◀Previous Post
Next Post▶

rangercartridgeandbullet

Reuters is reporting that an unnamed 23 year old male suspect (now room temperature) shot and killed at least one person 250 miles southwest of Dallas and wounded five more in what is being described as a “spree.” Reports indicate that the man was firing wildly from his pickup truck, and was stopped after a shootout with Texas State Troopers and Game Wardens. Initial reports claim that an “assault rifle” and handgun, as well as hundreds of rounds of ammo were discovered in the suspect’s car. More information as we get it.

◀Previous Post
Next Post▶

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

60 COMMENTS

  1. anyway to change the preview pic? my heart sank because i thought it was a local gun shop where this happened before i read anything.

  2. Good thing there wasn’t an armed citizen with a zeroed deer rifle of any caliber (but I prefer .270) in range of this madman!

  4. According to the article you linked the shooter appears to actually be one of the two dead? He killed one person, injured 5 more, and was then himself killed in a shootout if I’m reading the article correctly

    • I just read the article on Reuters and I read the way you did. Torres was the name of the other deceased. Including the gunman, two people died. Not that it makes it any better that he killed someone, but at least he was taken down before he got more. Of course Reuters called what I assume some type of semi auto “scary black rifle” a assault rifle. We as gun enthusiasts really need to push others to stop calling these guns assault rifles. Little battles help turn the tide in our favor.

      • A comprehensive re-branding is really needed.

        “Personal Defense Weapon” is already existing terminology for compact semi-automatic firearm between pistols and rifles — some of them even fire the 5.56mm cartridge! Why not expand usage of this term in the same way “assault weapon/rifle” has expanded? Or perhaps “personal defense rifle”, so as to avoid any objection that M4-type weapons aren’t considered PDWs by the military. While an “assault weapon” is certainly nothing a law-abiding citizen would ever use, a “personal defense rifle” has a laudable purpose that anyone can understand.

        For full-size, full-length rifles, “Designated Marksman Rifle” has become the term of art in the military. People not in military units don’t need to “designate” anyone, so how about “Marksman’s Rifle” to cover Garands, M14 clones, FALs, etc.? Let someone else explain why they think marksmanship — that is, accuracy — is a bad thing, and then feel free to ask them whether they would prefer that bullets be sprayed at random.

        While we’re at it, let’s de-emphasize the terms “pro-gun”, “anti-gun”, and “pro-gun-control”. We are now the “pro-self-defense” community. People who favor stringent controls on firearms are “anti-self-defense.” They oppose something that everyone — a few radicals aside — supports, a robust right to defend one’s life from armed, criminal attackers.

        I’m half joking, yes. But that means I’m also half serious.

      • Unfortunately before the AWB, that’s how they were marketed – by manufacturers and sellers both.

        AR-15, Steyr AUG, AKxx, whatever. They called ’em assault rifles and assault weapons because the name appealed to buyers way back when.

        I think we’re stuck with the term – at least for anything related to anything military and newer than the M1.

      • Come on people… the original “Assault Rifle” was introduced in Vietnam as a rifle that was light weight, fast shooting, and capable of “Repelling Assaults”. i.e. It was an “anti-assault rifle”!!!!!

        • Actually, the Fedorov selective fire rifle of 1910 was first. The Germans did some research along those lines, as well…

          The greatest advances both in design and doctrine were made in Russia in the ’40s, starting with the SKS and progressing very quickly to the AK.

          The U.S. came to the party late – the mid ’50s – although they did come in style.

        • I believe Hitler gave the rifle the name Sturmgewehr, which translates to Storm Rifle.

        • AR stands for ArmaLite Rifle, not Assault Rifle.

          And it has nothing to do with “repelling assaults”. It’s a general-purpose individual infantryman weapon, meant to be efficient on both offensive and defensive.

  5. we have to be grateful that these patsies are so f-ing inept. This will be mostly ignored, I’d like to know if he ‘self-destructed’ like so many of these guys do when confronted by force.

  9. Crap. Ad so it begins, again…
    Can we agree, as ‘armed intelligentsia’, that should we feel anyone we know is about to go postal, that we work to stop that person?
    Just sayin. I’ve never known anyone, heard of anyone I know who knew… But, can we agree to bring to a stop one of these shootings should we hear about an impending event?
    I know, the clackamas mall is likely a good example for DGU.
    I’d just like to read about it more often.

