Santa massacres Christmas partygoers with handgun, homemade flamethrower.

Griffith · December 26, 2008

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D95A6IHO0&show_article=1

Man in Santa suit kills 8, self on Christmas Eve
Dec 26 01:14 AM US/Eastern
By CHRISTINA HOAG
Associated Press Writer

COVINA, Calif. (AP) - Stinging from an acrimonious divorce, a man plotting revenge against his ex-wife dressed up like Santa, went to his former in-laws' Christmas Eve party and slaughtered at least eight people before killing himself hours later.

Bruce Pardo's ex-wife and her parents were believed to be among the dead. Investigators planned to return to the scene Friday and sift through the ashes of the home, which Pardo set ablaze using a bizarre homemade device that sprayed flammable liquid.

Pardo, 45, had no criminal record and no history of violence, according to police, but he was angry following last week's settlement of his divorce after a marriage that lasted barely a year.

"It was not an amicable divorce," police Lt. Pat Buchanan said.

Pardo chose to exact his revenge at the annual Christmas party his former in-laws held at their two-story home on a cul-de-sac in a quiet Covina neighborhood 25 miles east of Los Angeles.

"Christmases were that special time of the year, it meant so much to them," Rosa Ordaz, a family friend of the victims, told KCBS-TV.

In past years, a neighbor dressed as Santa Claus and entertained guests. But the neighbor had moved away and there was no Santa—until Pardo arrived around 11:30 p.m.

The massacre began when an 8-year-old girl answered Pardo's knock at the door. Pardo, carrying what appeared to be a large present, pulled out a handgun and shot her in the face, then began shooting indiscriminately as about 25 partygoers tried to flee, police said at a news conference.

A 16-year-old girl was shot in the back, and a 20-year-old woman broke her ankle when she escaped by jumping from a second-story window. Those two, and the 8-year-old, remained hospitalized Christmas Day. All were expected to recover.

The gift-wrapped box Pardo was carrying actually contained a pressurized homemade device he used to spray a liquid that quickly sent the house up in flames. Police said Pardo had recently worked is the aerospace industry.

David Salgado, a neighbor, said he saw the 8-year-old victim being escorted to an ambulance by four SWAT team members as flames up to 40 feet high consumed the house.

"It was really ugly," Salgado said.

Another neighbor, Jan Gregory, said she saw a teenage boy flee the home, screaming, "`They shot my family.'"

When the fire was extinguished early Thursday, officers found three charred bodies in the living room area.

"They were met with a scene that was just indescribable," police Chief Kim Raney said. Investigators found five more bodies amid the ashes later in the day and planned to return Friday to continue looking.

None of the dead or missing has been identified. Authorities were unable to immediately determine whether the victims were killed by the flames or the gunfire.

Following the shootings, Pardo quickly got out of the Santa suit and drove off, witnesses told police. He went to his brother's home about 25 miles away in the Sylmar area of Los Angeles. No one was home, so Pardo let himself in, police said.

Police were called to the home early Thursday, and officers found Pardo dead of a single bullet to the head. Two handguns were found at the scene, and two more were discovered in the wreckage of his former in-laws' house.

Investigators seeking further information about Pardo's motives have begun searching his home in the suburban Los Angeles community of Montrose.

Pardo's next-door neighbor, who did not want her name published to protect her privacy, said he moved in more than a year ago with a woman and a child. She said they kept mostly to themselves and the woman later moved out with the child.

Pardo was often seen walking a dog around the neighborhood and working on his lawn, the neighbor said.

He also served regularly as an usher at evening Mass at Holy Redeemer Catholic Church in Montrose, the Los Angeles Times reported.

Jan Detanna, the head usher at the church, was stunned when told about the violence.

"I'm just—this is shocking," Detanna told the Times. "He was the nicest guy you could imagine. Always a pleasure to talk to, always a big smile."

Bong Garcia, another of Pardo's next-door neighbors, told the Times he saw Pardo between 9 and 10 p.m. Christmas Eve and spoke briefly to him. Pardo told him he was on his way to a Christmas party, Garcia said.

That about sums it up, but here's an extended article:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2008560960_shoot26.html

I saw this early yesterday morning before it really developed, under the catchy headline 'Santa' shooter kills 4, I skimmed it as it was sketchy on the details, basically that the guy had a gun, shot and killed 4 people, wounded others, the house burned down but it didn't say how or equate it directly to him, and he killed himself. Then later I saw the body count in the headline had gone up to 6, then only a few minutes later to 8... so I read the updated story, and WOW, MERRY CHRISTMAS!

Aazealh · December 26, 2008

The massacre began when an 8-year-old girl answered Pardo's knock at the door. Pardo, carrying what appeared to be a large present, pulled out a handgun and shot her in the face, then began shooting indiscriminately as about 25 partygoers tried to flee, police said at a news conference.

