Abington Murder

[Admin]

Blah blah blah. I would ask that you please consider PM'ing your next sermon so the rest of us don't confuse it with an on-topic post. Perhaps at a minimum you might consider slipping in some gratuitous topic-related comment.

Did you even read Eric's post?

 

[isr2kba]

Did you even read Eric's post?

I read every post on this thread. His was on topic and I hadn't felt like I wasted my time after reading it.

 

[drgrant]

While I am new to the sport I have noticed an alarming trend, especially amongst those closer to my age of 23. It seems to me as many people seem to wear thier gun as an extension of thier manhood. These are the types of people who not only walk around armed at all times but do so without any legitimate fear behind thier choice to carry and in many ways advertize this fact. These are the types of people who tend to get thier liscence and start carrying immediatly and fail to see the type of responsibility that comes with gun ownership. Perhaps it is just an overall reflection of my generation as I do not see as much of this mentallity amongst old timers. But this mentallity represents the true fear of most liberals and make them unwilling to listen to the responsible gun owners.
I am not condemning all of those who chose to carry. Indeed I got my liscence because, besides enjoying target shooting, I hope to work as a public defender in places like Springfield, Holyoke, Lawrence , and Roxbury. Places where there is a great need, high crime, and I am a minority. However, when I chose to get my liscence 2 years before I plan to carry so that I will have enough practice to be safe and effective if the time ever comes. The problem is many do not have this mentallity.

And this has what to do with a pissed off guy who shot his wife, how? Maybe I'm missing something here.

FWIW I carried a gun live with a round in the pipe the day after I got an appropriate holster for it, which was like less than a week after I got my first LTC. Does that make me an evil person for wanting to exercise a civil right?

Using your logic, people who get drivers licenses should refrain from driving until they take an additional course in vehicle handling.... after all, driving a car is a huge responsibility as well- considering that anytime one of us goes out on the road, we're essentially wielding a large kinetic energy weapon that can easily kill someone else with so much as a couple seconds worth of inattention. Yet, because a car isn't politically incorrect, anyone who operates one is given the benefit of the doubt- yet anyone who wants to carry a gun concealed on their person, is guilty by default, for having "bad motives" etc....

I don't disagree with the premise that owning and/or carrying a firearm requires responsibility- but I think it helps to put things in the proper perspective.

I somewhat see what your getting at- you probably think that "those new young guys" don't have the proper mindset WRT carrying a gun, etc... but I
think that to some degree, this "fear" is a bit misplaced. Not every 20 something is "irresponsible" WRT guns. Otherwise the Marines wouldn't
trust my GF's 21 year old nephew to stand behind a bunch of other guys in Iraq with a loaded rifle in his hands. He might not have the accumulated wisdom as those older than him- but he's certainly figured out how to be responsible. Responsibility is something someone either learns or they don't learn. Irresponsibility with firearms (or anything else) is not strictly confined to young guys, I'll tell you that much.

-Mike

 

[Underwhere]

As a first year law student I agree with the need to remember that this person is innocent until proven guilty. However the facts are what they are and even though this man has not been convicted I see nothing wrong to condemning him the facts being what they are. I would however, like to address another aspect of this case that is his reported myspace pages with quotes such as "rock out with my glock out."
I am a seemingly rare breed, a liberal gun owner (Card carrying member of the ACLU, NOT the NRA). While I am new to the sport I have noticed an alarming trend, especially amongst those closer to my age of 23. It seems to me as many people seem to wear thier gun as an extension of thier manhood. These are the types of people who not only walk around armed at all times but do so without any legitimate fear behind thier choice to carry and in many ways advertize this fact. These are the types of people who tend to get thier liscence and start carrying immediatly and fail to see the type of responsibility that comes with gun ownership. Perhaps it is just an overall reflection of my generation as I do not see as much of this mentallity amongst old timers. But this mentallity represents the true fear of most liberals and make them unwilling to listen to the responsible gun owners.
I am not condemning all of those who chose to carry. Indeed I got my liscence because, besides enjoying target shooting, I hope to work as a public defender in places like Springfield, Holyoke, Lawrence , and Roxbury. Places where there is a great need, high crime, and I am a minority. However, when I chose to get my liscence 2 years before I plan to carry so that I will have enough practice to be safe and effective if the time ever comes. The problem is many do not have this mentallity.
The media no doubt will be all over the fact that this monster was a gun owner, but the lesson that needs to come from this is for us gun owners and as such educators to look at why we choose to keep and bear and how we go about doing this. This is the crux of responsible gun ownership. Perhaps if this firearm were locked up, he would have had an extra second to consider the magnitude of what he was doing we may never know but in the end it is up to US to educate both the public as well as members of our own ranks as to WHY and HOW we should execute our rights. Maybe then we can end this phallic connection to our guns. Only then can we be accepted in a state where we are held in the same regard as this monster

