White man goes on shooting rampage in Texas
The race of the shooter is only mentioned because it likely wouldnt be in the Newstalkers daily news column tomorrow morning
A man shot and killed three people and led the Austin police on a chase that included two carjackings.
Probably out of concern as to how the incident would be ignored in right wing media, the ABC network news show tonight identified the shooter as a 33 year old white man.
====================================
related
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — A gunman opened fire Monday in a Target store parking lot in the Texas capital, killing at least three people, then stole two cars during a getaway that ended with police using a Taser to detain him on the other side of the city, authorities said.
Austin Police Chief Lisa Davis said the suspect is a man in his 30s with “a mental health history.”
Davis said the suspect fled the scene in a stolen car, wrecked that car then stole another from a dealership. He was captured in south Austin, where he was taken into custody, she said during a news conference.
She said responding officers found three people who had been shot in the Target parking lot.
Austin-Travis County EMS Chief Robert Luckritz said two people were pronounced dead at the scene and one person was taken to a hospital where they were pronounced dead. He said another person was treated on the scene for unrelated injuries.
“This is a very sad day for Austin. It’s a very sad day for us all and my condolences go out to the families,” Davis said. She said she had no information to release about the victims.
Trolling, taunting, spamming, and off topic comments may be removed at the discretion of group mods. NT members that are known plagiarists, repeat comments, or continue to disrupt/deflect the conversation risk having all of their comments deleted. Please remember to quote the person(s) to whom you are replying to preserve continuity of this seed. Any use of the phrase "Trump Derangement Syndrome" or the TDS acronym in a comment will be deleted. Any use of the term "Brandon", "Traitor Joe", or any variations thereof, when referring to President Biden, will be deleted. Right wing trolls can expect to have their irrelevant questions and comments deleted. Posting debunked lies will be subject to deletion. Use of the terms "leftist" or "lefty" will also be subject to deletion.
Tags
Who is online
118 visitors
[✘]
It was one of the lead stories on the evening news tonight.
It was on my local news this morning
[✘]
Possibly because it is a good example of irresponsible gun ownership
If not it is because the race of the person makes no difference and is not important to the story.
Probably out of concern as to how the incident would be ignored in right wing media, the ABC network news show tonight identified the shooter as a 33 year old white man.
Ignored?
Note " Police initially described the suspect as a White man, possibly wearing khaki shorts and a Hawaiian floral shirt."
If the shooter were a part of 13 percent, he/she would be labeled as "possibly a white man".
Hell that's me on most summer days. I do however have a solid alibi
If they added beer in hand it could have been me.
Morning...when ever there is a mass/shooting over there most people think of what colour the shooter is first thing? Or have I got that wrong?
To us it's an American who is shooting Americans regardless of colour...and we look at the number of lost souls first before anything..
sadly I dont think you have it wrong , it is used as a political bludgeon by those that have agendas to further .
sadly, there is someone here who goes out of their way to post articles about black and brown people behaving badly.
This morning there was a story about the mother of a boy who was thrown into a New York city river. I dont think their race was part of the story, but it was on Newstalkers.
All i can say John , is opinions vary on what should and should not be included in news stories , Race never really has to be mentioned , on that i would agree, but pictures of those involved , well it is what it is .
[✘]
[✘]
To prove the point of my deleted post, the 45.1 is percentage of white murders, the 51.2 percent is percentage of black murders. There were 4.7 million white murderers compared to 1.8 million black murderers, so there is a much larger chance that if a person was murdered, it would be by a black person. These statistics are put out every year, this statistic is from 2024.............enjoy
You botched these statistics so badly, and obviously, your whole point is worthless.
First of all, the link you say is from 2024 has a big ole "2019" on it.
Secondly
is a reading of the wrong line . The 4.7 figure and the 1.8 figure refer to all crimes, not murder arrests.
In 2019 there were 7,964 murder arrests , 3650 white and 4078 black, so 46% of the murder arrests were white and 51% of the murder arrests were black.
OK so you proved my point even with 5 year old statistics. I did a search for "murder rate by demographic 2024" but apparently the 2019 came up first.
This is from the 2023 rates.
" In 2023, FBI data indicates that Black individuals experienced a higher homicide victimization rate compared to other racial groups. Specifically, the homicide rate for Black individuals was 21.3 per 100,000, while for White individuals, it was 3.2 per 100,000"
What I proved is that you are sloppy.
[✘]
[✘]
Actually what you have proven is that 58% of the population (white) accounts for 45% of murder arrests while 12% of the population (black) accounts for 51% of the murder arrests.
The statistics speak for themselves.
Based on 2023 demographics. https://datausa.io/profile/geo/united-states#:~:text=The%205%20largest%20ethnic%20groups,%2DHispanic)%20(5.75%25).
I made no claim about the statistics, all I said was that the commenter was careless, which he was.
See, you went and screwed up and highlighted an inconvenient truth. Kudos for the correction.
