Black, Gay Reporter Murders Straight, White Journalists — Media Blame the Gun

[Scataphagos]

in all of these shootings I think, "if only they had been packing heat".

If more people carried sidearms there would be more of these murderers cut down?

There are some studies which say "yes".

"Gun free" zones likely the worst. The perp knows nobody else is armed and can be easy targets with no retaliation.

Better the bad guy being concerned "somebody/everybody is armed and I'll likely get killed" if I go shooting the place up.

 

[fhl]

 

[Frederick Foresight]

American negros have no respect for anyone or anything.
They have been conditioned and coddled by the media to blame Whitey for their failures.

You are a worthless piece of racist crap. This was essentially a workplace shooting for all intents and purposes, perpetrated by a disgruntled and crazy man. But you're quick to blame it on "negros" [sic] in general.

Perhaps you'd be interested to know that whites perpetrate the majority of mass and workplace homicides.

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/122624/breitbart-its-only-race-murder-if-victims-are-white

http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/08/27/when-fox-news-acknowledges-a-hate-crime-depends/205225

http://www.politicalresearch.org/20...ave-a-gender-and-a-race/#sthash.UC1aK8ZE.dpbs

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...001d02-97f3-11e2-814b-063623d80a60_story.html

http://bossip.com/698648/race-matte...urders-than-blacks-or-any-other-racial-group/

You and are truly the poster child for Planned Parenthood. As are a number of your inbred cousins in this thread.

 

[Frederick Foresight]

in all of these shootings I think, "if only they had been packing heat".

If more people carried sidearms there would be more of these murderers cut down?

That's a great general purpose stock quote. Thanks for phoning it in. The lunatic shot two people, fled, and then killed himself. You wouldn't even have had a chance to take your thumb out of your ass before he was gone. And would a few of your own bullets afterwards have changed the outcome of this particular tragedy? If not, then what is the purpose of your NRA-approved post?

 

[gwb-trading]

That's a great general purpose stock quote. Thanks for phoning it in. The lunatic shot two people, fled, and then killed himself. You wouldn't even have had a chance to take your thumb out of your ass before he was gone. And would a few of your own bullets afterwards have changed the outcome of this particular tragedy? If not, then what is the purpose of your NRA-approved post?

Actually based on the film put out by the suspect - he started filming with his gun out at least 15 seconds before he shot the victims (who were busy in the interview & not aware of his presence). He was fumbling about to setup the best camera position to capture his act (with his gun out while doing it).

I would state that any armed witness to the scene would have had 15 seconds to act to stop the shooting of the victims in this incident.

 

[Frederick Foresight]

Actually based on the film put out by the suspect - he started filming with his gun out at least 15 seconds before he shot the victims (who were busy in the interview & not aware of his presence). He was fumbling about to setup the best camera position to capture his act (with his gun out while doing it).

I would state that any armed witness to the scene would have had 15 seconds to act to stop the shooting of the victims in this incident.

And you know for certain that passersby saw that gun before he started shooting? Or that anyone armed would necessarily have whipped out their gun and started shooting in time? Not everyone with a gun is a crack shot action hero ready to make a split second decision in the heat of the moment. And that is what would have been required to have changed the outcome.

So, to summarize, the action hero would have had to see the gun, identify it as a gun and be ready to instantly use lethal force. What if he or she knew the reporter and cameraman from previous broadcasts? Might he or she also recognize that the guy with the gun had also been (and maybe still was, for all he or she knew) a reporter? Therefore, might this have been some kind of ill-conceived stunt or demonstration? Would the action hero be prepared to kill first and ask questions later?

 

[gwb-trading]

And you know for certain that passersby saw that gun before he started shooting? Or that anyone armed would necessarily have whipped out their gun and started shooting in time? Not everyone with a gun is a crack shot action hero ready to make a split second decision in the heat of the moment. And that is what would have been required to have changed the outcome.

