Tucker Carlson is distancing himself from the Buffalo shooter. Yahoo story here
Ah, the ol' plausible deniability. Just like "lone wolf" and "mental health" dragged out by the GOP whenever one of their protegés kills at their behest.
At an elementary school. The governor is saying that 14 students and one teacher were killed, and that the shooter, who also killed his grandmother, was an 18-year-old high school student.
At an elementary school. The governor is saying that 14 students and one teacher were killed, and that the shooter, who also killed his grandmother, was an 18-year-old high school student.
Jesus wept.
Another angry teenager. Perhaps we'll discover why he was angry.
And the Texas AG is already saying "we can't stop bad people doing bad things, so teachers need guns".
Or, you know, remove the guns, so the bad people don't have them.
From what I understand, the shooter was also Hispanic.
And is dead, which he presumably wouldn't be if he'd been white, so they'll never know his motives.
No, I think this is probably one of the few instances where even white, he’d have been shot.
Meanwhile, I didn’t see it last night, but first thing this morning I saw Golden State Warriors head coach Steve Kerry’s pregame press conference from last night’s NBA Western Conference finals game, played in Dallas. It’s worth watching. Kerr’s father, then president of American University in Beirut, was killed by Islamic Jihad terrorists in 1984, and he has long been outspoken on the subject of gun violence and gun control.
Yes, I see the shooter was Hispanic. I did not know that until after I posted. I would imagine we will know more about him in the days ahead. He had posted some graphic pictures on Instagram according to FOX news. Why didn't anyone alert the authorities?
I find it odd that those pro-lifers come over all "pro choice" when it comes to gun control. (And the death penalty.)
As the saying goes, “offer ends at birth.”
Does it even last until then? If a woman is poor and develops late and expensive pregnancy complications that put her and the foetus' life at risk?
If some of these folks have their way, yes, even then.
I think you misunderstand me. I mean will they ensure that such a woman gets the treatment she needs for her and her foetus to survive, or will they saddle her with bankruptcy over the medical care they force her to have? Or will they say they shouldn't have to pay for her care and let both die?
My point is that opposing abortion and at the same time refusing funding for medical care for expectant mothers implies that they are only pro-life for people who can afford it.
Strong words from President Biden - obviously in an emotional state - but his frustration at not (apparently) being able to do anything about gun control, even though he's President, came over clearly.
Strong words from President Biden - obviously in an emotional state - but his frustration at not (apparently) being able to do anything about gun control, even though he's President, came over clearly.
Yes. One has to feel for the victims, for the President and all those who want gun control.
He had posted some graphic pictures on Instagram according to FOX news. Why didn't anyone alert the authorities?
I'm in two minds about this sort of post-facto "he posted a picture of a gun" kind of story. When I was at school, I went through a phase of doodling things in random corners of my notes etc. I was always awful at drawing living things, but not too bad at mechanical objects. So I had a month where I drew sailing boats on everything, a month where I drew stacks of boxes, and a month where I drew various kinds of knives and swords. I don't remember ever drawing guns, because I didn't have detailed images of interesting-looking guns in my head to draw, but I wouldn't have considered doodling guns in a different light from all my other doodles.
Strong words from President Biden - obviously in an emotional state - but his frustration at not (apparently) being able to do anything about gun control, even though he's President, came over clearly.
You have to ask who is in charge - the President or the NRA?
I think what's frustrating is the narrative - "gun control won't reduce school shootings", "If only the criminals have guns then the criminals will all have guns". Are people not capable of looking beyond their borders and seeing that when you restrict gun ownership mass shootings are reduced and people aren't at the mercy of armed criminals. If this narrative were correct, in the UK we wouldn't dare leave our houses because of all the armed criminals walking the streets committing mass shootings whenever they felt like it.
Here's a Twitter thread from blogger Amanda Marcotte, who grew up in a small Texas town similar to Uvalde, about the context for some of the things we have heard about the alleged gunman.
As someone who grew up in rural Texas, every bit of the shooter's story feels familiar to me: The utter ruthlessness of the bullying, the hopelessness, the way that so many kids have unstable homes and end up living with grandparents.
