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

frostyjacks

Strider wrote: »

There was a psychologist kn Sky News after Sandy Hook and he said that people seeking notoriety generally see the coverage of such shootings and are encouraged by it. He said there is normally another shooting within 30 days of a major one such as Sandy Hook as a result of this effect.

Yes, I remember Charlie Brooker doing a piece on media reaction to these sort of shootings.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PezlFNTGWv4

Basically, media should try and make it as localised and boring as possible, otherwise some other lunatic out there will get ideas in their head. But I just know this is going to be played out like some kind of Hollywood movie.

The woman's boyfriend tweeting about her death was bizarre. I can only imagine his agent or someone offered to post something on his behalf to let people know how he was. I can't believe he was sitting tapping away on his phone, checking the WiFi connection etc. at a time like that. The world is going mad.

Call Me Jimmy

Bonkers. What can ye say with any conviction that isn't redundant?

darkpagandeath

lawlolawl wrote: »

Can't wait to get the excuses in.

I find the disconnect in shootings in the USA weird. If it's white on black anything that is said is gospel. Black on white excuses.

RasTa

Here we go.... Most white on black seem to involve the police. This shooting has nothing to do with race

For a change, how about we talk about the victims and not the shooter or gun control in America? I mean.. for once. I don't know many details about them, bar the fact that they were so young - 24 and 27.

Sunflower 27

darkpagandeath wrote: »

No it's not, The shooter tried that approach and got nowhere.

So you know for a fact that no-one made any racist comments at all. No comments at all that could have been perceived by him to be racist. And you know that? Because you were there?

ok.

Nothing can justify what he did. It was a cowardly act and two young lives should never have been taken, but coming on here making out you know details you possibly could not is misleading.

frostyjacks

RasTa wrote: »

Here we go.... Most white on black seem to involve the police. This shooting has nothing to do with race

He sued another TV network for racism before he was asked to leave. Seems he played the race card and lost.

briany

This is a worrying evolution in the spree killer/random shooting phenomenon as well, because he's taken a video from his POV and done the whole social media thing as well. That's crazy to think the next thing will possibly be guys/girls going around taking their own video and possibly be providing their own commentary as they carry out murders, and then live tweeting about it.

That video he took is scary, not only for the "b*tch" utterance, but he holds the gun up at them ready to shoot, while they don't notice and just carry on the interview all sunny and light.

darkpagandeath

RasTa wrote: »

Here we go.... Most white on black seem to involve the police. This shooting has nothing to do with race

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

So you know for a fact that no-one made any racist comments at all. No comments at all that could have been perceived by him to be racist. And you know that? Because you were there?

ok.

Nothing can justify what he did. It was a cowardly act and two young lives should never have been taken, but coming on here making out you know details you possibly could not is misleading.

So the whole fact that the shooter tried the race approach and lost is coincidental ?

pmasterson95

briany wrote: »

This is a worrying evolution in the spree killer/random shooting phenomenon as well, because he's taken a video from his POV and done the whole social media thing as well. That's crazy to think the next thing will possibly be guys/girls going around taking their own video and possibly be providing their own commentary as they carry out murders, and then live tweeting about it.

That video he took is scary, not only for the "b*tch" utterance, but he holds the gun up at them ready to shoot, while they don't notice and just carry on the interview all sunny and light.

Havent seen that version.

Dots1982

namloc1980 wrote: »

What the heck does that mean?

I guess it means that the aftermath of the last mass shooting in the US focused on the perpetrators racist motives and he was white. This shooting also appears to have a race element though more oblique and it's likely it won't be discussed in the media .

Sunflower 27

frostyjacks wrote: »

He sued another TV network for racism before he was asked to leave. Seems he played the race card and lost.

The guy is clearly unhinged. People can 'play the race card' but using that to murder two people.... that's taking play the race card a bit far.

Apparently the cameraman's fiancé saw the whole thing live as she was at the station. Absolutely horrific thing to see and to be helpless to do anything for him.

darkpagandeath

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

The guy is clearly unhinged. People can 'play the race card' but using that to murder two people.... that's taking play the race card a bit far.

Apparently the cameraman's fiancé saw the whole thing live as she was at the station. Absolutely horrific thing to see and to be helpless to do anything for him.

Yet if it was a White cop shooting the race card would be fine.

Sunflower 27

darkpagandeath wrote: »

So the whole fact that the shooter tried the race approach and lost is coincidental ?

What do you know about the race 'approach'? I don't know anything at all. Just that he claimed a racist remark was made. Now, if a remark is said between two people it is very hard to prove if the other person says 'no, I didn't say that'.

wakka12

The older woman being interviewed is also in a critical condition.

RasTa

darkpagandeath wrote: »

So the whole fact that the shooter tried the race approach and lost is coincidental ?

Of course as he knew his victims. He didn't just walk up to two white people and kill them for being white.

He used his own messed up ideals for justification for their killings afterwards by saying they got him fired and were actual racists etc etc and then shot himself.

