On May 30th, police believe Ian L. Stawicki was armed when he entered Café Racer in the University District in Seattle at 11 a.m. He opened fire, killing four people and wounding another.
About a half hour later, Stawicki shot and killed 52-year-old Gloria Leonidas at Eighth Avenue and Seneca Street, near Town Hall on Seattle’s First Hill, according to police.

Yesterday the ABC affiliate station KOMO ran a story revealing Ian Stawick had a concealed weapons permit and that Walt Stawicki, the father of accused killer, says he knew his son was troubled and was getting more volatile, but believed there was nothing the family could do to get the concealed carry permit revoked.
“The response to us was, there’s nothing we can do, he’s not a threat to himself or others, or we haven’t had a report of it, or we haven’t had to pick him up – call us when its worse,” Walt Stawicki said in a Thursday morning interview with KOMO Newsradio.
In the rest of the story you hear of a family that knows there is a problem, but doesn’t know what to do to protect the safety of others. The father was hoping there was some minor incident with his son that would allow an intervention.
♦ How would you help this father if he came to you asking for advice?
Instead of going to the usual experts I wondered what if Walt Stawicki had asked someone who strongly believes the best way to protect his children involves arming himself and others like Stawicki’s son. Imagine if two weeks ago Walt took this son’s problem to Tim Schmidt, the head of the United States Concealed Carry Association.
“Dear Tim. “My son has a CCW. He is starting to act more volatile and I’m now worried for the safety of the people around him. The police say, “There’s nothing we can do, he’s not a threat to himself or others, or we haven’t had a report of it, or we haven’t had to pick him up – call us when its worse,”
If he goes off and shoots someone I’ll feel terrible. I’m especially concerned when he is out in public with his CCW. What can I do to get his CCW revoked? What is the process? After it is revoked, what can I do to keep guns away from him? What steps do you suggest? “
-Signed, Imaginary Walt Stawicki, Seattle Washington.
This is a scenario that I’m sure many families and communities have had to deal with. I know the fear of a partner getting violent drives a lot of restraining orders, but how is the matter complicated when the person has a concealed carry permit?
I can already hear the cries, “If he wanted to hurt someone he could have used a knife or a car, do you want to ban all knives and cars!?” Yes, he could do that, and no, I don’t want to ban all knives and cars. So save the strawman arguments for YouTube comments.
The father knew there was a problem. His son’s weapon of choice was a gun, not a knife. A weapon that, because of his ability to easily and legally get a permit, gave him the official blessing to keep a handgun next to him ready to respond to his emotion with lethal force on a moments notice.
Now you can argue, and people will, that revoking the CCW would do nothing since he could continue to carry illegally. And guns don’t kill people yada, yada yada, bark, bark, woof, woof. But what would the action of revoking the CCW say to the son, the community and the police who issued it?
It would sent a message to the community,
“This person no longer can be trusted to carry hidden lethal force in public. The rights of the public to be safe in their community are more important than the privileged extended to this individual to carry a concealed weapon.”
It would send a message to the police,
“Approach with caution, had a conceal carry permit, might still be armed.”
What about the message it sends to the son?
“Your behavior or actions have indicated you can no longer be trusted to carry lethal force in public.”
How will the son interpret that message? Will he be angry? Will he understand the concern behind the revocation and agree? “Yep, it’s better not to have a handgun with me in public, I’m on the edge and I don’t want to take an action I can’t take back.”
Will he flip out and threaten to shoot anyone who tries to take away his guns? How he responds and how he interprets this will also tell us something about whether he should be able to maintain his CCW permit.
Like Revoking Drivers’ Licenses?
I don’t know what the exact process is in Washington to revoke the CCW permit, but I do know that they have a list of reasons they can use to revoke them. ( I also don’t know how it is enforced or managed, do they send the person a letter saying, “Permit revoked! Please tear it up and send the pieces to our office for verification.” )
If the father wanted to get the CCW permit revoked without getting his son committed for mental health treatment (which might not have been a bad idea in retrospect) he could go about setting up the “minor incident” he was hoping would happen.
