California shooting

Started by Time-Immemorial27 pages

Yea I know that, but its so stupid.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
The Army cannot deploy on civilian ground like that, that is a police tank bro..wtf does the police need a god damn tank for? You dont need a tank to take down some homos with Ak-47's.

A tank in situation like this has several logical uses; here's two:

-Cover for a team of SWAT as they move in position

-A safe place to view and coordinate with outside personal

No you don't, but it can help and possibly keep people out of harms way. Early reports also said or implied these guys were well armed, armor etc. So who knows if they had explosives like grenades or an RPG, rather have the cops over prep for something like this and not need it than find out they needed an armoured vehicle after more people died.

What's your beef with this anyways?

I doubt that tank did anything, and I will give Obama where praise is due, he just stopped the police from getting military grade weapons and vehicles. Im am pleased with his decision.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
I doubt that tank did anything, and I will give Obama where praise is due, he just stopped the police from getting military grade weapons and vehicles. Im am pleased with his decision.
👆

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
I doubt that tank did anything, and I will give Obama where praise is due, he just stopped the police from getting military grade weapons and vehicles. Im am pleased with his decision.

I'd not be surprised if all it did was burn fuel, but that's not the point, it was a precaution to the unknown. If these fools had an RPG to go along with their AKs, a tank could be useful.

yes, yes, you'll be an Obamite in no time 😄

If he stopped them from getting military grade weapons and vehicles then why is there apparently a friggin tank on the streets of California right now?

Also are we insane? That shouldn't of been a thing that needed to be stopped because we shouldn't of been doing it in the first place. You might as well give a 2 yr. old a flame thrower. If a cop wants to use military grade stuff the only way that should happen is if he quits the force and joins the actual military.

Originally posted by Robtard
I'd not be surprised if all it did was burn fuel, but that's not the point, it was a precaution to the unknown. If these fools had an RPG to go along with their AKs, a tank could be useful.

yes, yes, you'll be an Obamite in no time 😄

I agree with TI that it was overkill and unnecessary.

Originally posted by Surtur
If he stopped them from getting military grade weapons and vehicles then why is there apparently a friggin tank on the streets of California right now?

Also are we insane? That shouldn't of been a thing that needed to be stopped because we shouldn't of been doing it in the first place. You might as well give a 2 yr. old a flame thrower. If a cop wants to use military grade stuff the only way that should happen is if he quits the force and joins the actual military.

It's not uncommon for the S.W.A.T. branch of a police department to be armed with military grade weapons, it stands for "Special Weapons and Tactics".

What would be the point if they were armed and trained to be identical to a regular police force?

Originally posted by Surtur
If he stopped them from getting military grade weapons and vehicles then why is there apparently a friggin tank on the streets of California right now?

Also are we insane? That shouldn't of been a thing that needed to be stopped because we shouldn't of been doing it in the first place. You might as well give a 2 yr. old a flame thrower. If a cop wants to use military grade stuff the only way that should happen is if he quits the force and joins the actual military.

That tank chase/standoff in Cali back in the early or mid-90s may have been all the leeway that they needed to make that happen.

Interesting press conference.

"We will not rule out terrorism."

Edit: Update, One Shooter male, One Female.

If it turns out to be an ISIS cell, like in the Paris attacks, this is small-scale. Regardless, freightening.

Its interesting its a male and female shooter. You notice this always happens in gun free zones. Nothing really happens here in Texas, we will shoot you dead and bury you outback.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Its interesting its a male and female shooter. You notice this always happens in gun free zones. Nothing really happens here in Texas, we will shoot you dead and bury you outback.

Cuz no one would even want to go down there. 😂

Originally posted by Robtard
If it turns out to be an ISIS cell, like in the Paris attacks, this is small-scale. Regardless, freightening.

You are jumping to this conclusion based on what?

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Its interesting its a male and female shooter. You notice this always happens in gun free zones. Nothing really happens here in Texas, we will shoot you dead and bury you outback.

Texas has a 3.2 per 100k gun murders and Cal has 3.4. So not sure your claim is supported.

Where did I compare gun murder rates of california vs texas?

Just another example of you being silly and mis quoting me.

Originally posted by The Ecks
You are jumping to this conclusion based on what?

Did you misread me? I said "if", not that this is related to ISIS.

I personally think it's domestic terrorism.

Originally posted by The Ecks
Cuz no one would even want to go down there. 😂

😂

Mexicans love here it!

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Its interesting its a male and female shooter. You notice this always happens in gun free zones. Nothing really happens here in Texas, we will shoot you dead and bury you outback.

A list of America's deadliest mass shootings

"On Oct. 16, 1991, A 35-year-old named George Hennard crashed his pickup through Luby's Cafeteria, a packed restaurant in Killeen, Texas. He shot and killed 23 people before shooting and killing himself. Twenty-seven others were wounded. The Texas massacre is the deadliest shooting to not happen at a school in U.S. history. According to a former roommate, Hennard "hated blacks, Hispanics, gays. He said women were snakes." "

"On Aug. 1, 1966, former U.S. Marine Charles Joseph Whitman, 25, killed his mother and wife, then went on top of a tower at University of Texas at Austin and killed 16 others. He also wounded at least 30. Whitman had complained of physical and mental health issues before the attack. He was then shot by a police officer. An autopsy after his death revealed he had a brain tumor, but it was not clear whether that had affected his actions. "

Two with more casualties than this one.

Then there's the Fort Hood shooting, 13 dead, and inside an actual military base in Texas, and not the only one inside a military base- there was also a shooting at Washington Naval Yard two years ago that killed 12, though that one's not Texas.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Where did I compare gun murder rates of california vs texas?

Just another example of you being silly and mis quoting me.

You said nothing really happens in Texas, which would be a comparison.

Anyhow, as seen, mass shooting have happened in Texas.