    Lets keep up the good fight.

  10. This story all ready hot subject with ant gun people ant gun media post all over the place msnbc all ready climax all over this story so is huffingtonpost.

    • Just because the MSM is all hot and bothered about this story doesn’t mean you can’t stop, take a deep breath, and type in normal sentences with punctuation.

  11. It always makes me suspicious when MSM won’t identify a murderer. Are they waiting until they can claim that he (or she) once read an American Rifleman magazine? or confirm a voter registration card?

    I’m also really tired of this “assault rifle” bull$hit. The same goes for “tactical”, “arsenal”, “meh”, and “^this”. But I digress. (it also annoys me when people say that!)

  12. Just a thought:
    …an unnamed 23 year old male suspect (now room temperature) rammed and killed at least one person 250 miles southwest of Dallas and injured five more in what is being described as a “fanatical reckless driving spree.” Reports indicate that the man was speeding wildly in his pickup truck, and was only stopped after being shot by Texas State Troopers and Game Wardens. Initial reports claim that methamphetamines and beer, as well as hundreds of baggies of marijuana were discovered in the suspect’s vehicle. More information as we get it.

    Where’s the outrage…yet drug fueled violence occurs every day, particularly in metropolitan bastions of democratic progressivism.
    And there is no protected right to possess outlawed drugs.

    • It’s time to redirect the message.

      It’s not the inanimate guns, stupid.

      Look at all the violent wanna be phony crime dramas dreamed up by liberal Hollywood types glamorizing wild gunfights performed by pretty actors.
      Look at the grossly violent fantasy video games.
      Look at the lack of parental supervision or participation in their kids lives.
      Look at the lack of real life social interaction replaced by superficial electronic communication.

      Look at the dumbing down of our social mores and morals in the name of liberal elite brainless progressivism.

      Too many people especially young people end up with faulty moral compasses or are affected by impersonal social bullying with little guidance for dealing with the stresses.

      The elite progressive grabbers have their hand at the wheel of most of the violence that plagues our society.

      Time to assign blame where blame is due!

      /end rant/

      • “Look at the grossly violent fantasy video games.”

        This is the same own-goal that Wayne LaPierre did seven months ago. It took video gamers, who are a huge sub-culture also and were similarly dreading being tarred with the Connecticut brush, and turned them against us. It was a horrible, horrible mistake. These people should have been allies and we could have shut it all down before it even came to a vote.

        Don’t shove fellow travelers in front of the headsman; they tend to remember and resent it.

        As to their culpability, if the action of shooting pixels on the screen with a virtual gun-image is psychosis inducing, then shooting silhouette targets with a real gun should be as well. Neither is true.

        • Thanks for saying this.

          While modern gaming does offer a spree-killing “trainee” an inexpensive means to perfect their aim, the nut as to already be a nut.

          Noone (to my knowledge) suggested banning Micro$oft Flight Simulator after 911, even though Al Queda found it to be indispensable.

        • I have a theory in this vein. Those few predisposed towards violent behavior tend to gravitate to violent media, similar to the way we geeks tend to gravitate to anime, computers, comics, gaming and most anything technology related. However, violent media also functions for the overwhelming majority of normal people as a way to blow off steam, a way to socialize with friends, a temporary means of escape from much of what sucks about daily life (i.e. get up, work for peanuts, try to get most of the bills paid, come home, eat, sleep, rinse, repeat)
          Violence in the media is no more to blame than guns, the guilt ultimately rests on the shoulders of those committing acts they know to be wrong. If they don’t know the difference between right and wrong it isn’t necessarily their fault, some people are born that way, but don’t blame the media or weapon for it either.

          Side note, if a parent allows their child to play a MA rated game, that’s their choice, just like taking them to an R rated movie. If a parent doesn’t bother to get informed of what games their child plays, what that entails and if they have any objections to the content, they don’t get any sympathy when they decide the game they bought for their kid isn’t appropriate. Case in point: Lady walked in to a game store, picked up a game and asked my friend about it, if it was “a good Christian game” for her son. My friend explained the it was about killing people, so no, it probably wouldn’t be a good fit for her household. She then bought God of War because “It has ‘God’ in the title”. I really wish I could say I was making that up.

          tl;dr
          violent games and media are no more culpable than guns, irresponsible parents make my head hurt with their grabber-like logic

        • You know, point taken. I can agree with what you say and I may not have stated my case as well as I should.