Here is what the Washington State laws says about concealed pistol license — revocation.
(1) The license shall be revoked by the license-issuing authority immediately upon:
(d) An order that the licensee forfeit a firearm under RCW 9.41.098(1)(d).
How can you get that firearm forfeited? If the son was carrying out and about while drunk or stoned.
(1) The superior courts and the courts of limited jurisdiction of the state may order forfeiture of a firearm which is proven to be:
(e) In the possession of a person who is in any place in which a concealed pistol license is required, and who is under the influence of any drug or under the influence of intoxicating liquor, as defined in chapter 46.61 RCW;
So I’d tell the dad it’s a two step process. First, notify the police he is carrying while drunk, they will then require him to forfeit his firearm. Next, notify the police that his firearm was forfeit because he was carrying while drunk. His concealed pistol license will be revoked.
When a driver’s permit is revoked one message to the community is, “This person no longer can be trusted to drive in public.” Can people break the law and drive without a license, sure, but the process is in place to help the community protect itself from people who have become dangerous to themselves or others because of mental or physical problems.
If you know any seniors who have had their licenses revoked (or their keys taken away) you know that they usually have the self awareness that they have a problem. They might not be happy about it, but they agree with the decision and they want to remain law-abiding citizens who understand they have a duty to protect themselves and others.
Now when I offer this CCW permit revocation suggestion to some friends who aren’t familiar with responsible gun owners and people with hard won concealed carry permits, they will often say, “Taking away their CCW permits will mean nothing, they will carry anyway. Getting one gun forfeited won’t stop them from buying others illegally.”
What they don’t understand is that most responsible gun owners and people with conceal carry permits WANT to be on the right side of the law. Their self image is of a law-abiding citizen. And if that is challenged, they won’t necessarily jump to breaking the law. They will either try to remedy the situation by getting back on the right side of the law, or try and fix the law, by making the actions that are illegal, legal. (For example, working to make carrying in bars or federal buildings legal or helping felons get their guns back.)
In contrast, the gun manufacturers lobbying firm, the NRA, just wants more guns out there, they aren’t really that picky if they are in the hands of terrorists, criminals or law-abiding citizens. They don’t really care if you have 1000 hours of training in real life situations before you get a CCW permit or if you don’t know a trigger from a hammer.
Speaking of training, if you read “How to Get a Concealed Pistol permit” laws in Washington you will find an amazing fact: There is no training required to get a concealed pistol permit in the state of Washington. Zero. Nada. You don’t even have to watch a video.
My friends with concealed carry weapon permits believes live, in-person training should be required before permits are issues. They also believe that states that have no training requirements should not be allowed reciprocity with those that do. “I spent a lot of time qualifying for my permit, why should someone who hasn’t even proved they can safely handle a gun get the same ability to carry in public?”
Now, I’ve given the father and the family advice on what to do and how to go about getting a CCW license revoked. I think it would make a difference, and could prevent a tragedy. Will the head of the USCAA offer equally good advice to help prevent this tragedy? Will the members spend their energy thinking only about how getting guns out of the hands of one disturbed person with a CCW permit is going to impact them?
If they say it’s just “a crazy person” will they spend energy ensuring that “crazy people” ( or all the people who have serious mental health problems) get entered into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System? Note: The NICS’ database of mentally ill people has less than 20% of the records it should.
How they respond to this fathers plea for help can tell you just how serious they are about policing their own community, whether they will help work within the legal system or ignore reasonable requests and fight against the desires of a family and a community to be safer.



20 Comments

You’re right about the second message, but I’m not so sure about the others. I fail to see how the public would know about the permit revocation. I doubt there would be a piece on the evening news about the revocation of one permit from one person, unless that person was already prominent (either a celebrity of some sort, or known for involvement in some other newsworthy incident).
As for the message to the son, it was just as likely to be taken as validation of his paranoia, feeling that others were out to get him, etc.
