Clackamas Town center Shooting Portland, happening now.

page: 16
79
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 12:36 AM
link   
Why wear bulletproof gear if you plan to die anyway? I guess he wanted to live long enough to take his own life? hmm




posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 12:37 AM
link   
reply to post by PaperbackWriter
 


Always sounds strange to me, the details in these shootings never add up.



posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 12:39 AM
link   
And he hid. Yes, I heard the spokesperson say they had a heck of a time searching the whole towncenter to find his body.
With his bullet-proof vest on, I guess he took it off to shoot himself in the chest? Or he aimed for the head?

It's a good thing there weren't any witnesses to that storyline, huh?



posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 12:58 AM
link   
reply to post by benrl
 



Wow! That is the mall that I shop at, and I would have never expected that to happen here. I am very glad that your wife was alright, and that she is home and safe.

Stopped by there the other night for dinner, and a movie. I could not imagine what that must have been like, and I am glad that more people were not hurt, but very sorry to hear that people died and were injured.



posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 01:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by gnosticagnostic
reply to post by Hefficide
 


I agree this is a known psychological fact which is why eye witness testimonies are not the best to use in court cases because 2 people will view the same person 2 different ways.. no he had black hair.. no it was brown.. he had a green coat.. no it was dark blue hoodie... etc
edit on 11-12-2012 by gnosticagnostic because: (no reason given)


well.. only in OREGON ..

is hearsay allowed..



posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 01:35 AM
link   
These constant shootings in malls are mighty suspicious, doesn't any one think?



posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 01:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Nightwalk
 


No, but the selective media coverage combined with what appears to be disinformation would indicate a hiding in plain sight conspiracy. People shoot in malls *somewhat* frequently, but not with intent to massacre... no that is rare.

I also wonder how so many shots were fired, yet only 2 dead (3 if you count that ....individual....). If he was trying to massacre people.... I just feel like this is not adding up. No not at all. Unless a jam prevented him from shooting people before they got away.
We have more atrocious killings happening all the dang time. Like.... every.... single...... day? Why is this on every single freaking news website!

So far, my best guess is foreign intelligence. No one seems to like my theory though.

Why is it so hard to believe? If it were a foreign intelligence agency is this not how they would react?

Why is it so hard to figure out the number of shooters if it happened in a mall. There are cameras all over malls...

Makes. No. Sense.

Then again I am tired, and I am looking for a conspiracy, not a way to discredit conspiracy.

Does anyone see a flaw in my logic here?

We have bigger massacres happening somewhere in the US..... every...... single......day? WHAT AM I MISSING!!



posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 01:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by NarrowGate
reply to post by Nightwalk
 

I also wonder how so many shots were fired, yet only 2 dead (3 if you count that ....individual....). If he was trying to massacre people.... I just feel like this is not adding up. No not at all. Unless a jam prevented him from shooting people before they got away.



My wife and I where just discussing this very thing, she said she heard atleast 10-15 rapid fire shots before they all made it into the stores inventory room,

And yet not many people got shot, what we simply came up with was the person had no formal fire arms training, and certainly not involving moving targets.

Maybe the crazy guy only went to a range and shot stationary targets.

Even trained soldiers, who have extensive training to shoot moving targets when faced with live humans in combat have a tendency to miss when they are in their first fire fight, they will often aim high, unconsciously missing when faced with a living human target.

I would suppose that even a deranged person intent on doing harm, might face a similar situation.



posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 02:04 AM
link   
reply to post by NarrowGate
 


Speaking generally, the low hit/shot ratios for spree shooters is usually because they are inept with the weapons they use for attack. Combine that non-existent or limited weapons based skill with:

1) Body chemistry ( fear, adrenaline, ect)
2) Moving targets in a highly chaotic and emotionally charged environment
3) The culmination factor. Spree shooters tend to focus upon the moment of their "act". Once they fire a few rounds reality sets in. One could use climax as an example - an intense interest, followed by pursuit of that interest, followed by an act, followed by a feeling of completion and loss of interest.

That third aspect often factors in with spree killers - leaving open those who claim a "Manchurian candidate" theory. Shooters often either commit suicide or are found at the scene, seemingly emotionally void and compliant.

Think in terms of a time when you lost control of your own temper - and then imagine it exponentially worse and in slow motion. That, in my mind, is the mechanism behind spree shootings.

~Heff



posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 02:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by benrl

Originally posted by NarrowGate
reply to post by Nightwalk
 

I also wonder how so many shots were fired, yet only 2 dead (3 if you count that ....individual....). If he was trying to massacre people.... I just feel like this is not adding up. No not at all. Unless a jam prevented him from shooting people before they got away.



