US Journalists shot dead live on air [MOD WARNING in opening post]

Overheal

Brian2011 wrote: »

Oh right, but surely u wouldn't get far before dropping dead.

That depends entirely on the type of gunshot wound: you could survive anywhere from milliseconds after the shot (direct blow to neocortex) to hours, even days after the shot if shot in a non-vital location, which even in the center of mass there are a lot of places you could be shot and still function nominally for a given period of time after the attack. After all, organ failure isn't instant death, its a critical condition. And that assumes that you hit an organ; most of the shot could have been absorbed during impact with a rib or something.

stephenl15

pmasterson95 wrote: »

Theres a thing called adrenaline Brian. When you go to big boy school you will learn about it in a class called "science".
Apologies if 2011 isnt actually your birth year but the posts so far seem to indicate so.

Overheal wrote: »

Your body excretes a natural hormone when you're threatened, called Adrenaline. perhaps you've heard of it?

Armchair experts..

Ahh here there's no need for that superiority complex

fryup

Brass Eye brilliantly lampooned America's gun culture

**Watch it Here**

Niemoj

Guns are illegal EU wide and sure gun crime still exists but compare those numbers to America and see the difference. I believe a condition of joining is banning gun ownership and the EU is bigger too I think so it's a culture thing not size.

If the president can't really do anything then could they not try to campaign for reform whereby slowly, year by year that guns are removed from the media and then eventually ban them altogether. I've no idea how that would actually work but worth a shot huh?

mzungu

Niemoj wrote: »

Guns are illegal EU wide and sure gun crime still exists but compare those numbers to America and see the difference. I believe a condition of joining is banning gun ownership and the EU is bigger too I think so it's a culture thing not size.

If the president can't really do anything then could they not try to campaign for reform whereby slowly, year by year that guns are removed from the media and then eventually ban them altogether. I've no idea how that would actually work but worth a shot huh?

Its far too late for that approach. The genie is out of the bottle and there is no way the US public would accept having to hand back their firearms. Plus, it would be pretty much unenforceable to boot.

RichardCeann

Niemoj wrote: »

Guns are illegal EU wide

No they are not. Czech Republic, for example, has very loose gun laws.

martingriff

Niemoj wrote: »

Guns are illegal EU wide and sure gun crime still exists but compare those numbers to America and see the difference. I believe a condition of joining is banning gun ownership and the EU is bigger too I think so it's a culture thing not size.

If the president can't really do anything then could they not try to campaign for reform whereby slowly, year by year that guns are removed from the media and then eventually ban them altogether. I've no idea how that would actually work but worth a shot huh?

But why ban them altogether just new tougher laws are needed. You don'y see Canada or Switzerland war mongering. Even Australia who restricted there laws still have a portion of there population with guns. What is needed is a good federal law for all to follow and then the states can build off them. It does not have to be one extreme or the othere

Notavirus.exe

Niemoj wrote: »

Guns are illegal EU wide

Rifles and shotguns are legal in Ireland. That is as long as the Gardai accept your request for a gun license.

DeadHand

Niemoj wrote: »

Guns are illegal EU wide

What? No they're not.

Hundreds of Thousands of legally held guns in Ireland alone, mostly in rural areas.

In the entire EU I'm sure it's in the tens of millions.

Manic Moran

Wompa1 wrote: »

People talked about the Manifesto left by the kid in California that rolled up in a BMW and started shooting.

That incident is interesting for another reason: he actually stabbed more people to death than he shot. The discussion, however, quickly turned to gun laws, implying an unwillingness to discuss underlying issues.

CabanSail wrote: »

There was a report here the other day to say that since the gun restrictions imposed in Australia after the Port Arthur massacre there has been a sustained reduction of gun crimes.

It's not rocket science.

Actually, it is. University of Melbourne did a study on the effect of he 96 ban, the PDF is online. https://www.melbourneinstitute.com/downloads/working_paper_series/wp2008n17.pdf

Conclusion was that though the bans appeared to make sense and sated public demand, there was no evidence that the restrictions had any tangible effect on firearm homicide or suicide. Yes, firearms incidents have declined, but it was a trend which had started before then ban.

