West Seattle Crime Watch: Robbers tie up 3, steal guns, cars

August 26, 2010 at 7:17 am | In Crime, West Seattle news | 40 Comments

Update from Seattle Police on a “home invasion” robbery they’ve been investigating in the 7900 block of 4th SW this morning: Det. Mark Jamieson tells WSB they don’t believe it was random – they think this house “was targeted”: Someone knocked at the house around 3 am; a woman in her 60s answered, a man with a gun forced his way in, tied her up; two other people who were home – a man in his 30s and his girlfriend in her 20s – came out, and they too were tied up. Police believe at least three robbers were involved; they stole “items including rifles and handguns” as well as two cars, a gray 2005 Toyota Camry (license 9224*DP) and 1995 white Ford Windstar (license 6532*DP). The only description they have, according to Det. Jamieson, is that the man who knocked was described as “Asian”; no other descriptions so far, but detectives are continuing to do interviews.

40 Comments

  1. TR, are those dealer plates? ’cause they’re not standard WA plate number format.

    Comment by mar3c — 7:22 am August 26, 2010 #

  2. DP as in disabled person. I have replaced one digit from each with an asterisk as per our policies.

    Comment by WSB — 7:25 am August 26, 2010 #

  3. This is a frightening story, however it does seem VERY targeted. From initial reports, it sounds like they had a more than reasonable amount of data that pointed to multiple firearms in this location.

    HK

    Comment by HolyKow — 8:12 am August 26, 2010 #

  4. Excellent. Now we have more (soon to be) illegal guns on the street! Its too bad Carson has to have a license (and a chip) but my gun doesn’t. Gotta love those 2nd Amendment wacko’s!

    Comment by Carson — 9:06 am August 26, 2010 #

  5. DO NOT ANSWER YOUR DOOR AT 3 AM!

    Comment by k — 9:12 am August 26, 2010 #

  6. Something tells me that if you’re being targeted for an armed home invasion the perps aren’t going to be foiled by you just not answering the door. It seems like it would take an extraordinarily lackadaisical home intruder to say, Huh, I guess they’re not home, lets go get some IHOP.

    Comment by austin — 9:18 am August 26, 2010 #

  7. Hey k…. do you really think the bad guys “knocked on the door?” Those are some polite boys to come over for a visit at 3am and “knock” first. I am sure the cops are asking the right questions and will be able to figure this out.

    Comment by AnotherIdiotInWS — 9:25 am August 26, 2010 #

  8. Ironic that I was part of a conversation last night where I said I thought it seemed pretty quiet and lowkey in that part of Highland Park.

    Ha. Wrongo.

    Comment by d — 9:49 am August 26, 2010 #

  9. This is terrible! My sincere condolences to the people that had to go through this. It must have been terrifying! I hope there is some resolution soon.

    Comment by crystal — 10:17 am August 26, 2010 #

  10. Wow Carson, really? So you are using your first ammendment rights to step on the second ammendment and calling gun owners “wackos”? A well thought out argument sir!

    Comment by DOC — 10:41 am August 26, 2010 #

  11. This seems really bizarre. Seems like there is a more to the story. For the robbers to get so lucky finding what sounds like a larger than average (in Seattle) collection of guns.

    Comment by mike03 — 11:02 am August 26, 2010 #

  12. DOC, did you read what I wrote? I never called gun owners “wackos”, I called the 2nd Amendment Freaks, aka The NRA, Wackos, there is a HUGE difference. Its called sensible gun laws, and no, I have no clue what the details are in this case, but if they guns stolen are used to kill someone in the future it will again be written off as just more criminals not obeying the law…like the 6 dead cops this past year, killed with legally purchased guns that were allowed to easily fall into the wrong hands, criminal or unstable.

    Comment by Carson — 11:08 am August 26, 2010 #

  13. Answering the door at 3am? C’mon…a recipe for disaster.

    Comment by onceachef — 11:11 am August 26, 2010 #

  14. Carson, it just seemed you didn’t have an argument and went straight to “second ammendment wackos”. It would be like if I said “those first ammendment wackos”, yet was only talking about crazy folk like Fred Phelps. People would just to conclusions, because I didn’t say what I meant. Also, I don’t think that the NRA endorses criminals or murderers. They endorse your right to own a firearm as guaranteed by the constitution. If someone does something bad with a gun, it is not the NRA’s fault. Oh, watch “Thank you for Smoking” for a pretty funny conversation about this.