Most kids that face these challenges find a way forward. But you definitely see kids, especially the boys, who become monsters that are totally alienated from other human beings and themselves. And when they turn 18, our Republican leaders invite them to "man up" with guns.
Obviously, drug addict parents and school bullies are everywhere. What I think the rural life makes worse is the isolation. A lot of kids really don't have a full view of how big the world is and how many opportunities lay beyond your small town, and that creates hopelessness.
I never doubted for a moment I was getting out, but I also had the fortune of spending my elementary years in El Paso, which was the Big Scary City to kids at my high school. (Don't laugh. Or do.) So I knew there was a bigger world, in a vague sense, and I wanted in on it.
But way too many people in these tiny rural communities think that's basically all there is to life. And there is a total lack of resources for people who are struggling. The response is often punitive, because of the conservatisim of rural communities.
It goes on from there to note that schools are one of the few lifelines available for troubled kids in these towns and that the twin Republican agendas of strangling public education and making sure everyone has access to a lot of guns seems designed to produce incidents like this.
A Washington Post headline says, Massacre is deadliest mass shooting at U.S. school in nearly a decade. I read that as some sort of acceptance of the inevitable, and surprise that it has been so long since the last one. (The definition of 'mass shooting' seems to be that four or more were killed, so the lesser shootings in schools aren't counted).
Long ago I recall a boy having a catapult confiscated and getting a detention for bringing it to school. That was about the limit of violence there.
We have four grandchildren in schools in the USA, and I wish they were somewhere else.
The definition of 'mass shooting' seems to be that four or more were killed, so the lesser shootings in schools aren't counted.
There's no official definition, but most folks use the one used by the Gun Violence Archive, which is four or more people shot, whether fatally or non-fatally, not including any shooters that might have been involved.
Strong words from President Biden - obviously in an emotional state - but his frustration at not (apparently) being able to do anything about gun control, even though he's President, came over clearly.
You have to ask who is in charge - the President or the NRA?
<snip>
I got the impression that Mr Biden was, in a way, asking himself that very question.
No, I think this is probably one of the few instances where even white, he’d have been shot.
Why? ISTM from past instances of shootings perpetrated by white people that they're more likely to be taken alive. Or am I mistaken?
I don’t have stats, but my recollection is that school shootings and other public places shootings have ended with a mix of police killing the shooter, police apprehending the shooter and the shooter commuting suicide. There may be some racial correlation I’m not remembering, but it hasn’t been my impression that these cases mirror other types of cases where there is a clear racial factor at play.
Here, the shooter was armed with automatic weapons and was wearing body armor. I don’t know that taking him into custody without a lot of other people being killed or injured in the process was a realistic possibility, but I certainly could be wrong.
I do think, that whilst the gun control debate rages on, serious efforts to tackle bullying would be one way of trying to lower the frequency of school shootings specifically.
After further inspection of the deceased suspect’s clothing, it now appears the suspect was not wearing body armor as previous information had indicated. Instead, Ramos is said to have been wearing only a plate carrier with no ballistic armor inside when he exchanged gun fire with several officers at the school.
So either the police were wrong at first or they're wrong now. Or maybe "a source with close knowledge of the events" is just jerking KPRC 2 around for whatever reason. Given how often American police departments will shade the truth in whichever direction they think will make them look better I'm not sure we can say for sure which of these accounts is accurate.
After further inspection of the deceased suspect’s clothing, it now appears the suspect was not wearing body armor as previous information had indicated. Instead, Ramos is said to have been wearing only a plate carrier with no ballistic armor inside when he exchanged gun fire with several officers at the school.
So either the police were wrong at first or they're wrong now. Or maybe "a source with close knowledge of the events" is just jerking KPRC 2 around for whatever reason. Given how often American police departments will shade the truth in whichever direction they think will make them look better I'm not sure we can say for sure which of these accounts is accurate.
It's not like someone with a gun wearing a plate carrier and someone with a gun wearing a plate carrier containing ballistic plates look so terribly different at a glance. It's quite reasonable to see someone wearing a plate carrier and make the assumption that he might have plates in it.