If someone is sloppy, should we mention what race they are?
Why or why not?
Bingo!
You must not read the NT daily news.
Some people over here think you have an absolute, unrestricted right to guns…unless you’re the wrong color or religion.
And some people over here think restrictions on gun ownership should be all encompassing and absolute. So around and around we go ……
Strange, I only ever hear those on the left calling for common sense gun laws like universal background checks and bans on bump stocks or large capacity magazines which feels really really far from restrictions being "all encompassing and absolute". But then you know that already but chose to claim otherwise, so around and around we go...
Same goes for ALL the law abiding shooters I know. The problem is in the definition of what “common sense gun laws” entail. If the left had their way it would be all encompassing and absolute. A fact that Dem politicians regularly let slip and profess. But as you say, you already know that. Even if you won’t admit it here. So yep, it’s Groundhog Day again.
You forgot to mention the states that ban whatever it deems "assault weapons". Some even don't bother with the distinction and just ban nearly all semi automatic long guns. Logically, semi automatic handguns will be next. All the rest after that, maybe?
Point, they are already going down the road you seem to be denying exists.
And then there's a third category: there are some people that don't think at all!
Yeah, that’s the lie that desperate people on the Right tell each other so they can justify their hysterical demonization of their political opponents. If that lie had any validity at all to it, there would be several states that allowed no guns at all. But there aren’t. There isn’t a single state out of the 50 that is like that.
You know what does exist, though? States banning abortions (12 of them, so far). States with gay marriage bans still on the books, just in case SCOTUS reverses itself (25 of them, at least). States banning gender affirming care (27 of them).
In short, conservatives really are restricting other people’s rights in ways that are all encompassing and absolute. That is a real thing. You might not be able to buy a suppressor or a 50 round mag for your firearm in California, but at least you can still buy the firearm.
Is that why you think states don’t ban guns? And not because the second amendment makes it impossible (at least until progressives pack the court and rewrite the constitution)
[✘]
Bullshit.
You think because it hasn’t happened there aren’t a lot on the left who want it to happen? That is the premise of my comment. Read it again if you need to.
Your comment is utter nonsense.
The answer to this is already in the comment you replied to. I’m not surprised you ignored it though. You would have to unless you wanted to open your mind to the hypocrisy of extremist conservative policy-making.
As I said, and repeat here, the genuinely oppressive states keep laws banning rights on the books, even when SCOTUS has determined they violate the Constitution.
Oh, you can always find a small handful of extremist people who think the Earth is flat and we’ve never been to the Moon. But not enough to matter.
So, in liberal California, can you find someone who wants to get rid of all guns? Sure, probably. But the Left has controlled state government for decades without even trying to do that.
Meanwhile, conservative states routinely try to push prayer in public schools in violation of the Constitution. Or place the Ten Commandments in the same way. And they have either passed laws or keep laws on the books in hopes that they can get SCOTUS decisions overturned - decisions protecting individual liberties that don’t impact the Right, but offend them personally. Next up? Repealing the 19th Amendment.
I think everyone should own at least one rifle and one shotgun
I have one handgun, one rifle and one shotgun. I keep saying I need to have the rifle taken in and refinished...
I have a semi-automatic pistol that needs a good cleaning. My husband has a 9 mm. Mine's a .380.
We also have a shotgun. We were using it to scare the vultures off our property but a shitty neighbor called the cops on us. Asshole is getting the cops called on him when he shoots off fireworks.
I have a single shot, breech loading, shoulder bruiser. Used it for squirrels once. There wasn't enough left to eat.
I can imagine. Mr G is planning on shooting some rabbits with the shot gun (I think)
First, the supreme court ruled in DC V Heller " Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited . It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose : For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court's opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller's holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those "in common use at the time" finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons." District of Columbia v. Heller - Wikipedia
Second, the "Some" you mention are in reference to States that have States rights to pass laws, unless you don't believe in States rights. So if they want to ban the semi-automatic rifles that are used most often in mass shootings like the AR-15 then that should be up to their voters.
As for any sort of "logical" next step to 'ban all semi-automatic handguns' and then "all the rest" is pure lunacy. Democrats, liberals and progressives also own lots of guns and cherish the 2nd amendment, they just don't let their gun ownership define them as if they have some chip on their shoulder that they're waiting for someone to knock off so they can blast them in the face with their 2nd amendment rights as it seems some conservatives are want to do.
That makes as much sense as saying because we have speed limits the government is going ban cars. Just because we have some gun laws doesn't mean that the 2nd amendment is under threat. That is pure hyperbolic rhetorical nonsense.
[✘]
[✘]
Again, the second amendment exists. If it didn't states would absolutely pass gun confiscation laws. The democrats just nominated a candidate who supported mandatory gun buy backs and banning pistols. The idea that it's a "fringe" idea on the left is preposterous.
