Reward&Risk > Crime > R&R Management >
Peace order 2012
Last revised: January 10, 2013

Did a killer find a map to his victim's home in a "peace order" that was supposed to keep him away?

"Victim's Family Believes Gunman Got Home Address from Peace Order" (Your4State, 6/14/11)

No, but the victim's survivors believe that the killer got her home address from the "peace order". "Maryland lawmakers say it would be a challenge to keep that address hidden because they need to be able to tell a suspect where they can't go."

Maryland lawmakers may have a point, but maybe a peace order has no point, if it tells a sufficiently motivated or out-of-control victimizer exactly where to find the victim.

"Petition for Peace Order" (, 2//03)

If you look at the nearby link to the form for a Peace Order in Maryland, you'll see that if the "petitioner" (i.e., the alleged victim) wants an order to keep the offender from a specific residence, school, and/or work place, then the form must indicate the address of that residence, school, and/or work place. This order is supposed to stop someone who has allegedly committed kicking, punching, choking, slapping, shooting, rape or other sexual offense (or attempt), hitting with object, stabbing, shoving, threats of violence, harassment, stalking, detaining against will, trespass, and/or malicious destruction of property, etc.

"Harris Remains on Life Support, Family Releases Statement" (Your4State, 6/13/11)

If we can trust the media, the police, and Randy McPeak, a peace order didn't stop him from shooting Heather Harris: "Randy McPeak told police he shot his ex-girlfriend before noon that day, and then, when she was on the ground, he shot in her in the head because 'Harris was suffering.' He then called a friend, admitting what he had done, and the friend called police."

"Cops theme song" (Youtube, 11/5/11)

This website is not the place to convict McPeak. Here, as on Cops, "all persons are considered innocent, until proven guilty in a court of law."

"Animals Please Don't let me be Misunderstood" (Youtube, )

So, let us consider various hypotheses. (While considering, you may want to listen to the nearby song by The Animals.) When Randy McPeak was shooting Heather Harris, was he thinking, "I'm just a soul, whose intentions are good"? Did McPeak shoot Harris because he was angry and out of control, or  because "Harris was suffering". Did he say that to support a plea of "not guilty by reason of insanity", or was McPeak fishing sincerely for an award for "humanitarian of the  year"? Is his favorite prayer, "Oh, Lord, please don't let me be misunderstood"?  Will the court misunderstand Randy McPeak? Oh, Lord, we hope not.  

"Victim's Family Believes Gunman Got Home Address from Peace Order" (Your4State, 6/14/11)

"'Unfortunately sometimes you only find out the problems in the law when an actual circumstance or situation occurs,' said MD Delegate Michael Hough (R-Washington Co. & Frederick Co.)."

This is true, but did no legislator think through the likely consequences of this law? If legislators thought of the consequences, but passed the law, anyway, what good is that?

"Victim's Family Believes Gunman Got Home Address from Peace Order" (Your4State, 6/14/11)

'You can't make the law to stop somebody who's a psychopath who's just going to go in and pre-meditated execute somebody,' said Hough. 'Something like that unfortunately you can put all the laws in you can't always stop that. What we can do is look at places where we can better protect people.'"

Could Maryland better protect those with peace orders by expediting their concealed carry permits? Maybe, all law-abiding persons should be able to carry concealed weapons.

If the law can't stop a psychopath, then did it make sense to disarm the psychopath's victims? Just askin'.

"Feinstein's New Gun-Ban Bill Likely to be Introduced January 22" (NRA-ILA, 1/4/13)

Senator Feinstein will likely introduce her gun-control bill on 1/22/13.

"Pelosi: "We Have to Pass the Bill So That You Can Find Out What Is In It" (Youtube, 3/9/10)

Will we need to learn what's in Feinstein's bill only after the Senate passes it?  (i.e., with no debate.)

"Pelosi defends her infamous health care remark" (Wapo, 6/20/12)

In fairness to Speaker Pelosi, read Jonathan Capeheart's rationalization for her "infamous" remark about the Obamacare bill. Apparently, passing bills before people know what's in them is a good thing. Does that mean that legislative leaders who do this don't want people to know what's in the bills, and that's a good thing?

"Rand Paul: Fiscal Cliff Bill Was Brought to Floor at 1:36AM, We Voted at 1:3" (Youtube, 1/3/13)

This didn't happen just with Obamacare. Rand Paul said that " I'm not sure there was ever a ["fiscal cliff"] bill printed, but I was told that it was somewhere online at 1:36 a.m. and we voted at 1:39 a.m." He voted against the bill. 

"Victim's Family Believes Gunman Got Home Address from Peace Order" (Your4State, 6/14/11)

Will we learn about the problems with
about the problems with Senator Feinstein's promised gun control law, only after the President signs it into law, and "an actual circumstance or situation occurs"? And then what? We watch politicians emote for the the cameras and say we need more legislation?

More on this murder 1/7/13

"Hagerstown woman shot in Dual Highway home has died" (HeraldTribune, 6/15/11)

"Man indicted in Dual Highway slaying" (Herald-Mail, 6/28/11)

"Mother of murder victim brings suit against daughter's killer" (Herald-Mail, 5/16/12)