Dallas shooting!

a reply to: sg1642

I'm using your post to reply to so I can link this gif I came across last night of that scene by the pillars with the cop being shot down. I've no idea why the gif is wrong side up at the link but it is. Also, it's in HD so it's the clearest one I've seen.

At the end of the gif you can hear the person who took the video saying, "Damn!," in a let down voice. I'm glad he wasn't happy about the officer being killed.

Link

Maybe someone knows how to right it and slow it down so the clothing can be better studied. Just a thought.

a reply to: sg1642

Now I am confused. That is most certainly an AK variant, from the handguard I would say a modified Saiga. But it could be anything with the weirdness of imported AKs from different companies. Lots of Saigas went out with a handguard like that. Now I'm wondering why i'm seeing SKS everywhere because they are very different in receiver design. The safety lever on the side the is dead giveaway. I tried zoom in the pic but it's not good enough quality to get much more detail.

savvysurvivor.com...

Just found this link that has some pics showing basically the same gun. Only different really is the stock and handguard which is a simple and common change. The top two images are the closest. Scope mount is different, but that is also a push and pop change.

a reply to: Shamrock6

Even an arial drone require some form of human operator, to push the button and pilot it. It can not just merely operate on its own. It is like a the radio controled airplanes that has been around as a hobby. As I recalled, and have heard tales from a few who were into the hobby, there was a way to attach a firearm to it, where it could fire, simulating the real thing, namely a warthog aircraft, where it even mimic the way the craft would jump with each fire.

But be that as it may, what difference would it had been if the item flown or was rolled up, the point being that without so much as a trial, with out so much as an attempt to capture this person alive, using an automatic vehicle to deliver a lethal blow from a distance, is in short wrong.

a reply to: Shamrock6

Because it shows a difference in the way the justice system is handled between those who are of one skin color and those who are another and the outcomes of such. If you apply that same threat to the other cases, then why did only one person from the Oregon standoff, die and the rest arrested? Why is it that a person who is lawfully convicted of rape, only gets 6 months in jail, while another person who is of a minority gets the book thrown at him?

There is enough in the way of records, to show that there is a valid problem with the way those of European descent get arrested and sentenced and those who are of African descent go through the justice system. Time and time again 2 people who are shown to do the same crime are often treated different, where one gets a more brutal response and the other far less.

I am not a bleeding heart liberal, and believe that the law should apply equally, across the board, not the way it is being currently done in the country right now. I also believe that the Black Lives Matter, is going in the wrong direction and the message from the name is incorrect and will only result in a band aid, and in 30 years the country will be having another movement.

On a side note, we should find this to be ironic that this did happen in a bastion of the NRA, state wise, and where open carry is so embraced and considered to be sacred.

a reply to: MyHappyDogShiner

What we should be concerned with is not that if it is high or low end, but such can be either hijacked or others who are not so law abiding decide to use the exact same thing.

a reply to: sg1642

Safety lever is the give away. FAL has a little rotating safety, not the long lever. Plus the charging handle on the FAL rides along the receiver in a different way.

a reply to: [post=20972842]sdcigarpig[/post
When the truth about our use of drones to kill people in foreign countries leaked out, I distinctly remember hearing at least two radio talk show hosts ask, "How long do you think it will be until these same drones are turned on the American people?"
I suppose we have our answer.
I'm sure they will never, ever be abused or used to kill "innocent" people. I'm pretty sure they will promise not to target suspects at weddings in the US.

Texas Governor Greg Abbot severely burned in accident:

www.redstate.com...

This happened BEFORE the shooting in Dallas. It's very strange how he suffered second and third degree burns on his legs and feet but wouldn't say how. He may be paralyzed from the waist down but he still has nerve receptors in his legs and feet so he felt a lot of pain.

If I put on my tinfoil hat could it be he refused to go along with the planned attack and was made an example? Against his doctors orders, he still traveled to Dallas to speak at a press conference.

It's strange timing, IMO Now, if something happens to Chief David Brown...

mind controlled assassin....all planned and set up.....cue martial law

a reply to: tweetie

Would be nice if someone could do that thanks for posting.

a reply to: DinobotIV

Well to be fair this isn't confirmed as his weapon and police have said they recovered several at the scene.

a reply to: texasgirl

If I'm not mistaken, Jackson Hole is where Cheney has a residence.

From what I've read, Brown is very unpopular with the officers of DPD. It was also reported he met with O. not long before the Dallas massacre.

That's very, very odd about the Governor and I'm sorry he was burned. I hope he's a good guy.

A police car outside one of the slain officer's homes was hit:

www.nbcdfw.com...


Happened early Sunday morning where a car hit the police car and drove off. They don't know if it was an accident or if it was intentional.

Just thought I'd post the story.

a reply to: sg1642

Okay, this was the only pic I could find anywhere and the only gun I had heard about was the SKS. Thanks.

a reply to: sdcigarpig

Stop using your false narrative to build your argument. The shooter was afforded the chance to stop being a jackass and be taken into custody.

He declined.

Literally nothing else you've said matters since it's all built off that fabrication you persist in using.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: sdcigarpig

Stop using your false narrative to build your argument. The shooter was afforded the chance to stop being a jackass and be taken into custody.

He declined.

Literally nothing else you've said matters since it's all built off that fabrication you persist in using.

The fact he was exchanging gunfire and clearly stated his intentions to take more lives says it all. I can understand people having concerns about the possible ramifications of using the 'bot. But put yourself in the police chief's position here. At that point he was playing a guessing game when trying to work out how many families he was going to have to tell to make funeral arangements that night. How could he possibly justify to them or the country deciding to risk further lives when he had the option to end it by other means?

It wasn't just in the police's interests to end it. The public at that point were still at risk. Didn't they have just as much right to live as him?

I still think the whole story stinks but if that is how it went down then that decision at that moment in time was justified. Yes a precedent may have been set and people have every right to show concern about that. But it is not fair to call him out on the moral decision that was taken when we weren't there watching people die.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: sdcigarpig

Stop using your false narrative to build your argument. The shooter was afforded the chance to stop being a jackass and be taken into custody.

He declined.

Literally nothing else you've said matters since it's all built off that fabrication you persist in using.

Why is it that we automatically assume that every word coming from a cop's mouth is absolute truth? We have only the word of the people who killed him---only one side of the story at this point----from a group of people who put out a lot of incorrect information whilst the incident was on-going. Just look at how the story changed from time to time....sigh. For all we know the cops could be fabricating to cover their own behinds. Are there tapes of what he is reported to have said? Can we hear those tapes? Or are we to just take one side of the story and run with it?
In the news conference I saw at 12:30 on the night of the shooting the police chief and mayor were very clear that there were multiple shooters? Now they say only one was involved.....and say that he was moving about like some time traveler to do the "triangulation" thingie they spoke of....and yet they expect us to take their word as absolute truth that he was the only one and that only bombing him remotely would solve the problem. Forgive me if I remember times when it has been proven that cops lie to cover their mistakes.