PDA

View Full Version : San Antonio shooting



Shaken1976
04-22-2014, 03:23 PM
SAN ANTONIO -- Local investigators were called to the scene of a fatal double shooting on the west side early Tuesday morning.

Police said a man shot his wife in the chin during a dispute inside their home in the 2200 block of Muuga Manor. The husband then walked into another room and shot himself to death, according to the San Antonio Police Department.

The man's wife was transported to an area hospital and is expected to survive the attack, police said.

Four children were reportedly inside the home when the shooting happened, around 12:30 a.m. Police said one of the children called police and reported that her 'step dad' had shot her mom.

Family members identified the suspect as Senior Chief Petty Officer Paul Zurita Ramirez. Investigators said the man was an officer in the Navy.

Ramirez's mother told KENS 5's Marvin Hurst that Ramirez served in Afghanistan. She believes her son was suffering from PTSD.

"You see it all the time but you never think that it's going to happen to you, to the person that you love," said Yolanda Zurita Donnias, the supects mother. "He had so much. He loved his boys and his beautiful wife. A beautiful family. He had everyhting going for him. But something happened. Something happened."

Police said officers would look into the PTSD claim as part of their on-going investigation.

Rusty Jones
04-22-2014, 03:48 PM
Family members identified the suspect as Senior Chief Petty Officer Paul Zurita Ramirez. Investigators said the man was an officer in the Navy.

Welp, there goes the credibility of those investigators!

Shaken1976
04-22-2014, 03:50 PM
Welp, there goes the credibility of those investigators!

Or maybe the reporter...

Measure Man
04-22-2014, 03:51 PM
Welp, there goes the credibility of those investigators!


Or maybe the reporter...

Or maybe the forum posters...

Shaken1976
04-22-2014, 03:55 PM
Or maybe the forum posters...

Nah. I pulled it from the KENS 5 website

Measure Man
04-22-2014, 04:02 PM
Nah. I pulled it from the KENS 5 website

My point was the article is correct. The man is (or was) an officer....of the noncommissioned type.

Using the term "officers" to refer to only commissioned officers is military shorthand and we all know what we mean, but not technically correct. NCOs are, in fact, officers.

We should have no reason to expect civilian investigators or reporters to follow our shorthand, though.

RS6405
04-22-2014, 06:56 PM
I have a problem with other "facts" in the article. I do not agree with the presumption that the violence is directly connected and a result of any (alleged) PTSD instead of acknowledging that person as being being pre-disposed to being violent to significant others. ( Domestic violence/ murder suicides happen to plenty of couple who have never served or experienced PTSD). I think the presumption gives an excuse instead of looking at the behaviors of the individual. (I will reserve/exclude those individuals with PTSD who break with reality in my opinion)

I was married to a batterer (a zillion years ago) and have dated a soldier who has had PTSD. Through the worse episodes of the PTSD, it was obvious, the soldier was trying "protect" me and never tried to hurt or control me.

Now I have two polar cases I'm working on. One case involves a civilian that I pushed for an order of protection. I had several "roadblocks" as people tried to excuse the red flags I raised in the matter. This past weekend the guy tried to buy a gun at a pawn shop. Luckily I got the order of protection and the guy was denied buying the gun.

The other case involves someone who has served. The wife is trying to paint him as a danger just because of his service. I consider myself an expert on domestic violence (& have been qualified as such in legal cases). If anyone trying to control the other, it is the wife not my client. The thing is that allowing for this false connection (aka an excuse to the violence) between PTSD and DV only hurts fellow service members who has to over-come those presumptions to get a fair shake in proceedings. It also allows those who would batter regardless of service to have a ready made excuse for their behaviors.

Ok rant over.

efmbman
04-22-2014, 07:39 PM
...I think the presumption gives an excuse instead of looking at the behaviors of the individual...

It does seem like the catch-all for violent acts by military personnel. Due to the prolonged involvement in overseas adventures, this is categorized as a nation-wide epidemic of military folks with PTSD and the military and the VA are doing nothing to address this (which is untrue). All the news sources were going ape over the latest shooting at Fort Hood... until it turned out the shooter was confronting people he thought had robbed him. Oh... nevermind... doesn't sound like PTSD after all. Story died.

I also feel that veterans are aware of this and will try to claim PTSD as a get out of jail free card. It all takes away from those that actually do suffer from PTSD and will eventually marginalize their ability to be looked at as anything other than a time bomb waiting to explode. Maybe that's why veterans are having trouble getting employed despite all the assistance programs for employment...?

Stalwart
04-22-2014, 08:06 PM
First and foremost, this is terrible for all involved.

I have heard a lot of people say they have PTS, someone they know has PTS etc. While combat is not a requirement for PTS, not everyone who participates in combat has PTS or even any issues at all, most that do actually have not been diagnosed with PTS and instead have an anxiety disorder. The news has to be quick to respond to and generate a story; it seems that the SOP is to get something, ANYTHING out there now to attract viewers and keep the churn going while the facts become available – the product of an information hungry/easily distracted/instant gratification environment.

I don't know if the perception that every veteran has PTS is a factor in veteran employment issues or not, I think it can be depending on the employer. Based on what I have seen a large part of the problem is a lack of preparation by the veteran and a lack of planning.

efmbman
04-22-2014, 08:18 PM
...Based on what I have seen a large part of the problem is a lack of preparation by the veteran and a lack of planning.

Sir! How dare you try to make personal accountability and responsibility a factor in the lives of our treasured service members!

(that was sarcasm by the way).

I could not agree more. Just like when I hear about the thousands of military members living off food stamps, I wonder how many would benefit more from sound financial advice and counseling. I had my share of troubled troops in my time as an NCO and a leader... 9 times out of 10 it boiled down to choices made.

Measure Man
04-22-2014, 08:34 PM
Sir! How dare you try to make personal accountability and responsibility a factor in the lives of our treasured service members!

(that was sarcasm by the way).

I could not agree more. Just like when I hear about the thousands of military members living off food stamps, I wonder how many would benefit more from sound financial advice and counseling. I had my share of troubled troops in my time as an NCO and a leader... 9 times out of 10 it boiled down to choices made.

+1 Everytime I hear a politician or someone say, "No veteran should be homeless in America", I think, "Why the hell not? Should someone who did a four year tour in the 1980s get housing for life?"

Screw that...I'm all for veterans get any and all benefits they deserve...the life choices they make beyond that is on them.