Current Events > Man kills 3 after judge denies ex-wife's request to have his guns taken away

(+) Yeah! (+)

http://thehill.com/homenews/395421-man-allegedly-kills-3-after-judge-denies-ex-wifes-request-to-have-his-guns-taken

An Alabama man is accused of shooting three people to death after a judge denied his ex-wife's attempts to order him to surrender his weapons, according to The Decatur Daily.

The news outlet reported on Tuesday that police say Darwin Brazier, 43, of Ardmore, used a semi-automatic SKS rifle with a high-capacity magazine to shoot and kill his ex-wife and two other people before killing himself.

In addition to killing Debra Ann Rivera, the Limestone County Sheriffs Office said Brazier killed her husband, Radex Rivera, and their roommate, Timothy James Hayward-Boger.

The sheriff's office told the news outlet that Brazier shot 30 high-powered rounds near the scene before leaving and later was found by a SWAT unit with a self-inflicted gunshot wound.

The report notes that Debra Rivera had twice attempted to get a judge to order Brazier to surrender his weapons because of alleged abuse. The requests were rejected both times.

Her most recent attempt to get Brazier stripped of his guns came in March. She petitioned Limestone County Circuit Judge Chad Wise for a protection-from-abuse order March 1, which was initially granted on a temporary basis. It was terminated on April 10, however.

He calls my husband threatening to hurt both of us, Debra Rivera wrote in a court filing. (He) drives by my house all hours of day to check where I am. He is upset I am now married and dont want to be with him. He has been physical in the past, pulled a gun on me. I know he has anger toward me and in past has caused physical pain to me."

What the fuck
---

At least his God given rights weren't infringed upon.
---

ALABAMA MAN!

Welp.

Man kills [number] of [students/club-goers/theater audience members/religious worshippers/people] after [parents/families of victims/citizens] ask country to [update gun laws/amend an amendment/have better gun control].

America, any week.
---

Ban fingers

Without fingers, you can't pull the trigger

The constitution doesn't give you a right to keep your fingers
---

mech dragon posted...

Man kills [number] of [students/club-goers/theater audience members/religious worshippers/people] after [parents/families of victims/citizens] ask country to [update gun laws/amend an amendment/have better gun control].

America, any week.

Gonna sig this

Damn it, it's too long. Why did GameFAQs remove quotes anyway @SBAllen
---

frozenshock posted...

Ban fingers

Without fingers, you can't pull the trigger

The constitution doesn't give you a right to keep your fingers

toes
---

One citizen, simply put, should have no right to demand that another citizens constitutional rights be taken away.
---

That's unfortunate but you can't strip people of their civil rights just because someone demands it. The judge couldn't have agreed to that demand.
---

frozenshock posted...

Ban fingers

Without fingers, you can't pull the trigger

The constitution doesn't give you a right to keep your fingers

Ban fingers and only the bad guys will have fingers.
---

southcoast09 posted...

One citizen, simply put, should have no right to demand that another citizens constitutional rights be taken away.

Funbazooka posted...

That's unfortunate but you can't strip people of their civil rights just because someone demands it. The judge couldn't have agreed to that demand.

Wrong on both accounts.
---

Bio1590 posted...

southcoast09 posted...

One citizen, simply put, should have no right to demand that another citizens constitutional rights be taken away.

Funbazooka posted...

That's unfortunate but you can't strip people of their civil rights just because someone demands it. The judge couldn't have agreed to that demand.

Wrong on both accounts.

Yeah, he lost all right to his rights when he started threatening other humans with his firearms. The judge is a shit head for allowing this to happen and you two, not Bio, are terrible posters. Please seek help for your love of guns.
---

The idea of a "right" to tools of murder is a joke.

southcoast09 posted...

One citizen, simply put, should have no right to demand that another citizens constitutional rights be taken away.

Funbazooka posted...

That's unfortunate but you can't strip people of their civil rights just because someone demands it. The judge couldn't have agreed to that demand.

Oh shut the fuck up.
---

Take a chill pill.
---

Funbazooka posted...

Take a chill pill.

we cant oh my god. that guy deserves the death penalty.
there's consequences for killing people.

if they lived, he probably deserves life in prison.
---

You know that nunchuks are illegal in some states
---

if you act psychotic and make threats, you can't keep your guns anymore. you lose the right to own them if your threatening to use them for murder.

the judge should be fired. hopefully at least he gets voted out the next election. depending on the thinking of his local people. hopefully they are mad about this and not just thinking about their guns

Must've been one of those responsible gun owners I keep hearing about
---

its time for changes to the gun laws.

we can make common sense changes and lets get this judge disbarred or whatever.

fucking idiot.
---

Honestly, gun control laws are not worth arguing about anymore. If a shooting at an elementary school cannot change anything, then nothing will. People are that heartless.
---

MonkeyBones23 posted...

Honestly, gun control laws are not worth arguing about anymore. If a shooting at an elementary school cannot change anything, then nothing will. People are that heartless.

all we can do is continue to mourn our losses :( and hope things change in a positive manner.
we already lost one today. poor puppers (sad youtube blog).
---

MonkeyBones23 posted...

Honestly, gun control laws are not worth arguing about anymore. If a shooting at an elementary school cannot change anything, then nothing will. People are that heartless.

This, might as well do away with all of them and watch the Gunz for tots businesses start opening up to teach your kid how to fire a .22 before they learn to say "poopie"
---

shanefu22 posted...

At least his God given rights weren't infringed upon.

This. His rights are more important than innocent lives. Nobody has a right to life, but he has a right to guns.
---

Ignorance.
---

Funbazooka posted...

Ignorance.

Not every day you see a user call themselves out like this.
---

Funbazooka posted...