On the basic subject of establishing procedures that are clear and easily followed to cancel CCW permits, I’m all for that. And I think in those instances in which a permit has to be cancelled because the permit holder is judged to be a viable potential threat to the public, certainly some steps to confiscate their weapon(s) is appropriate. Whether it pertains just to handguns or to all weapons is a subject for more analysis.
Shit Spocko here in Ca you can’t even get a Hunting license without attending a gun Safety class never mind a concealed pistol permit.. even if you have served in the Military and can prove it and we all know in the Military you are TRAINED how to use a weapon and the safety behind such use!
Um… whether or not he has a concealed carry permit isn’t going to necessarily have any effect at all on whether or not his carrying a concealed weapon.
That’s about as ridiculous as saying, “My son is a dangerous driver, how can I get his license revoked?”
As though a license is a prerequisite to the physical act of driving a car.
There is nothing anyone can do. I would advise such as Walt Stawicki to get away from the troubled individual, report their concerns to the police, and then simply wait for the bodies to drop. That’s the how things work in the US.
If the father had been successful in getting the concealed carry license revoked, he could have reported the son to the police if he caught him carrying. That might have stopped this deadly rampage – might. It at least would have been a start.
You continue to show you are nothing but a douche bag Nathan… You have no respect for Human life and according your thinking it is just fine for a mentally incompetent person to carry and use a weapon, any weapon, on innocent people with impunity.. you don’t give any credence or a rats ass to your citizenship in fact you are despicable sorry excuse for a human… Just how you make me feel about your comments… Why are you here in the first place? Just to show how selfish and self centered you are..
Sorry to the rest of you Pups but Nathan continues shows his true colors once again.. Just take the time to read thru his history of comments.. He would make a better agent of the Gestapo than …..
What in the ever loving fuck are you talking about?
Literally nothing about what I said indicates the following,
What I said specifically was that whether or not someone has a conceal carry permit has literally zero effect on their ability to carry a concealed weapon.
To illustrate. Leave your driver’s license in your kitchen. Go out to your car. Start it. Drive it around town. Come home. See that your driver’s license is still sitting in the kitchen. Do you have to mentally grapple with the fact that you just took your car for a drive around town all while not having had your license to drive actually on you?
Nope but your comments sure looks like you condone what this murder did and that his dad was powerless to get authorities to listen to the fact that he had already lost his ability to know that killing strangers is wrong.. You sure came across that way… Now if that is not what the meaning of what you wrote is different you need to use your words more cautiously… Just saying because that is what your words said to me.. A Family member can’t try and prevent such violence/.. My Mother had her license and keys taken away by my sister when she say that my Mother could no longer be trusted, not just for herself but for the Public, to drive. But this guy’s dad was powerless to prevent this tragedy.. If things were different four people would still be ALIVE and their families would have been spared their grief…
It was performance art!
BP, when I was speaking about “the community” I was thinking about 1) the close community of friends and family first and then community in the general terms. As in “society”
But your point is well taken, one of the things I found out is that I can not find out is someone has a concealed carry weapon permit unless I’m in law enforcement.
As to the son, It might make him more paranoid, or it might be a wake up call. What I don’t want to do is assume that he will flip out and “go off” he might “get it” that his family is concerned in a more serious fashion that just hearing they are concerned.
That is why I compared it with revoking a seniors’ drivers license.
I’ll start out by saying that I am a regular reader and commenter at FDL, and I am also a regular at the Cafe Racer. It is without a doubt the the best, friendliest cafe in Seattle. For the record, it is more a coffee house/cafe that also sells alcohol and does occasional live music at night, less than a “bar”. The people who frequent it are all friends and the victims, Drew and Joe, will be missed.
