Amy Bishop charged in brother's 1986 shooting death

Full story: Lowell Sun 54
A biology professor charged with killing three of her colleagues at an Alabama university has been indicted in the 1986 shooting death of her brother in Massachusetts. Full Story
First Prev
of 3
Next Last
Kevin

Lowell, MA

#1 Jun 16, 2010
They should not waste the time and money. Amy will either be executed, or spend the rest of her life in an Alabama jail.
They should go after her mother, the one who testified it was an accident, or delehunt, for negligence.
All three are equally liable for the deaths in Alabama.
Frank

Brookline, MA

#2 Jun 16, 2010
Talk about a waste of taxpayer money. Are any of the witnesses even alive????

Not to mention she is likely going to be put away for the office shooting.
Bagdad Harry

United States

#3 Jun 16, 2010
Better question...why is it happening now?
3 People should be alive...somebody dropped the ball...
bigbanana

Lexington, MA

#4 Jun 17, 2010
this flake should have been in jail a long time ago!!!
Amused

Boston, MA

#5 Jun 17, 2010
Bagdad Harry wrote:
Better question...why is it happening now?
3 People should be alive...somebody dropped the ball...
It has nothing to do with the pursuit of justice. Everyone in MA knows full well that there is very little chance of her ever seeing a jury in Massachusetts. This is strictly face-saving and poltical posturing, with a heavy dose of "blame the old guy" thrown in for good measure.

If anything, no doubt at some point in the future, when she is running out of appeals in Alabama, she will suddenly decide that she wants to stand trial in Massachusetts. Once she's here, she'll waive every speedy trial right from here to Baghdad, file every dilatory motion her court-appointed lawyers can think of, take every interlocutory appeal possible, and push her date with the needle well into the next half-century.
Really now

Wallingford, CT

#6 Jun 17, 2010
Well, I hope the ladies in the Alabama prison system show this b1cth some real southern hospitality.....violently.
Jim

Fitchburg, MA

#7 Jun 17, 2010
How sad that she killed her brother, and the police looked the other way.

If they had done their job then, she would not have had the chance to kill again.
Amused

Boston, MA

#8 Jun 17, 2010
Really now wrote:
Well, I hope the ladies in the Alabama prison system show this b1cth some real southern hospitality.....violently.
My guess is that with four notches on her gun already, she'd be more likely to be a ringleader than a victim. I doubt any of the other inmates wants to become #5.
Patriot

Hingham, MA

#9 Jun 17, 2010
How's that assachusetts gun control working out?

New legislation is on the table so law abiding gun owners will only be able to purchase ONE gun a month. Yet the criminals don't seem to care about gun laws, do they?
Amused

Boston, MA

#10 Jun 17, 2010
Patriot wrote:
How's that assachusetts gun control working out?
New legislation is on the table so law abiding gun owners will only be able to purchase ONE gun a month. Yet the criminals don't seem to care about gun laws, do they?
Apparently, all of Amy Bishop's victims were killed with legally obtained weapons. The shotgun belonged to her brother. The gun used in the Alabama shootings was apparently legally obtained in NH and legally possessed in Alabama. So the Massachusetts gun laws, which do not control transactions in NH or possession of guns in Alabama are essentially irrelevant.
Patriot

Hingham, MA

#11 Jun 17, 2010
She brandished an alleged loaded weapon on a public way and threatened people at the automotive shop after the killing of her brother. There is NO open carry law for citizens in Ma., and I'm fairly confident that BACK THEN it was a mandatory one year prison law. How did she get off? I think there should be an investigation into the local and state authorities who dealt with the case by a third party and if favors were done those involved should be prosecuted and punished severely. There is and always has been a double standard and just as punishment for citizens who kill cops in this state is MORE severe, so should the punishment be for cops who break the law. They should set an example, not abise their position and power.
Amused

