4 minutes -- do I have to listen to the whole thing? Of course it's nonsense. The gun loving Right want to talk about anything other than sensible gun control measures like reviving the national assault weapons ban and limiting magazine capacity and related. They are a bit on the defensive about this latest mass shooting, it's so egregious on many levels.
The Fox above is very similar to what is being spewed in weak defense of lax TX gun laws on social media platforms. More guns, teachers w guns, barbed wire around schools, turn them into lockdown prisons, etc. Though I hadn't heard the one about declaring martial law. That's funny.
And the local cops who initially, eventually responded -- whether or not they were told to stand down until backup arrived, they were complicit in their cowardly ways. The way to handle these things, I'm told by the experts, has been well known in law enforcement since Columbine in 1999 -- get in quickly, don't wait for backup, get to the shooter with whatever you have, however few you have. Police are there to protect and serve, not to take the safe route so they can be sure to return home safe at the end of the day. If they wanted a job free of risk, they should have joined up to become librarians.
@wokkamile
KB makes the exact same point as my last one, so good for her. Slight objection to KB-Saager team presentation is they should have read from a written timeline of key events as we know them to now, rather than winging it while leaving out key facts.
Such as, the grandmother reported to 911 she had been shot, the school was only a mile away and authorities should have been notified to lock down the school. When the suspect crashed his car in a ditch near the school, he then shot at 2 people standing across the way at a funeral parlor. Did they too call 911? Would be strange if they didn't.
He then proceeded to the school where apparently he spent some 10 minutes outside with his rifle and backpack, meanwhile the police station was only 1.2 miles away in that tiny town. 3-4 minutes to get there if they had only acted or were informed immediately. There are likely more timeline questions to ask. And what Saager should have emphasized at the end was the need for an independent investigation of the entire response, not just an investigation. Otherwise, good enough presentation of the situation.
4 minutes -- do I have to listen to the whole thing? Of course it's nonsense. The gun loving Right want to talk about anything other than sensible gun control measures like reviving the national assault weapons ban and limiting magazine capacity and related. They are a bit on the defensive about this latest mass shooting, it's so egregious on many levels.
The Fox above is very similar to what is being spewed in weak defense of lax TX gun laws on social media platforms. More guns, teachers w guns, barbed wire around schools, turn them into lockdown prisons, etc. Though I hadn't heard the one about declaring martial law. That's funny.
And the local cops who initially, eventually responded -- whether or not they were told to stand down until backup arrived, they were complicit in their cowardly ways. The way to handle these things, I'm told by the experts, has been well known in law enforcement since Columbine in 1999 -- get in quickly, don't wait for backup, get to the shooter with whatever you have, however few you have. Police are there to protect and serve, not to take the safe route so they can be sure to return home safe at the end of the day. If they wanted a job free of risk, they should have joined up to become librarians.
@wokkamile
If the cops don't want to risk their lives when babies are being slaughtered, then they should quit.
BTW, I've read that the police budget is 40% of the city's budget. Plus they had an armed security guard.
So how many "good guys with a gun" do we need?
4 minutes -- do I have to listen to the whole thing? Of course it's nonsense. The gun loving Right want to talk about anything other than sensible gun control measures like reviving the national assault weapons ban and limiting magazine capacity and related. They are a bit on the defensive about this latest mass shooting, it's so egregious on many levels.
The Fox above is very similar to what is being spewed in weak defense of lax TX gun laws on social media platforms. More guns, teachers w guns, barbed wire around schools, turn them into lockdown prisons, etc. Though I hadn't heard the one about declaring martial law. That's funny.
And the local cops who initially, eventually responded -- whether or not they were told to stand down until backup arrived, they were complicit in their cowardly ways. The way to handle these things, I'm told by the experts, has been well known in law enforcement since Columbine in 1999 -- get in quickly, don't wait for backup, get to the shooter with whatever you have, however few you have. Police are there to protect and serve, not to take the safe route so they can be sure to return home safe at the end of the day. If they wanted a job free of risk, they should have joined up to become librarians.
@gjohnsit
school district had spent some $435k this year on school security, and did have a detailed emergency plan in place including school security guards. Obviously, leaving outer and inner doors unlocked is going to hamper such measures.
to the cops huh? Seems that the only time they are Jonny on the spot ready to attack people is when we peasants get too uppity and think that we can protest our government for redress. They are always willing to beat up unarmed civilians and shoot their non lethal weapons at them to inflict maximum damage.
Now that Covid is making a return Biden has told states to use any unspent money for Covid on the cops. What a swell guy.
Here’s a picture of the cops outside the school…
4 minutes -- do I have to listen to the whole thing? Of course it's nonsense. The gun loving Right want to talk about anything other than sensible gun control measures like reviving the national assault weapons ban and limiting magazine capacity and related. They are a bit on the defensive about this latest mass shooting, it's so egregious on many levels.
The Fox above is very similar to what is being spewed in weak defense of lax TX gun laws on social media platforms. More guns, teachers w guns, barbed wire around schools, turn them into lockdown prisons, etc. Though I hadn't heard the one about declaring martial law. That's funny.
And the local cops who initially, eventually responded -- whether or not they were told to stand down until backup arrived, they were complicit in their cowardly ways. The way to handle these things, I'm told by the experts, has been well known in law enforcement since Columbine in 1999 -- get in quickly, don't wait for backup, get to the shooter with whatever you have, however few you have. Police are there to protect and serve, not to take the safe route so they can be sure to return home safe at the end of the day. If they wanted a job free of risk, they should have joined up to become librarians.
up
10 users have voted.
—
There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?
Cops yelled get on the ground and deployed the taser at the same time. Unfortunately the guy was pumping gas in his motorcycle and boom. The cop faces a misdemeanor.
to the cops huh? Seems that the only time they are Jonny on the spot ready to attack people is when we peasants get too uppity and think that we can protest our government for redress. They are always willing to beat up unarmed civilians and shoot their non lethal weapons at them to inflict maximum damage.
Now that Covid is making a return Biden has told states to use any unspent money for Covid on the cops. What a swell guy.
Here’s a picture of the cops outside the school…
up
6 users have voted.
—
There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?
that solving the issue of gun violence would take a very minor change to the legal system. Here's my modest proposal:
Anyone convicted of the commission of a crime (any crime, down to and including jaywalking), while in possession of a firearm, should be given one automatic appeal. At the end of said appeal, if their conviction is upheld, the perpetrator should be killed by the bailiff with a single gunshot to the head, right then and there, in open court. Finis. Short, sharp, and messily tidy.
