Anti-Abortion Activist Killed! - Anyone Notice?

very sad

very sad

good Lord!

I noticed, but only because I'm in Michigan and it's almost local.
You are right, the killing of Tiller was a 'BIG DEAL' to the liberals but when it's the other side it's a buried issue.
It's sad, but I also know that Mr. Pouillon is now rejoicing in glory with our Saviour, whose work he died doing.

I forgot to mention there is also another murder investigation underway that they believe is related to this. Not sure who the victim is, only that it was in the same area and MSP are saying they believe it is directly related.

I apologize for the misunderstanding of your post. This type of behavior is unacceptable by either those on the Right or those on the Left. With all the hysterical, fringe and lunatic behavior I've witnessed over the last few months, I assumed that it was business as usual.

Once again, I apologize.

Lloyd

And if some nitwit on the Left is responsible for the death of this Anti-Abortionist activist, then I consider them no different than the extremists in Afghanistan or Pakistan. They too, I consider an American Taliban.

Being from Michigan !!

It does not matter who gets killed its wrong!!!
But to say that one life is more important then other is not right either..
The bad ones who kill are the ones to blame and they are on both sides..
Pro life is Pro life.. not just for one group its for all life...

___________;-)

HUH?
Those on the right??
as in CONSERVATIVES??
This man that was killed WAS a conservative.

someone just read the title I think and knee jerked

sad... in more ways than one.

You didn't read the article,
The man's pro-life activities had nothing to do with his killing.

"No motive was given for the shootings, but Compeau said he believed Pouillon appeared to be a target.

“I would speculate it was ... intended,” Compeau said. “He was out protesting right across the street from the high school ... and there (were) multiple people around there and that person was targeted.”

Students said Pouillon was a fixture outside the high school and regularly held graphic signs of aborted fetuses."

WHO didn't read the article??????

More HERE:
"As to the reason for the killing of pro-life activist Jim Pouillon, Harlan Drake has told police that he was “offended” by Pouillon’s anti-abortion messages. "
and HERE:
"Owosso Police Director of Public Safety Michael Compeau says his detectives believe they know the motive in the killing of pro-life activist James Pouillon. They say 33 year old Harlan Drake of Owosso gunned down the 63 year old in front of Owosso High School because of his continuing anti-abortion demonstrations.

“I don’t think he knew him personally,” says Compeau. “ (Drake) was aware of him, and was offended by the material that Mr. Pouillon carried with him.”

Mr. Pouilion was known nationally for travelling with graphic signs featuring pictures of aborted fetuses. He was holding one of his signs as he demonstrated in his hometown at Owosso High School when he was killed in front of students on their way to class."

just a side note....this was reported on abc national news at 6:30 p.m. est.

i don't know about the other stations, i wasn't watching them. bill o'reilly kept saying it was nowhere in the national news, but it was. not to the extent of abortion doctor killings, but it was there.

another side note....my daughter went to baker college in owosso. owosso is not outside of detroit. it is midway between lansing & flint. sorry....detroit has enough problems we don't need to drag them into this one.

killing is wrong no matter who or why.

They've already pulled the story off most of the Grand Rapids channels as if it were "old news."
But the Tiller story sat there for a few days.

Great article Jane. Very sad, in several ways.

Depends on if it was the motive and from reading the article it appear it wasn't the motive.

No motive was given for the shootings, but Compeau said he believed Pouillon appeared to be a target.

“I would speculate it was ... intended,” Compeau said. “He was out protesting right across the street from the high school ... and there (were) multiple people around there and that person was targeted.”

Students said Pouillon was a fixture outside the high school and regularly held graphic signs of aborted fetuses.

"No motive was given..."

"I would speculate..."


It appears to me that the motive is still up for debate.

Not anymore... see my comment above.

Now this is truly a stupid post.

Dr. Triller was killed because he performed abortions.

This man was killed for other reasons, not his pro-life activism.

NOT THE SAME THING

WHERE does it say that?????

http://www.operationrescue.org/

This man was killed because he took a stand for the rights of the unborn, who have no way to stand up for themselves.