I don't know how anyone could do something like that.

Griffith · December 26, 2008

Right in my backyard too, my girlfriend lives less than a half hour from Covina.

SaiyajinNoOuji · December 26, 2008

America.... FUCK YA! :ganishka:

In any case... Jesus man... You have to wonder why the marriage lasted a year or so. :schierke:

Vampire_Hunter_Bob · December 26, 2008

He should have just killed him self. Fucking piece of shit.

Walter · December 26, 2008

Nothing surprises me these days. This guy just wanted to go out with a depraved, rehearsed BANG, as a big F U to the world. Bravo, buddy.

Griffith · December 27, 2008

Looks like he was actually planning to escape to Canada, had a plane ticket and $17,000 in cash on him, but he suffered 3rd degree burns which left the Santa suit partially melted into his body... that might have forced him to reevaluate the situation.

Ramen4ever · December 27, 2008

Not so Merry Christmas. The part about the 8 year old girl getting shot in the face is what got to me the most. Though the entire thing is really quite insane.

Russian Rainbow · December 27, 2008

Ramen4ever · December 27, 2008

Носферату said:
Wow, what a merry christmas.

Man, that's really fucked up about the little girl though, I mean come on, what did she do to deserve that?

She participated in the party. Apparently that was more then enough.

avidwriter · December 31, 2008

Do we really need more reasons to ban gun sales in the US? I think not.

Walter · December 31, 2008

avidwriter said:
Do we really need more reasons to ban gun sales in the US? I think not.

Sure, here ya go:

Boy Dies After Accidentally Shooting Self With Uzi: http://wbztv.com/local/boy.shot.with.2.849254.html

Vampire_Hunter_Bob · December 31, 2008

avidwriter said:
Do we really need more reasons to ban gun sales in the US? I think not.

Guns aren't all that bad, take this for example. http://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2008/dec/31/burglar-flees-after-resident-fires-shot/

This is even better: http://www.kfvs12.com/Global/story.asp?S=9273275&nav=8H3x

Ramen4ever · December 31, 2008

Vampire_Hunter_Bob said:
Guns aren't all that bad, take this for example. http://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2008/dec/31/burglar-flees-after-resident-fires-shot/

This is even better: http://www.kfvs12.com/Global/story.asp?S=9273275&nav=8H3x

I have to agree with Bob. Gun's aren't bad they just have to be handled with respect. I would speculate that the kid who shot himself in the head by accident was probably a result of the kid being unaccustomed to shooting an automatic weapon, like an Uzi. Unless I misread the article on my initial skim through, the kid had experience with smaller fire arms. Most likely hand guns? An automatic weapon reacts differently when you hold down the trigger. Accidents like that happen but not very often.

Banning guns in general would not have stopped the lunatic in the Santa Massacre. I feel like I should stress the point that the man booby trapped his car with a pipebomb and even made a homemade flamethrower. The guy was creative. Not having a gun would not have stopped him from killing those people. Whether by knife or setting the house on fire. Or homemade explosives or even acquiring a gun from an underground/black market source.

Aazealh · January 1, 2009

Ramen4ever said:
I have to agree with Bob. Gun's aren't bad they just have to be handled with respect.

I personally love guns, but the amount of crazy people versus that of sensible, safety-concerned ones makes me glad I live in a country where it's quite difficult to gain access to firearms.

Ramen4ever said:
Banning guns in general would not have stopped the lunatic in the Santa Massacre.

It would have made things harder for him though, which is at least a step in the good direction. And it'd stop other crimes.

Ramen4ever · January 1, 2009

Aazealh said:
It would have made things harder for him though, which is at least a step in the good direction. And it'd stop other crimes.

That's the thing. Apart from making it more difficult. It wouldn't actually prevent crimes from occurring. Holding up a convenience store with a large kitchen knife, a crossbow, an ax or even a box cutter isn't much different from holding it up with a gun. Granted some convenience stores have owners/workers that have baseball bats and the such to protect themselves and a gun is easily the most difficult to protect against.

Still what if the guy in the Santa Massacre used a Chainsaw? I don't even want to imagine what would have happened to that poor little girl who opened the door. :sad:

Griffith · January 1, 2009

Ramen4ever said:
I have to agree with Bob. Gun's aren't bad they just have to be handled with respect.

That's a good point.

Ramen4ever said:
I feel like I should stress the point that the man booby trapped his car with a pipebomb and even made a homemade flamethrower.The guy was creative. Not having a gun would not have stopped him from killing those people. Whether by knife or setting the house on fire. Or homemade explosives or even acquiring a gun from an underground/black market source.

I feel I should stress the fact that he shot these people. He would not have killed them with the same effectiveness using a knife. That's ridiculous. None of those other methods you describe would have been as easy and effective as a gun, which is why he used one. You even contradict the initial point that he didn't need a gun by coming full circle to him getting a gun again.