Cops are specifically included, perhaps especially so, in the abovementioned "anyone". Robert Heinlein said "An armed society is a polite society". Well, this takes it right to that level- and enforces it. The constitution says everybody can have whatever arsenal they want, and that isn't changing any time soon. However, it makes no mention whatsoever of there being any right to not be immediately annihilated by the state for one's own stupidity. If you want to carry, you'd damned well better be polite, or know that you are absolutely in the right, before brandishing that hogleg in the heat of the moment.
After a few thousand people got their brains scattered over a few thousand courtrooms for relatively minor offenses while packing heat, maybe people would start to take things seriously. It'd suck to be one of them, of course, but it would at least let things suck for them every bit as much as it would suck for their potential victims. The victims shouldn't have all the fun, amirite?
A very minor change. Just a thought, since the problem is clearly not going to solve itself. Your mileage may vary, of course.
perhaps would have more meaning
if it was done unto themselves
you wanna pack heat to feel in power?
then face the band and show your true colors
shoot your way outta that one cowboy
violence and death at the end of a gun
after all is still a cowards way out
that solving the issue of gun violence would take a very minor change to the legal system. Here's my modest proposal:
Anyone convicted of the commission of a crime (any crime, down to and including jaywalking), while in possession of a firearm, should be given one automatic appeal. At the end of said appeal, if their conviction is upheld, the perpetrator should be killed by the bailiff with a single gunshot to the head, right then and there, in open court. Finis. Short, sharp, and messily tidy.
Cops are specifically included, perhaps especially so, in the abovementioned "anyone". Robert Heinlein said "An armed society is a polite society". Well, this takes it right to that level- and enforces it. The constitution says everybody can have whatever arsenal they want, and that isn't changing any time soon. However, it makes no mention whatsoever of there being any right to not be immediately annihilated by the state for one's own stupidity. If you want to carry, you'd damned well better be polite, or know that you are absolutely in the right, before brandishing that hogleg in the heat of the moment.
After a few thousand people got their brains scattered over a few thousand courtrooms for relatively minor offenses while packing heat, maybe people would start to take things seriously. It'd suck to be one of them, of course, but it would at least let things suck for them every bit as much as it would suck for their potential victims. The victims shouldn't have all the fun, amirite?
A very minor change. Just a thought, since the problem is clearly not going to solve itself. Your mileage may vary, of course.
die by the gun. Period, end of statement, full stop. Makes perfect sense. The right to keep and bear arms is in the constitution. The right to get publically *dead* by fucking up with your goddamned gun should be in there as well. After all, the rest of us already have that “right”: gun people can freedom us to death at any moment. Simple. Biblical, even, if you think about it. The whole world is already blind, anyway. Tit for tat.
perhaps would have more meaning
if it was done unto themselves
you wanna pack heat to feel in power?
then face the band and show your true colors
shoot your way outta that one cowboy
violence and death at the end of a gun
after all is still a cowards way out
Seems that the only time they are Jonny on the spot ready to attack people is when we peasants get too uppity and think that we can protest our government for redress. They are always willing to beat up unarmed civilians and shoot their non lethal weapons at them to inflict maximum damage.
All too often the case. However there are notable exceptions:
An off-duty US Customs and Border Protection agent fearlessly rushed into Robb Elementary School with his barber’s shotgun and rescued dozens of children and his daughter after his wife texted him that there was an active shooter.
Jacob Albarado had just sat down for a haircut when he received the horrifying message from his wife, Trisha, a fourth-grade teacher at the Uvalde, Texas, elementary school, he told the New York Times.
“There’s an active shooter,” she wrote. “Help,” she sent before sending a chilling: “I love you.”
He immediately leaped out of his seat, grabbed the barber’s shotgun and sped off toward the school.
His daughter, a second-grader, was locked inside a bathroom while his wife hid under desks with her students, the Times reported.
In another wing of the school, 18-year-old crazed gunman Salvador Ramos had opened fire and ultimately murdered 19 children and two teachers.
A tactical team was preparing to enter the school when Albarado arrived. Desperate to get his daughter and wife out, he made a plan with other officers to try to enter the school
Questions:
How many more kids might have died if he hadn't taken the initiative?
Why did the barber have a shotgun at hand?
What would have been the consequences of there *not* being a weapon handy?
Apparently, Alvarado did get police weapons and a radio before going in with two other officers,
but no helmet, body armor, etc. - and very nearly fatal consequences for himself:
@Blue Republic
but a little less than it's cracked up to be and a little confusing in parts. Would he have responded the same way if his wife and daughter had not been in jeopardy at the school? Did the barber's gun make any difference in the end as he availed himself at the site with weapons from law enforcement?
Are we to make a big hero of the guy just bc he lacked body armor and helmet? Isn't it still the job of law enforcement to protect and serve, to accept risk as part of their job? Or are we to make something special of them just because they are not fully equipped to the hilt? Is the moral of the story supposed to be that if only more weapons were easily accessible in all public places for good guys to grab there would be less violent crime?
Seems that the only time they are Jonny on the spot ready to attack people is when we peasants get too uppity and think that we can protest our government for redress. They are always willing to beat up unarmed civilians and shoot their non lethal weapons at them to inflict maximum damage.
All too often the case. However there are notable exceptions:
An off-duty US Customs and Border Protection agent fearlessly rushed into Robb Elementary School with his barber’s shotgun and rescued dozens of children and his daughter after his wife texted him that there was an active shooter.
Jacob Albarado had just sat down for a haircut when he received the horrifying message from his wife, Trisha, a fourth-grade teacher at the Uvalde, Texas, elementary school, he told the New York Times.
“There’s an active shooter,” she wrote. “Help,” she sent before sending a chilling: “I love you.”
He immediately leaped out of his seat, grabbed the barber’s shotgun and sped off toward the school.
His daughter, a second-grader, was locked inside a bathroom while his wife hid under desks with her students, the Times reported.
In another wing of the school, 18-year-old crazed gunman Salvador Ramos had opened fire and ultimately murdered 19 children and two teachers.
A tactical team was preparing to enter the school when Albarado arrived. Desperate to get his daughter and wife out, he made a plan with other officers to try to enter the school
Questions:
How many more kids might have died if he hadn't taken the initiative?