Kind of hard to stand up for yourself when your non-self is the size of the tip of a pen.

don't listen or watch the news. sad it happen..

There were DEATH THREATS as well.
http://www.operationrescue.org/

I'm with TI on this one. I've seen little evidence that this was connected at all with politics.

Most killings are senseless to those not doing the killing. Only the killer and maybe the investigators can make sense of the act.

It just goes to prove how far Liberals will go to defend their deadly actions against anyone and everyone who disagrees with them. The man was murdered because he was pro-life. He was the target of the attack. There is nothing you Liberals can do or say that can change that except stick your heads in the sand and keep it there. You are unable to see the truth even when it's staring in your faces.

The SAD thing is that for many years I was horrified by all violence, until I became angry and frightened by the attacks on the doctors and clinic workers, until I was terrorized by the viciousness I saw spew from protestors outside a clinic where we went for my husband's prostate bloodwork, to the point that today, when I saw the article, all I felt was "About time THEY had to feel the loss and fear they have so long inflicted on others." Is it wrong? Yes. Do I care? Sadly, no.

This man walked with signs, he didn't physically harm anyone. He didn't use violence, he used SIGNS.

Violence is a relative term... he didn't JUST carry a sign; he carried photos of bloody fetuses outside a children's school. (Lot of abortions going on in the nurse's office there?) He intruded on the peace of mind of parents and teenagers who were trying to go about the business of school as they should have been. Nevertheless, until all the facts are in, you don't KNOW what relationship, if any existed between these two men.

There is a more PERSONAL LOOK at it from someone who lives IN the town of Owosso, Michigan and KNEW the victims, HERE.

This is a very thoughtful article. It paints a very disturbing picture of Pouillon.

When pro-lifers stop killing doctors I might find an ounce of concern for the loss of one of you. That is how I see things--in a circle things end where they start.

Another source...differently worded article:

Well-Known Local Pro-Life Activist Gunned Down in Michigan

By Kathleen Gilbert

OWOSSO, Michigan, September 11, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A pro-life activist was shot multiple times and killed this morning in front of Owosso High School in Michigan, according to local police cited in the Flint Journal newspaper.

Locals say that the victim, James Pouillon of Owosso, was well-known in the area for his pro-life activities. Columnist Doug Powers wrote on his blog that Pouillon, called “the abortion sign guy" by Owosso locals, was known for standing on street corners holding up signs with pictures of aborted children.

Pastor Matt Trehella of Missionaries to the Preborn said today that Pouillon had joined his organization for a few stops of a pro-life tour less than a month ago. "Jim was a selfless, soft-spoken, kind-hearted man. All who knew him, knew this," he said. "Please pray for Jim's family."

Trehella said that Pouillon was an elderly man who needed constant use of an oxygen machine.

Reports indicate that a second individual was shot and killed in a different area of the city shortly afterward, and the two shootings are believed to be related, according to Shiawassee County sheriff George Braidwood. Police confirmed that a suspect was taken into custody at the suspect's home shortly after the 7:30 a.m. shooting.

A black car was parked near the scene of the shooting, where a portable oxygen tank lay in a front yard next to a large sign with the word "Life" and an image of a baby.

In the wake of the tragedy, Fr. Pavone of Priests for Life told LifeSiteNews.com that he hoped to see "a strong expression of indignation from the pro-abortion community, just like there was a strong expression of indignation form the pro-life community at the killing of Dr. Tiller."

Secondly, Fr. Pavone called for "a renewal of unity within the pro-life community, coming to one another's assistance supporting one another, and by no means allowing fear or intimidation to have any role in our lives, but rather to move forward in peaceful organized ways to stand against this evil of abortion."

Developing...

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/sep/09091101.html

From the MSNBC link Jane gave...this:

'Police declined to release the gunman’s identity'

Why?

I have a better question:

Why did he steal Pouillon's car first??

Click here to see a photo of Jim Pouillon........

The media is not too liberal everywhere. It depends on where you are and what media you listen to, read or watch. Also, killing is not always wrong. For example, killing in self-defense is justified.

