I'm so glad I didn't watch the video of him actually doing the shooting. A couple people have asked me if I saw it and then repeatedly told me to be glad I didn't see it.
Two members of Roanoke/Lynchburg WDBJ TV crew killed during live broadcast
- Thread starter Raising Heel
- Start date
Really wanted him to try to shoot it out with the cops and be fulled with lead!
Hope he dies on the operating table so the medical personnel can use their skills on
deserving patients.
Now the White House is doing their usual gun control BS again already. This is nothing more than hate and evil just like that punk in Charleston. I freakin can't stand that bunch in Washington.
Come to your own conclusion...
http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/08/...-shootings-allegedly-faxed-manifesto-abc-news
http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/08/...-shootings-allegedly-faxed-manifesto-abc-news
Unreal to see several videos of a person being shot and killed by a lunatic. The way he posted it to Facebook and twitter proves how sick and twisted he is. We counted 15 shots on the video that he posted...several of those shots came seconds later....almost like he was making sure they were dead...video was blacked out so that is pure speculation. Had to have been a small caliber gun as the reporter took off running after she was initially shot from less than 5 feet...or just adrenaline! Unbelievable how people are tripped out these days.........
The fact that the White House and the governor of Virginia are using this incident as means to push their political agenda of gun control is sickening and is a slap in the face to the families of the victims.
Whether you believe gun control is needed or not, now is not the time to bring it up publicly, in my opinion.
Whether you believe gun control is needed or not, now is not the time to bring it up publicly, in my opinion.
He obviously had mental problems. The whole thing was premeditated, with a plan to film it, stop somewhere to send the fax, change getaway cars, etc. Anybody who spends that much time thinking through all the horrific details and still decides to go through with it is insane.
I can't imagine what the reporter and cameraman's families must be going through right now. The shooter's family is surely suffering, too. The whole situation is just heartbreaking.
I can't imagine what the reporter and cameraman's families must be going through right now. The shooter's family is surely suffering, too. The whole situation is just heartbreaking.
Gay punk:
The document, which the writer at one point calls a suicide note to friends and family, talks of a race war and makes references to Charleston shooter Dylan Roof.
“As for Dylann Roof? You (deleted)! You want a race war (deleted)? BRING IT THEN YOU WHITE …(deleted)!!!” He added that Jehovah spoke to him, telling him to act.
Often rambling, the manifesto expresses support and admiration for Virginia Tech mass killer, Seung Hui Cho and for the Columbine High School killers.
“Also, I was influenced by Seung–Hui Cho. That’s my boy right there. He got NEARLY double the amount that Eric Harris and Dylann Klebold got…just sayin’.
Among the grievances in the document:
The document, which the writer at one point calls a suicide note to friends and family, talks of a race war and makes references to Charleston shooter Dylan Roof.
“As for Dylann Roof? You (deleted)! You want a race war (deleted)? BRING IT THEN YOU WHITE …(deleted)!!!” He added that Jehovah spoke to him, telling him to act.
Often rambling, the manifesto expresses support and admiration for Virginia Tech mass killer, Seung Hui Cho and for the Columbine High School killers.
“Also, I was influenced by Seung–Hui Cho. That’s my boy right there. He got NEARLY double the amount that Eric Harris and Dylann Klebold got…just sayin’.
Among the grievances in the document:
- He says he suffered racial discrimination, sexual harassment and bullying at work.
- Black men and white females attacked him. He also was attacked for being gay.
Agreed. Plus it's the same cycle over and over again, but nothing ever changes. Horrific act of violence --> outrage --> calls for gun control --> references to the Second Amendment --> furor subsides and everybody forgets about it. If Sandy Hook didn't move people to action, nothing will.
I'll preface this by saying I'm about as right wing as they come. To think that there isn't a gun problem in this country is just plain naive and blind. I'm all about the amendment rights and all but there HAS to be a stronger system to make sure known risk individuals aren't allowed to just walk into a shop and buy one. I've heard reports on this guy today that claim he has been a very violent individual for years -- and when he was fired by WDBJ7, they had to evacuate the station and get a police escort when he cleaned his desk. There is absolutely NO way that person should have been able to obtain any weapon, much less a gun.
The problem is, without having some all-knowing computer that just KNOWS whether someone is a potential killer, it's impossible to know who should and shouldn't be allowed a gun. He should've been denied the right to buy a gun because cops had to escort him out of his office after getting fired..? I'm not buying that one.
Regardless though, like I said, there's no way to predict/track who will be a killer and thus should be barred from purchasing guns.
And guns are not the only weapon that kills. Again this is about evil plain and simple.
How would we have tracked this guy and deemed him a potential killer? Specifically, what points to him being a killer? Suing employers for discrimination, playing the victim a lot, needing police to escort him after being fired -- none of these point to him being a killer.
What pointed to Dylan Roof being a potential killer? That he was racist...? That doesn't mean he's a potential killer.
True, but handguns seem to serve no purpose other than making it easy and efficient to kill other human beings.
This case is interesting because the shooter says he bought a handgun two days after the Charleston shootings. Maybe that's a little easier to flag. But how do you identify/stop somebody who has owned guns for years?
Stepping back from the gun control thing, I'm still a bit confused about Flanagan's motive here. On the one hand, there's the loonybin manifesto. On the other hand, he specifically selects two targets he knows, one who reported him to HR, and the other who didn't accept his advances (?) at a previous station (?). But I've heard he was gay, so.....I'm just very confused.