    Comment by DOC — 11:18 am August 26, 2010 #

  15. Wow Carson, really? Okay, let me get this straight. Are you saying that if the government took away all of our guns, then the criminals would turn their guns in and stop robbing people? I personally think that it would be “open season” on anyone they choose to rob, now that they know nobody is armed.
    I think that there is probably more to this story that we may find out later. But just think for a minute. What if guns for home protection was encouraged, and safety programs were offered by the police department. Don’t you think that a criminal that was thinking about breaking into your house, would stop and wonder if the home owner had a gun and if he or she knew how to use it?
    Maybe we should all get yard signs that read either; “I am a 2nd Amendment Wacko who protects this house with a 45 cal. Smith and Wesson and a shotgun”……..or………”I’m a Liberal Wacko who does’t believe in guns. I protect my home with good intentions and fairy dust.”
    What-ever

    Comment by As-If — 11:19 am August 26, 2010 #

  16. Did I say take away guns? I own a gun, and you would need to pry it from my dead hands, to quote another….its called sensible control. I am a liberal, I grew up with guns, no issue there, but when anyone can go and buy a gun, no questions, no ID, no background check then we have problems. Yes, thats true. Little Nickel, gun shows to just name a few of the easy ways criminals buy guns.

    Comment by Carson — 11:33 am August 26, 2010 #

  17. Carson, you had a poor choice of words, you made a broad statement and you were unwise to do so.

    Just correct your poor use of english, state more clearly what you mean and let it go, because as of now, you seem more like the wacko…

    hk

    Comment by HolyKow — 11:39 am August 26, 2010 #

  18. HK, its all just a matter of whats important. To some its the ability to own a gun. Period. To others its reasonable limits. The 2 sides will never agree and I know we will never have anything close to gun control, and we have the lowest crime rates in the Industrial World to show as proof that our way works best!

    Comment by Carson — 11:57 am August 26, 2010 #

  19. No, you didn’t say “take away guns”, but that is what it will lead to. It is the dis-trust of Governments’ ever increasing control of our basic freedom that worries me. Maybe you, like me, are okay with “reasonable limits” such as ID checks for sales. But there are those that understand the term “reasonable limits” as one that is relative, and will use all the power they can to sway our laws in their direction. That is why we have the NRA. It would not exist if Wacko’s didn’t believe in what it stands for. I agree with you though, “2 sides will never agree”, but that is what makes us free….for now.

    Comment by As-If — 12:55 pm August 26, 2010 #

  20. If someone knocks on my door at 3am, the first thing I’d do is dial 911. The outcome would most likely have been very different if that happened here. That should be a lesson for us all. If you get a knock at 3am, look through the door peephole, and if you don’t recognize the other person, dial 911. Period. If it’s a misunderstanding, fine, the police will understand your concern . . .

    Comment by bridge to somewhere — 1:01 pm August 26, 2010 #

  21. It will never lead to that, and we both know it. Comparing any reasonable restraint on guns does not take us back to Pre-Nazi Germany as the right would have you believe. To the gun lobby a few dead cops here, a few dead children there are sad and all, but they are acceptable losses. And preventable . Losses that could be avoided but not at a price we want to pay….reasonable laws….

    Comment by Carson — 1:05 pm August 26, 2010 #

  22. Does anyone really think that tweakers stop for a minute to think about whether their victims have a gun or are trained to shoot it? They are putting their life at risk every day to get their fix and I really don’t think logic or self-preservation enters into their thought process. Not sure how owning a gun would help the situation.

    Comment by Mr. Smith (or is it Wesson) — 1:12 pm August 26, 2010 #

  23. So, these people owned guns, the thieves knew they had guns, but they still broke in. In this case, it seems like having a gun was an invitation to rob, not a deterrent.

    If guns were illegal, then only criminals will have guns, true. But criminals have guns now, and maybe they would have less if they were illegal. You don’t hear too many stories of people winning a shootout with burglars right now anyway.

    Comment by Bill V — 1:19 pm August 26, 2010 #

  24. I AM SO HAPPY THAT NOBODY WAS HURT this could have truly turned out a whole lot worse, so keep your eyes and ears open.

    Comment by CONCERED NEIGHBOR — 4:21 pm August 26, 2010 #

  25. A reminder to some would-be commenters in this thread: Blaming the victim or speculating that a specific person might be to blame or involved with a crime is not allowed, and those comments will not be approved (or if they made it past the moderation queue, will be deleted). If you have specific information that might help solve a crime, please contact the police. Thanks – Tracy

    Comment by WSB — 5:06 pm August 26, 2010 #

  26. Carson, I understood what you meant, and I agree with you. It’s easy to spot the 2nd amendment wacko by their overreaction and defensiveness to even the suggestion that guns help facilitate crime.