In trying to access Operation Rescue via an e-mail alert...I get this:

SRVE0255E: A WebGroup/Virtual Host to handle /tn.jsp has not been defined.

SRVE0255E: A WebGroup/Virtual Host to handle rs6.net:80 has not been defined.

IBM WebSphere Application Server

I cut and paste the e-mail:

Pro-life Activist Gunned Down In Cold Blood

September 11, 2009

Operation Rescue and the Christian Defense Coalition to hold a press conference in Washington, D.C. today to discuss the murder and other threats against pro-life leaders

Owosso, MI - A pro-life activist gunned down this morning as he peacefully held a picture of a baby with the word "Life" outside a high school in Owosso, Michigan. The victim is Jim Pouillon, a well known activist in the Owosso area and a friend of Operation Rescue.

A suspect was arrested about 45 minutes after the shooting and is now in police custody.

"We are stunned by Jim's murder. We extend our condolences to the family and share in their grief over his loss. His life was characterized by his love and concern of the vulnerable, and he will be greatly missed," said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman.

"We denounce this senseless act of violence in the strongest terms, and pray that this murderer will be swiftly brought to justice."

This shooting comes in the wake of hundreds of death threats that have been received by Operation Rescue and other pro-life organizations over the past three months.

Operation Rescue and the Christian Defense Coalition will hold a press conference today in Washington DC to discuss this senseless murder and threats against the pro-life community.

Press Conference Details:

Friday, September 11, 2009
2:30 PM
Outside the U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC

Speakers will include Troy Newman, rev. Patrick J. Mahoney of the Chrisitan Defense Coalition, and other pro-life leaders.

"We have received literally hundreds of death threats in the past three months. Our office has been vandalized three times. Just yesterday, the FBI was in our office and picked up a stack of threatening letters that we received," said Newman. "We denounce violence in the strongest terms. The bloodshed must stop both inside and outside of the abortion clinics."

Read e-mailed death threats to Operation Rescue
Listen to a sample of telephonic death threats to Operation Rescue (Caution, strong and disturbing language.)

Wouldn't we have to know more about the motive for killing the gravel pit operator before we could conclude that the anti-abortion protester guy was killed because of his anti-abortion protesting? I mean, the shooter killed the gravel pit operator in his office earlier that day. It seems like the two shootings are connected somehow.

2 Dead, 1 Spared: A Shooter's Hit List
Jim Poullion WAS killed because of his anti-abortion stance. Mike Fouss was at one time the shooters' mother's boss, no connection yet made with the 3rd man (who was spared only because police found the shooter before he could get to him) who was a real estate agent.

So the shooter tried to kill a third person, too? Sounds like the shooter really lost his mind and started shooting people he knew. The facts you are giving support the conclusion that Jim Poullion WAS NOT killed because of his anti-abortion stance. Perhaps the shooter knew him.

This is tragic, regardless of the reason for the shooting. Since the shooter is implicated in another killing of a gravel pit operator, your logic would extend to surmising that the shooter was anti-gravel? I would wait until the police investigate and find out why exactly the shooter targeted these two individuals before jumping to the conclusion that this man was shot because of his 'pro-life' demonstrations and politics.

Felix's c&p offers no further evidence - just additional guessing by people. I would keep my shorts straight until I knew the facts behind this whole thing. Perhaps the man was fooling around with the shooter's wife. No one knows for sure. Settle down.

I agree with you, Sheryl. According to Joy, the shooter also tried to kill a third man but was unsuccessful. That would tend to show that the shooter was going off on a rampage and shooting everybody he knew.

I think harassing school children with your disgusting anti-abortion posters is way over the line and no one should be surprised if this inflammatory behavior leads to violence although I don't condone it. At this point, no one knows why this happened. The shooter could have been just as anti-abortion as the deceased and the fight over money. And both certainly could have been on the same side of gun rights.

So........

You're saying that "no one should be surprised" if an American citizen, freely and peacebly exercising his or her First Amendment rights, is gunned down in broad daylight because some lunatic didn't like it??

