Clackamas Town center Shooting Portland, happening now.

Wow, another public shooting, where it seems multiple people are involved, but the official story is lone nutbag gunman....... It seems to happen more and more lately.....

reply to post by RalagaNarHallas


Basically, like Heff said, they will investigate to see if it was Abdul Al Jabberwocky that did the shooting, making it a terrorist attack, or checking the perps name on their database to see if John Redneck Doe was on one of the domestic terrorist lists. If the shooter is not on anyone's list, the investigation will be turned back over to Oregon state, county and city officials with the FBI then becoming consultants.

If the FBLie is there it is only to make sure their CIA buddies don't get caught.

reply to post by starviego


And surely,this early after the shooting..you do have proof of this right?

What's that? You don't. That's what I thought.

When I first heard about this it was breaking on local news website... I thought for sure it was going to be gang related... a random, lone, hockey-masked shooter was not what I was expecting to come of it.

reply to post by starviego


Its not known as the CIA inside the continental boundaries of the US. The CIA, by law cannot perform operations in the US. There is another group that stages these things, but I don't believe that is the case this time as it was ended to soon. I believe it truly was a local nutter this time.

reply to post by VikingWarlord


Possibility I suppose. He could have made bail being a minor I would presume. It's likely the authorities didn't confiscate every weapon and being that the weapons that were confiscated were stolen, chances are he could have gotten more if he made bail after being arrested on the 7th of Dec.

Here's the distance from the address this 17 year old lived to the Mall. Not too far really.

Back.

Wife is home, drinking a nice couple glasses of wine.

What she said happened, was that she and her coworkers where talking during a slow part of the day. She heard a loud bang, that she thought was something being dropped on the 2nd floor above her store.

Soon followed by a succession of loud bangs and people screaming, she said they could see the flashes with the bangs light up that section of the mall, (her store is located between the macys and the food court).

The bangs got considerably louder, her and her fellow employees immediately ran to the coded lock on the inventory room to secure themselves in there.

After locking and securing the back room, they heard banging on the emergency exit that leads into the halls in the mall. They where to scared to open it, and who ever was out there moved on.

They got intouch with mall security from the secured room who got intouch with SWAT to let them know their employees secured location.

Swat came by checked the store, and told them to wait. At a later point they where all escourted out of the store to the mall parking lot where they had to wait some more.

She knows one of the dead is the Zales kiosk owner, an elderly man.

Yes let's blame the guns... of course it's the guns I mean in places like china where only the rich can have guns people don't go on rampages and kill people with other things like knives......


OH WAIT THEY DO!!!

But most HuffPo readers wouldn't know that because it doesn't fit the narrative huffpo and others with an AGENDA to disarm the populace are trying to hammer into the public consciousness!!!

The bottom line is there are hundreds of millions of guns in the US that have never once been used to commit a crime.

Guns are tools plain and simple! while some of you may not have a use for them or may downright dislike them that does not give you the right to try to outlaw them. If anything those of you who dislike guns should encourage things like national concealed carry reciprocity agreements so that there is a better chance of an armed bystander being able to KEEP YOU FROM GETTING KILLED which happens quite often in tragic situations such as this!

For examples of this check out the New Life Church shooting where an armed volunteer brought an end to the crisis.

Or either of the TWO attempted school shootings in Utah where armed citizens successfully stopped the incidents before ANY blood could be shed.... Yes that's right NO ONE died not even the person who was attempting to do the shooting!

You can then cross reference this with shootings incidents like the one at virginia tech or any of the myriad of post office shootings that occurred in areas where law abiding citizens and employees were not allowed to be armed. Hell at virginia tech even the CAMPUS police had to go back to the station to get their guns out of the safe before they could respond!!!

But yes feel free to blame guns and legal gun ownership for all that ails this once great nation.

reply to post by benrl


I'm glad to hear, you are both back home. It will take some time for the shock to wear off your Dear Wife. Be kind and gentle with her...

You done Good Benrl...


Des

Originally posted by VikingWarlord
Katu reporting no shots were fired by law enforcement, so the shooter died of self inflicted wound.

Katu shouldn't be to quick to jump on that bandwagon, I've been listening to the live scanner link.. and around 30 to 45 minutes ago I did hear -

One officer was relaying info about a civilian, who had pointed out a .223 round to another officer... located by such and such area. (didn't jot down where exactly, sorry) That same transmission was repeated once more, maybe half a minute later. I took mental note of it, because it explicitly said two-two-three round - phonetically.

There was a response from another officer stating that he has aware of it, and that it was a "department round." Nothing else was said further about it.

Anyone else listening to the feed hear that exchange?

Originally posted by Druscilla

Originally posted by TRUELIES11

I'm extremely liberal. I'm so liberal I think everyone should be allowed to have even LEO/military exclusive firearms. There should even be "dispute resolution" zones where people can go to permanently resolve their differences, or commit suicide by playing FFA Last Man Standing games. Such places could even have entertainment feeds plugged in for voyeurs that like that kind of sicking violence. Give all the violent stupid people some place to 'play', and they can sort themselves out. It's brutal, but, prisons, for the most part, don't work.

reply to post by Druscilla

 

Try looking up the definition of liberal before you write such nonsense and no, I will not continue this conversation.