Just a quick comment to you. I'm not trying to flame you. Just giving you some perspective.

You are coming onto a firearms forum and lecturing people, many of which have been enjoying the sport for longer than you have been alive. We understand there are irresponsible people out there but also realize that there is nothing you can do about stupidity. Bringing it up really does none of us any good.

It seems like you are taking gun ownership seriously. I commend you. However there is no need to tell us how responsible you are or are going to be. We aren't going to pat you on the back. The rest of us are just as responsible.

There is also no reason for you to tell us why you may have a need to carry concealed. It doesn't concern us. No one asks you why you are driving a car. You can drive one just to be on the road and with no destination in mind. It is your right, and so is carrying a firearm. Carrying is legitimate for whatever reason. Feel free to do it whenever you are comfortable with it. No need to notify us when you do.

Lighten up and enjoy the forum. Do less lecturing and more learning.

 

[packingungal]

Just a quick comment to you. I'm not trying to flame you. Just giving you some perspective.

You are coming onto a firearms forum and lecturing people, many of which have been enjoying the sport for longer than you have been alive. We understand there are irresponsible people out there but also realize that there is nothing you can do about stupidity. Bringing it up really does none of us any good.

It seems like you are taking gun ownership seriously. I commend you. However there is no need to tell us how responsible you are or are going to be. We aren't going to pat you on the back. The rest of us are just as responsible.

There is also no reason for you to tell us why you may have a need to carry concealed. It doesn't concern us. No one asks you why you are driving a car. You can drive one just to be on the road and with no destination in mind. It is your right, and so is carrying a firearm. Carrying is legitimate for whatever reason. Feel free to do it whenever you are comfortable with it. No need to notify us when you do.

Lighten up and enjoy the forum. Do less lecturing and more learning.

I like that!! +1

 

[Feral]

I just saw this on Fox news and they mention he used a Glock 45ACP. Yeah, probably the same type of Glock 45ACP I bough home today from Zero Hour.

My wife and I were watching the news story - wanna talk about an uneasy silence?

Just remind yourself and your wife, it's the 'a-hole' who commited the violence, not the gun.

 

[Erebus]

Fox25 is reporting this morning that he used 2 guns to fire the 12 rounds and that he called 911 and admitted to killing his wife on the 911 call and to police at the scene. The quote as reported by The Globe

"My wife has been cheating on me, and I just shot her dead. Please come arrest me. . . . I'm sorry," Tassinari, 29, told a 911 dispatcher Tuesday night, according to the police report filed in Brockton District Court.

It appears there is little question as to what happened, however...

During a brief arraignment in Brockton District Court yesterday, Tassinari pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder and was ordered held without bail.

When police arrived at the Tassinari home Tuesday, they recovered what they described as two .45-caliber Glock pistols near Barbara Tassinari's body. At least 12 spent shell casings and possibly as many as 20 were found in piles near the weapons, police said.

This might have something to do with it. Emphasis mine:

Earlier Tuesday night, Robin Scolaro told police, Barbara Tassinari had visited for tea and told her that John Tassinari was drinking and had accused her of having an affair. After 15 minutes, Tassinari called his wife on her cellphone and demanded that she return home.