Why did the barber have a shotgun at hand?
What would have been the consequences of there *not* being a weapon handy?
Apparently, Alvarado did get police weapons and a radio before going in with two other officers,
but no helmet, body armor, etc. - and very nearly fatal consequences for himself:
(I made it through the whole thing) has got to be the biggest pile of crap I've ever encountered on You Tube - if I ever saw worse it must have been traumatic enough that I've blocked out the memory.
Patronizing, out of context distortion, lies and deflection front to back. Everything to deflect from the manifold ills of society and place all the blame on evil GUNS. While presenting no evidence at all that the various 'common sense reforms' being put forward would do anything other than advance state power at the expense of responsible people.
OK, maybe some of the measures might result in some modest reduction in gun deaths. But just because something is effective doesn't mean it's the wise course of action - burning down your house will quite definitively solve a mold or termite problem. However...
- When Christianity is mentioned, the ST guy's response is that America is 70% Christian but there is still gun violence and would be if the country was 100% Christian. But it's a fair question to ask, how many Christians (or Sikhs/Buddhists,Moslems...)are committing violence compared to others? What about looking at where the violence is coming from by age/ethnicity/gender? Or do we not want to go there, even though they are obvious avenues of enquiry?
- He dismisses/ridicules the importance of imparting basic moral values to children - like failure to do so is not going to have a profound impact?
- He ridicules even common-sense suggestions such as that maybe it would be a good idea to keep the back door locked. Or the idea of a single, controlled entrance to school, saying it flies in the face of fire regulations. As if there cannot be multiple emergency EXITS.
- He dismisses the idea that the proliferation of psych drugs can be a contributing factor to the problem. Even though it's a lot harder to find mass shootings where they are *not* involved than those where they are. ssristories.org
- He ridicules the idea of arming teachers or administrators, even though there are cases on record where school shootings have been stopped by such.
- He dismisses the importance of helping kids develop interpersonal relationships and the negative impact that Covid lockdowns and social media have had on kids in particular.
Not everyone is so dismissive:
School shooters use violent phantasies to compensate for psychosocial injuries, a perceived lack of reference figures and missing viable perspectives in their social reality. These phantasies intensify over years and become more detailed as the shooting draws closer. As the mental images become more specific, shooters often become buttressed by a distorted sense of what is just or moral, such as the need to avenge a perceived offense or the belief in a divine right to decide the fate of others. In their personal view, school shootings appear as means to gain control, a sense of masculinity, and recognition. Although they may at first hide their destructive phantasies out of fear of rejection, they increasingly feel a need to express them. They begin to leak their thoughts and plans to friends, chat rooms, and even media outlets. Distinguishing extreme violent phantasies from harmless daydreaming can enable parents, teachers, social workers, and other trusted adults to intervene months before a school shooting. These adolescents need help to build protective factors: social prospects, a pro-social self-image, and strong relationships with peers, teachers, and other adults. Strong pro-social relationships enable them to find a sense of bonding with society and also help them to find solutions for seemingly insoluble problems and to reduce their subjective need for violent compensatory phantasies.
It's worth remembering that Ramos ten years ago was likely just as cute and full of potential as the kids he ended up killing - and worth taking a serious look at how he came to the point of doing it.
Unedited Tucker C. - for a far better-spent fifteen minutes:
@Blue Republic
All the things you mention are common to western societies. The unfettered access to firearms make those issues lethal in the US. Side stepping that issue is really ignoring the elephant in the room. This is the point of the video that you criticized.
(I made it through the whole thing) has got to be the biggest pile of crap I've ever encountered on You Tube - if I ever saw worse it must have been traumatic enough that I've blocked out the memory.
Patronizing, out of context distortion, lies and deflection front to back. Everything to deflect from the manifold ills of society and place all the blame on evil GUNS. While presenting no evidence at all that the various 'common sense reforms' being put forward would do anything other than advance state power at the expense of responsible people.
OK, maybe some of the measures might result in some modest reduction in gun deaths. But just because something is effective doesn't mean it's the wise course of action - burning down your house will quite definitively solve a mold or termite problem. However...
- When Christianity is mentioned, the ST guy's response is that America is 70% Christian but there is still gun violence and would be if the country was 100% Christian. But it's a fair question to ask, how many Christians (or Sikhs/Buddhists,Moslems...)are committing violence compared to others? What about looking at where the violence is coming from by age/ethnicity/gender? Or do we not want to go there, even though they are obvious avenues of enquiry?
- He dismisses/ridicules the importance of imparting basic moral values to children - like failure to do so is not going to have a profound impact?
- He ridicules even common-sense suggestions such as that maybe it would be a good idea to keep the back door locked. Or the idea of a single, controlled entrance to school, saying it flies in the face of fire regulations. As if there cannot be multiple emergency EXITS.
- He dismisses the idea that the proliferation of psych drugs can be a contributing factor to the problem. Even though it's a lot harder to find mass shootings where they are *not* involved than those where they are. ssristories.org
- He ridicules the idea of arming teachers or administrators, even though there are cases on record where school shootings have been stopped by such.
- He dismisses the importance of helping kids develop interpersonal relationships and the negative impact that Covid lockdowns and social media have had on kids in particular.
Not everyone is so dismissive:
School shooters use violent phantasies to compensate for psychosocial injuries, a perceived lack of reference figures and missing viable perspectives in their social reality. These phantasies intensify over years and become more detailed as the shooting draws closer. As the mental images become more specific, shooters often become buttressed by a distorted sense of what is just or moral, such as the need to avenge a perceived offense or the belief in a divine right to decide the fate of others. In their personal view, school shootings appear as means to gain control, a sense of masculinity, and recognition. Although they may at first hide their destructive phantasies out of fear of rejection, they increasingly feel a need to express them. They begin to leak their thoughts and plans to friends, chat rooms, and even media outlets. Distinguishing extreme violent phantasies from harmless daydreaming can enable parents, teachers, social workers, and other trusted adults to intervene months before a school shooting. These adolescents need help to build protective factors: social prospects, a pro-social self-image, and strong relationships with peers, teachers, and other adults. Strong pro-social relationships enable them to find a sense of bonding with society and also help them to find solutions for seemingly insoluble problems and to reduce their subjective need for violent compensatory phantasies.