Like New York keeping it's gun law on the books after the Court rejected it? Glad we can at least agree NEw York has an oppressive government. .
aside from all your sweeping generalizations, I own guns, but I only own 1 registered gun, that I will only have to surrender to those that fear the 2nd amendment the most. I'm most proud of a gun that I bought at an estate sale last month. I could have bought the entire contents of the gun cabinet, but her neighbor queered that deal after she already had agreed to sell me the pistol for $400. a highly sought after machine pistol the previous owner also had with 2 extended magazines for. the kid at the pistol range lost his shit when he saw it, and when we both turned it loose at the range. he's looking for a replacement threaded barrel for it so that I can get a suppressor. all of my guns have 2 specific purposes, self defense and defending the constitution from christo-fascists.
they scream when they get hit ...
[✘]
oh lord....Charlene likes to catch baby bunnies and they scream
if you see bunnies during the day, you've got apex predators roaming there at night ...
We have coyotes. I hear them early in the morning. I actually had one approach my front porch while I was sitting there drinking my coffee. He ran off when I yelled
... nice doggie, heh, heh ...
I used to have video of 3 coyotes approaching me while standing outside my car having a smoke years ago.
That's a lot of words, none of which actually address what I said. Semi auto long guns have been commonly held firearms for about as long as they've existed. When muskets were the common weapon, civilians owned them. When lever actions were invented. Same thing. When magazine fed. Same. When semi auto. Same.
For decades, we've been told by the Left that they aren't going after our guns. Now, not only do they not make the distinction between whatever it is they consider assault weapons, they just banned the sale of nearly all of them, in some states, even when they account for a tiny fraction of shootings. One doesn't have to be a mensa genius to see the same people applying the same reasoning to semi auto handguns. After all, what's the difference? As we have seen, one man with a semi auto pistol and a few spare mags can do a lot of damage. It's far easier to conceal, as well. Deny the obvious all you want, but most people aren't going to buy it.
Is it really necessary to point out to you that states rights do not trump Constitutional rights?
See above.
First, considering we're talking about Democrats, all that's necessary to get most of them to eventually change their minds about it is have some celebrities make it seem cool to turn them in, politicians saying it's the responsible thing to do and the always favorite "it's for the kids".
Second, there's an estimated 339 million guns in the US. If conservatives were as you claim, there'd be a lot more dead people out there. Instead, most of the dead people are created by the criminals Dems protect.
I won't be giving up any of my guns while there is still maga left breathing on this planet.
Aside from the fact that you've probably landed yourself on a government watch list a long time ago due to similar comments, okay, thanks for letting me know. Not sure what I'm supposed to do with that, though. Any suggestions???
I usually ignore empty threats from most of the far leftists on here.
Not worth my, or anyone else's, effort.
I find it hilarious when people are worried about their safety when it comes to say, people who voted for Trump. Really, really shitty situational awareness to say the least.
I know. Was in a mood.
“Not sure what I'm supposed to do with that”
Do what i did, laugh.
I think most of us do. Speaking for myself, if a shooting happens at a school, I assume the shooter is most likely white, as that seems the most statistically probable. If it's inner city, most likely non-white. Mall? Toss up. Party? Non-white. Again, that seems to be the statistical probabilities as far as I can tell.
I'd like it to be that way here, too, but certain segments of society push the importance of race so hard it's hard to do anything else these days.
Morning Drakky......I see there has been another shooting in Texas... really makes you wonder what people are thinking to do this..
But we can't talk been a double murder in Melbourne y'day.. someone didn't pay someone and the guy was decapitated and the women killed she was 5 months pregnant..
They will trot out "mental issues" on this one as well, but as they are all known to the police it may not work..
Have no idea what the perpetrators colour is and couldn't care less....he murdered three people and that to us is enough to know...
Seems like Texas has a much higher percentage of killings than many other states.
Is this due to race?
Religion? (Or maybe something in the water?)
Hi, Shona... Without getting long winded, the direction we're heading here in the US... we're getting disconnected from each other. Societal norms are being attacked, replaced with self-centered focus. Used to be that more people believed in God. Now, people believe they are god of their own lives and so, when they get displeased enough, they deal justice (according to whatever their personal inner monolog justifies) and then people die.
At leas, that is how it seems to me.
there's a lot of fluoride in the water down there
reporting?
The MSM does have a tendency to report what and where something happens to their own liking .
When it comes to homicide rates it is much more helpful to talk cities since that is where the highest numbers are in most states. Based on 2023 data:
Memphis, St. Louis, Baltimore, Washington DC …… all with one common denominator. All Democrat run cities.
Too much fluoride? RFK Jr, is that you? /s
History of mental illness. Yeah because he's white
[✘]
[✘]
I'm sorry you don't recognize sarcasm
[✘]
There are more mentally ill people who are white. Do you know why?
There are also more "well adjusted" people who are White.
Why?
Here's why (I just googled it):
60% of the population is White!
maga
oh...my....
[✘]
[✘]
Bingo!