What Julia is saying is that many people who publically and continuously demonstrate, especially in an area with kids, a strong political view is bound to attract people who may want to stop them through use of violence.

How is this different than the crazy folk who demonstrate outside veterans' funerals and burials, 'freely and peacebly exercising his or her First Amendment rights', carrying signs that the veterans were killed because of America's homosexuals? What this man did was just as abhorant to some people, especially in the view of children every day with graphic signs.

Just because you believe in his cause doesn't make what he did any better. But, as Julia points out, no one should condone violence in any way, shape or form.

What part of "although I don't condone it" don't you understand? We don't know the motives of the shooter, nor do I know what the anti-abortionist thinks about gun control. But I can guess. Like I said, abortion protest may have just been an irrelevant coincidence.

Nonetheless, school children should be left out of this. I know my disgust at the judgmental nut who has to put pictures of an aborted fetus on a sign and parade around town with them, a person who because of his anatomy will never have to personally face such a dilemma so his morality is rather cheap as to the policing of his own behavior, would be amplified if he targeted my children's school during school hours.

Is a woman who is provocatively dressed bound to attract someone who will commit a violent act against them? The whole point of our rights and freedom is that we can express ourselves as we choose. This in no way gives anyone the right to make us a victim. Although you may not condone the violence you are implying he in some way attracted it by his actions and is in some way asking for it.

Absolutely, Jane. But, reality is quite different than the way things 'should be'. A woman should be able to walk around provocatively dressed and not expect to be raped. But, the reality is that women who do so stand a higher chance of attracting violent behavior than women who do not. No one is saying that the rapist has the 'right' or a valid 'excuse'. It's simply a fact.

So, considering the stats, would you advise your daughter to dress more conservatively if going to a frat party, or would you stand on her Constitutional rights? I think I would opt for the safer path. My mother used to say, "Better safe than sorry."

Where does the Constitution state that a woman (or a man, for that matter) has the "right" to dress provocatively??

And, as to your reference to "crazy folk who demonstrate outside veterans' funerals and burials," the Westboro Baptist Church, in my opinion, is not representative of mainstream Christianity. However, their actions (unfortunately) are covered and guaranteed under the First Amendment just the same as KKK rallies, Communist conventions, and Gay Pride marches........

No one has the right to shoot a klansman or a homosexual any more than they have the right to shoot an anti-abortionist........

They should be made to stay away from schools like all other perverts.

You say the liberals are burying this story as fast as they can. Tell me, has Faux, I mean Fox news, the conservatives servent, published anything about this killing or is it being ignored as insignificant by both sides?

Yes, Fox News is on it (it is on their website) and I expect they will have a lot to say about it tonight. Fox is the closest thing to balanced reporting we have left.

"Fox is the closest thing to balanced reporting we have left. "

Ha! YOu do yourself a grave disservice with that comment. But, I will hold judgement to see if Fox actually presents the FACTS and not the innuendo you presented in this article.

FACTS....not questions. Fox is very good at asking leading questions, like:

"The police do not know what the shooters motives were at this time, but, could it be that the shooter was PRO-ABORTION???????"

Yeah, great, responsible reporting - they're famous for that.

They report with their crystal ball - it looks.

I wonder how the story will really turn out.

If Faux is the closest thing to balanced reporting we have, we are really in deep dodo.

The FACT is the man WAS shot because of his anti-abortion stance.

The fact is somebody snapped and was killing people he didn't like. This man happened to be an anti-abortionest, but what of the gravel man and the 3rd would be victum if the cops hadn't caught the shooter? Was the motives for their death or would be death any less important because it was different from killing the first man?

Murder is wrong, no matter who commits it. It is wrong, and it is illegal. That said, I find no evidence in these articles that this was a political killing, as was the murder of Dr. Tiller.

Fox is the propaganda arm of the Republican party.

No I'm not surprised at this killing. Extremism leads to extreme acts.

I'm sorry for the dead and their families.

I'm also sorry that people are dumb as rocks.