It's worth remembering that Ramos ten years ago was likely just as cute and full of potential as the kids he ended up killing - and worth taking a serious look at how he came to the point of doing it.
Unedited Tucker C. - for a far better-spent fifteen minutes:
to guns is the critical issue, how do you account for the vast differences in gun violence between different areas and between different age/gender/ethnic demographics *within* the US?
Consider, say, Vermont or OtC's rural Texas neighborhood - high rates of gun ownership and liberal gun laws - but where is the rampant violence? How do those places compare with Chicago, Baltimore, NYC, LA...? All of the latter with strict gun laws but far higher levels of gun violence.
Again, if guns are the overriding cause of gun violence then please feel free to explain the vast difference in violence levels between Vermont and Chicago given that there are plenty of guns in both places.
Or do you think that just possibly there are other important factors involved? And that maybe the (vast majority of) responsible people who choose to possess guns should not have to suffer yet more intrusion into their lives because of the actions of a small (but dangerous) minority who behave irresponsibly?
#4 All the things you mention are common to western societies. The unfettered access to firearms make those issues lethal in the US. Side stepping that issue is really ignoring the elephant in the room. This is the point of the video that you criticized.
to guns is the critical issue, how do you account for the vast differences in gun violence between different areas and between different age/gender/ethnic demographics *within* the US?
Consider, say, Vermont or OtC's rural Texas neighborhood - high rates of gun ownership and liberal gun laws - but where is the rampant violence? How do those places compare with Chicago, Baltimore, NYC, LA...? All of the latter with strict gun laws but far higher levels of gun violence.
Again, if guns are the overriding cause of gun violence then please feel free to explain the vast difference in violence levels between Vermont and Chicago given that there are plenty of guns in both places.
Or do you think that just possibly there are other important factors involved? And that maybe the (vast majority of) responsible people who choose to possess guns should not have to suffer yet more intrusion into their lives because of the actions of a small (but dangerous) minority who behave irresponsibly?
@Blue Republic
obvious to observe that bc of our nationwide patchwork of vastly different gun laws, criminals and those intent on getting a gun can just go elsewhere in the state or cross state lines to where the gun laws are lax. Such is the case with Chicago, where a study showed that nearly 60% of the guns used in violent crime could be traced to sources outside of the city and outside the state. https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/nation-world/national/article2618...
Other issues would include Vermont's long tradition of hunting and sporting activities creating a specific benign gun culture, it's much lower poverty rate and much lower population density compared to places like Chicago. Vermont however is above average in its suicide rate, and most of those are committed with their handy firearms, a little like Switzerland in that respect.
to guns is the critical issue, how do you account for the vast differences in gun violence between different areas and between different age/gender/ethnic demographics *within* the US?
Consider, say, Vermont or OtC's rural Texas neighborhood - high rates of gun ownership and liberal gun laws - but where is the rampant violence? How do those places compare with Chicago, Baltimore, NYC, LA...? All of the latter with strict gun laws but far higher levels of gun violence.
Again, if guns are the overriding cause of gun violence then please feel free to explain the vast difference in violence levels between Vermont and Chicago given that there are plenty of guns in both places.
Or do you think that just possibly there are other important factors involved? And that maybe the (vast majority of) responsible people who choose to possess guns should not have to suffer yet more intrusion into their lives because of the actions of a small (but dangerous) minority who behave irresponsibly?
When Christianity is mentioned, the ST guy's response is that America is 70% Christian but there is still gun violence and would be if the country was 100% Christian. But it's a fair question to ask, how many Christians (or Sikhs/Buddhists,Moslems...)are committing violence compared to others?
I think the history of Christianity in this country answers your question. And more of other religions are not really an option.
No, more religion is not going to solve anything.
- He dismisses/ridicules the importance of imparting basic moral values to children - like failure to do so is not going to have a profound impact?
How would you implement this? How would you even measure this? And who's morals are these?
- He ridicules even common-sense suggestions such as that maybe it would be a good idea to keep the back door locked. Or the idea of a single, controlled entrance to school, saying it flies in the face of fire regulations. As if there cannot be multiple emergency EXITS.
I think that it's a joke. Unless you want to turn all of our schools into virtual prisons.
And then there are churches, nightclubs, grocery stores, etc.
Are we going to turn every building into a fort, before we ever even consider gun laws?
- He ridicules the idea of arming teachers or administrators, even though there are cases on record where school shootings have been stopped by such.
I think that it's a horrible idea. First of all, what teacher wants that? Second, how many teachers are trained for this?
- He dismisses the importance of helping kids develop interpersonal relationships and the negative impact that Covid lockdowns and social media have had on kids in particular.
Since school shooting were epidemic before COVID then we can rule that out a significant cause.
Mass shootings in America are far and away an outlier in the developed world.
To deny that the proliferation of guns isn't a primary cause of that is just denying reality. Especially when we don't even have universal background checks.
However, there are also lots of guns in Canada. Not nearly as many, but a significant amount. They also have a similar culture. So what's different between the U.S. and Canada?
For starters, universal health care. One part of universal health care is mental health services.
It's not like we don't have a mental health crisis in the U.S., yet no one, particularly Republicans, want to do anything about it.
Then there is our constant state of war. Violence overseas sometimes comes home.
Another outlier in this country is our justice system. Between locking up an excessive percentage of our population, treating them like animals, and throwing up every possible roadblock to prevent them from assimilating back into society.
That's just off the top of my head.
(I made it through the whole thing) has got to be the biggest pile of crap I've ever encountered on You Tube - if I ever saw worse it must have been traumatic enough that I've blocked out the memory.
Patronizing, out of context distortion, lies and deflection front to back. Everything to deflect from the manifold ills of society and place all the blame on evil GUNS. While presenting no evidence at all that the various 'common sense reforms' being put forward would do anything other than advance state power at the expense of responsible people.
OK, maybe some of the measures might result in some modest reduction in gun deaths. But just because something is effective doesn't mean it's the wise course of action - burning down your house will quite definitively solve a mold or termite problem. However...
- When Christianity is mentioned, the ST guy's response is that America is 70% Christian but there is still gun violence and would be if the country was 100% Christian. But it's a fair question to ask, how many Christians (or Sikhs/Buddhists,Moslems...)are committing violence compared to others? What about looking at where the violence is coming from by age/ethnicity/gender? Or do we not want to go there, even though they are obvious avenues of enquiry?
