[News] News crew gunned down live on air in Virginia.
- Thread starter Dave
- Start date
It was on his (now suspended) twitter account, along with his POV of the shootings (which I stopped watching as soon as I saw what they were).
I saw just now. Awww.[DOUBLEPOST=1440602738,1440602675][/DOUBLEPOST]
Oddly, the video ended with the camera guy and the reporter ducking for cover - she'd been shot at, but was still moving away. I wonder how he managed to not attract attention standing there visibly waving a gun for 10+ seconds.
GasBandit
Staff member
From what I saw, they were kind of up on a balcony type thing with not many people around. The three victims were not looking at him because they were busy doing the broadcast.
She and the lady being interviewed were looking at each other and the cameraman was shooting off to the right. I'd imagine you get used to ignoring passersby when you're a field reporter doing fluffy shit like she was for morning news.
His facebook (with the video from his point of view) was up until about 10 seconds ago.
Dave
Staff member
Dude was standing there a long time with the gun out but they didn't see him. He shot the reporter first and then the cameraman. His tweets suggest his beef was with the cameraman who complained to HR about him and the reporter, who he said made racist comments. He was pissed that he was fired and she was hired.[DOUBLEPOST=1440603390,1440603185][/DOUBLEPOST]Dude sent police a 23 page fax before he did it. He's now driving in what they believe to be a rented car. So he ditched his car at the airport and then rented one. Dude is doing a good job eluding police. He had this thing planned pretty well.
GasBandit
Staff member
Except for the whole "positively 100% identified immediately" thing. He can run, but he can't hide. Unless he's already got someone lined up to harbor him, I guess.
The "sent 23 page fax" thing, once again, screams "sending a message"; not "trying to get away with it". If he wanted to get away with it he wouldn't have shot them on camera and so forth.
Dave
Staff member
Something interesting that I hadn't thought of. He stood there for a while with his gun out and I thought it was weird. But he was waiting for the reporter to be back on camera. He wasn't going to shoot while the cameraman was facing the water park. He wanted her to be shot on the air.
http://www.wdbj7.com/news/local/law...86?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter_WDBJ7
Maybe he'll live to face justice.
Eh. Check his blood group, use every bit of him that's useful to save some lives. Much more sensible and positive than keeping him alive just to give him a life in prison or death penalty. The difference between an organ from someone who's still alive vs someone who's been dead for half an hour is ASTOUNDING in amount of medicine necessary and rejection rates.
The station GM talked about the shooter's time there. It wasn't a pleasant one. Seems the dude would go out of his way to take offense to something coworkers said or did. And when the station finally had enough and sent him packing, he didn't go quietly. Police had to escort him off the property.
That complaint to the EEOC mentioned? Rejected out of hand.
That complaint to the EEOC mentioned? Rejected out of hand.
FYI, folks, the pic on the first page is apparently not at all the right guy.
"whoops! We shot the wrong guy 'cause we saw his face on Twitter! Sorry!" - is gonna happen one of these days. You just know it.
I was afraid of that when i first ran across that picture (on twitter) early on. I couldn't find any independent verification that the pic was of the shooter, and didn't post it.
A few days ago the news over here was full of the great bravery of three unarmed American servicemen who tackled, and apprehended a heavily armed terrorist on a train in France.
Today we hear of this crime. What a contrast.
I am not qualified to comment on your gun laws, but do you really need to bear arms?
Today we hear of this crime. What a contrast.
I am not qualified to comment on your gun laws, but do you really need to bear arms?
GasBandit
Staff member
Yes.
Edit - and I should also add, as is usually necessary in such threads as this, that gun crime in the US is on the downtrend and has been since the 80s, it's just getting a lot more airtime in the world of the 24/7 cable news cycle.
Additionally, not only is the right to keep and bear arms constitutionally guaranteed and indispensable, but changing the law now to ban gun ownership would only disarm the law abiding at this point. The US is a huge nation with vast swaths of undeveloped, unpatrolled territory, much of which is along its borders. The guns are already here and would continue to enter as easily as the drugs currently are that we're spending so much money and blood to try to outlaw. The difference is, the criminals would be armed and the innocents all the more helpless. For example, look at Chicago or DC - two cities with the strictest (and really, to an unconstitutional degree) gun control laws in the country - also have the worst gun crime problems.
So in summary,
1) Yes, the second amendment is arguably the most important in the bill of rights
2) Gun violence is disproportionately portrayed to hook and keep eyeballs on the news because $$$
and
3) Gun control is ineffective in the US.
Last edited:
I'm not suggesting that we should be required to bear arms, but over here we feel like we should certainly be allowed that as a choice.
--Patrick
So a few things I've learned as I've followed up on the events.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/shooting-alleged-gunman-details-grievances-suicide-notes/story?id=33336339
He rented his car days ago, leaving his mustang in the parking garage at the airport.
Which means the cops were looking for the wrong car the whole time, which is why they had trouble finding it.
He faxed his manifesto after he shot the reporters. Then he called back later, saying cops were all over the place. So, if they'd had the right vehicle description, they probably would have caught him a lot sooner.
His manifesto talks about being discriminated against for being gay and black, but also praises several mass shooters, like Seung Hui Cho and the Columbine kids. He evidently bought his gun 2 days after the Charlston church shooting with the intention of returning the favor somehow.
He sounds like a nutcase with too much time on his hands (because of no job), stewing in his own nuttiness until he popped.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/shooting-alleged-gunman-details-grievances-suicide-notes/story?id=33336339
He rented his car days ago, leaving his mustang in the parking garage at the airport.
Which means the cops were looking for the wrong car the whole time, which is why they had trouble finding it.
He faxed his manifesto after he shot the reporters. Then he called back later, saying cops were all over the place. So, if they'd had the right vehicle description, they probably would have caught him a lot sooner.
His manifesto talks about being discriminated against for being gay and black, but also praises several mass shooters, like Seung Hui Cho and the Columbine kids. He evidently bought his gun 2 days after the Charlston church shooting with the intention of returning the favor somehow.
He sounds like a nutcase with too much time on his hands (because of no job), stewing in his own nuttiness until he popped.
Actually, DC and Chicago don't even show up in the Top 10 when you look at crime rates.
http://www.forbes.com/pictures/mlj45jggj/1-detroit/
I think the problem here is people see gun control as an "all or nothing" scenario. Either they get to have every gun and ammo type they want or they'll be completely disarmed. Or they adopt a "slippery slope" fallacy wherein they believe more intensive background checks are just a couple steps away from death camps. I don't think anybody's pushing for a complete disarmament.