WaPo: Multiple injuries reported in ‘active shooter situation’ near Planned Parenthood in Colorado Springs

[Predicto]

Near impossible? The last one is closing. No one will be able to buy a gun inside SF soon. Congrats.

 

 

Meh.   There was only one gun shop in SF before the ordinance passed.   The demand to buy guns isn't high, and there are about 15 places I can get a gun in the burbs right outside the city limits.   Since the whole city is only 7 miles by 7 miles, it's really not a big deal.  

[TradeTheBeal!]

Seems interesting

 

http://www.examiner.com/article/witness-accounts-conflict-with-planned-parenthood-shooting-narrative

 

A horrific shooting on Friday may not have originated at a Planned Parenthood abortion facility in Colorado Springs as widely reported if witness accounts are to be considered.[/size]

Pathetic.

[Predicto]

Burgold,

As with many issues, you have the extremes that are so ideologically driven you can never hope to have a conversation with them about those issues; they are not in any way, shape or form interested in hearing about 'the other side', much less considering revising their position.

 

And that's a problem with both sides of the 'aisle' and it's a huge problem with our society today.

 

You can add into that the ridiculous fear some have of ever admitting that maybe they were wrong.

 

But that's the extremes. The middle ground people are not getting their news from the NRA and are not letting the NRA swing their position. They're not getting their opinions from either extreme end.

 

That middle ground has had the discussion. Over and over and over. Or at least they've participated in it. And currently they're not willing to support the politicians to get anything passed.

 

The middle ground isn't actively participating much anymore because they're tired of the extremes. They're tired of being shouted at, and over. But that shouldn't be mistaken for not having an opinion, or never having the discussion, or not having an 'honest' discussion about it. They have. The support isn't there. Maybe one day it will be, but it's not going to come by you asking for an honest discussion. The discussions been had... It's a matter of supporting for the politicians campaigning on either side, and for the most part politicians in 'purple' areas are terrified of supporting gun control.

 

I'm growing tired of the demands for 'discussion' by people who are just upset they haven't gotten their way. It's as if you're unaware of the discussions this country has been having about gun control going back decades. "Honest discussion" has become code for: a discussion where my opinion is deemed the correct one.

 

 

Political scientists will tell you that it is more complicated than that.   According to what I have read, the current gun control situation results from disproportionate interests on the two sides of the issue.   The pro-gun people are outnumbered, but they really, really care about the issue and they will cast their votes based on that issue alone.   The gun control supporters do not view it as the sole basis for their vote, and a politician will not lose their votes by pandering to the NRA.  

 

Politicians are not stupid, and they understand this.    So any politician in a purple area cares more about the hundreds of thousands of pro-gun voters who will vote against him if he supports more gun control than the millions of pro-gun control voters who will be kind of displeased about it but not necessarily vote against him if he doesn't.   Basically, only gun owners vote based on gun issues.  The NRA knows this, and constantly reminds politicians of it as well.

 

Here's an excerpt from a book discussing this subject.

 

https://books.google.com/books?id=x57IaQ95MZkC&pg=PA95&lpg=PA95&dq=gun+owners+single+issue+voters&source=bl&ots=8KH2j2dDfF&sig=6zyrgsTbEOW9f31gQDJYADCgO2Y&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwikmtXlsrnJAhXEMIgKHfGLCHI4ChDoAQgbMAA#v=onepage&q=gun%20owners%20single%20issue%20voters&f=false

 

Here's 

[twa]

Pathetic.

 

Certainly

[Predicto]

Hah, that sounds ridiculous.

 

You're video taped putting gas in your car... that causes people to not buy guns?

 

My question would be - how has this changed crime and gun ownership? Sounds like it's just about the purchasing of guns. If the net result is that all the gun shops moved outside of SF, but nothing else changes, then it's an empty 'win' for the gun control crowd...

 

 

It's a stupid law.   All local gun control ordinances are doomed to failure.  

 

To answer your question, it won't change a thing because, like I said, there was only one gun store in SF anyway and it was tiny and did little business.   If you want to buy a gun you went to the shops in the burbs - there are plenty of them.

[mistertim]

It's a stupid law.   All local gun control ordinances are doomed to failure.  

 

To answer your question, it won't change a thing because, like I said, there was only one gun store in SF anyway and it was tiny and did little business.   If you want to buy a gun you went to the shops in the burbs - there are plenty of them.

Yeah, pretty much any law isn't going to do much if the person can just drive 30 minutes and not have to worry about the same restriction.

[Predicto]

Yeah, pretty much any law isn't going to do much if the person can just drive 30 minutes and not have to worry about the same restriction.

 

 

More like 10 minutes.  There are at least 10-15 places that sell guns in Daly City and South San Francisco alone, i.e., within 5 miles of my house.     