- He dismisses/ridicules the importance of imparting basic moral values to children - like failure to do so is not going to have a profound impact?
- He ridicules even common-sense suggestions such as that maybe it would be a good idea to keep the back door locked. Or the idea of a single, controlled entrance to school, saying it flies in the face of fire regulations. As if there cannot be multiple emergency EXITS.
- He dismisses the idea that the proliferation of psych drugs can be a contributing factor to the problem. Even though it's a lot harder to find mass shootings where they are *not* involved than those where they are. ssristories.org
- He ridicules the idea of arming teachers or administrators, even though there are cases on record where school shootings have been stopped by such.
- He dismisses the importance of helping kids develop interpersonal relationships and the negative impact that Covid lockdowns and social media have had on kids in particular.
Not everyone is so dismissive:
School shooters use violent phantasies to compensate for psychosocial injuries, a perceived lack of reference figures and missing viable perspectives in their social reality. These phantasies intensify over years and become more detailed as the shooting draws closer. As the mental images become more specific, shooters often become buttressed by a distorted sense of what is just or moral, such as the need to avenge a perceived offense or the belief in a divine right to decide the fate of others. In their personal view, school shootings appear as means to gain control, a sense of masculinity, and recognition. Although they may at first hide their destructive phantasies out of fear of rejection, they increasingly feel a need to express them. They begin to leak their thoughts and plans to friends, chat rooms, and even media outlets. Distinguishing extreme violent phantasies from harmless daydreaming can enable parents, teachers, social workers, and other trusted adults to intervene months before a school shooting. These adolescents need help to build protective factors: social prospects, a pro-social self-image, and strong relationships with peers, teachers, and other adults. Strong pro-social relationships enable them to find a sense of bonding with society and also help them to find solutions for seemingly insoluble problems and to reduce their subjective need for violent compensatory phantasies.
It's worth remembering that Ramos ten years ago was likely just as cute and full of potential as the kids he ended up killing - and worth taking a serious look at how he came to the point of doing it.
Unedited Tucker C. - for a far better-spent fifteen minutes:
Prior to the Covid vaccinations, psychiatric medications were the mass prescribed medication that had the worst risk to benefit ratio on the market. In addition to rarely providing benefit to patients, there are a wide range of severe complications that commonly result from psychiatric medications. Likewise, I and many colleagues believe the widespread adoption of psychotropic drugs has distorted the cognition of the demographic of the country which frequently utilizes them (which to some extent stratifies by political orientation) and has created a wide range of detrimental shifts in our society.
Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) have a similar primary mechanism of action to cocaine. SSRIs blocks the reuptake of Serotonin, SNRIs, also commonly prescribed block the reuptake of Serotonin and Norepinephrine (henceforth “SSRI refers to both SSRI and SNRI), and Cocaine blocks the reuptake of Serotonin, Norepinephrine and Dopamine. SSRIs (and SNRIs) were originally used as anti-depressants, then gradually had their use marketed into other areas and along the way have amassed a massive body count.
Once the first SSRI entered the market in 1988, Prozac quickly distinguished itself as a particularly dangerous medications and after nine years, the FDA received 39,000 adverse event reports for Prozac, a number far greater than for any other drug. This included hundreds of suicides, atrocious violent crimes, hostility and aggression, psychosis, confusion, distorted thinking, convulsions, amnesia and sexual dysfunction (longterm or permanent sexual dysfunction is one of the most commonly reported side effects from anti-depressants, which is ironic given that the medication is supposed to make you less, not more depressed).
SSRI homicides are common, and a website exists that has compiled thousands upon thousands of documented occurrences. As far as I know (there are most likely a few exceptions), in all cases where a mass school shooting has happened, and it was possible to know the medical history of the shooter, the shooter was taking a psychiatric medication that was known for causing these behavioral changes. After each mass shooting, memes illustrating this topic typically circulate online, and the recent events in Texas are no exception.
See website for the list of shooters and what drug they were on when they did the deed. I was given no warnings about the side effects that came with this wonder drug and it’s not surprising that the FDA did absolutely nothing as the bodies stacked up. Look at how long they allowed OxyContin to destroy lives across the country whilst pharma execs made tons of money. Congress also sat on their asses and watched it happen. But I guess it’s easier to blame the guns for the mass killings instead of going up against their owners who funnel their profits back to them.
Kids who have too much energy are given powerful drugs and gawd only knows what their long term effects will be.
I was prescribed Prozac for depression in the 80's and it kicked me into a manic mode. But even worse was the suicide ideation that popped out of the blue. I’d be driving to work and up popped the idea that I should drive my car into the bridge supports and other weird ways to end my life.
up
5 users have voted.
—
There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?
of their deadly products while their victims pay the price.
“Christopher Pittman became manic and shot his two grandparents to death two days after his dose of Zoloft had been doubled. Despite being only 12 years old when he did this, he was sentenced to 30 years of prison.”
“David Crespi was on Prozac and three other drugs, which he had taken for a couple of weeks, when he killed his two twin daughters with a knife. He pleaded guilty to avoid the death penalty and got a life sentence with no chance of parole, although he became his old self after coming off the drugs.”
“Kurt Danysh was 18 years old when he was inappropriately prescribed Prozac by a general practitioner . He became restless and violent and shot his father, the person he loved the most, 17 days later in a totally out-of-character mood. Kurt had no history of violence prior to Prozac, but in 1996, he was convicted of murdering his father and sentenced to 22.5 to 60 years in prison. During this case, Eli Lilly lied in court, and claimed that Prozac would not cause aggressive behaviour resulting in his conviction. Later in 2004 when it was exposed Lilly had concealed data from 1988 showing Prozac caused violence, the FDA recognized that SSRIs can cause violent behaviour, particularly in children and adolescents. Despite these events and dozens of cases of homicide linked to Prozac that had subsequently been reported to the FDA, the judge has dismissed all appeals, and it took 24 years of legal work and petitioning for Kurt to finally be released from prison.”
Gøtzsche also notes the Canadian court system is more considerate of pharmaceutical homicide. For example: “In 2011 a Canadian judge ruled that Prozac induced a 16-year old boy to commit murder; he knifed a friend to death. In another case David Carmichael, who killed his 11-year old son while on antidepressants, was ruled “not criminally responsible on account of a mental disorder,” and today, Carmichael writes and speaks on the dangers of antidepressants.”
