Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we stay on subject. Start your own thread about firebombed abortion clinics if you want to discuss that.

I’m responding to the deranged posters who are literally justifying murder (not posters who are joking, or unmoved by the death.) It’s relevant to the discussion in that some people need to put a little thought into what kind of societal contract they’re rooting for.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have professional and personal reasons to really loathe the insurance industry but I still am very disturbed by the reaction-not the jokes but the people actually thinking it’s justified. This type of thinking is how we get people shooting docs who perform abortions. This isn’t the way, folks.

1) we’ve already had abortion doctors getting shot for decades. That horse is so far out of the barn it’s now holding kid’s craft projects together on thousands of refrigerators around the country.

2) it’s extremely telling that the very first reactions among corporate leadership wasn’t “hey wow, people are really upset at us - maybe we need to re-examine our ethics and the way we do business”, but instead it was “I need a fully armored Mercedes and a 6-man protection team composed of former SEAL operators, armed with submachineguns to watch over me 24/7/365”. This was the EXACT wrong reaction for corporate America - and this reaction shows why this stuff probably needs to happen a few more times.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At first I thought this guy must be acting on his own, especially given that he left his phone and cup. But now I think he's an assassin. Everything he left, he left on purpose. He looked directly at the camera in the cab on purpose. The only mistake he made was to flirt with that woman at the hostel. And he is clearly much smarter than the cops.

That could be plausible, except for the problems with the gun. Because he was clearly expecting the gun to function again after firing the first shot. Except it didn’t. He tried to fire, realized it hadn’t cycled the action, and then had to cycle it manually to get it to fire again. Then he had to repeat that process several more times. That means he hasn’t previously tested this gun and suppressor combination before. That’s something that a professional would never do - go into a job with untested gear.


Other than that, your theory is plausible.

I thought they weren’t actual jams but that this particular gun model had to be manually cycled between shots. But either way, he clearly knew what he was doing in handling it with ease. It didn’t seem to throw him off.

+1. I don't know much about guns, but whatever happened he didn't miss a beat.

Anonymous wrote:Can we stay on subject. Start your own thread about firebombed abortion clinics if you want to discuss that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have professional and personal reasons to really loathe the insurance industry but I still am very disturbed by the reaction-not the jokes but the people actually thinking it’s justified. This type of thinking is how we get people shooting docs who perform abortions. This isn’t the way, folks.

1) we’ve already had abortion doctors getting shot for decades. That horse is so far out of the barn it’s now holding kid’s craft projects together on thousands of refrigerators around the country.

2) it’s extremely telling that the very first reactions among corporate leadership wasn’t “hey wow, people are really upset at us - maybe we need to re-examine our ethics and the way we do business”, but instead it was “I need a fully armored Mercedes and a 6-man protection team composed of former SEAL operators, armed with submachineguns to watch over me 24/7/365”. This was the EXACT wrong reaction for corporate America - and this reaction shows why this stuff probably needs to happen a few more times.

I think if we as a society decide we aren’t going to have a bright line about murdering people who we feel are unethical we will see a lot more abortion providers killed. No argument from me that the corporate response is both idiotic and infuriating.

You are clearly unaware of violence perpetrated against reproductive care providers and staff, PPFA facilities, etc for at least four decades. There was a firebombing in my hometown. That line was crossed a long time ago with pretty much zilch push back from GOP leadership.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At first I thought this guy must be acting on his own, especially given that he left his phone and cup. But now I think he's an assassin. Everything he left, he left on purpose. He looked directly at the camera in the cab on purpose. The only mistake he made was to flirt with that woman at the hostel. And he is clearly much smarter than the cops.

That could be plausible, except for the problems with the gun. Because he was clearly expecting the gun to function again after firing the first shot. Except it didn’t. He tried to fire, realized it hadn’t cycled the action, and then had to cycle it manually to get it to fire again. Then he had to repeat that process several more times. That means he hasn’t previously tested this gun and suppressor combination before. That’s something that a professional would never do - go into a job with untested gear.


Other than that, your theory is plausible.

I thought they weren’t actual jams but that this particular gun model had to be manually cycled between shots. But either way, he clearly knew what he was doing in handling it with ease. It didn’t seem to throw him off.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He’s back in Lebanon

or Iran because he gives Persian vibes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At first I thought this guy must be acting on his own, especially given that he left his phone and cup. But now I think he's an assassin. Everything he left, he left on purpose. He looked directly at the camera in the cab on purpose. The only mistake he made was to flirt with that woman at the hostel. And he is clearly much smarter than the cops.