[tshile]

Political scientists will tell you that it is more complicated than that.   

...

So any politician in a purple area cares more about the hundreds of thousands of pro-gun voters who will vote against him if he supports more gun control than the millions of pro-gun control voters who will be kind of displeased about it but not necessarily vote against him if he doesn't.   Basically, only gun owners vote based on gun issues.

While I get that it's more complicated, I feel like you're just reinforcing my point. Not enough people actually care to push the politicians in the direction of more gun control. The votes aren't there to support it.

 

You can write it off as one-issue voters, extremes, etc, but what you can't do is pretend the issue is that we haven't had a discussion about it; or an honest one.

 

The problem isn't with the one-issue voters; to rephrase: don't get me wrong, they're a problem, but they're not a solvable problem, they will never agree with any of you on gun control. Ever. There's zero need for honest anything, they are as entrenched as it gets (like some on the other side of the issue).

 

The problem is the whole middle ground that's heard both sides and isn't giving any real support to the gun control crowd. They'll answer the surveys in a way that makes you think you've got their support, but they don't cast their votes that way. And votes are what count.

 

If you're interested in trying to get more gun control you might want to try to figure out why so few people actually care the way you do about the opinions you have on the issue. It might mean coming up with some criticism of your ideas... instead of writing it off as rednecks that don't care about children dying in schools.

[PCS]

If I give other sources for the shooting starting away from PP will it change your mind?

 

 

 

 

From a reputable source, of course

 

 

Probably won't find them.  Near as I can tell,it's similar sites parroting each other.

 

I could provide links for the following,but they've actually been provided in the link twa posted,(along with a helpful map). Just have to be patient and follow them through,(lot's of clicking). And dots can connect after reading all this too.   Okay. Let's take a look at this. From the link posted. 

 

 

 

multiple reports conflict with this narrative, including accounts from eye witnesses.

 

 

 

Witnesses at the scene told MSNBC the original gunshots came from near the Planned Parenthood at a Chase Bank facility.

 

 

 

 

John Berman of CNN interviewed Supercuts employee Denise Speller who claimed to see "one of the officers go down" from her business, which is .2 miles from the Planned Parenthood abortion provider in Colorado Springs 

 

 

Follow things around enough,you realize that it was the same witness for all three stories,(except one where the guy was at a near bye store,heard shots from the direction of the Bank and then turned and walked back in).

 

 

 

The Gazette reported that one of the injured civilians is an employee of Elite Vision, a business located in a building adjacent to the abortion facility.

 

No. The Gazette didn't say that. They said one of the injured was in the Elite Vision location,not an employee.  You'll see more on that later. 

 

 

Without elaboration, the Colorado Springs Gazette reported at 1:34 p.m.:

Colorado Springs police says there is no connection to Planned Parenthood and shooting victims are getting treatment.

 

Yep. And then less than 10 minutes later stated: 

 

 

1:43 p.m.

Police say they do not know the connection to Planned Parenthood, but that is where the 911 call came from. Police do not know the number of shooters, the containment of the shooters, or the number of victims. Police are not evacuating neighborhoods to the north of the scene, but they are asking residents to stay inside and to avoid the area. There are still people inside the nearby businesses, and police do not know if there are any hostage situations. 

 

What the heck.   http://gazette.com/active-shooter-situation-reported-near-planned-parenthood-in-colorado-springs-reports-of-multiple-people-shot/article/1564419

 

Now there seemed to be an attempt by that site to tie that into the original calls. 

 

 

The Denver Post reported that at 11:40 a.m., "the Colorado Springs police scanner began to erupt. 'They are advising someone in the parking lot is shooting,' a dispatcher hollered, according to archives captured on Broadcastify.com. 'Actually we are getting several more calls now.'"

 

 

Right after that,(from the link highlighted). 

 

 

As units began to respond, three loud beeps came over the radio.

"Attention all units, attention all units," another dispatcher excitedly called. "CSPD is working an active shooter. Again, CSPD has an active shooter."

And then, one woman was reported shot. A middle-aged man in a jacket, callers said, was walking around the outside of the Planned Parenthood branch on Centennial Boulevard opening fire.

And then the gunman turned his weapon — described as a long gun — at officers.

"He's shooting! Stop there!" an officer called. "He's shooting at you as you're coming in!"

"I've been shot!" one officer said.

"I've been shot!" another said.

"Officer down!" said a third.

 

(Note: Knowing what happened to one of those officers later made that a bit difficult to read). 

 

A little further down. 

 

 

At roughly 12:15, the gunman went inside Planned Parenthood and began firing out the windows at propane tanks placed around the clinic's parking lot, an officer told dispatch over his radio.