Ditto.
Wilka

"Extremism leads to extreme acts."

Perhaps so, Obi wan, but in the eyes of many, certainly Mr. Pouillon's, abortions are extreme acts. Akin in some respects to the killing of newborn girls in some other societies . . . and surely you can understand how that might cause some people to get a bit extreme, in trying to reduce the perceived wrong . . No?

It is cruel that people take the issue of 'life' when it may not be viable yet to survive life outside the womb, as more important to protect than one that is already living and just trying to voice a powerful opinion. If a woman wants to kill her kid for whatever reaason, just let her ! How we view and act on what others do appalls me ! If you don't agree with abortion thats fine but don't be upset or ridiculing if a woman chooses to end a life of a child not even born yet !

I bet you'd be the first to scream if you saw someone beating new born puppies to death.

But those puppies were already born, thats comparing apples to oranges.

Abortion is bad, but... Who has the right to tell another how they should live their life? Each woman has her right to choose what to do, I would wish it was life for the baby but I would not assume I had the right to tell her what to do.

I usually stay out of this, but this is messed up. Completely and utterly MESSED UP. Gah.

HUMANS are the ONLY species that deliberately abort their unborn.

(Now, I wait for someone to supply the EXCUSE "It's because we have the ability to REASON".)

Many other species eat their unwanted newborns, for some reason!

Erica, I would disagree with you that abortion is ending the life of a child. There is no child.

There is something terribly wrong when people are killed or injured during efforts to save the unborn. The idea of the Pro-Life movement is that the unborn have an equal right to life. When people are killed, regardless of which side of the issue they favor, their rights are taken just like the unborn rights.

It sounds as if this killer was crazy and not necessarily anti-abortion. Killing people is always wrong.

Owosso is a small, peaceful, family city and this sort of activity is just not typical.

Would you say that killing in self-defense is wrong? I wouldn't.

Oxnard,

I think killing is always wrong. Sometimes the best choice - survival - is the only choice. Killing in self-defense is still killing, but may be the only option.
That said, I would do almost anything to protect my children and grandchildren.

I don't know that the story was buried. It was in my Yahoo headlines this morning.

I don't mean that it wasn't reported, but you had to look for it. MSNBC doesn't even have the story on their front page anymore.

MJ? There's buried. And then there's BURRIED....

I feel bad for all those babies that died without having a chance at life. As far as the Doctor goes I have no comment

Well Pro life means Pro life no matter who it is.. If you say you are Pro life and its ok that the Doctor was murdered you are not a true Pro Lifer...that means only when it fits for you.

I am sorry, I thought she said the Dr was the one who did the abortions. My mistake. I feel whoever killed him should pay with their life

I caught it on the radio - I live in the Detroit area - but not much notoriety compared to some of the other awful things than happen around here

Is Detroit really that bad? When I lived in Connecticut and worked at Yale I would never walk alone in that area. And now a girl is missing. She could be another run away bride seeing her wedding was in a few days but New Haven is one place you don't take walks alone

Actually it is - news is jam packed with the lastest killings, drive by shootings and car jackings - this week a five year old girl was shot in the face by an irate boy friend who was recently paroled for a previous murder - not too bad here in the burbs but its close - oh so close - we have problems similar to the one you mentioned at both Wayne State University and U of M

i believe the very last thing the Lord would want us to do is to kill each other.....

Everyone get off your pedastals and soap boxes for five seconds.
The killer murdered another man earlier in the day at a gravel pit, and then killed this gentleman. There was also apparently suppose to be a THIRD VICTIM but the killer was arrested before he could do it.

This had nothing to do with abortion. The killer was a psycho on a killing spring. He had personal grundges against the three victims and this was not an abortion issue.

As much as I realize some people were really hoping for a martyr for the cause, the victim is just a victim of random violence, not a martyr for your movement.

NOW! Do we want to talk about GUN CONTROL?
No? I thought not.

Wilka

Typical. Take a gun control issue, and turn it into an abortion issue.
So freaking sad.
How DO they Do it? Day after day...week after week.
Misdirection and mind control.
W

JULIA,
WRONG.
This man WAS murdered because of his stance on Abortion. The killer told the police that.