Considering that I'm mostly a socialist, with favoritism for abolishing money as well as equalizing quality of life and standards of living for everyone, starting with free housing, education, and living wage with the poorest, homeless and destitute, even and especially if it it comes at the cost, sacrifice and discomfort of the rich, I'd say that "Liberal" describes me fairly well.
I'm pro-Choice, Atheist, pro-Gay, pro-deregulation and de-criminalization of many controlled substances, and, well, all that other stuff typically associated with being liberal.

Essentially, most of the nonsense about government telling people what they can and can't do with their own bodies, as well as what sorts of recreational substances they can legally purchase needs go bye-bye.
Part of telling people what they can and can't buy regarding substances would also include firearms.
Let the people that want guns have em.

I have no need for them other than my grandfather's old WWII Browning .45 I carry on wilderness excursions.

Nutters are going to be nutters regardless. If people can defend themselves against nutters quit readily, it might just give some nutters pause enough for Darwin to find them some other way.

Some people, I suppose, as you've suggested, go look up the definition of "Liberal" and try to fit whatever mold that mold offers.
I, however, make my own rules for the most part, and supply the generalization of what I believe with labels that most closely match what I believe.
Thus, I'm "liberal" by default of the convenience of the label being tagged onto so many things I just happen to support. If being "Liberal" gravitated to some other beleifs, I'm not going to change my beliefs just to hold onto a label.

If guns for everybody is against the "Liberal" way, then, whatever.

Eventually we'll all be owned by machines, hopefully in the next 50 years or less, so, whatever we all think, no matter what we think, doesn't really matter.

edit on 11-12-2012 by Druscilla because: (no reason given)

What does your views lib/soc/drugs/abortion have to do with the OP?

OFF TOPIC!

reply to post by Druscilla

Considering that I'm mostly a socialist, with favoritism for abolishing money as well as equalizing quality of life and standards of living for everyone, starting with free housing, education, and living wage with the poorest, homeless and destitute, even and especially if it it comes at the cost, sacrifice and discomfort of the rich, I'd say that "Liberal" describes me fairly well. I'm pro-Choice, Atheist, pro-Gay, pro-deregulation and de-criminalization of many controlled substances, and, well, all that other stuff typically associated with being liberal. Essentially, most of the nonsense about government telling people what they can and can't do with their own bodies, as well as what sorts of recreational substances they can legally purchase needs go bye-bye. Part of telling people what they can and can't buy regarding substances would also include firearms. Let the people that want guns have em. I have no need for them other than my grandfather's old WWII Browning .45 I carry on wilderness excursions. Nutters are going to be nutters regardless. If people can defend themselves against nutters quit readily, it might just give some nutters pause enough for Darwin to find them some other way. Some people, I suppose, as you've suggested, go look up the definition of "Liberal" and try to fit whatever mold that mold offers. I, however, make my own rules for the most part, and supply the generalization of what I believe with labels that most closely match what I believe. Thus, I'm "liberal" by default of the convenience of the label being tagged onto so many things I just happen to support. If being "Liberal" gravitated to some other beleifs, I'm not going to change my beliefs just to hold onto a label. If guns for everybody is against the "Liberal" way, then, whatever. Eventually we'll all be owned by machines, hopefully in the next 50 years or less, so, whatever we all think, no matter what we think, doesn't really matter.

I admit though, you made me smile.

reply to post by UberL33t
I was thinking he may have been partners with the shooter and just got caught earlier. When I heard reports that the shooter was wearing a hockey mask, I quickly remembered that story from a few days earlier. Just thought it may be related somehow.

reply to post by benrl


Glad to know your wife is alright.



I bet you will see more of this. The Holidays, all the doom and gloom in the World. Not to mention those who believe the World is going to end.


Thanks for keeping ATS updated.

S&F

Oh I see that this individual did not get hit, but killed himself. My original post in this thread stands in it's entirety. If you haven't read it, please do (member - posts in thread).

You have two extremes to everything, and you are almost always looking for the middle ground - that is where the truth normally resides.

There are the people who will say "well if I was there blah blah".

Then there are the people who will say "You can not do the police's job for them".

Then you have the middle ground, which is that you should be prepared to defend your own life or the lives of others at any given time. That takes a certain mentality that is frowned upon in society. In that case, people don't understand why no one thinks like you and call you paranoid.

reply to post by riverwild


We were discussing gun control where I expressed favoritism for giving everyone access to even fully automatic weapons, even though I'm primarily a Liberal, in response to someone's comment about Liberals taking away all the guns.

Someone else then popped up and made some statement that I should look up the definition of Liberal because I'm not it.

I then replied to which you've popped up asking what any of it has to do with anything.

If you followed the thread you'd know this.

It's a diagonal tangent loosely associated with the topic where predictable Liberal vs. Conservative arguments pop up over gun control.

Me: Let everyone have guns, including gay people, communists, and tree hugging nature lovers.

good to hear she's home man

the news here briefly mentioned it a few minutes ago, no surprise there. the city's slowest buses is getting more attention.

reply to post by telemetry


I heard them talking about the .223 round, but must have missed the part about it being a department round. At one point early on, I'm pretty certain I heard them saying something about securing a witness who had taken a shot at the shooter, but my little one was screaming for a bottle, so I didn't hear it clearly.

there's been two different descriptions of the shooter - one in cammo & one in all black. both wearing hockey masks. There's a police conf at 8pm - where they may announce the other shooter is still at large.