….
In the 1990s, school shootings transition from being very rare to a frequent facet of American life. As this timeline overlaps with the entrance of SSRIs to the US market, many articles have evaluated the link between mass shootings and psychiatric medications. I will quote a one of the more comprehensive summaries (written in 2013) which attempted to analyze all known mass shootings:
•Eric Harris age 17 (first on Zoloft then Luvox) and Dylan Klebold aged 18 (Columbine school shooting in Littleton, Colorado), killed 12 students and one teacher and wounded 23 others, before killing themselves. Klebold’s medical records have never been made available to the public. [A detailed summary of the clear contribution of the psychiatric medication's to their mass shootings can be found here].
Drug companies knew the dangers of their drugs during their trials, but they covered it up with the help from our regulatory agencies.
Worth a read to see why the jabs have been allowed to kill and injure millions with no consequences for big pharma or the regulators. Remember what after Rockefeller created the WHO prescription drugs were given priority over natural remedies. And we are seeing the consequences of it.
With these drugs, because of a courageous whistleblower (John Virapen) and documents released in court, it is possible to gain an intimate understanding of how these companies operate and the specific forms of fraud they commit.
Extensive bribery, deliberate falsification of clinical trail data, the highest leaders within the government being quarterbacks for these drugs and the FDA doing everything it could to conceal adverse events has been proven to have occurred for the SSRIs. The key point can be gotten from that summary, but to further understand what happened with the COVID medications and vaccines, I also believe there is significant value and understanding exactly what happened behind the scenes with the SSRIs. If there is an interest in the comments, that will be the second part of this article (I have significantly more to write than I have time to, so I'm trying to focus on the topics both I and the readers deem important.).
I first learned about regulatory capture during Bush’s tenure when people from the drug enforcement agency were caught having a drug party overseas and some had been snorting cocaine off of people’s body parts. Remember that? I don’t remember what happened to them, but if anyone does please spill.
Look at how the EPA allows big farma to poison our environment and if it’s especially dangerous to kids so what?
Prior to the Covid vaccinations, psychiatric medications were the mass prescribed medication that had the worst risk to benefit ratio on the market. In addition to rarely providing benefit to patients, there are a wide range of severe complications that commonly result from psychiatric medications. Likewise, I and many colleagues believe the widespread adoption of psychotropic drugs has distorted the cognition of the demographic of the country which frequently utilizes them (which to some extent stratifies by political orientation) and has created a wide range of detrimental shifts in our society.
Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) have a similar primary mechanism of action to cocaine. SSRIs blocks the reuptake of Serotonin, SNRIs, also commonly prescribed block the reuptake of Serotonin and Norepinephrine (henceforth “SSRI refers to both SSRI and SNRI), and Cocaine blocks the reuptake of Serotonin, Norepinephrine and Dopamine. SSRIs (and SNRIs) were originally used as anti-depressants, then gradually had their use marketed into other areas and along the way have amassed a massive body count.
Once the first SSRI entered the market in 1988, Prozac quickly distinguished itself as a particularly dangerous medications and after nine years, the FDA received 39,000 adverse event reports for Prozac, a number far greater than for any other drug. This included hundreds of suicides, atrocious violent crimes, hostility and aggression, psychosis, confusion, distorted thinking, convulsions, amnesia and sexual dysfunction (longterm or permanent sexual dysfunction is one of the most commonly reported side effects from anti-depressants, which is ironic given that the medication is supposed to make you less, not more depressed).
SSRI homicides are common, and a website exists that has compiled thousands upon thousands of documented occurrences. As far as I know (there are most likely a few exceptions), in all cases where a mass school shooting has happened, and it was possible to know the medical history of the shooter, the shooter was taking a psychiatric medication that was known for causing these behavioral changes. After each mass shooting, memes illustrating this topic typically circulate online, and the recent events in Texas are no exception.
See website for the list of shooters and what drug they were on when they did the deed. I was given no warnings about the side effects that came with this wonder drug and it’s not surprising that the FDA did absolutely nothing as the bodies stacked up. Look at how long they allowed OxyContin to destroy lives across the country whilst pharma execs made tons of money. Congress also sat on their asses and watched it happen. But I guess it’s easier to blame the guns for the mass killings instead of going up against their owners who funnel their profits back to them.
Kids who have too much energy are given powerful drugs and gawd only knows what their long term effects will be.
I was prescribed Prozac for depression in the 80's and it kicked me into a manic mode. But even worse was the suicide ideation that popped out of the blue. I’d be driving to work and up popped the idea that I should drive my car into the bridge supports and other weird ways to end my life.
up
4 users have voted.
—
There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?
makes the non-response response look even worse. From the time the first officers (Uvalde PD, three) arrived and entered the school at 11:35am followed by 3 more then one local deputy sheriff (total of 7 officers), until the time a total of 19 officers standing outside the classroom entered -- 12:50pm -- I count 75 minutes required before the courageous officers decided to go in, after getting the key from the school janitor.
Meanwhile, per some 911 calls from a 4th grade student calling from inside the classroom, it appears some of her fellow students were still alive inside, presumably some badly injured and in need of immediate medical attention, possibly some who were unharmed but then shot as the police stood outside and did nothing. https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2022-05-25/timeline-of-texas-...
Comments
Ah, I gave it
4 minutes -- do I have to listen to the whole thing? Of course it's nonsense. The gun loving Right want to talk about anything other than sensible gun control measures like reviving the national assault weapons ban and limiting magazine capacity and related. They are a bit on the defensive about this latest mass shooting, it's so egregious on many levels.
The Fox above is very similar to what is being spewed in weak defense of lax TX gun laws on social media platforms. More guns, teachers w guns, barbed wire around schools, turn them into lockdown prisons, etc. Though I hadn't heard the one about declaring martial law. That's funny.
And the local cops who initially, eventually responded -- whether or not they were told to stand down until backup arrived, they were complicit in their cowardly ways. The way to handle these things, I'm told by the experts, has been well known in law enforcement since Columbine in 1999 -- get in quickly, don't wait for backup, get to the shooter with whatever you have, however few you have. Police are there to protect and serve, not to take the safe route so they can be sure to return home safe at the end of the day. If they wanted a job free of risk, they should have joined up to become librarians.