An account of what he was wearing after he was dead and could be inspected by actually taking off his clothes would, I trow, be more accurate than something guessed from afar.
An account of what he was wearing after he was dead and could be inspected by actually taking off his clothes would, I trow, be more accurate than something guessed from afar.
Yes, of course. My point is that the two claims aren't really contradictory. If you see an active shooter wearing a plate carrier, you're going to act as though he's wearing body armor. After he's been killed, you then discover that he didn't have ballistic plates in. OK.
Reports here indicate that the school had at least some armed "security" guards who shot at the killer, but failed to stop him. So much for the NRA's "solution" that what schools need is more armed guards. (Also the position of the Texas governor).
"Their arguments were belied, however, by the facts of the Uvalde massacre. As the shooter entered the school, two local officers and a school guard opened fire but failed to stop him."
I saw some once and if I recall correctly the unplated body armour was still very much body armour (the actual plate being only the chest). I think still even light firearm resistant with the plate taking it to medium, but it may have been knife to light firearm (and I may have been lied to as a gullible civilian anyway, and body armour varies).
I don't think Tasers would have worked in that state (I'm guessing they'd be pretty lethal in the head, and not penetrating in the body)
To be fair there have also been times when the ggwag has stopped a shooting.
You need to compare with the cases with good guy stopping a bad guy with a pizza (also non zero) and the number of times they failing too (probably also non zero).
At this half way point it probably does work slightly in the ggwag favour.
Then reckon against the times legally bought pizza and legally bought guns have respectively been used for evil. Which makes it pretty clear cut.
In an ideal world you’d be trying to capture not kill, I wonder if any none lethal methods were tried, tasers (range 35ft) or mace for example.
I suspect "we have a gunman with an AR-15 who has already shot a bunch of children in a school that might still contain live children" will always take precedence over trying to preserve the gunman's life.
In an ideal world you’d be trying to capture not kill, I wonder if any none lethal methods were tried, tasers (range 35ft) or mace for example.
I suspect "we have a gunman with an AR-15 who has already shot a bunch of children in a school that might still contain live children" will always take precedence over trying to preserve the gunman's life.
I meant the people responding before he entered the building, who appear to have shot at him, missed, and then sheltered waiting for backup.
Comments
Ah, the ol' plausible deniability. Just like "lone wolf" and "mental health" dragged out by the GOP whenever one of their protegés kills at their behest.
Jesus wept.
And the Texas AG is already saying "we can't stop bad people doing bad things, so teachers need guns".
Or, you know, remove the guns, so the bad people don't have them.
And is dead, which he presumably wouldn't be if he'd been white, so they'll never know his motives.
And oppose public healthcare.
It's been suggested that schools be redesignated as uteri to attract their attention.
Does it even last until then? If a woman is poor and develops late and expensive pregnancy complications that put her and the foetus' life at risk?
No, I think this is probably one of the few instances where even white, he’d have been shot.
Meanwhile, I didn’t see it last night, but first thing this morning I saw Golden State Warriors head coach Steve Kerry’s pregame press conference from last night’s NBA Western Conference finals game, played in Dallas. It’s worth watching. Kerr’s father, then president of American University in Beirut, was killed by Islamic Jihad terrorists in 1984, and he has long been outspoken on the subject of gun violence and gun control.
I think you misunderstand me. I mean will they ensure that such a woman gets the treatment she needs for her and her foetus to survive, or will they saddle her with bankruptcy over the medical care they force her to have? Or will they say they shouldn't have to pay for her care and let both die?
My point is that opposing abortion and at the same time refusing funding for medical care for expectant mothers implies that they are only pro-life for people who can afford it.
I'm in two minds about this sort of post-facto "he posted a picture of a gun" kind of story. When I was at school, I went through a phase of doodling things in random corners of my notes etc. I was always awful at drawing living things, but not too bad at mechanical objects. So I had a month where I drew sailing boats on everything, a month where I drew stacks of boxes, and a month where I drew various kinds of knives and swords. I don't remember ever drawing guns, because I didn't have detailed images of interesting-looking guns in my head to draw, but I wouldn't have considered doodling guns in a different light from all my other doodles.