As a gunfight played out between police and the shooter, some officers entered nearby businesses to protect those inside. Those first wounded made their way to other buildings for help.

Doctors in one office tended to a woman.

 

 

There's also these two,especially the guy,who may have heard the first shots and nearly became one of the first victims. 

 

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/witness-colorado-planned-parenthood-recounts-shooting-article-1.2448848

 

 

 

Ozy Licano was sitting in his parked truck while waiting for a friend in front of the clinic Friday afternoon when he heard a boom to his left.

“I turned my head and I saw this guy crawling on the ground, on all fours, headed to the entrance. I didn’t understand what I was seeing,” Lizano told the Daily News.

Licano, 61, a retired guitar player, narrowly missed becoming one of 12 victims in Friday’s bloodbath at a Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood clinic that killed three people, including a police officer.

His recollection of the terrifying attack mirrored the chaotic violence witnessed by patients inside the clinic. The alleged gunman, identified as Robert Lewis Dear, fired at least three times in a “calm, but crazy” manner before a patient waiting for her boyfriend inside the clinic bolted for safety.

 Click link for more.  

 

Oh. Ozy drove to the near bye supermarket and got help there from bystanders,(who called 911 as well), before being transported to the hospital. 

[twa]

the reporting is rather scarce on detail, but the shooting clearly started in the parking areas with the turd parking quite a way away

 

 

http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/28/us/colorado-planned-parenthood-shooting-witnesses/

 

 

the CCN wire even noted a witness fleeing to PP to escape

 

the scanner log indicates quite a while outside shooting.

 

 

rather odd if PP was the target, as was the hours within the facility where he shot police but not staff or patients.....of course he doesn't seem too cognitive.

 

 

all in all it seems to support the link I gave earlier

 

add

 

approx 35 minutes according to this link of active shooting outside before he entered PP facility.

 

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_29175120/officers-responding-planned-parenthood-shootings-faced-chaos-live-gunfire-casualties

[Predicto]

 

While I get that it's more complicated, I feel like you're just reinforcing my point. Not enough people actually care to push the politicians in the direction of more gun control. The votes aren't there to support it.

 

You can write it off as one-issue voters, extremes, etc, but what you can't do is pretend the issue is that we haven't had a discussion about it; or an honest one.

 

The problem isn't with the one-issue voters; to rephrase: don't get me wrong, they're a problem, but they're not a solvable problem, they will never agree with any of you on gun control. Ever. There's zero need for honest anything, they are as entrenched as it gets (like some on the other side of the issue).

 

The problem is the whole middle ground that's heard both sides and isn't giving any real support to the gun control crowd. They'll answer the surveys in a way that makes you think you've got their support, but they don't cast their votes that way. And votes are what count.

 

If you're interested in trying to get more gun control you might want to try to figure out why so few people actually care the way you do about the opinions you have on the issue. It might mean coming up with some criticism of your ideas... instead of writing it off as rednecks that don't care about children dying in schools.

 

 

Cmon, please take the chip off your shoulder.   I criticize bad gun control ideas all the time.   Everyone on here does.  You write your posts like everyone just posts HuffPo editorials and makes fun of rednecks and like you are really mad about it.      

 

When people in this thread complained that we haven't had a legitimate debate on gun control, they weren't taking about you and me.  They were talking about Congress and the other politicians who can actually pass laws.   You can pull out all the scientific studies you want about what types of gun control might work and what kinds are useless or too restrictive, but it doesn't matter because no one will listen to them.   All of the politicians are too cowardly to dare buck the NRA and its millions of deliverable votes.  There is no honest debate in the only arena that counts.  

 

Single issue voting is a huge problem in a democracy.   Way too many of our laws are not based on the best ideas, or the ideas supported by the majority, but rather on the interests of the minority of voters who are truly committed on that particular issue.  Gun control is not the only example.  Look at farm subsidies, for example.  

 

I don't know what the solution is, but you can't just waive your hand and pretend that it doesn't matter and that we are jerks for noticing it and being upset about it.    

[Zguy28]

Single issue voting is the hindrance to gun control measures. Especially abortion. Because so many people are either entrenched against it(like me) or for it, this limits voting choices. So what do you do when you are faced with a dilemma like that? It's not that I don't want be a moderate on most issues, but on abortion I can't give ground because it is such a horrific and immoral thing. I hate our two party dominated system. Maybe I should get back into politics and run on a pro-life, and welfare and gun control reform platform?

[Major Harris]

Single issue voting is the hindrance to gun control measures. Especially abortion. Because so many people are either entrenched against it(like me) or for it, this limits voting choices. So what do you do when you are faced with a dilemma like that? It's not that I don't want be a moderate on most issues, but on abortion I can't give ground because it is such a horrific and immoral thing. I hate our two party dominated system. Maybe I should get back into politics and run on a pro-life, and welfare and gun control reform platform?