Boston, MA

#12 Jun 17, 2010
Patriot wrote:
She brandished an alleged loaded weapon on a public way and threatened people at the automotive shop after the killing of her brother. There is NO open carry law for citizens in Ma., and I'm fairly confident that BACK THEN it was a mandatory one year prison law. How did she get off? I think there should be an investigation into the local and state authorities who dealt with the case by a third party and if favors were done those involved should be prosecuted and punished severely. There is and always has been a double standard and just as punishment for citizens who kill cops in this state is MORE severe, so should the punishment be for cops who break the law. They should set an example, not abise their position and power.
I absolutely agree with you that this investigation was botched badly, whether through incompetence or corruption. But, how do you know she did not possess an FID or an LTC? Neither permits you to threaten anyone with a firearm, but they do allow you to carry one. While MA laws do not expressly permit open carry, they do not expressly forbid it either. A license to carry, is exactly that, a license authorizing the holder to carry firearms. In the absence of any statutory mandate that the carried firearm be concealed from view, there would be no authority for arresting someone carrying a firearm openly. After all, when you hunt, even on public property, you carry your weapon unconcealed.
Kevin

Lowell, MA

#13 Jun 17, 2010
Do nothing Delehunt would never go against a fellow democrat. Mommy was a liberal member of the board of selectman and an active member of the democratic party.
what

Lowell, MA

#14 Jun 17, 2010
A true sociopath. And she has those cold as ice eyes that have no soul. Scary.
Patriot

Hingham, MA

#15 Jun 17, 2010
Amused wrote:
<quoted text>
I absolutely agree with you that this investigation was botched badly, whether through incompetence or corruption. But, how do you know she did not possess an FID or an LTC? Neither permits you to threaten anyone with a firearm, but they do allow you to carry one. While MA laws do not expressly permit open carry, they do not expressly forbid it either. A license to carry, is exactly that, a license authorizing the holder to carry firearms. In the absence of any statutory mandate that the carried firearm be concealed from view, there would be no authority for arresting someone carrying a firearm openly. After all, when you hunt, even on public property, you carry your weapon unconcealed.
I beg to differ.

You can carry a loaded or unloaded rifle or shotgun upon or across a public way if you are engaged in hunting and hold a valid hunting license. You do not need a trigger lock or case on the rifle or shotgun provided you are engaged in hunting with a valid hunting license.

NOTE: You shall not possess a loaded rifle or shotgun nor discharge same within 500 feet of a building or dwelling in use without the owners or occupants permission. Also, you shall not discharge same upon or across any state or hard surfaced highway nor within 150 feet of such highway.

Even if she WAS hunting at the time (ya right) and had a ltc or fid, she was guilty of carrying a loaded shotgun within 500 feet of a dwelling and 150 feet of a road.

Of you're going to profess gun laws get them right. ANYBODY who hunts KNOWS you don't load your shotgun until you get 150 feet into the woods from the road.
Patriot

Hingham, MA

#16 Jun 17, 2010
Amy Bishop told police she took her father's shotgun on Dec. 6, 1986, loaded it, and fired a shot in her bedroom, then went downstairs to the kitchen and shot her brother in the chest. She said she accidentally shot him while trying to figure how to unload the shotgun.

According to police reports from 1986, Bishop then fled the home, tried to commandeer a car at gunpoint from a Braintree auto dealership, and trained the gun on police, who eventually persuaded her to drop the weapon. Bishop was released within hours and did not face charges.
More GOVT Waste

Lowell, MA

#17 Jun 17, 2010
What is the point....Let Alabama spend the time and money to incarcerate her.
Ron

Lowell, MA

#18 Jun 17, 2010
I hope she dies in prison.
Patriot

Hingham, MA

#19 Jun 18, 2010
More GOVT Waste wrote:
What is the point....Let Alabama spend the time and money to incarcerate her.
Well. I guess my point would be that if police and politicians looked the other way, and people in Alabama died because of it, they should be considered accessories and put on trial with her. But that will never happen, will it. The old Patomic two step. Citizens are held accountable for everything and police and politicians... NOTHING.
Amused