Sounds like a lot of things contributed to this tragedy, no one has to tell any of us that guns and alcohol don't mix. Add a little suspicion of infidelity and the emotional turmoil that comes with it and you have a recipe for disaster.

 

[Garys]

In today's Herald story there is a picture which they lifted from his My Space page. It's the one where they are sitting together and he has his arm around her shoulder. While neither one looks particularly happy, she looks like a hostage. Yeah, I know it's impossible to make a judgment from that one picture, but she sure looks unhappy to me.

Gary

 

[MassMark]

All that potential wasted....A young life snuffed out for what?

 

[Raoul Duke]

Originally Posted by vicpinto View Post
I just saw this on Fox news and they mention he used a Glock 45ACP. Yeah, probably the same type of Glock 45ACP I bough home today from Zero Hour.

My wife and I were watching the news story - wanna talk about an uneasy silence?

Just remind yourself and your wife, it's the 'a-hole' who commited (sic) the violence, not the gun.

Wow...that must have been a difficult moment for you two. I bet you could hear the paint peeling for few minutes there huh? Well, like 6.5 said, remind her that she married you and not a nut like this guy. Also, remind her that there are plenty of other couples who own the same car you do yet, you can't expect to share their fate by that link alone...

 

[abiffmaster]

This story is fool of holes....

i.e. If he called 911 and reported the shooting why was he held at gun point?

 

[cbrburns]

He was held at gunpoint by HER brother who lived next door. Who by the way, showed extreme control considering the situation.

 

[M1911]

so much for innocent until proven guilty 'round these parts...

I understand what you are saying. However, when the Globe reports that:

"My wife has been cheating on me, and I just shot her dead. Please come arrest me. . . . I'm sorry," Tassinari, 29, told a 911 dispatcher Tuesday night, according to the police report filed in Brockton District Court. The report quoted him as saying he "shot her more than 12 times" and promised to wait for them patiently and unarmed at the end of his driveway.

it is pretty hard not to jump to the conclusion that he is guilty.

Full text here: http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2008/04/24/drama_of_guns_rage_and_death_in_abington/

 

[Admin]

I understand what you are saying. However, when the Globe reports that:

it is pretty hard not to jump to the conclusion that he is guilty.

Full text here: http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2008/04/24/drama_of_guns_rage_and_death_in_abington/

Guys! When he made that post the story didn't have any details at all...

 

[dwarven1]

Guys! When he made that post the story didn't have any details at all...

Hey, Derek... don't confuse people with facts; their minds are already made up.

 

[Martlet]

Guys! When he made that post the story didn't have any details at all...

Hey, since when have we let the facts get in the way of a good steamroll?

ETA:

Hey, Derek... don't confuse people with facts; their minds are already made up.

You beat me, Gimli.

 

[jcr]

The unproven facts of the case sound like a charge of 1st Degree Murder is appropriate. If convicted, the mandatory life without parole will probably mean that he will live at MA taxpayers expense for about 50 years.

He administered a death penalty to his wife for the UNproven offense of "cheating" on him.

Why doesn't MA have a death penalty for cases like this? Oh yeah, a Salem-pol-Kennedy-wannabe switched his vote and the bill failed. I'm thankful that at this moment, I don't recall his name, but whenever it is mentioned, sadly, I do recognize it. We'll never know if he got anything for switching his vote to the D leadership position on that vote.

And we won't even know if Tassarini will actually serves without parole. Who knows whether, 40 years from now, some idiot politicians will roll out the "he's been a model prisoner for all these years; he made a "mistake" when he was young; we should let the elderly man out of prison" whining. All it takes is a soft-headed Governor to commute the sentence. (likelihood of soft headed governors in MA has been proven).

Worse, given the alleged self-incriminating statements, this case is ripe for a plea bargain. His attorney will offer a guilty plea to 2nd Degree Murder (parole possible in 12y) to avoid a trial -- he'll cite "first offense", "science awards", "drunkeness" and assert the guy deserves a second chance (sadly, his wife didn't have a lawyer).