Nah, let's talk about this, and I'll even let you complain about the source.

The fact is that we know that one was an anti-abortion activist, but we do not know the motive for the other murder and the attempted murder. For all anyone knows, the murderer knew the other two people also held anti-abortion stands. It's not as if he went on a rampage at one place and just happened to murder an anti-abortion activist. The grudge he had (or grundge, as some people put it) may have been the exact same grudge for his grundgy spring.

The murdered ADMITTED he killed Poullion because of his Anti Abortion message. He came right out and said that is why he did it.

The motive for the second murder had something to do with the fact that the killers mother worked for the murdered man. Apparently there is some "beef" there with how his mother was treated or not treated.

Also no "attempt" was made... only the killer saying he wanted to kill the 3rd man... he had a list of 3 men he wanted dead and he got 2 of them before the police caught up with him and prevented the 3rd.

And I have no clue why you are trying to bring a totally unrelated article into this.... one is about Obama and this is about the murder of an innocent man.

Joy, calm down. I'm on your side here. Take a deep breath and read and take the time to write what you really mean too. I don't think that the murdered admitted anything because he's dead. I think you meant to write the murderer there, but you're all flustered.

I haven't seen this report, so I don't know anything for sure, but I do not doubt that the motive for the anti-abortion activist's murder was because he is an activist for that cause, especially having read Felix's comments.

I also stated that we do not know the reasons behind the attempted murder and the other one. That the killer's mother worked for the murdered man is not a motive unless there was something else to that too. That may have been the relationship, but it was not to do with the motive. Yes, the motive may have had to do with the way his mother was treated. It may have even had something to do with the way his mother was treated because of something she had said about being anti-abortion, but that's just speculation, of course. We just don't know. We also do not know the motive for the attempted murder, but that may also be related to an anti-abortion stand. We do not know. No one knows right now.

As far as the link I left, I was just having some fun because these people are so far off the deep end with wanting to say that these murders had nothing to do with an anti-abortion stand with no real evidence to support it, I don't think it makes any difference what they say anywhere about anything, but I apologize if I've upset you.

(Joy . . I heavily doubt that there are a lot of reasonable people being "taken in", by the sorts of lame denial tactics being attempted on this thread. You needn't counter their every meandering rationale for justifying the vast difference in their reactions to the two roughly equivalent tragedies . . . They betray themselves quite well, I feel ; )

Yes, the motive may have had to do with the way his mother was treated. It may have even had something to do with the way his mother was treated because of something she had said about being anti-abortion...that should say pro-abortion. I meant that he may have felt his mother's stand on choice was not looked upon kindly by her boss.

Has anyone ever thought that he chose this anti-abortionist BECAUSE he was so public and is trying to gain "fame" (I use that word loosely) by claiming what he is claiming! I was upset they killed Tiller not because he was an Abortion Doctor but because he was a person. That is not the way to deal with this problem. I hate that some people do not LIKE the freedom of speech that the CONSTITUTION gives them the right to have. If you do not like what someone is saying you have the FREEDOM to walk away or change the channel .... YOU do not have the right to kill. AND YES I am a pro-lifer ... I do not believe in abortion. But I am a person that does not believe in violence to get the word out. Education is the way.

It was on the national news ... I watched it ... they said the guy had a grudge against 3 people and he got two of them ... that it wasn't about abortion.

Did they say what it was about? Did they say they know it wasn't about abortion? That's pretty swift and hi-tech interrogation methods they've got going to determine the motives of a maniac. Why aren't all crimes' motives able to be determined so quickly and conclusively?

The news report I watched said that it wasn't about abortion that this man had long standing grudges against 3 individuals. That they got to him BEFORE he could kill the third person on his agenda.

More HERE:
"As to the reason for the killing of pro-life activist Jim Pouillon, Harlan Drake has told police that he was “offended” by Pouillon’s anti-abortion messages. "
and HERE:
"Owosso Police Director of Public Safety Michael Compeau says his detectives believe they know the motive in the killing of pro-life activist James Pouillon. They say 33 year old Harlan Drake of Owosso gunned down the 63 year old in front of Owosso High School because of his continuing anti-abortion demonstrations.