The other interesting snippet is that their neighbors in New Zealand are quite gun friendly, over a million firearms in a population of four million. No particular issues going on there, so it's an interesting counterpoint in the same general region of the world with fairly similar cultures that firearms are not really the best area of focus,

pmasterson95 wrote: »

I'm sure that lot and the gun fanatics will just say that if the reporters had guns they'd be fine. Its not having a gun that got them killed

No, we are not. This is one case where it likely would not have made any difference. Unlike Chattanooga last month where a naval officer broke regulations to bring his firearm to work, shot back, and survived. (To the question of whether or not he will be charged for bringing a weapon to work)

The ability to defend oneself is not a panacea for crime. It is a last ditch defense for an individual when all other possibilities have failed, and, like any last ditch defense, does not always work.

I own eight firearms, all of different types and calibres for different purposes. What does it matter? I can only use one at a time anyway.

Heckler

Notavirus.exe wrote: »

Rifles and shotguns are legal in Ireland. That is as long as the Gardai accept your request for a gun license.

So are hanguns. The only way you can get a licence for one is if you're a member of a target shooting club. As of, i think, 2008 no new licences are issued for centerfire handguns. If you had one before then you can renew your licence. Otherwise you are limited to .22 calibre firearms.

Little CuChulainn

Anyone see the front page of the Sun? They had a photo of the gun pointing at the crew from the first person view posted but they appear to have photoshopped in some flames coming out of the barrel.

cdeb

Saw that alright. Classy stuff as expected.

And yet people keep buying it.

Notavirus.exe

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Anyone see the front page of the Sun? They had a photo of the gun pointing at the crew from the first person view posted but they appear to have photoshopped in some flames coming out of the barrel.

What's wrong with that?

Oryx

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Anyone see the front page of the Sun? They had a photo of the gun pointing at the crew from the first person view posted but they appear to have photoshopped in some flames coming out of the barrel.

They spoke about the headlines on the radio and it was assumed that was real. Disgusting.

Little CuChulainn

Notavirus.exe wrote: »

What's wrong with that?

That's not when he shot them.

That newspaper cover was absolutely disgusting - Photoshopping a photo to make it more dramatic. Surely that's in breach of some regulation?

Sunflower 27

The boyfriend is literally everywhere, wtf?

This quote from him makes me want to hurl. I really wish someone close to him would tell him to take a few (maybe 20) steps backwards now. He is making the tragedy about him and it is actually very weird.

“ I will be speaking about our love together, which burned white hot for only a short time, but was a kind of love that I was so privileged and lucky to have had”

- Chris Hurst, WDBJ anchor and boyfriend of victim Alison Parker

Sunflower 27

Deleted User wrote: »

That newspaper cover was absolutely disgusting - Photoshopping a photo to make it more dramatic. Surely that's in breach of some regulation?

Agree, it was appalling. Anything to sell papers, eh!

Thing is that they're purposefully falsifying information, by placing that muzzle flash there.

EDIT: It is also in breach of the press code of conduct.

1.2 When a significant inaccuracy, misleading statement or distorted report or picture has been published, it shall be corrected promptly and with due prominence.

Sunflower 27

Deleted User wrote: »

Thing is that they're purposefully falsifying information, by placing that muzzle flash there.

EDIT: It is also in breach of the press code of conduct.

Regardless of the picture, it won't bring them back and the photo has already been distributed. Not much that can be done about it now.

It was a very creepy thing to do, and without doubt in poor taste for the families and friends of the deceased, but no point getting all het up about it. It wont change a thing.

Even if the paper apologised, what difference does it make?

shampoosuicide

pmasterson95 wrote: »

Theres a thing called adrenaline Brian. When you go to big boy school you will learn about it in a class called "science".
Apologies if 2011 isnt actually your birth year but the posts so far seem to indicate so.

there's no real need to be so condescending, it's not as if he's spouting a conspiracy theory. also it's sadly not necessary to watch a fictional movie to see someone get shot (and how their body reacts) these days. all you have to do is type 'police shooting' into youtube

edit: i thought it was unusual when i watched it too, and presumed he'd missed her.

Sunflower 27

Deleted User wrote: »

Photoshopping a photo to make it more dramatic.

Happens all the time.