Ignorance.

You probably shouldn't post this in the same topic where you demonstrated that you didn't know people lose access to certain rights when they make or portray themselves as threats

Pretty sure that's dependent on whether or not they're arrested and found guilty of something in the court to warrant that. I mean, even if someone has a restraining order against you, it doesn't mean you have to give up your guns, thank God.

You don't get your civil rights taken away based on allegations.
---

Actual Federal Law states that if you have a restraining order against you it's illegal to buy a firearm lmfao
---

Eat More Beef posted...

Yeah, he lost all right to his rights when he started threatening other humans with his firearms. The judge is a shit head for allowing this to happen and you two, not Bio, are terrible posters. Please seek help for your love of guns.

Zikten posted...

if you act psychotic and make threats, you can't keep your guns anymore. you lose the right to own them if your threatening to use them for murder.

the judge should be fired. hopefully at least he gets voted out the next election. depending on the thinking of his local people. hopefully they are mad about this and not just thinking about their guns

This. You should have the right to buy and own a gun if and only if you can show that you are mentally stable enough to use it responsibly, which this guy clearly was not. If you're sane and responsible, and you can prove it, then buy all the guns you want. Go wild. But once someone's mental state or (especially) threatening actions make them a clear and present danger to those around them, which this guy clearly was, they should no longer be allowed to have access to a gun.
---

Bio1590 posted...

Actual Federal Law states that if you have a restraining order against you it's illegal to buy a firearm lmfao

Alright to be fair, I wasn't exactly right, but you're not right either when you take all this into account. Then again, Alabama doesn't follow the ERPO law... so I was right that the judge couldn't ever rule in her favor

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_Risk_Protection_Order

An Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO), also known as a red flag law, is a gun violence prevention law that permits police or family members to petition a state court to order the temporary removal of firearms from a person who may present a danger to others or themselves. A judge makes the determination to issue the order based on statements and actions made by the gun owner in question.[1] After a set time, the guns are returned to the person from whom they were seized unless another court hearing extends the period of confiscation.[2][3]

The report notes that Debra Rivera had twice attempted to get a judge to order Brazier to surrender his weapons because of alleged abuse. The requests were rejected both times.

Her most recent attempt to get Brazier stripped of his guns came in March. She petitioned Limestone County Circuit Judge Chad Wise for a protection-from-abuse order March 1, which was initially granted on a temporary basis. It was terminated on April 10, however.
---

Rika_Furude posted...

shanefu22 posted...

At least his God given rights weren't infringed upon.

This. His rights are more important than innocent lives. Nobody has a right to life, but he has a right to guns.

That's not true. Just depends on whether they're born or not yet.
---

RIP Man kills died shit up 97
---

Tyranthraxus posted...

Rika_Furude posted...

shanefu22 posted...

At least his God given rights weren't infringed upon.

This. His rights are more important than innocent lives. Nobody has a right to life, but he has a right to guns.

That's not true. Just depends on whether they're born or not yet.

nah even that, while biologically counting as life, does not count as legal life because nobody has a right to life, not even fully grown adults.
---

If she's his ex-wife than why is she meddling in his business. Move on.

iClockwork posted...

If she's his ex-wife than why is she meddling in his business. Move on.

Maybe because he was trying to kill her? Stupid trolling only makes you look dumb.
---

iHuman posted...

Maybe because he was trying to kill her? Stupid trolling only makes you look dumb.

Except he wasn't until she kept pestering the police to interfere in his business.

what are you trying to prove here? you can't read?
---

I'm not sure this should be a gun law debate, tbh. The judge majorly fucked up on not fulfilling the woman's request for him to have his firearm access restricted until he got right in the head.
---

iHuman posted...

what are you trying to prove here? you can't read?

Quite the opposite. It seems you're trying to make up some imaginary scenario to justify your narrative.

Nowhere in the article did it say he tried to kill her before she badgered police to interfere in his life.

so you read the article? read over it a couple more times until if you need to
---

iHuman posted...

so you read the article? read over it a couple more times until if you need to

I have and couldn't find it. Could you quote where he attempted to previously murder or kill his ex wife.

I'll wait.

you should use that time waiting to research and figure out where you went wrong
---

iHuman posted...

you should use that time waiting to research and figure out where you went wrong

Oh so you can't quote it? Not surprising since it isn't in the article and you made that up.

oof

if you're having trouble now, me spoon feeding you won't help either

you've apparently already seen the words
---

iHuman posted...

if you're having trouble now, me spoon feeding you won't help either

you've apparently already seen the words

Welp since it isn't in the article you can't spoon feed anything. Let's get to the point shall we?

You lied. The man never attempted to kill his wife before this incident as you claimed he had. You got caught and instead of correcting yourself and trying to move the conversation in a more positive and sincere direction you angrily doubled down and made yourself look foolish in the process.

It's a bad look, in the future please learn from this mistake and try to grow as a person.

we've been over the point

you said something stupid, i'm assuming to skirt the line of offensive, when it was obvious why she wanted his guns taken
---

iHuman posted...

Maybe because he was trying to kill her?

^^^ This was a lie and you got called out for it. Please refrain from lying in the future, thanks.

you tried calling me out on it but it merely showed your lack of comprehension, people like me won't be able to hold your hand always so i'd do some research if i were you

when you've felt like you've learned enough, read the article again
---

Tyranthraxus posted...

Rika_Furude posted...

shanefu22 posted...

At least his God given rights weren't infringed upon.

This. His rights are more important than innocent lives. Nobody has a right to life, but he has a right to guns.

That's not true. Just depends on whether they're born or not yet.

I thought you missed some really obvious sarcasm but he might actually be serious >_>
---