Those are risky enough for me to justify denying him access to purchasing a gun, yes. Bad analogy alert, but one that makes sense IMO -- Just b/c someone has 10 speeding tickets and one arrest on suspicion of DUI....there's a reason we revoke that drivers license -- even if we cannot make a direct connection to that individual one day causing a fatal car wreck. You still take the precaution. Yes, that person could still get behind the wheel of a car - and yes, a risky individual could still wind up with a gun if they truly wanted to - but I would make the argument that you've made is much tougher for them to do that, and potentially allowed enough people to see those attempts and give them time to stop it any harmful act. The absolute WORST thing is to sit back after-the-fact, throw your hands up, and go, "Well....we reeeeeallly had no way of knowing what this person was going to do and really had no way to stop them from theoretically committing this act. But, it's such a shame they did, RIP to the victims, and to Hell (literally) with the perp"....and then let's sit back and wait for the next one! I'm sorry - politics aside, there's no argument that will change my mind on this. With kids in school and having seen Sandy Hook -- something H-A-S to be done, even if it goes against the traditional thinking of the political side I personally align with. Don't outsmart your common sense.
Blue I understand what you are saying but they will never get rid of guns and if someone wants one bad enough they will get it on the street where most criminals do.
Those aren't even crimes. Should we ban people who listen to angry music from buying guns? I get what you're saying, and I agree something needs to be done, but I just fail to see how we can truly know who's going to be a killer.
Defaulting on credit cards isn't a crime either but we have systems in place to stop that person from purchasing a house, correct?
You know, I don't know specifically how it could be accomplished, but like it or not, we are all tracked, even if no one admits it. Google, Apple, Facebook, Verizon, AT&T, Comcast, Charter...you name it, and every single major outlet like these can - AND DO - track everywhere a device "goes" - both physically in some cases (i.e.: cell phones) and digitally (via IP address, etc). You simply cannot tell me that there is not a way for our Government to intervene here and blacklist certain individuals who are known to have a pattern to their behaviors.
The only ones I could make a case for as far as not being able to track would be people who are literally hobbits and don't use phones or computers. Everyone else - I hate to break the news, but we're tracked. It can be done.
You know, I don't know specifically how it could be accomplished, but like it or not, we are all tracked, even if no one admits it. Google, Apple, Facebook, Verizon, AT&T, Comcast, Charter...you name it, and every single major outlet like these can - AND DO - track everywhere a device "goes" - both physically in some cases (i.e.: cell phones) and digitally (via IP address, etc). You simply cannot tell me that there is not a way for our Government to intervene here and blacklist certain individuals who are known to have a pattern to their behaviors.
The only ones I could make a case for as far as not being able to track would be people who are literally hobbits and don't use phones or computers. Everyone else - I hate to break the news, but we're tracked. It can be done.
This argument doesn't hold water for me. If somebody wants to blow up a building badly enough, they will find a way to get the materials and find a way to do it. That doesn't mean law enforcement shouldn't take steps to prevent it from happening.
When talking generally about risk management, the key is mitigation IMO. There need to be obstacles and deterrents to reduce the frequency and severity of disastrous events. The current laws in effect obviously aren't having much effect, so there needs to be reasonable discourse about how to move in that direction.
I'm well aware that everything we do is tracked. I just maintain it's very difficult to predict who's a would-be killer. Unless someone straight-up makes a social media post about killing someone or google searches how to kill someone or something, I don't see how you can accurately predict who's going to be a killer.
Believe me, I'm not trying to be obtuse. I'm just calling it how I see it.
There's always a lot of misinformation early in stories like these. The story about rebuffed advances towards the reporter don't make sense. He said himself on his Twitter timeline that she had made racist comments, which was his beef with her.
This wouldn't have been at the Roanoke station though, from my understanding. They must've worked together somewhere else. Possibly, Greenville, N.C.?
Or to defend yourself from a crazy person wielding a knife, blow torch or pipe bomb.
There's no solution. You can put all the laws in place and it won't make a difference. If the guy was dedicated enough to write a 23 page manifesto and create a twitter feed for the purposes of eerily chronicling his life story, then I'm pretty sure he was invested enough to not let silly gun laws deter him.
"I'm so mad and I want to kill some people. Awww, but I can't legally purchase a gun. Welp, I guess I won't be able to carry out my dastardly plan."
He would have gotten a gun somewhere.
"I'm so mad and I want to kill some people. Awww, but I can't legally purchase a gun. Welp, I guess I won't be able to carry out my dastardly plan."
He would have gotten a gun somewhere.
A horrific attack by an obviously deranged man....it is worth noting AGAIN for the umpteenth time just WHO it is that does all they can to politicize these events..... and it isn't conservatives.
He was sane enough to post his gay/racist manifesto and video of the shooting on Twitter... Shows remediation and understanding of right and wrong. No way he would get off with an insanity plea.
Point taken, but those odds are better than trying to defend yourself against a crazy person wielding a gun.
Is it really "politicizing" a tragic event if you propose steps that can be taken to prevent similar events from happening in the future?
Again, this is not a reasonable argument. It doesn't mean you do nothing to deter it from happening.
Well duh. Considering conservatives are the ones resisting changes to existing laws, it would be counterproductive for them to politicize today's events. I'm sure the NRA will be along any minute, though, to remind us that a good guy with a gun could've prevented all this.