    Comment by JC — 6:29 pm August 26, 2010 #

  27. Carson, I think that the problem is you are just not writing everything that you want to say, therefore I am only getting part of your argument and it is leaving me quite confused.

    Bill V: The argument that the people own guns didn’t help is somewhat valid. However, assuming that they scoped out the house beforehand (like we are all assuming) the would have realized it was a woman in her 60′s with disabled license plates. Guns on not, perhaps they viewed that as an easier target.

    I personally would have no problem with making it slightly harder to obtain a firearm of any type, hopefully helping keep them out of the hands of some criminals. However I am ALL ABOUT keeping a gun for home defense and protecting your home with hallow-point slugs :)

    Comment by DOC — 6:52 pm August 26, 2010 #

  28. To the most recent people with deleted or unapproved comments:
    .
    We have very clear rules here that you can criticize ideas and opinions and statements but NOT the people making them. When someone posts a criticism of a person who is participating in the discussion, that is a rule violation. If it’s happened elsewhere and has not been taken down, that’s because we haven’t been flagged, and anyone is welcome to flag us about comments they believe to be rule violations at editor@westseattleblog.com. My example is that you can say this rule is idiotic but you can’t say I’m an idiot. This is the kind of policy that sets WSB apart from the sites that let themselves become sewers of personal attacks and other garbage and we unapologetically enforce our rules as best we can – TR

    Comment by WSB — 8:48 pm August 26, 2010 #

  29. Carson ……… what planet do you live on? I recently bought a .45 caliber pistol. I had to provide ID, fill out government forms, and get government approved permission via the NICCS system after a background check in order to make this purchase. You clearly don’t have a clue. Also, if it were not for the NRA, you would not have any gun rights by now. Only the military, the police, the royalty that we call politicians and their armed body guards, plus the criminals would have guns. This is the definition of a police state. You need to quit spreading misinformation about which you know nothing!

    Comment by Phil Dirt — 8:17 am August 27, 2010 #

  30. Phil,

    Guess what? If you go to a gun show, you don’t need to provide anything but cash. If you respond to an ad in the paper, like Little Nickel for example, you don’t need to provide any ID and the seller doesn’t have to ask for any. This is not misinformation, this is a fact. Next time, do your homework, then throw stones my way.

    I will wait for you to correct yourself…

    Comment by Carson — 9:43 am August 27, 2010 #

  31. Phil,

    Your silence speaks volumes! I am guessing you did a little research and can’t believe what you found. Yes, its that easy for ANYONE to buy a gun. Anyone. Don’t forget to keep that NRA Membership up to date, the criminals are depending on you!

    Comment by Carson — 2:31 pm August 27, 2010 #

  32. Carson,
    I am a member of the Washington Arms Collectors. We meet in Puyallup
    (the Gun show), and I can assure you that it is very well regulated. First of all, to become a member, you must pass a background check just as if you were purchasing from a licensed dealer, in order to become a member. It takes about one month before you are accepted, assuming, of course, that you pass the check. Secondly, if you want to be kicked out of the organization immediately, sell a gun to a non-member! Most members, myself included, not only do not sell guns to non-members, but we also refuse to sell a handgun to any other member who does not have a license to carry a concealed weapon. This is not a requirement, either at a gun show or at a licensed gun shop, but most of us adhere to this policy anyway. As to your Little Nickel, I suppose you are correct about that; however, I, nor anybody I know, would ever sell to an unknown buyer through the Little Nickel. These days it’s too dangerous. I guess you could say $**t happens. But, there are so many guns out there in circulation already that they are going to be just as easy to get as that stuff you liberals are smoking. You as a self professed liberal, who undoubtedly think there should be a law regulating all human activity, are probably not going to be happy until the government can control every move you or I make. If I were you I’d be glad that I am allowed to own a gun. And for that, you should think the NRA for all of its good work for protecting lawful gun-owner’s rights from the likes of people such as you. I suspect that you and I are never going to agree, since you claim to be a gun owner but seem to be against that right being extended to anyone else. Bye the way, I most certainly will keep my NRA membership paid up. Like I said, it’s because of people like you, and the politicians you help elect, that the NRA has been forced to become the political force that it now is. It was not always that way. Before liberals began trying to strip honest citizens of there Second Amendment rights, the NRA was mostly concerned with promoting gun safety. That, however, has changed because of people like you.

    Comment by Phil Dirt — 8:07 am August 28, 2010 #

  33. Phil,

    I am sorry, I must have missed your correction. Did you say its legal for sales at gun show and private sales with no proof of ID? Not your group, gun sales in general? I have also NEVER been against gun ownership, or limits on the number of guns. What I am for is sensible gun laws. For example, the gun show loophole. Keep hiding behind the NRA, criminals love you for it!!