Heh, I see that
KB makes the exact same point as my last one, so good for her. Slight objection to KB-Saager team presentation is they should have read from a written timeline of key events as we know them to now, rather than winging it while leaving out key facts.
Such as, the grandmother reported to 911 she had been shot, the school was only a mile away and authorities should have been notified to lock down the school. When the suspect crashed his car in a ditch near the school, he then shot at 2 people standing across the way at a funeral parlor. Did they too call 911? Would be strange if they didn't.
He then proceeded to the school where apparently he spent some 10 minutes outside with his rifle and backpack, meanwhile the police station was only 1.2 miles away in that tiny town. 3-4 minutes to get there if they had only acted or were informed immediately. There are likely more timeline questions to ask. And what Saager should have emphasized at the end was the need for an independent investigation of the entire response, not just an investigation. Otherwise, good enough presentation of the situation.
It's the reason they have a job
If the cops don't want to risk their lives when babies are being slaughtered, then they should quit.
BTW, I've read that the police budget is 40% of the city's budget. Plus they had an armed security guard.
So how many "good guys with a gun" do we need?
Yes, the tiny Uvalde
school district had spent some $435k this year on school security, and did have a detailed emergency plan in place including school security guards. Obviously, leaving outer and inner doors unlocked is going to hamper such measures.
Here's a nifty piece summarizing the 12 times police authorities have changed their story on the shooting in the past 2 days. https://www.insider.com/texas-police-change-timeline-of-uvalde-shooting-...
Good thing that congress threw millions in military equipment
to the cops huh? Seems that the only time they are Jonny on the spot ready to attack people is when we peasants get too uppity and think that we can protest our government for redress. They are always willing to beat up unarmed civilians and shoot their non lethal weapons at them to inflict maximum damage.
Now that Covid is making a return Biden has told states to use any unspent money for Covid on the cops. What a swell guy.
Here’s a picture of the cops outside the school…
There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?
Harris is unburdened of speaking going forward.
Here’s a ghastly story about cops using a taser
On an unarmed person and setting him and other cops on fire.
https://libertarianinstitute.org/articles/deputies-set-motorcyclist-and-...
Cops yelled get on the ground and deployed the taser at the same time. Unfortunately the guy was pumping gas in his motorcycle and boom. The cop faces a misdemeanor.
There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?
Harris is unburdened of speaking going forward.
I'm beginning to think
that solving the issue of gun violence would take a very minor change to the legal system. Here's my modest proposal:
Anyone convicted of the commission of a crime (any crime, down to and including jaywalking), while in possession of a firearm, should be given one automatic appeal. At the end of said appeal, if their conviction is upheld, the perpetrator should be killed by the bailiff with a single gunshot to the head, right then and there, in open court. Finis. Short, sharp, and messily tidy.
Cops are specifically included, perhaps especially so, in the abovementioned "anyone". Robert Heinlein said "An armed society is a polite society". Well, this takes it right to that level- and enforces it. The constitution says everybody can have whatever arsenal they want, and that isn't changing any time soon. However, it makes no mention whatsoever of there being any right to not be immediately annihilated by the state for one's own stupidity. If you want to carry, you'd damned well better be polite, or know that you are absolutely in the right, before brandishing that hogleg in the heat of the moment.
After a few thousand people got their brains scattered over a few thousand courtrooms for relatively minor offenses while packing heat, maybe people would start to take things seriously. It'd suck to be one of them, of course, but it would at least let things suck for them every bit as much as it would suck for their potential victims. The victims shouldn't have all the fun, amirite?
A very minor change. Just a thought, since the problem is clearly not going to solve itself. Your mileage may vary, of course.
Twice bitten, permanently shy.
the do unto others ragtime song
perhaps would have more meaning
if it was done unto themselves
you wanna pack heat to feel in power?
then face the band and show your true colors
shoot your way outta that one cowboy
violence and death at the end of a gun
after all is still a cowards way out
Live by the gun,
die by the gun. Period, end of statement, full stop. Makes perfect sense. The right to keep and bear arms is in the constitution. The right to get publically *dead* by fucking up with your goddamned gun should be in there as well. After all, the rest of us already have that “right”: gun people can freedom us to death at any moment. Simple. Biblical, even, if you think about it. The whole world is already blind, anyway. Tit for tat.
No smiley.
Twice bitten, permanently shy.
Seems that the only time they
All too often the case. However there are notable exceptions:
Questions:
How many more kids might have died if he hadn't taken the initiative?
Why did the barber have a shotgun at hand?
What would have been the consequences of there *not* being a weapon handy?
Apparently, Alvarado did get police weapons and a radio before going in with two other officers,
but no helmet, body armor, etc. - and very nearly fatal consequences for himself:
Nice story
but a little less than it's cracked up to be and a little confusing in parts. Would he have responded the same way if his wife and daughter had not been in jeopardy at the school? Did the barber's gun make any difference in the end as he availed himself at the site with weapons from law enforcement?
Are we to make a big hero of the guy just bc he lacked body armor and helmet? Isn't it still the job of law enforcement to protect and serve, to accept risk as part of their job? Or are we to make something special of them just because they are not fully equipped to the hilt? Is the moral of the story supposed to be that if only more weapons were easily accessible in all public places for good guys to grab there would be less violent crime?
That Secular Talk vid...
(I made it through the whole thing) has got to be the biggest pile of crap I've ever encountered on You Tube - if I ever saw worse it must have been traumatic enough that I've blocked out the memory.
Patronizing, out of context distortion, lies and deflection front to back. Everything to deflect from the manifold ills of society and place all the blame on evil GUNS. While presenting no evidence at all that the various 'common sense reforms' being put forward would do anything other than advance state power at the expense of responsible people.
OK, maybe some of the measures might result in some modest reduction in gun deaths. But just because something is effective doesn't mean it's the wise course of action - burning down your house will quite definitively solve a mold or termite problem. However...
- When Christianity is mentioned, the ST guy's response is that America is 70% Christian but there is still gun violence and would be if the country was 100% Christian. But it's a fair question to ask, how many Christians (or Sikhs/Buddhists,Moslems...)are committing violence compared to others? What about looking at where the violence is coming from by age/ethnicity/gender? Or do we not want to go there, even though they are obvious avenues of enquiry?
- He dismisses/ridicules the importance of imparting basic moral values to children - like failure to do so is not going to have a profound impact?