That being said, I don’t know how this could have actually been prevented. The police cannot simply act on hearsay. I do believe this is the first violent incident involving the killer. The man, Ian, had been in the place many times and had been asked to “take a break” by the management after a very minor disturbance (meaning he hadn’t even been 86′d permanently, just asked to stay away for a few days). Nobody had an inkling of any violent issues, he had come in the very next morning and tried to order coffee, when he was served his coffee, but told that he must take it “to go” he opened fire with no warning, killing two friends of mine, and injuring three more. NO one could have known, even if his parents had suspected.
I will also take issue with you using this tragedy, which has affected those I know directly to grind your own fucking gun control ax. Bad form, Spocko, I’ll remember this and skip anything you may write in the future, you opportunist shitbag.
P.S. I just learned from this piece (since i have been out of town) that two of the other victims died. Now I get to make phone calls and figure out who. Thanks for nothing.
I addressed this exact point in the article. Here it is
Now when I offer this CCW permit revocation suggestion to some friends who aren’t familiar with responsible gun owners and people with hard won concealed carry permits, they will often say, “Taking away their CCW permits will mean nothing, they will carry anyway. Getting one gun forfeited won’t stop them from buying others illegally.”
What they don’t understand is that most responsible gun owners and people with conceal carry permits WANT to be on the right side of the law. Their self image is of a law-abiding citizen. And if that is challenged, they won’t necessarily jump to breaking the law. They will either try to remedy the situation by getting back on the right side of the law, or try and fix the law, by making the actions that are illegal, legal. (For example, working to make carrying in bars or federal buildings legal or helping felons get their guns back.)
I’m quite aware that the license doesn’t stop you from carrying, I addressed it here. The point isn’t that they can’t, it’s that it makes the issue public and it involves others. If the person carries again they KNOW they are breaking the law, and I believe most CCW permit owners are law-abiding. When they cross over into non-law abiding that is an indicator that they aren’t respecting the rights of other in society.
Unlike some people I believe most gun owners and concealed carry gun owners are operating under the premise that the rules are in place for a reason and that when there is a legitimate concern that someone shouldn’t be carrying they Would support that person losing their permit.
To do otherwise would tell the world they don’t care who carries no matter what their mental state. (And that IS the gun lobbies view, because the NRA puts the gun ahead of the person. They are okay with terrorists having guns, most responsible gun owners are not. hem, responsible gun owners would agree people who have a history of mentally illness (a danger to thselves or others) should not be carrying legally, and if they carry, illegally they the community -police- have a legitament reason to pick them up.
First I am sorry about your friends. It is a tragedy.
Second, you say that you don’t know how it could have been prevented.I was responding to the fathers comments on the radio the next day. He was begging for a method to stop this, he didn’t need the police to act on hearsay, I described a method that might have an impact, there is no gsurentee it would work, but to throw up your hands and say, “nobody could have predicted” is just not accurate.
It is your right to think I am an “opportunist shitbag” for responding to the cry of the heart from the father. You are hurt and angry at the shooter and the loss of your friends. But I’m not going to apologize for my desire to find methods to decrease gun violence and increase the safety of everyone. One of my good friend’s son was shot in a resturant. His response was not to decide to arm everyone but to work to de-escalate gun violence. A friend of mine’s wife was gunned down with a machine gun at 101 California California (I was one block away at the time). When he went to the hearings to get assault weapons banned he brought his motherless daughter in a backpack.
He was told it was “bad form” to use this tragedy to advance his gun control ax.
The law to ban assault weapons was passed with the help of Diane Feinstein (who became mayor after a shooting at city hall of the mayor and supervisor Harvey Milk.)
Of course it was allowed to expire later after the gun manufacturers Lobbyists from the NRA use the emotions of fear and greed to stop it.
Again, I’m sorry for your loss. I think your anger is misplaced, but it is how you feel and it’s there. I’m not the one who shot your friends. I’m not the one who works to get more guns in the hands of people. I’m not the one who blocks people with mental problems from getting into the NICS. There are people who do that. Sure they might not comment on the issue three days after the event, they wait until people forget the raw emotion and pain and push the fear button for the next 350 days a year for the rest of the century.