Sunflower 27

shampoosuicide wrote: »

there's no real need to be so condescending, it's not as if he's spouting a conspiracy theory. also it's sadly not necessary to watch a fictional movie to see someone get shot (and how their body reacts) these days. all you have to do is type 'police shooting' into youtube

Agreed, clearly pmasterson95 is an expert on everything and has never asked any questions or questioned anything in his life. :rolleyes:

jobbridge4life

Deleted User wrote: »

That newspaper cover was absolutely disgusting - Photoshopping a photo to make it more dramatic. Surely that's in breach of some regulation?

It was the Sun... if someone needed this cover to make them realise that the sun is disgusting then they need some enlightening.

Samaris

Yup, having seen that headline and the photoshopped blast...the Sun really sinks lower and lower...

Kev W

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

The boyfriend is literally everywhere, wtf?

This quote from him makes me want to hurl. I really wish someone close to him would tell him to take a few (maybe 20) steps backwards now. He is making the tragedy about him and it is actually very weird.

“ I will be speaking about our love together, which burned white hot for only a short time, but was a kind of love that I was so privileged and lucky to have had”

- Chris Hurst, WDBJ anchor and boyfriend of victim Alison Parker

Yeah, weird how he keeps banging on about his murdered fiance like that. Yeah guy, we get it, you're sad.

Yakult

What ever about the gun problem, which I can't see going away, they need to start going after ammunition. Limit the amount you can purchase and charge $800-$1000 per bullet. Once again, what a waste of life..

shampoosuicide

Kev W wrote: »

Yeah, weird how he keeps banging on about his murdered fiance like that. Yeah guy, we get it, you're sad.

i've noticed this a lot on places like reddit lately, people getting jumped on for how they choose to grieve. this poor guy's fiance didn't just die, she's had her last moments broadcasted across the media and internet, plastered across the front of gutter papers like a comic strip. maybe he's trying to counter that with something positive. it's amazing that of all the things to get angry/annoyed about in this situation that he, or how he chooses to grieve, even registers.

Manic Moran

Maybe he figures this was the best way to memorialize her? To get her out to as many people as possible while they still care, and before the next thing shows up on the news cycle.

Speaking of news cycle, an article from two days ago just crossed my desk. The chief of police of Detroit has been in the news for two reasons. Firstly, he's the first chief of police to have any great success at lowering the ridiculous crime rate recently, and secondly, because part of his policy was to reverse his predecessors and not just stop prohibiting people carrying firearms, he actively called upon the private citizenry to arm themselves. In addition to crime rates in general going down, home invasion rates plummeted the first year by over 30%, and have dropped a further 18% his second year. As part of an overall package of measures, it would appear that more legal guns on the streets are, indeed, not a particular problem.

Manic Moran

Yakult wrote: »

What ever about the gun problem, which I can't see going away, they need to start going after ammunition. Limit the amount you can purchase and charge $800-$1000 per bullet. Once again, what a waste of life..

Would fall afoul of an immediate legal barrier, as an effective prohibition of the exercise of a constitutional right. Small taxes, like 5 cents a round, seem to be passing legal muster so far.

Witcher

Manic Moran wrote: »

Would fall afoul of an immediate legal barrier, as an effective prohibition of the exercise of a constitutional right. Small taxes, like 5 cents a round, seem to be passing legal muster so far.

That's actually a lot, even with the prices being lower there, 2.50 extra on a box of .22.

Wibbs

shampoosuicide wrote: »

i've noticed this a lot on places like reddit lately, people getting jumped on for how they choose to grieve. this poor guy's fiance didn't just die, she's had her last moments broadcasted across the media and internet, plastered across the front of gutter papers like a comic strip. maybe he's trying to counter that with something positive. it's amazing that of all the things to get angry/annoyed about in this situation that he, or how he chooses to grieve, even registers.

+ 1000. The poor man is in shock FFS, obsessively talking about the object of that shock is often how folks deal with grief and emotional insult, it's just these days the interwebs amplify that.

Manic Moran wrote: »

Maybe he figures this was the best way to memorialize her? To get her out to as many people as possible while they still care, and before the next thing shows up on the news cycle.