Boston, MA

#20 Jun 18, 2010
Patriot wrote:
<quoted text>
I beg to differ.
You can carry a loaded or unloaded rifle or shotgun upon or across a public way if you are engaged in hunting and hold a valid hunting license. You do not need a trigger lock or case on the rifle or shotgun provided you are engaged in hunting with a valid hunting license.
NOTE: You shall not possess a loaded rifle or shotgun nor discharge same within 500 feet of a building or dwelling in use without the owners or occupants permission. Also, you shall not discharge same upon or across any state or hard surfaced highway nor within 150 feet of such highway.
Even if she WAS hunting at the time (ya right) and had a ltc or fid, she was guilty of carrying a loaded shotgun within 500 feet of a dwelling and 150 feet of a road.
Of you're going to profess gun laws get them right. ANYBODY who hunts KNOWS you don't load your shotgun until you get 150 feet into the woods from the road.
Here's the actual text of GL c.269, section 12e that you refer to:

Chapter 269: Section 12E. Discharge of a firearm within 500 feet of a dwelling or other building in use; exceptions

Section 12E. Whoever discharges a firearm as defined in section one hundred and twenty-one of chapter one hundred and forty, a rifle or shotgun within five hundred feet of a dwelling or other building in use, except with the consent of the owner or legal occupant thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not less than fifty nor more than one hundred dollars or by imprisonment in a jail or house of correction for not more than three months, or both. The provisions of this section shall not apply to (a) the lawful defense of life and property; (b) any law enforcement officer acting in the discharge of his duties; (c) persons using underground or indoor target or test ranges with the consent of the owner or legal occupant thereof; (d) persons using outdoor skeet, trap, target or test ranges with the consent of the owner or legal occupant of the land on which the range is established; (e) persons using shooting galleries, licensed and defined under the provisions of section fifty-six A of chapter one hundred and forty; and (f) the discharge of blank cartridges for theatrical, athletic, ceremonial, firing squad, or other purposes in accordance with section thirty-nine of chapter one hundred and forty-eight.

I don't see anything in there prohibiting the carrying of firearms, rifles or shotguns, only discharging a shot without permission of the owner and not being within one of the exceptions listed.

Perhaps you mean this statute:

Chapter 131: Section 58. Shooting upon or across highway; hunting near dwelling

Section 58. A person shall not discharge any firearm or release any arrow upon or across any state or hard surfaced highway, or within one hundred and fifty feet, of any such highway, or possess a loaded firearm or hunt by any means on the land of another within five hundred feet of any dwelling in use, except as authorized by the owner or occupant thereof.

This too does not say what you claim it does. You can't shoot a gun within 150 feet of a road, nor can you carry a loaded weapon or otherwise hunt on land of another within 500 feet of a building in use, unless you have permission.

Nothing in either statute would prohibit carrying a rifle in a sling on your shoulder in public on a public way or sidewalk. If you enter onto private property and within 500 feet of a building in use, you would have to have the weapon unloaded, but the statute would not prohibit carrying an unloaded weapon.

If you have another statute which you believe supports your position, please post a citation to the actual statute.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Canton Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
dionkie blows (Aug '13) 13 hr Truth 345
Spouses hold out hope for new work visa rules 13 hr Kundrot dionkie 2
Celebrate Chanukah in Stoughton (Dec '12) Sat Kundrot dionkie 225
Doink Rules (May '14) Sat Doink C 144
Review: Ryan Development LLC Primrose Carwash Dec 19 Kundrot dionkie 2
Politics in youth sports (Sep '10) Dec 19 Kundrot dionkie 75
Seeking Owner of Lost Class Ring (Jan '06) Dec 18 sandee0822 537

Canton News Video

Canton Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Canton People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Canton News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Canton

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 4:42 pm PST