- He ridicules even common-sense suggestions such as that maybe it would be a good idea to keep the back door locked. Or the idea of a single, controlled entrance to school, saying it flies in the face of fire regulations. As if there cannot be multiple emergency EXITS.
- He dismisses the idea that the proliferation of psych drugs can be a contributing factor to the problem. Even though it's a lot harder to find mass shootings where they are *not* involved than those where they are. ssristories.org
- He ridicules the idea of arming teachers or administrators, even though there are cases on record where school shootings have been stopped by such.
- He dismisses the importance of helping kids develop interpersonal relationships and the negative impact that Covid lockdowns and social media have had on kids in particular.
Not everyone is so dismissive:
source
It's worth remembering that Ramos ten years ago was likely just as cute and full of potential as the kids he ended up killing - and worth taking a serious look at how he came to the point of doing it.
Unedited Tucker C. - for a far better-spent fifteen minutes:
A uniquely American experience
All the things you mention are common to western societies. The unfettered access to firearms make those issues lethal in the US. Side stepping that issue is really ignoring the elephant in the room. This is the point of the video that you criticized.
If 'unfettered access'
to guns is the critical issue, how do you account for the vast differences in gun violence between different areas and between different age/gender/ethnic demographics *within* the US?
Consider, say, Vermont or OtC's rural Texas neighborhood - high rates of gun ownership and liberal gun laws - but where is the rampant violence? How do those places compare with Chicago, Baltimore, NYC, LA...? All of the latter with strict gun laws but far higher levels of gun violence.
Again, if guns are the overriding cause of gun violence then please feel free to explain the vast difference in violence levels between Vermont and Chicago given that there are plenty of guns in both places.
Or do you think that just possibly there are other important factors involved? And that maybe the (vast majority of) responsible people who choose to possess guns should not have to suffer yet more intrusion into their lives because of the actions of a small (but dangerous) minority who behave irresponsibly?
Go ahead
Stick your head in the sand and enjoy your weapons
OK, I'll take that
to mean that you are unable to form a coherent response to any of the quite reasonable questions that I posed.
Got it.
It seems kind of
obvious to observe that bc of our nationwide patchwork of vastly different gun laws, criminals and those intent on getting a gun can just go elsewhere in the state or cross state lines to where the gun laws are lax. Such is the case with Chicago, where a study showed that nearly 60% of the guns used in violent crime could be traced to sources outside of the city and outside the state. https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/nation-world/national/article2618...
Other issues would include Vermont's long tradition of hunting and sporting activities creating a specific benign gun culture, it's much lower poverty rate and much lower population density compared to places like Chicago. Vermont however is above average in its suicide rate, and most of those are committed with their handy firearms, a little like Switzerland in that respect.
There are responses to most of those questions
-
I think the history of Christianity in this country answers your question. And more of other religions are not really an option.
No, more religion is not going to solve anything.
How would you implement this? How would you even measure this? And who's morals are these?
I think that it's a joke. Unless you want to turn all of our schools into virtual prisons.
And then there are churches, nightclubs, grocery stores, etc.
Are we going to turn every building into a fort, before we ever even consider gun laws?
I think that it's a horrible idea. First of all, what teacher wants that? Second, how many teachers are trained for this?
Since school shooting were epidemic before COVID then we can rule that out a significant cause.
Mass shootings in America are far and away an outlier in the developed world.
To deny that the proliferation of guns isn't a primary cause of that is just denying reality. Especially when we don't even have universal background checks.
However, there are also lots of guns in Canada. Not nearly as many, but a significant amount. They also have a similar culture. So what's different between the U.S. and Canada?
For starters, universal health care. One part of universal health care is mental health services.
It's not like we don't have a mental health crisis in the U.S., yet no one, particularly Republicans, want to do anything about it.
Then there is our constant state of war. Violence overseas sometimes comes home.
Another outlier in this country is our justice system. Between locking up an excessive percentage of our population, treating them like animals, and throwing up every possible roadblock to prevent them from assimilating back into society.
That's just off the top of my head.
What role does antidepressants play in mass shootings?
The Evidence for Antidepressants Causing Mass Shootings
See website for the list of shooters and what drug they were on when they did the deed. I was given no warnings about the side effects that came with this wonder drug and it’s not surprising that the FDA did absolutely nothing as the bodies stacked up. Look at how long they allowed OxyContin to destroy lives across the country whilst pharma execs made tons of money. Congress also sat on their asses and watched it happen. But I guess it’s easier to blame the guns for the mass killings instead of going up against their owners who funnel their profits back to them.
Kids who have too much energy are given powerful drugs and gawd only knows what their long term effects will be.
I was prescribed Prozac for depression in the 80's and it kicked me into a manic mode. But even worse was the suicide ideation that popped out of the blue. I’d be driving to work and up popped the idea that I should drive my car into the bridge supports and other weird ways to end my life.
There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?
Harris is unburdened of speaking going forward.
As usual big pharma gets to escape from the consequences
of their deadly products while their victims pay the price.
Drug companies knew the dangers of their drugs during their trials, but they covered it up with the help from our regulatory agencies.
Worth a read to see why the jabs have been allowed to kill and injure millions with no consequences for big pharma or the regulators. Remember what after Rockefeller created the WHO prescription drugs were given priority over natural remedies. And we are seeing the consequences of it.
ETA this video from a pharma whistleblower.
I first learned about regulatory capture during Bush’s tenure when people from the drug enforcement agency were caught having a drug party overseas and some had been snorting cocaine off of people’s body parts. Remember that? I don’t remember what happened to them, but if anyone does please spill.
Look at how the EPA allows big farma to poison our environment and if it’s especially dangerous to kids so what?
There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?
Harris is unburdened of speaking going forward.
Updated timeline
makes the non-response response look even worse. From the time the first officers (Uvalde PD, three) arrived and entered the school at 11:35am followed by 3 more then one local deputy sheriff (total of 7 officers), until the time a total of 19 officers standing outside the classroom entered -- 12:50pm -- I count 75 minutes required before the courageous officers decided to go in, after getting the key from the school janitor.
Meanwhile, per some 911 calls from a 4th grade student calling from inside the classroom, it appears some of her fellow students were still alive inside, presumably some badly injured and in need of immediate medical attention, possibly some who were unharmed but then shot as the police stood outside and did nothing. https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2022-05-25/timeline-of-texas-...