“I don’t think he knew him personally,” says Compeau. “ (Drake) was aware of him, and was offended by the material that Mr. Pouillon carried with him.”

Mr. Pouilion was known nationally for travelling with graphic signs featuring pictures of aborted fetuses. He was holding one of his signs as he demonstrated in his hometown at Owosso High School when he was killed in front of students on their way to class."

Joy, I heard the same thing as you.

Wow. I cannot believe that I actually read comments by people who think that because people shoot abortion doctors it's okay that someone shot an abortion protester. What kind of world are we living in?!?!?!?!?!

Okay? No. And I specifically said it is wrong. Nevertheless, I also do not care when violence occurs against those who support violence. If you expect my sympathy, then you should not be a "friend" of organizations that understand why someone would shoot a doctor or a nurse or a clinic worker who are providing legal medical services. I will not mourn Pouilion, regardless of why Drake killed him.

In case you didn't notice, when Tiller was killed Right to Life denounced that.
Right to life is against murder in ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM.

Follow your link..."Operation Rescue president Troy Newman said Pouillon was a member of the anti-abortion group, adding that he wept Friday when he received word that his friend had been killed." Operation Rescue may give lip service to opposition to extreme measures against doctors and nurses and clinic workers, but they have also incited and supported those who commit those horrible acts.

Exactly, Joy. People who are crazy kill other people. We should all stand together being against murder. That anyone would say otherwise is amazing to me.

I read about this earlier. What a sad and terrible story. Will the killer be up on hate crimes charges for the killing? After all, the guy was a physically challenged, elderly gentleman.

All killing is senseless. On that point, we agree. But, this murder is not that easily compared to the murder of Dr. Tiller.

There is a big difference between the premeditated murder of a doctor by an ideologue and the disjointed murder by a disturbed person. Legally, it has much to do with intent. Morally, it has to do with the basic principle that no one is entitled to decide for another person what is right and wrong when it comes to personal decisions about one's body. Of course, you don't understand how or even why that particular moral principle matters. I'm afraid that our culture no longer has a "live and let live" philosophy. When we did, Americans were better people, in my opinion.

And, furthermore, this has been all over the news. No one is burying this story. Your point about the media just isn't borne out by the facts.

Nevertheless, I'm sad to hear of Mr. Pouillon's murder. I may not agree with him, but I always come down on the side of defending the right to free speech.

I don't see much difference at all. If this man had a list of people, then it was also premeditated, wasn't it? Does it make a difference that one was more "important" than another? No. Both were murdered.

I see a big difference in planning the murder of someone who has never had ANY contact with you, who has angered you because he went about his legal job providing health care to people who wanted it, and murdering someone against whom you had a personal fight. The former is a type of cold terrorism that says you could strike at anyone, anywhere so long as your "ideals" justify it, and THAT is terrorism. The other, while still murder, is based on personal provocations, and might have extenuating circumstances. Both murder, but one more heinous than the other to a society in general.

Marilyn,

No one wrote anything in here about either man having more importance than the other. Of course, you introduce the idea to suggest that understanding the different nature of these murders is unnecessary. It serves your agenda which has always been to establish the superiority of your own ideas over all others. I won't try to interfere with your psyche when it comes to social issues or political ideas. But, I have to tell you that the facts are what drives most people's conclusions. You overlook facts to belittle and minimize the good in others, Marilyn.

