign lands?

January 19, 2013 | 12:32 AM

That one man dead is my child my son was murdered and everybody wants to scream gun control wake up guns dont kill people people do! You need to report facts the disturbance at the hospital was me Anthonys mother yelling at the Sac pd because theyre not doing anything to apprehend the people responsible for his murder! Sac pd at its finest my child is dead everybody knows whos responsible but thier walking free as my other children and i prepare to bury Anthony!!!

January 19, 2013 | 9:40 AM

Anthony’s mom, I offer my heart and prayers to you, your children, family and friends during this horrible time. In my heart I knew the disturbance was a mother’s pain. Because if it were my child I would disturb the world. I pray those responsible for taking Anthony from you are apprehended quickly and held responsibe for their actions. I realize this may give you little or no comfort but please know a community, who did not have to know your son, heart aches for your pain and is mourning your loss. If their is anything I can do, anyway I can help anyone I can reach to help you in any way please feel free to contact me. I have a friend Barbara Ramirez who works with POMC, Parents of Murdered Children, I would like to put you in contact with her. Barbara is not removed from understaning your pain, her 18yr old son James life was also prematurely taken in Sacramento. They also provide support to families sitting with them during the court process. I have another friend Shirley Rhodes whose son life was also taken and her and other families whose teens/youth were victims of homicide meet as well. I can also put you in contact with her. I know you have so much pain and so much do do and they can help do some of it for you. You can have a family member or I can contact Sac District Attorney’s Victim Witness Support and Homicide Support Network at 874-5701 You can email me directly at amomscry@yahoo.com if you have any problems with reaching anyone or if you need anything . May you be comforted and lifted in Jesus care. God bless you and your family

January 19, 2013 | 2:19 PM

lets put the blame where it belongs…gun control isnt the answer…what happends at home is the answer…all this delenquent trash is how the parents raised their kids,those gangbangers had no right and werent raised correctly,by looser parents that allowed this environment to flourish inside their homes,not spending quality time,if your not raising your kids,i guarantee some looser is,rochell,much love to you always <3 this is a society problem and needs to be dealt with in the home…

January 19, 2013 | 11:41 PM

My heart, prayers, love is also extended to the family of Alexander Brian Chavez, a 21yr-old Sacramento young man shot and killed yesterday 1/18/2013 Shot multiple times and found unresponsive in the driver seat of a Chevrolet Suburban in Rosemont area of Sacramento County. A young lady was in the car with him when he was shot and killed.

My heart, prayers, love is also extended to the family, friends and the 9 month old daughter of 20 yr-old Courtnee Davis The young woman was shot and killed last week 1/12/2013 while leaving the bowling alley and riding with friends, gunshot wounds to the upper body lifeless in a vehicle on 65th and S street.

The cries of families echo within the city and county of Sacramento. Families are grieving, mourning, suffering

ems
Avatar of ems
February 13, 2013 | 7:21 PM

Everyone is presumed to be a “legal, law-abiding, sane and safe gun” owner, until they shoot someone; this isn’t “The Minority Report.

Mark’s last two posts hit the nail right on the head.

@Anthonysmom If my kid was just killed, I sure as hell wouldn’t be spending my time surfing the web and commenting on news articles. Don’t disrespect the family and their grief by pretending to be someone you aren’t.

July 18, 2013 | 12:34 AM

EMS, it is Anthony’s mom and you disrespected her. Many families mourning grieving who have been contacted by mainstream media regarding their son or daughters homicide OFTEN google their childs name to read what was written about their loved one. Sometimes even finding info on the shooting on myspace and other web sites ( in fact LE surfs the web to gain information on shootings as well) When I use to write on here and other sites of the homicides it was how the families got to know me and contacted me. AND I know many who have found a voice by commenting on articles. And I know some whose family members tell them they read something and they go on the site to read it themselves and comment. You couldn’t say with certainty what you would or would not do until you lost a child. Your comment disrespected a mother mourning and could have aided in her pain

Leave a Reply