Speaking of news cycle, an article from two days ago just crossed my desk. The chief of police of Detroit has been in the news for two reasons. Firstly, he's the first chief of police to have any great success at lowering the ridiculous crime rate recently, and secondly, because part of his policy was to reverse his predecessors and not just stop prohibiting people carrying firearms, he actively called upon the private citizenry to arm themselves. In addition to crime rates in general going down, home invasion rates plummeted the first year by over 30%, and have dropped a further 18% his second year. As part of an overall package of measures, it would appear that more legal guns on the streets are, indeed, not a particular problem.

Funny enough I'd be behind that, in the case of the US anyway. At this stage the horse has long bolted on any sort of tightening and prohibition. Trying that would just make hardliners did their heels in and the nutters would always be able to source firearms as there are so many of them already in circulation. We can debate the rights and wrongs all the day long, but practical solutions are what count. Plus as it stands, the death/murder rate from firearms in the US has been steadily decreasing overall.

Notavirus.exe

Kev W wrote: »

Yeah, weird how he keeps banging on about his murdered fiance like that. Yeah guy, we get it, you're sad.

Another case of "poor me".

Where is he doing this? I'm not following any news channels.

custard gannet

Again, just wondering if anyone has found the fax he sent to the news broadcasters available to view online in full.....

Sunflower 27

Notavirus.exe wrote: »

Another case of "poor me".

Where is he doing this? I'm not following any news channels.

There is a video of him doing an interview and showing a personal scrapbook she made of photos and words for him. Her personal photos and heartfelt words.

I don't think the world media is the place for them, but that is just my opinion.

She died in front of the world, that is bad enough. Not everything has to be in the public domain.

custard gannet

custard gannet wrote: »

Again, just wondering if anyone has found the fax he sent to the news broadcasters available to view online in full.....

Yea, because what we need is for these people's manifestos to be spread. This is the kind of thing that really needs to be stopped.

beks101

The TV station's general manager released a statement outlining Flanagan's employment history with WDBJ7. Makes for a chilling read

Statement about Vester Flanagan's employment history at WDBJ7

Vester Flanagan was employed by WDBJ7 as a reporter between March 2012 and February 2013.Flanagan applied for the position using the air name of Bryce Williams. As part of WDBJ's standard protocol his background check resulted in positive references.

Flanagan’s job performance and his interaction with his co-workers led his manager to place Flanagan on a succession of performance improvement plans. Only slight improvement was noted each time.

Flanagan was placed on a final warning in December 2012 for failure to check his facts in a news story and, generally, for poor news judgment.

In January 2013 he accused a photographer of making trouble for him by questioning a decision to go on private property in pursuit of a story. At that point, he raised some concerns with HR of perceived unfairness, which were immediately investigated and found to be without merit.

Shortly after that, he confronted an anchor who was assigned to review one of his scripts.

At that point, management made the determination that he needed to be separated from the company.
On February 1, two news managers and the HR business partner notified Flanagan of the decision to terminate his employment. He reacted angrily, telling them that they would have to call the police because he was going to “make a stink and it was going to be in the headlines.”

The HR rep called 911. Employees had been notified to give Flanagan space to clean out his desk. At his desk, Flanagan attempted to reach the corporate CEO, without success. At that point, police arrive and escorted him from the building. On the way out, he handed a wooden cross to the news director and said, “You’ll need this.” He also made a derogatory comment to Adam Ward as he left.

The only contact between WDBJ7 and Flanagan after that were routine calls to HR about termination benefits.

Shortly thereafter, Flanagan filed a complaint of harassment and discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. WDBJ7 responded that his claims of mistreatment were unfounded and the EEOC denied the claim. He later filed a civil action in local court in Roanoke. That action was dismissed.

In two and half years since the termination, WDBJ7 employees reported seeing Flanagan in public places and there were no confrontations. He was never seen following employees and he did not attempt to enter the offices of WDBJ7.

All claims of mistreatment were investigated by senior management, by the HR representative and legal counsel. All investigations determined that no reasonable person would have taken any of the cited instances as discrimination or harassment.

Sunflower 27

beks101 wrote: »

The TV station's general manager released a statement outlining Flanagan's employment history with WDBJ7. Makes for a chilling read

As per the end if the article, he was clearly not a reasonable and normal person though. He murdered two people in cold blood live on air. These are not the actions if a reasonable man.