Ramen4ever said:
That's the thing. Apart from making it more difficult. It wouldn't actually prevent crimes from occurring.

Actually, that's what it would mean by definition.

Ramen4ever said:
Holding up a convenience store with a large kitchen knife, a crossbow, an ax or even a box cutter isn't much different from holding it up with a gun.

This is the second time you've asserted that guns are essentially no more effective than knives or melee weapons. That's quite an egregiously false slandering of guns. Not to mention history and statistics.

Ramen4ever said:
Still what if the guy in the Santa Massacre used a Chainsaw?

Then more if not most of those people could probably still be alive today; chainsaws aren't the most effective weapons. These arguments sound like they're based off of movies and anime. If you are trying to defend guns, you're undermining the cause with these kinds of false rationalizations, circular logic, and specious reasoning.

Like I said, it's an insult to guns, and our intelligence.

SaiyajinNoOuji · January 1, 2009

Ramen4ever said:
Still what if the guy in the Santa Massacre used a Chainsaw? I don't even want to imagine what would have happened to that poor little girl who opened the door.

Actually she got shot in the face when she answered the door.

Ramen4ever · January 1, 2009

Griffith said:
This is the second time you've asserted that guns are essentially no more effective than knives or melee weapons. That's quite an egregiously false slandering of guns. =)

It's more effective. It's just not the only way to kill someone. Place yourself in the little girls shoes. When you open the door it won't make much of a difference whether the psycho blasts you in the face with a gun or stabs you in the eye with a butcher knife. Your f3cked either way.

The knives/melee weapons were examples. What if the guy rang the door, kicked the girl out of the way and threw numerous pipebombs with bags of screws taped on into the middle of the group of people? I mean if we're looking at effectiveness then a homemade claymore is just as deadly as a gun.

SaiyajinNoOuji said:
Actually she got shot in the face when she answered the door.

I know that. I was explaining an alternative situation with just as devastating results.

Vampire_Hunter_Bob · January 1, 2009

Aazealh said:
It would have made things harder for him though, which is at least a step in the good direction. And it'd stop other crimes.

It wouldn't prevent an immediate spike in crime. The crime rate in the District of Columbia spiked in crime even after the 1975 gun ban. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Washington,_D.C.

One of the big deterrents to home intruders is the threat of a home owner having a gun. A good question to ask is how many lives have been saved from people being able to properly defend their selves from an armed intruder [and the number of people that decided to not break into a house just because they didn't want to take the risk] compared to the numbers of lives lost to crimes like the christmas massacre.

Ramen4ever said:
That's the thing. Apart from making it more difficult. It wouldn't actually prevent crimes from occurring. Holding up a convenience store with a large kitchen knife, a crossbow, an ax or even a box cutter isn't much different from holding it up with a gun.

That's just silly an Axe doesn't hold the same amount of power that a gun has.

Still what if the guy in the Santa Massacre used a Chainsaw? I don't even want to imagine what would have happened to that poor little girl who opened the door.

Difference is you can out run a chainsaw or if he had hit something thick and metallic it would bounce off and right back at him.

Ramen I don't think you understood what I was getting at with those links. None of those other weapons you mentioned are even as close to being as effective has a hand gun.

Griffith · January 1, 2009

Ramen4ever said:
It's more effective. It's just not the only way to kill someone. Place yourself in the little girls shoes. When you open the door it won't make much of a difference whether the psycho blasts you in the face with a gun or stabs you in the eye with a butcher knife. Your f3cked either way.

The knives/melee weapons were examples. What if the guy rang the door, kicked the girl out of the way and threw numerous pipebombs with bags of screws taped on into the middle of the group of people? I mean if we're looking at effectiveness then a homemade claymore is just as deadly as a gun.

I know that. I was explaining an alternative situation with just as devastating results.

That's the point, you're not actually thinking about this. You're just substituting them and automatically assuming the same results, instead of actually considering how the effectiveness of weapons changes the circumstances and vice versa. Substituting like that just doesn't make any sense, that's like saying it's possible to slam dunk a basketball off of concrete or off of a trampoline, so there's no difference in how effective the methods are. Effectiveness is not just about deadliness, you can kill someone with a pencil, but you wouldn't argue THIS could've been done with one. Guns are relatively easy to use and kill people with, killing people with knives and pipe bombs come a number of inherent complications that he obviously avoided by using gun, that's why it's more efficient, effective, deadly, and therefore devastating.

Ramen4ever · January 1, 2009

Griffith said:
That's the point, you're not actually thinking about this. You're just substituting them and automatically assuming the same results, instead of actually considering how the effectiveness of weapons changes everything. Effectiveness is not just about deadliness, you can kill someone with a pencil, but you wouldn't argue he could've done THIS with one. Guns are relatively easy to use an kill people with, that's the point. Killing people with knives and pipebombs creates a number of complications that he you avoided by using gun, therefore making it more efficient, effective, deadly, and more devastating.