But, you are correct if you believe that there is no difference between the two murdered men. They were participants in the American experiment and were always equal in legal and moral status. But, their murderers were not the same. One murderer harassed a doctor for many years and eventually planned and executed the demise of his nemesis. The other murderer went on a spree and executed the demise of his disturbed notion of good people and bad people. Legally, it is the intent that raised the murder of Dr. Tiller to the level that it did. It is good that our laws are guided by this important principle. The man who murdered Mr. Pouillon was clearly not psychologically well. Legally, it places the event in a different category. You may not understand in your comments, but something tells me that you would understand if it didn't serve your silly notion of an unfair world when it comes to anyone who belongs to your treasured groups (Christians, pro-lifers, etc. etc.). What bothers me about your comments, Marilyn, is that you are quite unfair towards just about anyone you have decided is wrong and then claim this sick victim status for the people you have decided are correct. It is that kind of thinking that created the cultural mess that we find ourselves today.

And, Paula, your point is quite salient. Our laws have to do with the overall effect crimes have on society. Our laws were never intended to satisfy the revengeful interests of those affected by crimes. That has always been an added benefit, but never a requirement with respect to justice.

Sigh. Just because a word was not used does not mean it was implied. If someone sees a difference, and there appears to be no real difference, you have to try to read between the lines.

I first saw this on FARK yesterday. Stupid dolts with guns. As pretty much everybody on this thread knows, I'm about as lib-rul as anyone can be, but this is awful. Shooting people for carrying SIGNS?!? REALLY?

So far as the story being buried goes, doesn't seem so to me, but...

So true..
It breaks my heart when people get killed for what they believe in!!
Yes I SAID WHAT THEY BELIEVE IN so if they are Pro CHoice they have a right to live too...

A day later I can certainly say that the story wasn't buried. I seen it and still see it today in my headlines that show up in a couple of different places, I didn't even look for it and I saw it. So stop crying that you aren't getting attention, you are. The media LOVES sensational murder stories - especially shootings with guns.

"Let's not mince words here. Killing is wrong for any reason and intensely wrong when innocent people are killed for expressing there views in a non-violent way.

But why does Dr. Tiller's killing warrant the extensive coverage that it received versus this analogous killing of a Pro-life supporter?"

I think several earlier commenters did a pretty good job of explaining why the two incidents aren't really "analogous", but to throw in my own two cents, why does it seem that Mr. Pouillon's murder warrants more extensive coverage (at least in this article and discussion) than the murder of Mr. Fuoss?

If, as you claim, you believe that killing is wrong for any reason, then surely the murders of an 46 people (statistically-speaking) every day throughout the U.S. is significantly more tragic than the death of a single individual, regardless of that individual's stance on abortion. And that doesn't even include the many other killings that are not categorized as murder. Out of curiosity, do you really believe that killing is wrong for any reason? Including self-defense?

In any case, given that you don't write an average of 46 articles every day discussing the different murders in the U.S., it appears that you pick and choose which ones you feel are worth mentioning, or discussing in detail, and which ones don't. Does it surprise you that others, including those who work in the media, make similar decisions?

I don't agree that killing for any reason is wrong, but I do agree that it's wrong to kill people for expressing their views, no matter how offensive those views might be.

Perhaps the different attitudes resulted from the fact that Pouillon was shot while rousing rabble on the street, and Tiller was shot while serving as a greeter in his church's Sunday service.

Killing is not always wrong. Killing in self-defense is justified.

Everyone has the right to an opinion. Everyone has the right to disagree with that opinion.
NO ONE has the right to kill to silence any opinion.

I do wholeheartedly agree with this statement. Unfortunately, I just don't care that Pouillon was murdered, and wouldn't raise a stir about his murderer's fate one way or the other. I know that's not empathetic, but nothing about the victim causes me to care.

We agree on that also. He was wrong himself. But free speech must remain an American right.

Dr. Tiller was threatened and harassed for ten years by fanatics who committed trespass and engaged in all sorts of violent activity against him.

Faux News abetted the blood lust whenever it could.

It is simply untrue to say that "pro-life" people eschew violence.

Now is fox to blame again. Oh give fox a break and put the blame where it belongs on the murderer

I noticed it was plain as could be on TV.

I do think it is very tragic that anyone should be killed for any reason, let alone their political or moral views.

Another interesting note is that when Dr. Tiller was killed every pro-life organization came out and denounced the murder immediateley.

Have NARAL or Planned Parenthood made any comments on Pouillon's killing?

Good question.