So, to summarize, the action hero would have had to see the gun, identify it as a gun and be ready to instantly use lethal force. What if he or she knew the reporter and cameraman from previous broadcasts? Might he or she also recognize that the guy with the gun had also been (and maybe still was, for all he or she knew) a reporter? Therefore, might this have been some kind of stunt? Would the action hero be prepared to kill first and ask questions later?

The reality is that it was unlikely to be early morning witnesses at this particular location.

However there have been many instances where crime has been stopped by an armed citizen. Many times the armed citizen does not shoot anyone but holds the criminal at gun point.

You do not need to know all the particulars of the relationships of the individuals to understand that someone with a gun out near a news crew muttering to himself for 15 seconds while fumbling to setup his own personal camera is an incident headed for trouble.

Usually the armed citizen would intervene by pulling his gun and demanding the culprit drop theirs. At which point 911 would be called. If the criminal attempts to shoot anyone instead of dropping the gun then the armed law-abiding citizen has the upper hand to shoot first. These incidents don't normally end in a killing but the arrest of the criminal when police are summoned. There are many examples of this in the news each week - but they seem to be ignored by the "all guns are evil take them away from everyone" crowd.

 

[Frederick Foresight]

...You do not need to know all the particulars of the relationships of the individuals to understand that someone with a gun out near a news crew muttering to himself for 15 seconds while fumbling to setup his own personal camera is an incident headed for trouble.

Usually the armed citizen would intervene by pulling his gun and demanding the culprit drop theirs. At which point 911 would be called. If the criminal attempts to shoot anyone instead of dropping the gun then the armed law-abiding citizen has the upper hand to shoot first. These incidents don't normally end in a killing but the arrest of the criminal when police are summoned. There are many examples of this in the news each week - but they seem to be ignored by the "all guns are evil take them away from everyone" crowd.

Assuming the armed witness saw the gun from the first second it surfaced and was ready to act instantly. And given how this tragedy played itself out, do you think the bad guy would have acquiesced? Remember, he already had his gun out. There would have been a gun fight with all kinds of crossfire. And how would that have played out if there were other people in the vicinity? The point I'm making is that I don't think most people who own a gun are trained or prepared to react properly in such circumstances. Look at how poorly some supposedly trained law enforcement officers have been performing lately. And now Joe Public is going to show them up?

I will acknowledge that guns can have their uses in limited circumstances. But in a case like this, it could just as easily have gone from bad to worse.

 

[CaptainObvious]

You are a worthless piece of racist crap. This was essentially a workplace shooting for all intents and purposes, perpetrated by a disgruntled and crazy man. But you're quick to blame it on "negros" [sic] in general.

Perhaps you'd be interested to know that whites perpetrate the majority of mass and workplace homicides.

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/122624/breitbart-its-only-race-murder-if-victims-are-white

http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/08/27/when-fox-news-acknowledges-a-hate-crime-depends/205225

http://www.politicalresearch.org/20...ave-a-gender-and-a-race/#sthash.UC1aK8ZE.dpbs

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...001d02-97f3-11e2-814b-063623d80a60_story.html

http://bossip.com/698648/race-matte...urders-than-blacks-or-any-other-racial-group/

You and are truly the poster child for Planned Parenthood. As are a number of your inbred cousins in this thread.

Too bad we don't use the same politically unbiased critique when it's a white racist squeezing the trigger. Simply calling him crazy and disgruntled does not remotely address the motive for the killing, and if racism as a motive is so important to discuss when the killer is white, then it is equally important when the killer is black.

 

[Frederick Foresight]

Too bad we don't use the same politically unbiased critique when it's a white racist squeezing the trigger. Simply calling him crazy and disgruntled does not remotely address the motive for the killing, and if racism as a motive is so important to discuss when the killer is white, then it is equally important when the killer is black.

What has that to do with what I wrote? Clubber Lang referred to black people in general as a result of this horrific killing. When a white guy does it, are sweeping statements made about all white guys?

As for the rest of it, did you even bother to look at the links in my post? I'm guessing you didn't.

Meanwhile, let's not overlook the fact that the OP sought to squeeze all the political juice he could out of this tragedy with his thread title. Truly a predictable, simple life form.