Active Shooter in San Bernidino

Yes, it's tragic. Beyond tragic.

Since this topic has a good chance of getting ugly, I'm going to politely ask that people keep it non-political. That's what Facebook is for.

Let's also keep it non-confrontational, too.

Thank you.

David S. Wallens wrote: Yes, it's tragic. Beyond tragic. Since this topic has a good chance of getting ugly, I'm going to politely ask that people keep it non-political. That's what Facebook is for. Thank you.

And that's why I bailed on Facebook! I suppose I was the first to make a politicalish post. Sorry I'm just so mad and sad.

In after the lock and before the lock?

Saddened by the news.

We had a quick timeout.

I figure we're all in this together. And together we're going to have to figure out a solution. To do so might take a little from column A and a little from column B. In the end, I don't think any of us like seeing innocent people being murdered like that.

My take-home message for today: Just be nice to each other.

WOW Really Paul? wrote: I still stand firm that the media attention given to these events is fueling this crap.

This. Add in a serious lack of a working mental health field, lack of parenting skills and the amount of idiocy on all sides, we're only going to see more of this crap.

It's starting to sound like it was either a workplace kind of thing or an outside person pissed off an agency.

The room was being rented for a holiday event for the Department of Public Heath.

It is pretty strange that it was 3 people though. It makes a bit more sense with one person (crazy wise), but 3, that's some serious crap.

Another tragic senseless loss of life. And the world is worried about terrorists... Seems like a lot more lives are lost to homegrown issues than the terror boogie man.

Whilst people will again howl for gun control, they fail to realise that criminals don't give a rats about the law so gun control doesn't really hold all the answers people would hope it does.

I'll qualify the above by saying that I'm from Australia, where we have some pretty draconian gun control and whilst it would from the outside appear that it works, gun crime still happens, and it almost always involves illegal weapons. It's a cultural problem and a desensitisation issue first and foremost.

I can only offer my well wishes to those affected by these kind of atrocious crimes

It's starting to finish up. They have one bleeding out on the street right now. Sounds like another one is on foot.

LOTS of police / FBI etc.

The problem with this story is not the reporter, its the correlator of information, reddit.

For whatever reason, the scope of their definition was very different from what has been used previously, which is the FBIs definition.

fbi: 4 or more victims slain in one shooting encounter

reddit: 4 or more people INJURED or slain, including suspect(s)

that is clearly a much broader definition to work from. And by not putting it in context, or clarifying the purpose or perspective of broadening the definitions, it only serves to irritate the situation.

There may be a perfectly good argument for Reddit's gathered information handled in this way. Don't count on it to be reported by the media in its entirety, tho, as they will cherry pick the data. Its on you the reader to not be ignorant.

pointofdeparture wrote:

mad_machine wrote: it's the Washington post.. so take it with a grain of salt.. but this is an eye opening article 334 days, 351 Mass shootings this year

But those were all false flag attacks carried out by the government so Obama can come and take away our guns! Except for the ones committed by Muslims, those were tragedies perpetrated by terrorists.

So per the current live news. They have 3 and have a house surrounded with a 4th. In my opinion, you can take mental health off the table. Unless it is another Manson clan, it is a planned and co-ordinated event.

Sounds like it is a government party that people came in and shot up. Motives could be all over the board in a situation like that. Family being stepped on by city hall fighting back, political or religious. It will be interesting to see.

Would a what vehicle thread on what you would use for active shooting be in poor taste?

I really don't understand the mentality of mass shooters. I can (unfortunately) easily imagine hunting some individual down and putting him in a box, but to just go and target random people seems so...something...to me. I suppose the fame thing could explain some of it, the marginalized loner taking out a government office that's wronged him, the terrorist idea could explain some, too.

Sad and weird.

We really need to de-militarize the police don't we?

I figure this was personal. That's to say the leader of the bad guys feels he was wronged by a person or more likely undefined people in this agency.
Possible :
Terminated employment
Denied claim
Revoked assistance/benefits.