Tassarini will be released in 12y -- 18y tops. He'll be younger than I am now. His wife will still be dead.

 

[PaulD]

So does anyone know if the guy was a member on this board? It seems likely.

 

[theGringo]

So does anyone know if the guy was a member on this board? It seems likely.

I must admit ... I had the same thought. Anyway, I expect they'll give him a fair trial before they hang 'im. Oh, wait! This is Massachusetts ...

 

[PaulD]

Tassarini will be released in 12y -- 18y tops. He'll be younger than I am now. His wife will still be dead.

He also screwed his kid over and put the financial burden of raising that kid on someone else. He's a major douche IMO.

 

[ericdimarzio]

My apologies to those of you who felt as though I came off as patronizing that was not my intent. What I was merely trying to get at is that as I look at the pieces of this guy's life as posted on this thread he seemed to view his gun as phallus, proof of his manhood rather than a tool or form of recreation and it is this mentality that worries me. It is a mentality I have seen many times in my limited experience and one that I have seen on some of these boards and this is the mentality, held by a minority of gun owners no doubt, that drives many people away from supporting gun owner's rights. I know that the ideas I present in both this post and my previous one are largely political, however I feel this to be the proper forum as it is this man's gun ownership that has the community so worried
As far as ACLU vs NRA I agree with a previous poster who said that they are not mutually exclusive. However, I feel that the NRA's seemingly knee jerk reaction to all regulation does more harm than good which is why I hesitate join. The NRA can no doubt be a valuable voice for gun owning America, however I feel it would be better served if it took a more moderated approach. To all the more experienced members I meant no disrespect. I am not some young kid trying to start trouble. I merely wished to bring a different perspective. Not one of a patronizing, educated Obama type which is how I fear last night's post came across but rather one of a newcomer who was raised in a household which abhorred the possession and use of firearms. Hopefully this will go far to clear up any misrepresentations I may have unintentionally made in my previous post.

 

[Martlet]

However, I feel that the NRA's seemingly knee jerk reaction to all regulation does more harm than good which is why I hesitate join. The NRA can no doubt be a valuable voice for gun owning America, however I feel it would be better served if it took a more moderated approach.

A more moderate approach to protecting freedoms named in the Constitution? Your attitude is why many of us don't care for the ACLU. "Well, we like THIS part of the Constitution, but this one.......not so much."

 

[Admin]

However, I feel that the NRA's seemingly knee jerk reaction to all regulation does more harm than good which is why I hesitate join.

Eric, the reason there is such a knee jerk on new gun control legislation is because there are already too many laws that are already ineffective and serve no purpose other than to give the sheeple a false sense of security.

There has been and always will be a constant assault on our 2nd amendment rights, the NRA is going to fight everyone of those assaults the best way it can.

 

[blindndead]

Eric, the reason there is such a knee jerk on new gun control legislation is because there are already too many laws that are already ineffective and serve no purpose other than to give the sheeple a false sense of security.

There has been and always will be a constant assault on our 2nd amendment rights, the NRA is going to fight everyone of those assaults the best way it can.

Thank You !!!

 

[PaulD]

A more moderate approach to protecting freedoms names in the Constitution? Your attitude is why many of us don't care for the ACLU. "Well, we like THIS part of the Constitution, but this one.......not so much."

+1.

If the ACLU acknowledged the 2A as an individual right, I'd be a lot more inclined to support them. I think they generally perform a necessary function otherwise.

It will be interesting to see them hem and haw in June if the SCOTUS finds in favor of Heller.

 

[ericdimarzio]

I agree that there is a constant assault upon second amendment rights. I also agree that most of these laws give us a false sense of security and make no sense. But it aggravates me when the NRA opposes legislation such things as database legislation or restrictions for those with previous mental illness. These to me are common sense rules which do have a far greater effect on public safety than laws which tell us what we can have, how to store it, etc. It is these seemingly extreme positions which paint gun owners in a poor light drive people on the left to take extreme positions the other way and which in turn turn those in the middle into single issue voters, especially in this neck of the woods. These single issue voters tend to swing many elections and I fear they shall again. If the NRA were to cease taking the more extreme positions you would see those on the left have less to react against and overall you would see a greater acceptance of second amendment rights and an overall lessening of restrictions.

