Society's Child

Breaking news: Two dead as active shooter opens fire in Houston, Texas

Tom Evans
The Daily Star (UK)
Sun, 29 May 2016 19:13 UTC

SITUATION: Police have responded to a shooting in Houston

TWO people have been found dead in an active shooter scene in Houston, Texas.

One suspect is dead and another is wounded in an active shooter scene in West Houston still in progress.

A resident was also found dead inside a vehicle.

Gunshots were showered across a residential street near a petrol station as two armed suspects fire "random" shots.

One even hit a gas pump, sparking a huge fire.

The suspect has been described as a man not wearing a shirt, dark shorts with a rifle.

Local police have warned residents on the situation

The shooting began this morning, when gunfire erupted in the western part of the city.

The Houston Police Department has asked residents in the area to shelter in place until further notice.

It comes after haunting footage emerged showing a gunman opening fire on a gig as a rapper was arrested.

Reader Comments

baron · 2016-05-30T02:38:20Z

Thanks for the "Active Shooter" headline. It's red flag which screams propaganda. Like anyone with a gun could become an active shooter, isn't that the implication? Hence guns are bad? We need to get rid of guns, isn't that what this story is really supposed to communicate? I see these panic inducing headlines and laugh now because I don't believe any of them any longer. There's no reason to believe these stories. There's no way to verify these stories, and most likely, even if they did happen the whole thing was contrived. I chock it up to yet another theatrical piece of the mainstream media's propaganda campaign to disarm the people.

Over 300 million people have been murdered in the past century by their own governments. Now who has more to gain by outlawing firearms? How is not having the right to defend yourself going to solve crime? It won't, but it will get you killed, even if you don't own or carry a gun the people who do are the reason you are safe most of the time, not the other way round.

What's safer, being in a population where half the people may have a gun on their body like in Montana, or being in New York where the people with guns on them are most likely real criminals, and the others are defined as criminals and who cannot act to help you because that would expose them and they would be arrested just for having a gun.

Rowan Cocoan · 2016-05-30T15:39:48Z

Baron Dead on Point

Baron Dead on Point (Pardon the Pun).

Cousin Scootie, infra, provides a classic use of mere 'anecdotal' data when he talks about how some (allegedly real) folks on a gun site claim that 'all innocents are sheeple worthy of death...(or such),' and they wouldn't defend them, etc. That is belied by the limited data available. (That data is limited as it's political/fiscal suicide for any university - the usual source for well funded studies and likewise - usually (even 'private' institutions) are ultimately publicly funded by political systems chock full of gun grabbers - to come down in favor of the Second Amendment - but that's why it's there; to protect those atypical folks who have and would use a firearm to stop serious injury or death to some innocent unknown to them.)

Stories about how good guys with guns stop or prevent violent crime are routinely NOT reported by the MSM, as are likewise the millions of situations where some LEGAL gun carrier stops a crime which is claimed a 'not newsworthy.' See, e.g., articles and analyses by John R. Lott Jr., et al.

If you are one of those who would 'do the right thing', (I learned this years ago in some training/education), if you decide to involve yourself to stop a violent situation, drop to one knee before yelling at or killing an 'active shooter',* as your shooting platform is more stable and accurate, your target, (if they get or try a chance to shoot you), will likely shoot over your head, and, most importantly, any rounds you shoot - whether hits or misses are far less likely to hit any innocent bystander.

R.C.

*Question: If I take out some 'active shooter', who's only just begun to kill their first of their 'hopefully many', does THAT then make me an 'active shooter?"

RC

Cousin Scootie · 2016-05-30T07:10:02Z

Not sure where the comparisons are coming from - Montana vs NY. NY is a big state, my relatively small Upstate town has a larger population than the capital of Montana and a lower crime rate per capita. The county I live in also has a relatively large number of issued CCP, above the average for the state but also contains an urban center that has a very high violent crime rate, That said I highly doubt my town has the same firearms per capita as Helena by half.

So to answer your question, you're safer in my upstate NY town than the capital of Montana - probably for reasons having little to do with gun ownership.

NYC may be a festering hole of rights abuses as are nearly all large urban centers, but the truth is having armed folk around doesn't make anyone else more or less safe except the folk that are packing, whichever side of the law they're on, and that highly conditional. Just check violent crime rates for places like Miami/Dade or Dallas/Ft Worth and compare them to urban centers in states with less permissive handgun regs - every bit as dangerous but how could this be?!!

Hang out on forums like Glocktalk for a few and pick upon all the people who declare they will not get involved to help out "sheeple" - any assumed warm fuzzy collateral positives from widespread gun ownership will disappear right quick and is not backed up by raw data or statistical inference without a lot of cooking. I cannot imagine that principle doesn't apply to a political/social breakdown as well and this too backed up by "case studies" from numerous hot-spots around the globe - armed folk aren't going to defend democracy at large by virtue and to think otherwise is a delusion.

Gun ownership is a personal decision that could save your life or end with you blowing your own head off. Statistically you are many times more likely to dust yourself off than be involved in a justified shooting - think for yourself. Guns aren't inherently good, once you strip away the rhetoric you realize the truth of this.

What should an "active shooter" situation be called to make it politically correct?

Jacob's Ladder says "Hi!"

boli

Slightly . Too bad.

Demore

''A U.S. official said in a statement to Reuters that Washington takes seriously all accusations of corruption except their own.''

Demore

Western Media: "Genocide? What genocide? I don't see any genocide! This is just the Israelis defending themselves."

Baybars

Gaza is a TRUE genocide streamed 24/7 ......meanwhile in Canada currently we have raging accusations of genocide by the Canadian government on the...

Gator

Society's Child

Breaking news: Two dead as active shooter opens fire in Houston, Texas

Reader Comments

Latest News

Picture of the Day

Quote of the Day

Recent Comments

Quantum Quirk