Sunflower 27

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Yet if it was a White cop shooting the race card would be fine.

Is that what you think? Because that is not what I stated or implied.

darkpagandeath

RasTa wrote: »

Of course as he knew his victims. He didn't just walk up to two white people and kill them for being white.

He used his own messed up ideals for justification for their killings afterwards by saying they got him fired and were actual racists etc etc and then shot himself.

How does one know that ?

RasTa

darkpagandeath wrote: »

How does one know that ?

So you believe he had no vendetta against this person? You see race as the issue and I see a mental health issue. Not sure why you want to but go right ahead. Pointless debating with you.

Eugene Norman

Hard to argue this wasn't a racially motivated attack.

enda1

darkpagandeath wrote: »

How does one know that ?

He tweeted about it for a start

wakka12

Ahh this is so sad , hope the parents weren't watching the broadcasts . Awful to see your son or daughters last moments like that

Sunflower 27

darkpagandeath wrote: »

How does one know that ?

Probably the same way you know a racist remark had nothing to do with what happened.

lawlolawl

Eugene Norman wrote: »

Hard to argue this wasn't a racially motivated attack.

Doesn't count because the perpetrator wasn't a white guy.

Racism is only possible if you are a white male, apparently. I fully expect to be banned for this post.

Samaris

darkpagandeath wrote: »

So let me guess the Racial issue in this one will be swept under the carpet as the wrong Race did the shooting ? The shooter already brought Race into it with accusations to the network bringing the Equal Opportunity Employment Committee to the table. And then happened to shoot a white reporter and a white cameraman.

From the looks of it, race has nothing to do with it. He was a disgruntled ex-employee who happened to be black, the cameraman and reporter were the unfortunate pair that happened to be in his vicinity.

This is not the same as police seeming to shoot a lot more black people than white people in routine or relatively routine stops. To suggest it is is a nasty bit of politicisation of a tragic event.

Somehow though, I'm not surprised.

On the note of the actual shooting, just saw about it now from this thread. Absolutely horrible stuff, and bloody awful for the people back at the station who had to cut it and somehow deal with it, not knowing entirely what had just happened, live on air. Also awful that her fiance and his fiancee were both in the station too.

darkpagandeath

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

Probably the same way you know a racist remark had nothing to do with what happened.

"Alison Made Racist comment" Shooters tweet.

Eugene Norman

Thought experiment.

White guy kills two black employees.
Claims they made racist remarks. Called him cracker (or whatever)

Is that racially motivated.

lawlolawl

Samaris wrote: »

From the looks of it, race has nothing to do with it.

Yeah, that tends to happen once the perpetrator is anything but white.

wakka12

darkpagandeath wrote: »

"Alison Made Racist comment" Shooters tweet.

Why are we even discussing this like what the **** I don't care what she said or how racist it was it doesn't make it anymore okay that he murdered her

Kev W

darkpagandeath wrote: »

"Alison Made Racist comment" Shooters tweet.

Well there we have it. I mean if you can't trust the tweets of a spree killer what can you trust?

darkpagandeath

wakka12 wrote: »

Why are we even discussing this like what the **** I don't care what she said or how racist it was it doesn't make it anymore okay that he murdered her

It does matter as if it was Racially motivated it's a Hate crime.

frostyjacks

Samaris wrote: »

From the looks of it, race has nothing to do with it. He was a disgruntled ex-employee who happened to be black, the cameraman and reporter were the unfortunate pair that happened to be in his vicinity.

Eh? They happened to be in his vicinity? Like this was some tragic accident?

Race seems to be the main factor in this shooting.

darkpagandeath

Kev W wrote: »

Well there we have it. I mean if you can't trust the tweets of a spree killer what can you trust?

I think you will find that tweet would be taken very seriously in a court of law for example.

lawlolawl

darkpagandeath wrote: »

It does matter as if it was Racially motivated it's a Hate crime.

Don't be silly.

Things can only be racially motivated race crimes if white people did them.

shinny

Live stream press conference with Franklin County police: http://abcnews.go.com/live?stream=1

briany

Eugene Norman wrote: »

Thought experiment.

White guy kills two black employees.
Claims they made racist remarks. Called him cracker (or whatever)

Is that racially motivated.

Counter thought experiment.

Fat guy kills two skinny employees.
Claims they made remarks about his size. Said he should just eat rice crackers (or whatever)

Is that size motivated.

Eugene Norman

briany wrote: »

Counter thought experiment.

Fat guy kills two skinny employees.
Claims they made remarks about his size. Said he should just eat rice crackers (or whatever)

Is that size motivated.

Surely. Absolutely. Most definitely.

But you didn't answer my thought experiment except with a question. Try again.

Sunflower 27

darkpagandeath wrote: »

I think you will find that tweet would be taken very seriously in a court of law for example.

Were you not saying a few pages back that race had nothing to do with it?