          The thrust of my rant has more to do the permissive degeneration of morals associated with the progressive agenda and how that is supported by the actions of the entertainment media and most elitist liberal progressives and politicians (look at ex congressman Weiner). It tears down the walls of moral conduct and responsibility making reality less of a presence in life until – until it hits you square in the face.

      • Lt. Colonel Dave Grossman in his “Bulletproof Mind” seminars mentions research showing the susceptibility of young children to media violence. For example an Indiana University brain scan study found that violent TV, movie and video game exposure had an effect on normal children causing their brain scans to become similar to those of children with documented, diagnosed Aggressive Behavior Disorder.

        In a similar vein the TV Turnoff Challenge has reported significant positive results in student achievements.

        • I thought that was only live-action violence, rather than cartoons or video games?

        • 1. A similar MRI reading is not mechanistic in and of itself.

          2. Correlation is not causation.

    • Hmm… where’d you see the info on the meth and weed in the car? That makes this a bit of a different animal than just some asshole shooting at people. Meth-heads shooting at people is bad enough on its own, but that points to the particular 23-yr old probably being no stranger to the law…

      • People who do meth usually don’t do weed – unless they’re guests and just doing what’s there.

        Did he actually have both in the vehicle?

        There oughter be a law aggin’ meth…

      • I only changed the scenario to highlight drugs, rather than guns, as the big contributing factor of the bad actors carnage.

        Drugs are THE biggest factor in most violence in America; and we as society are allowing it to flourish. It’s not just a law enforcement problem.

        • Ahh. Funny what a difference that makes in the narrative, huh? Guess I demonstrated your point nicely.

  13. Look at that beautiful mushroomed slug in the pic. And to think saps are still paying stupid prices for old ass Black Talons.

  15. Well…so much for expanding where CHL holders can carry and getting open carry passed…The liberals in Austin are gonna block that for sure now if it doesnt die in committee.

    • I dunno. Someone’s gonna argue that more armed Texans might’ve stopped him sooner’n fewer armed Texans managed to.

  16. Meanwhile, Drudge is reporting that there were 17 people shot over the weekend, with 6 fatalities, in Chi Town.

  17. Don’t forget the 6 dead over the weekend in chicago.

    http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/police-people-dead-weekend-chicago-shootings-19262543#.UaNWdLXVAYY

    Of course the media also brings up one of the killings was semi-near one of obama’s homes…. because you know… that’s relevant.

    There was also a local athlete that was also shot and killed, but he was black so the activists don’t care.

    While I think the entire anti-gun movement is bs and politically motivated and no shootings should be brought up because the shootings aren’t the point…. it does annoy me when black people are killed it is mostly swept under the rug… while anyone white is killed and it’s the most heinous thing ever.

    So much for equality.

    • it does annoy me when black people are killed it is mostly swept under the rug

      Um… unless it can be used to support some narrative e.g. Trayvon Martin.

      • That was swept under a rug for six weeks before his parents managed to get it into the public eye.

      • yes true… but far more often ‘white’ deaths are paraded in the public eye than minorities.

        *** meant to be a reply to chaz.

    • It is unfair that so any black victims are gang-on-gang that we’ve largely come to presume that all are unless it’s pointed out to be otherwise.

      Also, it’s a class thing – poor people “mattering” less, y’know.

      When the news was an hour, tops, and the papers ruled, we were not so thoroughly innundated with narrative, and not so desensitized.

      Furthermore, we now can all be “ditto heads,” picking our news sources for their similarity to our views.

      The news outlets that talk about Chicago black kids aren’t the news outlets followed by most people – especially at a distance from Chicago.

      • True.

        Now I’m not too familiar with chicago law… but I thought you weren’t allowed to own a gun in chicago? If that is the case then my general line of thought would be “seems like it doesn’t work too well.”

        Apparently criminals don’t follow laws. Too bad politicians can’t get that through their thick wallets.

      • It gets really bad when you consider than many gangs initiate their members having them shoot someone. Doesn’t help that when the police don’t care and show up 30min later, and no one helps. It’s pretty ridiculous actually, I’m _sure_ the neighborhood knows who the gang members are, even the police.

Comments are closed.