My wife and I where just discussing this very thing, she said she heard atleast 10-15 rapid fire shots before they all made it into the stores inventory room,

And yet not many people got shot, what we simply came up with was the person had no formal fire arms training, and certainly not involving moving targets.

Maybe the crazy guy only went to a range and shot stationary targets.

Even trained soldiers, who have extensive training to shoot moving targets when faced with live humans in combat have a tendency to miss when they are in their first fire fight, they will often aim high, unconsciously missing when faced with a living human target.

I would suppose that even a deranged person intent on doing harm, might face a similar situation.


There is a very serious flaw in that theory. Those soldiers are trying to avoid killing someone. He was trying to kill people. They did a study after vietnam on soldiers aiming high in their first firefight, and adjusted the training to compensate. Most soldiers do not do that anymore.

The reason they did it was to avoid killing another human being. The way they adjusted the training was to have them visualize humans when training, use more humanoid targets for practice, and to breed more of a killer heart in them in training.

An AR-15 is extremely easy to shoot - he would not be missing that much. If no jam, I am very suspicious.

Regardless, I am happy that your wife made it out OK. I will be praying for her. I suffer from PTSD it is not fun. Expect paranoia, and for the next couple of months likely auditory hallucination.



posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 02:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 


All very valid points. I still feel this ratio is exponentially low comparatively but I have not studied spree shooters at all.

I wonder what drugs were in his system as well.



posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 02:13 AM
link   
reply to post by NarrowGate
 


well I think it still holds, maybe a bit of the lack of formal training, combined with what Heff suggested.

Either way it certainly always surprises me how often these spree shootings have such low casualty rates based on the crowds and equipment involved.

As for my wife you maybe right, she has already twice asked me if someone was outside claiming to have heard something, I did not hear anything.

I believe her company will be offering counseling and we both have already agreed that will be a good idea.



posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 02:15 AM
link   
A shooter in Portland Oregon. Portland, a liberal town. Colorado is liberal too. Seems a lot of these shootings are in liberal havens.



posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 02:19 AM
link   
So has it been said yet? False flag to restrict assault rifles?



posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 02:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by benrl
I believe her company will be offering counseling and we both have already agreed that will be a good idea.


I agree and wanted to suggest that earlier myself; but, didn't because of reasons I won't explain (off topic).

Sometimes we go through events like this and come out unscathed, other times we don't. Our minds are fickle sometimes.

It won't hurt for her to take the counseling, even if she has no problems with the incident now.

We are glad she is safe, for your sake as well as hers.



posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 02:29 AM
link   
reply to post by shelookslikeone
 


I highly doubt that is the case. Maybe drum magazines. I would have to say, it is not a false-flag per say. It might be twisted up for that agenda though you are right. In fact - we already know the media is going to be talking about assault rifles tomorrow.
I think if it is a conspiracy, it is more sinister than a simple assault weapons bad.



posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 02:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by shelookslikeone
So has it been said yet? False flag to restrict assault rifles?


I wouldn't say that, what I would say is the Scumbag gun grabbers never miss an opportunity to capitalize on horrific tragedy to push their agenda further. Its shameful opportunistic behavior, the focus should be on mental health care in this country and how we identify troubled souls before things like this happen, not on gun control.

My wife, who was directly effected by this event had this to say about gun control in relation to this event and it was.

"I need my CCW permit, if someone in that food court had theirs people might not have died"



posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 02:42 AM
link   
The shooting makes perfect sense to me, if I am right.
In the next few days, the media will hype the story and glorify the shooter by letting us know EVERYTHING about him/her.
I am thinking that the shooter went to the mall to kill one person and get away quick.
So....Shooter aims at target and there is one additional in collateral damage, shooter gets trapped in the mall and decides that prison life is not for him/her.
I dunno if this idea has been presented but I cannot read the 500 previous pages to see.

I do believe like I said, that we will find out all sorts of things about the shooter though.
We will probably not hear a damn thing of the victims though...


(Edit)
BTW Ben, I am greatful that your wife is well and in one piece.
This could have ended much differently.
edit on 12-12-2012 by g146541 because: to add



posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 02:52 AM
link   
reply to post by NarrowGate
 


I wonder if he was on drugs too. Anderson Cooper interviewed two girls that said he was running around in the mall with his hockey mask on and jumping out at small children. They said this occurred about 25 minutes before he started shooting.



posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 03:02 AM
link   
reply to post by elmrich
 


I'm sorry, you misunderstood my post.

I was not wondering if he was on drugs.

I was wondering what type of drugs he was on.





top topics
 
79
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join