 

[drgrant]

A more moderate approach to protecting freedoms named in the Constitution? Your attitude is why many of us don't care for the ACLU. "Well, we like THIS part of the Constitution, but this one.......not so much."

+1,000,000!!! A lot of people don't get it, but the NRA is kinda the "middle of the road" as it were. People whine about the NRA being evil but more often than not the NRA ends up making concessions to meet some sort of middle ground to abate the whining. (eg, things like NICS, etc. ). Anyone who thinks that the NRA is "extremist" with regards to protecting our rights certainly needs a reality check. If the ACLU really gave a rats ass about civil rights, and not just the ones that are "politically correct" for them, then they would be 110% behind gun owners WRT the 2nd amendment.

-Mike

 

[gene]

There is not one crime that can be committed by any weapon that didn't have an existing law that could be used to take the trash and pond scum off the streets 20 years ago. The judicial system failed to enforce the laws and the liberal gun grabbers answer was to create new laws for the people that were not breaking the original laws.

There will always be people that should not be allowed to own a handgun because they are un-balanced or deranged. Even though they are a tiny fraction of the people who's second amendment right is abused. The guy that killed his wife in this story did have a firearm legally from the sounds of it and his my space page, atleast to me, he seemed to be very strange.

Every instinct I have tells me that the same person would have just as easily picked up a knife from the kitchen and killed his wife just as swiftly. Today he would be just as wacked out and she would be just as dead. The only difference might have been the noise of a gun that caused a more rapid response.

 

[clinotus]

I agree that there is a constant assault upon second amendment rights. I also agree that most of these laws give us a false sense of security and make no sense. But it aggravates me when the NRA opposes legislation such things as database legislation or restrictions for those with previous mental illness. These to me are common sense rules which do have a far greater effect on public safety than laws which tell us what we can have, how to store it, etc. It is these seemingly extreme positions which paint gun owners in a poor light drive people on the left to take extreme positions the other way and which in turn turn those in the middle into single issue voters, especially in this neck of the woods. These single issue voters tend to swing many elections and I fear they shall again. If the NRA were to cease taking the more extreme positions you would see those on the left have less to react against and overall you would see a greater acceptance of second amendment rights and an overall lessening of restrictions.

There are many members of the NRA that do not agree with the practices of the NRA in regard to some of their stances; none the less the NRA is the only national group that is spearheading firearms rights. It’s a catch 22. If you want to continue your sport you need to join a national group, a local group (here we have GOAL) and start converting people and standing up for your rights. Complaining anonymously on a forum about the NRA does the same thing that the anti-firearms groups do in public. In short contribute then complain.

As far as the databases and legislation goes, you will find a lot of people agree. We (or at least myself and many friends) don’t care to be around anyone mentally deficient who has access to firearms…same towards ‘temporarily mentally deficient individuals’ with keys to 1 ton vehicles... See the irony there? Drunk laws and most firearm laws both have lots of ink on parchment and neither really work.

 

[BOBKATT]

I feel that the NRA's seemingly knee jerk reaction to all regulation does more harm than good which is why I hesitate join.

WE(the NRA), do have a knee jerk reaction to all the regulation because the regulation does more harm then good. That is the point that the ACLU is missing and you are as well. Is it wrong to have a knee jerk reaction to legislation that threatens your fundamental rights not only to the American Constitution, but those basic fundamental human rights that include self defense and freedom?

I wonder if you would have a knee jerk reaction if someone decided that they would like to take away your FIRST Amendment rights? Yes, those rights that give you the freedom of speach, which is only protected by the fact that you have your SECOND Amendment rights.

The NRA can no doubt be a valuable voice for gun owning America, however I feel it would be better served if it took a more moderated approach.

We'll take a more moderated approach when our rights are no longer under the threat of being moderated. If you don't want to lose your freedoms join the NRA.