SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Federal authorities are responding to a shooting at the First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas, a small community southeast of San Antonio.
In a press conference Sunday night, an official from the Texas Department of Public Safety described the scene: Around 11:20 am, the suspect, dressed in black, approached the church and began firing an assault rifle. He then entered the church and continued firing.
Gov. Greg Abbott confirmed that at least 26 people were killed. A Texas Department of Public Safety official said the ages of the victims ranged from 5 to 72 years old. The AP reports that the pastor's 14-year-old daughter is among the dead.
The Department of Public Safety confirmed to NPR that at least 20 others were wounded. A DPS official said in the press conference that the gunman was confronted by an armed civilian outside of the church.
The shooter, who was found dead in neighboring Guadalupe County, has been identified as Devin Kelley, 26, a former Air Force member.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Monday November 06 2017, @03:55AM (23 children)
I don't know what his political affiliation was nor do I care. It doesn't make his crime and more or less heinous. I would simply point out he could have killed everyone in the church by blocking all the exits and setting the building on fire. If you're gonna do evil, you'll find a way.
So maybe we ought to cut the crap and finally tackle the dysfunction underlying all of this. This is all symptomatic of fundamental societal stress that has built so high all the crazies are starting to pop off spontaneously. Do we want to recognize that as the quite serious warning sign it is, or bury our heads in the sand a little while longer until everything can really cut loose into a general bloodbath?
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 06 2017, @04:09AM (2 children)
It will be interesting watching the 2018 riots as a bystander.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Monday November 06 2017, @04:30AM (1 child)
What part of the world do you think will permit you to remain a mere bystander? Certainly not Europe. Not East Asia. The Middle East, perhaps? Venezuela? If you're thinking Canada, lemme just point out that big ships sick down everything near them when they plunge to the bottom.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 06 2017, @04:31PM
I'm not speaking from the perspective of the nations that existed before N-day. There were plenty of rural areas that were minimally affected by the chaos that started in 2018.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 06 2017, @04:41AM (11 children)
Profits shall not be stopped by a bunch of peons going crazy, you get me?
Your masters (of political and/or economical nature) want you as dependent on their whim as possible; this runs contrary to letting you feel secure and stress-less.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Monday November 06 2017, @05:03AM (10 children)
I hear you, but is it because they're so unconcerned that they're installing panic rooms and building bunkers and travelling around in armored cars?
When the French Revolution finally kicked off it didn't matter how armored the aristocracy's chateaus were.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday November 06 2017, @06:40AM (7 children)
Unlike the French Revolution, it wouldn't take weeks of traveling in disguise to flee the country. Hop on a plane and you can be out of the country inside of six hours.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 06 2017, @06:55AM (6 children)
And then what?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday November 06 2017, @07:17AM (5 children)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 06 2017, @09:28AM (1 child)
So, good riddance, we'll manage easier without them.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday November 06 2017, @03:23PM
Yes, we didn't need that prosperity anyway. There's a reason most people aren't on board with revolution. It's because the revolutionists completely ignore the harm they cause and are perfectly willing to starve the populace (in the process creating more inequality than they attempted to fix) for frivolous ideological reasons.
(Score: 3, Informative) by TheRaven on Monday November 06 2017, @09:45AM (2 children)
sudo mod me up
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Monday November 06 2017, @02:17PM (1 child)
Currencies and markets totally wouldn't crash and erase that wealth immediately. Local warlords and gangsters totally wouldn't take advantage of the collapse of the American superpower to seize all that distributed wealth.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday November 06 2017, @03:25PM
Indeed. The wealth that couldn't be moved would probably be lost, but not everything outside of the country.
There are other countries out there in the world.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday November 06 2017, @06:45AM (1 child)
That has to be the last incarnation of "pissing down economy" (grin)
Cause the next step is recruiting a personal army against violent riots - war like, can't speak of economy in the social sense.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Phoenix666 on Monday November 06 2017, @02:14PM
I know with an apocalypse breaking out my first thought as a highly paid body guard would be to lay my life down for the rich dude whose electronic bank account in the Caymans will be instantly worthless instead of taking the fancy body armor, weapons, and evac chopper out to rescue and protect my own family.
I hope when that happens said body guards snap pics of the look on the rich dude's face as they lift off, because it would be the most shared image of all time.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday November 06 2017, @05:07AM (2 children)
Crazies have been popping off for a long time. Wikipedia mentions US examples going back to the mid-19th century.
I think societal stress would go down (hint! hint!), if people stopped seeing imaginary trends in one-time events.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Monday November 06 2017, @02:23PM (1 child)
That's another thing, there's never been a time when Americans haven't had a lot of guns. They have always had them. So why are there more of these incidents now when there weren't before? Why aren't there mass shootings every day in Switzerland, where every adult has a military assault rifle in his closet? If prevalence of guns explains shootings like these, then why don't they have them?
People calling for gun control want the killings to stop. I want them to stop, too. But taking the guns away will not stop the killing. It will only change the method of killing.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday November 06 2017, @03:17PM
More incidents than when? I don't actually see the alleged increase in these incidents. Keep in mind that we have almost 350 million people in the US now.
There are 40 times as many US residents as there are Swiss (even at the start 377 mass shoots would correspond to 9 mass shootings in Switzerland, thus no daily mass shootings even at US rates per capita). The US is much more diverse and divisive ethnically and doesn't have the common interest that a common culture like the Swiss have (including better relationships between law enforcement and citizens). The war on drugs is more perverse in the US, for example, and that is a big driver of both mass shootings and of mental illness contributing to mass shootings (I'm of the opinion that widespread recreational drug use, both legal and illegal, especially when coupled with binging behavior common in the US, tends to cause more mental illness than it helps).
And maybe there's less mass shootings in Switzerland because everyone knows that every male adult has a military assault rifle in his closet?
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 06 2017, @05:10AM (3 children)
Probably not as most, if not all, churches have windows that could be broken in that kind of a situation. It never ceases to amaze me the degree to which the pro-murderers out there will concoct in their attempt to avoid responsibility for their irresponsible stance on the issue.
The reality is that without access to a firearm of this type that it would have been far, far harder to commit this sort of crime than you're suggesting. Limiting the number of rounds in a magazine, proper background checks, actually limiting firearms to weapons that are appropriate for hunting would all have made this crime impossible. Sure, he might have shot a few people, but if he was only able to shoot a half dozen rounds before reloading, that would have given at least some people time to escape.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 06 2017, @07:21AM (1 child)
Pro-murderers? Are people who oppose the NSA's mass surveillance pro-terrorist? Some people believe that freedom is more important than safety. You might not agree with their stance, but that does not mean they are in favor of murder.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 06 2017, @09:32AM
Yeah, I reckon in this case the correct term is "righteous killing" (large trollish grin)
(Score: 2) by AssCork on Monday November 06 2017, @06:18PM
I'm not going to call you a troll, but I find it interesting that you speak to these views under the guise of the common good, but wont let your name be tied to them.
Just popped-out of a tight spot. Came out mostly clean, too.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 06 2017, @07:49PM
this is right. we need to be home schooling/neighborhood schooling children and teaching the hell out of them so that they graduate with skills that are useful and are cable of building a future for themselves. these people have no skills(except maybe shooting), no hope and are mentally ill.