 

that doesn't fit the formula for success in our ****ed up system.

[Zguy28]

that doesn't fit the formula for success in our ****ed up system.

That's exactly my point. Our parties are so entrenched in their platform issues, that the real money goes only to those who are ideologues across the whole thing.

 

But occasionally an anomaly slips through like John Bel Edwards (D) who just won governor of Lousiana. He's pro-life and pro gun Democrat. He beat heavy favorite Vitter ® by 10%.

[skinsmarydu]

But occasionally an anomaly slips through like John Bel Edwards (D) who just won governor of Lousiana. He's pro-life and pro gun Democrat. He beat heavy favorite Vitter ® by 10%.

And he'll be on the hot seat.

Pro-life does not equate to anti-abortion. Pro-gun does not equate to anti-background check.

As Ricky said, he's got a lot of 'splainin' to do.

[Burgold]

I read today another diatribe about how pro-lifers are not pro life... given the stands that so many take on capital punishment, health care, school lunch programs, refugees, etc. I was mainly the usual screed, but the one thing I thought interesting was the punchline which I thought was apt.

 

They are not pro-life. They are pro-birth.

 

I think that's a more honest dichotomy. Pro-Birth vs. Pro-Choice.

[skinsmarydu]

I read today another diatribe about how pro-lifers are not pro life... given the stands that so many take on capital punishment, health care, school lunch programs, refugees, etc. I was mainly the usual screed, but the one thing I thought interesting was the punchline which I thought was apt.

 

They are not pro-life. They are pro-birth.

 

I think that's a more honest dichotomy. Pro-Birth vs. Pro-Choice.

Thank you, I needed an author to help (yes, one word was eluding me!~the "b" word, that is....)

[Major Harris]

I read today another diatribe about how pro-lifers are not pro life... given the stands that so many take on capital punishment, health care, school lunch programs, refugees, etc. I was mainly the usual screed, but the one thing I thought interesting was the punchline which I thought was apt.

They are not pro-life. They are pro-birth.

I think that's a more honest dichotomy.

How cute and fits into your stereotypes

[TheGreatBuzz]

Bull****. Many pro life (christians) volunteer lots of time to the exact things you're speaking of.

But it's cute and fits into your stereotypes

Is it possible that he was refering to a generalization of a large group and that his statement does not refer to EVERY person in that group?  Like so many other topics, the good point that was made is lost because you'd rather argue and poke a little hole in what was said than think about what was said for the point that was being made. 

 

And now queue your response about how I am wrong because he said "how pro-lifers are not pro life" but didn't quantify it by saying MOST or MANY so he must have meant every single one.  And refuse to address the point of what he was saying and the fact that it is actually true.   

 

EDIT:  And to help quantify my position on this, I say this as a pro-choice, pro-(limitied) gun control Republican.

[Major Harris]

Well i forgot we can generalize when convenient.

I mean, it is definitely a reasonable action to compare abortion to the death penalty.

Honest question. ..are school lunch programs under attack from the right?

[TheGreatBuzz]

Well i forgot we can generalize when convenient.

 

Oh don't act you and everyone else don't do it.  You've never made a comment about "liberals" do X or "christians" do Y?  Isn't that a generalization?  How about just focusing on the point of the statement and not goetting wrapped up around every nuance.

[Major Harris]

Oh don't act you and everyone else don't do it.  You've never made a comment about "liberals" do X or "christians" do Y?  Isn't that a generalization?  How about just focusing on the point of the statement and not goetting wrapped up around every nuance.

 

fair enough on the nitpicking of nuances....

 

but ok......

 

are school lunch programs under attack from the right?

 

can you really compare the death penalty to abortion?

 

there's our start.

[The Evil Genius]

No, but would it be fair to you Major to point out that WIC and other social help programs that exclusively help poor and/or teenage moms are always under attack from the same party that has largely labeled itself as pro-life? Wouldn't that be an example of pro-birth (but not pro-life)?

[Major Harris]

No, but would it be fair to you Major to point out that WIC and other social help programs that exclusively help poor and/or teenage moms are always under attack from the same party that has largely labeled itself as pro-life? Wouldn't that be an example of pro-birth (but not pro-life)?

 

yes, that's fair, though i personally hear way more about food stamps / SNAP being abused than I've ever heard complaints about WIC.  

 

the refugee one was fair (i've taken my parents to task on this one)

 

i'm not saying that the right doesn't confuse me.  they do.  i overreacted a bit, which is why i edited 22 times.

[@DCGoldPants]

@LukeRussert

Speaker Ryan says after CO Planned Parenthood shooting, Congress will work on bill addressing problems w America's mental health system.