Or, just plain crazy like believing the agency was out to get them or some unwarranted paranoia.

Watching TV, I sure feel like the talking heads want this to be jihad style terrorism.

Got word from Mitchell the building is on lockdown, police and security are not letting anyone in or out of the area. He's safe.

In reply to JohnRW1621:

It might not be jihad style, but it's certainly terrorism, no different than the guy who shot up the planned parenthood or the people in Paris or Beirut.

New York Times is reporting that this might have been due to a disgruntled employee.

My coworker has an autistic kid who was supposed to have a visit from a specialist from that place. She never showed up. Hopefully she's okay.

What a day. People are crazy.

Fueled by Caffeine wrote: Got word from Mitchell the building is on lockdown, police and security are not letting anyone in or out of the area. He's safe.

That's one bit of good news.

madmallard wrote: The problem with this story is not the reporter, its the correlator of information, reddit. For whatever reason, the scope of their definition was very different from what has been used previously, which is the FBIs definition. fbi: 4 or more victims slain in one shooting encounter reddit: 4 or more people INJURED or slain, including suspect(s) that is clearly a much broader definition to work from. And by not putting it in context, or clarifying the purpose or perspective of broadening the definitions, it only serves to irritate the situation. There may be a perfectly good argument for Reddit's gathered information handled in this way. Don't count on it to be reported by the media in its entirety, tho, as they will cherry pick the data. Its on you the reader to not be ignorant.

pointofdeparture wrote:

mad_machine wrote: it's the Washington post.. so take it with a grain of salt.. but this is an eye opening article 334 days, 351 Mass shootings this year

But those were all false flag attacks carried out by the government so Obama can come and take away our guns! Except for the ones committed by Muslims, those were tragedies perpetrated by terrorists.

The Reddit also explains the reasoning behind their expanded definition, and the explanation deserves some contemplation, IMO - expanding the definition to "4 or more people shot" from "4 or more people killed" removes the effects of bad aim and hospitals' ability to save lives. Even if the hospital is able to save lives or the perp can't hit the broad side of the barn, the intent to kill many people was still there.

The Redditors also publish their raw data - by the classic FBI definition, San Bernadino is the 41st mass shooting this year. Even by the narrower standards, I don't think we can deny the fact that something is seriously wrong here.

joey48442 wrote:

Dr. Hess wrote: A factual statement about how the data is compiled

And we all know if it's "gang related" or done by "moslems" it doesn't actually count.

Only people who deserve a kick in the dick say E36 M3 like that.

I know that is a confrontational statement, but it needed to be said.

Flight Service wrote:

joey48442 wrote:

Dr. Hess wrote: A factual statement about how the data is compiled

And we all know if it's "gang related" or done by "moslems" it doesn't actually count.

Only people who deserve a kick in the dick say E36 M3 like that. I know that is a confrontational statement, but it needed to be said.

I'm not sure dr Hess would appreciate you changing what he said when you quoted him?

joey48442 wrote: In reply to JohnRW1621: It might not be jihad style, but it's certainly terrorism, no different than the guy who shot up the planned parenthood or the people in Paris or Beirut.

Only Planned Parenthood was never shot up.

racerfink wrote:

joey48442 wrote: In reply to JohnRW1621: It might not be jihad style, but it's certainly terrorism, no different than the guy who shot up the planned parenthood or the people in Paris or Beirut.

Only Planned Parenthood was never shot up.

Oh? I was mistaken. I thought the guy in Colorado shot 3 people in a planned parenthood?

joey48442 wrote:

racerfink wrote:

joey48442 wrote: In reply to JohnRW1621: It might not be jihad style, but it's certainly terrorism, no different than the guy who shot up the planned parenthood or the people in Paris or Beirut.

Only Planned Parenthood was never shot up.

Oh? I was mistaken. I thought the guy in Colorado shot 3 people in a planned parenthood?

This was what I was referring to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Colorado_Springs_shooting