You have to ask who is in charge - the President or the NRA?
I think what's frustrating is the narrative - "gun control won't reduce school shootings", "If only the criminals have guns then the criminals will all have guns". Are people not capable of looking beyond their borders and seeing that when you restrict gun ownership mass shootings are reduced and people aren't at the mercy of armed criminals. If this narrative were correct, in the UK we wouldn't dare leave our houses because of all the armed criminals walking the streets committing mass shootings whenever they felt like it.
Here's a Twitter thread from blogger Amanda Marcotte, who grew up in a small Texas town similar to Uvalde, about the context for some of the things we have heard about the alleged gunman.
It goes on from there to note that schools are one of the few lifelines available for troubled kids in these towns and that the twin Republican agendas of strangling public education and making sure everyone has access to a lot of guns seems designed to produce incidents like this.
...and as the article points out, many schools are filled with feral bastards who mercilessly savage anyone who sticks out as being a bit different.
Some of the victims are driven to suicide. Perhaps others are driven to homicide.
Thing is, I'd buy that if he'd shot up his own school. He murdered kids 10 years younger than him.
Long ago I recall a boy having a catapult confiscated and getting a detention for bringing it to school. That was about the limit of violence there.
We have four grandchildren in schools in the USA, and I wish they were somewhere else.
There's no official definition, but most folks use the one used by the Gun Violence Archive, which is four or more people shot, whether fatally or non-fatally, not including any shooters that might have been involved.
I got the impression that Mr Biden was, in a way, asking himself that very question.
Why? ISTM from past instances of shootings perpetrated by white people that they're more likely to be taken alive. Or am I mistaken?
The Tops grocery shooter (white) was taken into custody alive.
Once nothing changed after Sandy Hook I knew nothing would happen.
Here, the shooter was armed with automatic weapons and was wearing body armor. I don’t know that taking him into custody without a lot of other people being killed or injured in the process was a realistic possibility, but I certainly could be wrong.
Maybe. Initial police reports say he was. Subsequent police reports say he wasn't.
So either the police were wrong at first or they're wrong now. Or maybe "a source with close knowledge of the events" is just jerking KPRC 2 around for whatever reason. Given how often American police departments will shade the truth in whichever direction they think will make them look better I'm not sure we can say for sure which of these accounts is accurate.
It's not like someone with a gun wearing a plate carrier and someone with a gun wearing a plate carrier containing ballistic plates look so terribly different at a glance. It's quite reasonable to see someone wearing a plate carrier and make the assumption that he might have plates in it.
Yes, of course. My point is that the two claims aren't really contradictory. If you see an active shooter wearing a plate carrier, you're going to act as though he's wearing body armor. After he's been killed, you then discover that he didn't have ballistic plates in. OK.
In an ideal world you’d be trying to capture not kill, I wonder if any none lethal methods were tried, tasers (range 35ft) or mace for example.
"Their arguments were belied, however, by the facts of the Uvalde massacre. As the shooter entered the school, two local officers and a school guard opened fire but failed to stop him."
"
I don't think Tasers would have worked in that state (I'm guessing they'd be pretty lethal in the head, and not penetrating in the body)
But come to that, you could try talking to the shooter - anything to delay entry to the building to allow for evacuation. https://edition.cnn.com/2013/08/22/us/georgia-school-shooting-hero/index.html https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Lee_Rigby
To be fair there have also been times when the ggwag has stopped a shooting.
You need to compare with the cases with good guy stopping a bad guy with a pizza (also non zero) and the number of times they failing too (probably also non zero).
At this half way point it probably does work slightly in the ggwag favour.
Then reckon against the times legally bought pizza and legally bought guns have respectively been used for evil. Which makes it pretty clear cut.
I suspect "we have a gunman with an AR-15 who has already shot a bunch of children in a school that might still contain live children" will always take precedence over trying to preserve the gunman's life.
I meant the people responding before he entered the building, who appear to have shot at him, missed, and then sheltered waiting for backup.
What use are they?