When there was a shooting in Omaha at a mall, the people impacted wanted to know what they could have done to stop the tragedy. They found a loop hole in the state law that they could close. The people who were suggesting it at the time were told not to “politicize the tragedy” and wait until everyone calmed down. They went to the unicameral in Nebraska to get that loophole closed. Then, when the strongest emotion faded, the patience of the well-paid gun lobbyists months latter won out. The armatures with no money, no experience and no leverage lost. The NRA made sure that the legislators were reminded of their NRA scorecard scores and that the donations from their supporters would be in danger if they closed this loop hold.
I think you’re confused about a few things. First, ownership of “machine guns” — fully automatic weapons — has been banned by Federal law since the 1930′s (as a response to the heat favored by Dillinger, B&C, the Barkers, Capone, and other villains of the period).
Second, CA passed, and still has in effect, a ban on “assault weapons”, which are defined as having any two of five characteristics, which include detachable magazines, a pistol grip, etc. That law also banned the sale or future purchase of magazines holding more than ten rounds. (Law enforcement officers exempted.) That law is still in effect.
Third, it was the Federal assault weapons ban which was allowed to expire. States like CA still can, and do, ban assault weapons.
Fourth, DiFi is the biggest fucking gun control hypocrite on the planet. After the Milk shooting she made a great public display of turning in her little .38 to the SF Police Chief. Of course, at the same time dear little Dianne has the benefit of s full-time, round-the-clock security detail including a driver who carried a FULLY AUTOMATIC 9mm UZI on the seat next to him. And I don’t mean an “Uzi” in the sense that the know-nothing media types used the phrase in those days to denote almost any semi-auto or auto weapon bigger than a pistol. No, this was a genuine, Israeli Arms Uzi, the same one carried by Israeli commandos, tank commanders, etc. And BTW, DiFi’s hubby also had (presumably still has) a CCW, and nowdays she has a full time SS protection detail by virtue of her place on the Senate Intelligence and Judiciary Committees.
Thanks BP, I knew I could count on you to correct me. As I was typing Machine guns (I knew someone would correct me. I was going to go back and fix it but my battery died.
I’ve had these kind of discussions enought to know that it is very important to get the terminology exact correct (its a magazine, not a clip) when talking about guns.
So thank you for that. I’m glad you made the state vs fed laws clear. I will endevor to correctly state that in the future.
And DiFi? I am not a fan. Am I going to complain about her professionally trained security guards with guns? No, just like I don’t complain about police officers. They aren’t perfect either, but they are not civilians with no training.
I’m not even sure there SHOULD be a message to the community. Mental health issues are still considered a stigma in this country. Putting something out there like this is almost punitive when it shouldn’t be. Furthermore, it might provoke someone who was mentally ill. Just like any other medical problem, mental health issues should be privileged information, not fodder for neighborhood gossip.
The point about DiFi is that with her official protection, she could easily afford to turn in her personal sidearm. (I don’t think she actually gave up her CCW, however.) But for the average person, esp. the shop owner who has to take proceeds to the bank, the woman fearful of an abusive ex, etc., there are only three choices: CCW, illegal/unlicensed carry, or be defenseless. (Illegal/unlicensed is often characterized as the choice between being judged by twelve or carried by six.)
Us corvids think the Washington State “shall-issue” concealed carry law is wonderful. Food!
Ian Stawicki had a clear history of erratic, sometimes violent behavior; he was not someone who, in any reasonable society, would have been been granted a permit to carry a concealed firearm.
So far as I can make out, the only mental health issues that allow the police in Washington to refuse to issue a permit, or allow it to be revoked, are those sufficiently serious to warrant involuntary commitment. In addition, thanks to years of budget cuts, the Washington police and courts are understaffed and overworked. At the same time, the increasingly punitive laws of Washington have made more and more work for them. The police and courts do not even have the resources to adequately investigate documented crimes; even if Washington law allowed the revocation of a concealed carry permit for people who are at risk of abusing it, they would probably work on more pressing issues.
Hominids.