Something was said that he took a certain way and that was his justification for doing what he did.

Sunflower 27

shampoosuicide wrote: »

i've noticed this a lot on places like reddit lately, people getting jumped on for how they choose to grieve. this poor guy's fiance didn't just die, she's had her last moments broadcasted across the media and internet, plastered across the front of gutter papers like a comic strip. maybe he's trying to counter that with something positive. it's amazing that of all the things to get angry/annoyed about in this situation that he, or how he chooses to grieve, even registers.

Have you seen any interviews with him?

Overheal

Kev W wrote: »

Yeah, weird how he keeps banging on about his murdered fiance like that. Yeah guy, we get it, you're sad.

My dad was very out of character when his spouse died. Like he went from 'never reveal you have feelings other than rage' to crying out to the moors like Heathcliff.

Overheal

Manic Moran wrote: »

Maybe he figures this was the best way to memorialize her? To get her out to as many people as possible while they still care, and before the next thing shows up on the news cycle.

Speaking of news cycle, an article from two days ago just crossed my desk. The chief of police of Detroit has been in the news for two reasons. Firstly, he's the first chief of police to have any great success at lowering the ridiculous crime rate recently, and secondly, because part of his policy was to reverse his predecessors and not just stop prohibiting people carrying firearms, he actively called upon the private citizenry to arm themselves. In addition to crime rates in general going down, home invasion rates plummeted the first year by over 30%, and have dropped a further 18% his second year. As part of an overall package of measures, it would appear that more legal guns on the streets are, indeed, not a particular problem.

Interesting. What were the other correlating metrics (homocides per capita, total crime rate, etc)?

beks101

Yeah I saw the interview with Chris Hurst on CNN. He seems numb tbh. Preachy and on autopilot and nervously clutching that photo album. He's also an anchor so his day job is the outward, confident, extroverted face he seems to be wearing to the world. Also with the prolific tweeting. He's probably using it as a coping mechanism.

I don't think it's on anyone to police someone else's grief and what is or is not an appropriate reaction to such a horrifying event.

custard gannet

Deleted User wrote: »

Yea, because what we need is for these people's manifestos to be spread. This is the kind of thing that really needs to be stopped.

I'd sooner see what it says than have the news tell me what it says.

Sunflower 27

beks101 wrote: »

Yeah I saw the interview with Chris Hurst on CNN. He seems numb tbh. Preachy and on autopilot and nervously clutching that photo album. He's also an anchor so his day job is the outward, confident, extroverted face he seems to be wearing to the world. Also with the prolific tweeting. He's probably using it as a coping mechanism.

I don't think it's on anyone to police someone else's grief and what is or is not an appropriate reaction to such a horrifying event.

Policing? It is an observation.

Fair enough, that's your opinion. I think showing her personal things is highly disrespectful. She was clearly a private person as they had kept their relationship under wraps.

Turning up to an interview with a scrapbook is downright intrusive.

moc moc a moc

Manic Moran wrote: »

Small taxes, like 5 cents a round, seem to be passing legal muster so far.

The value of a human life in America:

5 cents.

Overheal

moc moc a moc wrote: »

The value of a human life in America:

5 cents.

Sure.

Matt Holck

carrying trigger devices that can kill someone without reason is taking unnecessary risk and reckless behavior #ferguson

Ferguson Police
Put the gun down #ferguson #peace #NSA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIvHd76EdQ4

BettePorter

I agree the reaction of the boyf is a little (lot) off! Obviously anyone in such a job has a certain amount of ego and ambition ... its almost as if hes seeing this as his biggest scoop rather than the death of the love of his life. I get people grieve differently .... but seriously if we didn't already know exactly who the killer was ..... id be red flagging the boyf!

We haven't seen the camera guys fiancee once yet shes been equally bereaved. I think he's being almost crass.

Robsweezie

beks101 wrote:

I don't think it's on anyone to police someone else's grief and what is or is not an appropriate reaction to such a horrifying event.

Exactly, there is no "how to grieve" handbook. it does different things to different people and if he headed off to twitter for support, then that's his way, however strange it may seem.