That could be plausible, except for the problems with the gun. Because he was clearly expecting the gun to function again after firing the first shot. Except it didn’t. He tried to fire, realized it hadn’t cycled the action, and then had to cycle it manually to get it to fire again. Then he had to repeat that process several more times. That means he hasn’t previously tested this gun and suppressor combination before. That’s something that a professional would never do - go into a job with untested gear.


Other than that, your theory is plausible.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have professional and personal reasons to really loathe the insurance industry but I still am very disturbed by the reaction-not the jokes but the people actually thinking it’s justified. This type of thinking is how we get people shooting docs who perform abortions. This isn’t the way, folks.

1) we’ve already had abortion doctors getting shot for decades. That horse is so far out of the barn it’s now holding kid’s craft projects together on thousands of refrigerators around the country.

2) it’s extremely telling that the very first reactions among corporate leadership wasn’t “hey wow, people are really upset at us - maybe we need to re-examine our ethics and the way we do business”, but instead it was “I need a fully armored Mercedes and a 6-man protection team composed of former SEAL operators, armed with submachineguns to watch over me 24/7/365”. This was the EXACT wrong reaction for corporate America - and this reaction shows why this stuff probably needs to happen a few more times.

I think if we as a society decide we aren’t going to have a bright line about murdering people who we feel are unethical we will see a lot more abortion providers killed. No argument from me that the corporate response is both idiotic and infuriating.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At first I thought this guy must be acting on his own, especially given that he left his phone and cup. But now I think he's an assassin. Everything he left, he left on purpose. He looked directly at the camera in the cab on purpose. The only mistake he made was to flirt with that woman at the hostel. And he is clearly much smarter than the cops.

That could be plausible, except for the problems with the gun. Because he was clearly expecting the gun to function again after firing the first shot. Except it didn’t. He tried to fire, realized it hadn’t cycled the action, and then had to cycle it manually to get it to fire again. Then he had to repeat that process several more times. That means he hasn’t previously tested this gun and suppressor combination before. That’s something that a professional would never do - go into a job with untested gear.


Other than that, your theory is plausible.

maybe or he saw it coming.

Looks like a polymer 80 Glock 19 frame with a homemade suppressor that lacked a neilsen device or a lightweight guide rod spring causing the gun to short stroke. That would explain the slide popping out live rounds.

100% agree. Homemade ‘can with no booster. Amateur.

I know nothing about firearms, but a friend said it’s possible he used subsonic bullets to be quieter, which would mean he would have to cycle it manually.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At first I thought this guy must be acting on his own, especially given that he left his phone and cup. But now I think he's an assassin. Everything he left, he left on purpose. He looked directly at the camera in the cab on purpose. The only mistake he made was to flirt with that woman at the hostel. And he is clearly much smarter than the cops.

That could be plausible, except for the problems with the gun. Because he was clearly expecting the gun to function again after firing the first shot. Except it didn’t. He tried to fire, realized it hadn’t cycled the action, and then had to cycle it manually to get it to fire again. Then he had to repeat that process several more times. That means he hasn’t previously tested this gun and suppressor combination before. That’s something that a professional would never do - go into a job with untested gear.


Other than that, your theory is plausible.

maybe or he saw it coming.

Looks like a polymer 80 Glock 19 frame with a homemade suppressor that lacked a neilsen device or a lightweight guide rod spring causing the gun to short stroke. That would explain the slide popping out live rounds.

100% agree. Homemade ‘can with no booster. Amateur.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At first I thought this guy must be acting on his own, especially given that he left his phone and cup. But now I think he's an assassin. Everything he left, he left on purpose. He looked directly at the camera in the cab on purpose. The only mistake he made was to flirt with that woman at the hostel. And he is clearly much smarter than the cops.

That could be plausible, except for the problems with the gun. Because he was clearly expecting the gun to function again after firing the first shot. Except it didn’t. He tried to fire, realized it hadn’t cycled the action, and then had to cycle it manually to get it to fire again. Then he had to repeat that process several more times. That means he hasn’t previously tested this gun and suppressor combination before. That’s something that a professional would never do - go into a job with untested gear.


Other than that, your theory is plausible.

maybe or he saw it coming.

Looks like a polymer 80 Glock 19 frame with a homemade suppressor that lacked a neilsen device or a lightweight guide rod spring causing the gun to short stroke. That would explain the slide popping out live rounds.

100% agree. Homemade ‘can with no booster. Amateur.