    I will wait, again, for your correction, but know you will just keep dancing!!!

    Comment by Carson — 8:37 am August 28, 2010 #

  34. Carson,
    It is a violation of the Washington Arms Collectors ( the WAC ) bylaws to sell any firearm, handgun or long gun, to anybody but a member of the club. All members have club ID and must present it when purchasing a firearm. In order to have a membership badge, a prospective member must submit to a background check through the federal NICCS system. While not a requirement, most of us check the buyers drivers license as well, and if the purchase is for a handgun, we also check to see that they have a valid concealed to carry license. We are all very much concerned with keeping guns out of the hands of those who shouldn’t have them. But, I think that the so called “gun show loophole” is so much BS that has been perpetrated by liberal news media people and liberal politicians, most of whom don’t know which end of the gun the bullet comes out of. As for gun sales in general, yes, it is legal to sell without proof of ID. I’ve sold many guns over the years to personal friends and family without checking their ID. But, I’m not a criminal and neither are the people I’ve sold guns to. I don’t want the government telling me I can’t sell whatever I want to people I know damn good and well are lawful. What I suspect, or at least hope, you refer to as “general sales” is the criminal element selling stolen guns to other criminals. This should be a crime, but does it make any difference to a criminal if he breaks the law? What I, and most other people who think like me, don’t want is a bunch of laws that while supposedly are aimed at curbing criminal activity only effects the law abiding. That is my problem with you.

    Let me ask you a question. If the Obama Administration, which is as corrupt as any Administration this country has ever had, told you that it was no longer legal for you to own guns, and you must turn them in, what would you do? I will wait for your answer.

    Comment by Phil Dirt — 4:40 pm August 28, 2010 #

  35. Carson,
    It is a violation of the Washington Arms Collectors bylaws to sell a gun to a non- member. In order to become a member the applicant must submit to a federal background check through the NICCS system and be approved, just like what would happen if you walked into a gun store to by a gun. So, if at the gun show a buyer approached me and wanted to buy a gun and was able to present the proper ID, I’d sell to him/her if I wanted. What you, I think, mean when you refer to “sales in general” is some criminal selling a stolen gun to another criminal on the street. But since when does a criminal care if he has broken the law? What I don’t want to see are laws that restrict the law abiding and lets the criminal continue to do what criminals do, break the law. Over the years I’ve sold many guns to family and friends without an ID check. But, those people were known to me. They were not criminals. That’s a lot different than criminals selling to criminals. By your way of thinking, lawful citizens are restricted in order to, hopefully, restrict some criminal who doesn’t care. That only effects the lawful citizen and the criminal couldn’t care less. To answer your question: Is it legal to sell a gun without checking ID? Yes. But, the alternative is worse!

    Here’s a question for you. If the government told you that it is no longer legal for you to own a gun, and you must turn yours in, what would you do?

    Comment by Phil Dirt — 5:06 pm August 28, 2010 #

  36. Would I turn my gun in? Of course not, but its also a question that will never happen and as you well know, an impossibility. Stop worrying about the government telling you that you can’t have a weapon that can shoot 120 rounds a second, or that you need to wait a few days to buy a gun from a dealer. Worry about the gun owners, the ones not like you and me, that don’t care and and can and do sell their guns legally to anyone they want. A little common sense would help all of us, including the 6 dead cops all killed with guns easily obtained, legally!!

    Comment by Carson — 6:47 pm August 28, 2010 #

  37. Carson, this story has nothing to do with poor regulation at gun shows, please cease and desist. I will not be waiting for your answer.

    Comment by Chris — 10:47 am August 29, 2010 #

  38. Actually Chris, you are wrong. This is about more guns on the street, how they get there and how little control of those guns there is.

    Comment by Carson — 8:29 am August 30, 2010 #

  39. Carson,
    Where can I get one of those weapons that shoot “120 rounds a second” that you refer to? The article we are discussing is in reference to legally owned guns that were stolen from somebody’s house. What would you suggest be done in order to stop the proliferation of “guns on the street?” You have all of these misguided opinions about guns, tell me what you think should be done about it.

    Comment by Phil Dirt — 10:39 am August 30, 2010 #

  40. I think Carson is done dancing, or should I say, he has run out of ammunition? Worst time to preach about gun control EVER.

    Comment by Chris — 3:04 pm August 30, 2010 #

Sorry, comment time is over.

All contents copyright 2014, A Drink of Water and a Story Interactive. Here's how to contact us.
Header image by Nick Adams. ABSOLUTELY NO WSB PHOTO REUSE WITHOUT SITE OWNERS' PERMISSION.
Entries and comments feeds. ^Top^