You skimmed a few news stories online and then came on here sprouting that this was not about race. You have NO idea what motivated that man to do what he did. Suggesting otherwise is laughable.

darkpagandeath

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

Were you not saying a few pages back that race had nothing to do with it?

You skimmed a few news stories online and then came on here sprouting that this was not about race. You have NO idea what motivated that man to do what he did. Suggesting otherwise is laughable.

On the live stream they refuse to comment on a Racial component.

FatherTed

Dead

(CNN)[Breaking news update posted at 2:22 p.m. ET]

The suspect in Wednesday's killing of two WDBJ journalists died at about 1:30 p.m. at a hospital of a self-inflicted gunshot wound, Franklin County Sheriff Bill Overton told reporters.

briany

Eugene Norman wrote: »

Surely. But you didn't answer my thought experiment except with a question. Try again.

It's to show that if you believe there's motivation in something, then it's there. There's a thing, though, called appropriate response. The appropriate response, if you take umbrage at a slur, is probably not to shoot two people. I think, when you get to that stage, there are bigger personal issues at play. So a person can believe that racial motivations were a factor, but I think the bigger motivations were that he was, or became, a disgruntled nutter. To talk about racial motivations, is to talk about the vastly lesser side of the equation, and the trivialize the whole thing somewhat.

Sunflower 27

darkpagandeath wrote: »

On the live stream they refuse to comment on a Racial component.

And why do you think that is?

Paramite Pie

seamus wrote: »

When you have zero social supports for poor people, a health system that only serves the upper 20%, a for-profit education system and absolutely no individual protections in employment law, it's inevitable that the have-nots will increasingly become violent because they have nothing left to lose.

Yes, those middle class students who were so annoyed at their own virginity had nothing left to lose decided to shoot up a school because........ they couldn't get a job/welfare -- wait what?? It doesn't hold up.

"Have-nots" resort to crime (often violent crime) to make ends meet, yes. But the mass shooters are rarely from an impoverished background.

The causes of mass shootings are complex, but they often stem from an entitlement complex that the world owes them something -- usually something beyond money like recognition & attention. They feel they've been held back in life from not being noticed and they lash out violently.

Some of the shooters were bullied victims, others were entitled brats who wanted vengeance because their peers didn't realise how 'special' they were. Sometimes a sad combination of both.

Oryx

Does it matter if is racially motivated? A deranged man was still deranged. Is this race thing being mentioned by way of explanation? Because it explains nothing. The colour of these poor people could be completely irrelevant to why he did it.

AnonBoard

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

And why do you think that is?

Doesn't fit the narrative they wish to promote

Samaris

frostyjacks wrote: »

Eh? They happened to be in his vicinity? Like this was some tragic accident?

Race seems to be the main factor in this shooting.

In that case, there has been some more developments. What I read suggested that he was fired from the station and resented it bitterly. He decided he wanted revenge and attacked a news broadcast. It happened to be that pair that were there.

Now, he does seem to have been claiming racial discrimination against him, but he's pulled that before at another news-station he was fired from. So I, at least, am going to wait and see before pulling out the wahwahs of how life is so unfair for whites because blacks can't possibly be racist or whatever the rubbish going on is.

Eugene Norman

briany wrote: »

It's to show that if you believe there's motivation in something, then it's there. There's a thing, though, called appropriate response. The appropriate response, if you take umbrage at a slur, is probably not to shoot two people. I think, when you get to that stage, there are bigger personal issues at play. So a person can believe that racial motivations were a factor, but I think the bigger motivations were that he was, or became, a disgruntled nutter. To talk about racial motivations, is to talk about the vastly lesser side of the equation, and the trivialize the whole thing somewhat.

Of course he was nuts. But most spree killers are probably nuts or psychotics. His internal motivation was racial grievance.

Eugene Norman

Samaris wrote: »

In that case, there has been some more developments. What I read suggested that he was fired from the station and resented it bitterly. He decided he wanted revenge and attacked a news broadcast. It happened to be that pair that were there.

Now, he does seem to have been claiming racial discrimination against him, but he's pulled that before at another news-station he was fired from. So I, at least, am going to wait and see before pulling out the wahwahs of how life is so unfair for whites because blacks can't possibly be racist or whatever the rubbish going on is.

Your last sentence is a straw man. He accused the actual reporter he actually killed of racism. That was in the very first report I saw.

conorhal

darkpagandeath wrote: »

"Alison Made Racist comment" Shooters tweet.

So did his former employer (that he unsuccessfully sued) and the people at his new job he also claimed abused him racially (but HR disagreed). It seems that all the ills in life that have befallen this guy are down to 'The Man'.

Or

He's a nutbag with a chip on his shoulder that was impossible to work with, an aggressive, delusional and narcissistic individual who blames everybody else for his failings.

darkpagandeath

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

And why do you think that is?

What does one think ? And on me saying it was not race related that's not what I said. I said there was no Racial bullying in this case as the shooter had tried that already and lost. That has nothing to do with the shooter being racially motivated.