I think this argument is completely useless. The man was creative. He booby trapped his car with a pipebomb and made a flamethrower. A gun ban would not have prevented this tragedy. Debating what he could have used is really pointless and my stupid melee examples where just things off the top of my head. Things that are easy to acquire or come by. But the man had a pipebomb booby trap, that's not something you buy off the shelf. And for me that's the point. The man had an objective or at least a general idea of what he wanted to do. He was also creative enough make a weapon. I don't think a gun ban would have stopped him.

Griffith · January 1, 2009

Ramen4ever said:
I think this argument is completely useless.

What, actual logic and the effectiveness of a weapon? You can't shoot people from across a room with a knife, Ramen, let alone multiple people. It also makes you're other weapons less effective because people aren't as intimidated by a knife as with a gun, especially a crowd that could overwhelm you.

Ramen4ever said:
The man was creative. He booby trapped his car with a pipebomb and made a flamethrower. A gun ban would not have prevented this tragedy.

It was perpetrated with a gun, using the advantages of a gun; you just sound like you're in denial when you refuse to acknowlege the reality of the situation. The circumstances of the attack and the effectiveness of the weapon are dependent on each other and vice versa. It's a simple axiom.

Ramen4ever said:
Debating what he could have used is really pointless and my stupid melee examples where just things off the top of my head.

Yes, being glib about all this doesn't help.

Ramen4ever said:
Things that are easy to acquire or come by. But the man had a pipebomb booby trap, that's not something you buy off the shelf. And for me that's the point. The man had an objective or at least a general idea of what he wanted to do. He was also creative enough make a weapon. I don't think a gun ban would have stopped him.

You simply sound enamored with him and weapons here, that doesn't change the basic facts of weapons and their effectiveness, how they work. If he'd gone in with knives, pipe bombs, or chainsaws in the same fashion he went in with a gun, as you're arguing, it would not have been the same, and probably much less effective. A pipe bomb or multiple would not be as easy to use, assuming they worked as he planned, it's still a matter of timing, technique, and danger to the wielder that you don't have to worry about in the same way as a guns. It's a whole different ball of wax, and much harder to pull off without failure. That's why people use guns, that's why HE used a gun.

The useless argument is to say he could have just easily or effectively done it without a gun when he himself had that option and chose to use a gun. Obviously, even he disagreed with your assertion.

Ramen4ever · January 1, 2009

Griffith said:
You simply sound enamored with him and weapons here, that doesn't change the basic facts of weapons and their effectiveness, without thinking about how they work. If he'd gone in with knives, pipe bombs, or chainsaws in the same fashion he went in with a gun, as you're arguing, it would not have been the same, and probably much less effective. A pipe bomb or multiple would not be as easy to use or likely as effective, assuming they worked as he wanted them to, it's still a matter of timing, technique, and danger to the wielder. It's a whole different ball of wax, and much harder to pull off without failure.

That's why people use guns.

Right and using a gun does not require aim, skill or technique. :schierke:

This wasn't exactly a spur of the moment thing for the guy. The fact that he had money on him and he even made a device to burn the house down, indicate that it was planned. And if he planned it, he probably made the effort to become comfortable with whatever he was planning to use. In this case a gun.
If there were no guns, his plan would have been different but his goal and who he wanted to kill would not have changed.

Griffith · January 1, 2009

Ramen4ever said:
Right and using a gun does not require aim, skill or technique.

Certainly not the same technique as a pipe bomb, as you said, that's not off the shelf, it's specialty, with much less chance of malfunction or blowing oneself up.

Ramen4ever said:
This wasn't exactly a spur of the moment thing for the guy. The fact that he had money on him and he even made a device to burn the house down, indicate that it was planned. And if he planned it, he probably made the effort to become comfortable with whatever he was planning to use. In this case a gun.

That just goes to my point, and he chose a gun because it was most effective. This is the way he chose to do it, a gun was integral, and he couldn't have done it the same way without a gun. Very simple, I'm not sure what you're even arguing. If he could have been more effective by planning another method, he would have.

Ramen4ever said:
If there were no guns, his plan would have been different but his goal and who he wanted to kill would not have changed.

Who he did kill likely would have though, and that's the point. I hope it's clear by now.

Santa massacres Christmas partygoers with handgun, homemade flamethrower.

With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew

Administrator

With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew

I'm still better than you

Cats are great

Administrator

With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew

The Prettiest Girl A Boy Can Be

avidwriter

Guest

Administrator

Cats are great

Administrator

With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew

I'm still better than you

Cats are great

With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew

With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew

With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew