Giffords Shooting; No Video

[pcosmar]

I've been looking.
A media event, At a Shopping Center. A crowd of folks.No photographers or media, no video of the event.
You would thing in this day and age where most folks have cameras on Cell Phones and and many activists document events, None has showed up.
Has anyone seen any?

No mention of store or other security cameras either.
Curious.

[jmdrake]

Wow! I never thought of that. Here's video from the aftermath:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1C-O976JlA

Note what the author posted beneath the video:

IranContraScumDid911 | January 08, 2011 | 12 likes, 2 dislikes

8 hours later the police are looking into a second suspect when I could have told them by the number of people hit by a single glock handgun, if there is another then they should have warned the public 8 hours ago. Officials at University Medical Center have confirmed that U.S. Rep Gabrielle Giffords is alive. She is out of surgery. Doctors are optimistic about her chances of recovery.

The news is a dramatic reversal of previous reports circulated on some national news cable channels and local media claiming that Giffords had died.

Giffords was among 19 people shot at the Saturday morning at the Safeway grocery store at Ina and Oracle in Tucson. Six people died. One shooter is in custody.

Dr. Peter Rhee of University of Medical center told reporters at 2:00 PM Saturday morning that ten patients have been brought to the hospital. Of those, one is dead, five are in surgery and the rest are in recovery. The five in surgery are in critical condition.


That makes me wonder. From what I heard the shooter was grabbed while reloading. But he shot 19 people and the gun he used (Glock 19) only holds 15 rounds. Hmmmm....

[sailingaway]

I'm not sure the mushy middle of politics HAS activists, with or without video cameras.

[sailingaway]

Wow! I never thought of that. Note what the author posted beneath the video:

IranContraScumDid911 | January 08, 2011 | 12 likes, 2 dislikes

8 hours later the police are looking into a second suspect when I could have told them by the number of people hit by a single glock handgun, if there is another then they should have warned the public 8 hours ago. Officials at University Medical Center have confirmed that U.S. Rep Gabrielle Giffords is alive. She is out of surgery. Doctors are optimistic about her chances of recovery.

The news is a dramatic reversal of previous reports circulated on some national news cable channels and local media claiming that Giffords had died.

Giffords was among 19 people shot at the Saturday morning at the Safeway grocery store at Ina and Oracle in Tucson. Six people died. One shooter is in custody.

Dr. Peter Rhee of University of Medical center told reporters at 2:00 PM Saturday morning that ten patients have been brought to the hospital. Of those, one is dead, five are in surgery and the rest are in recovery. The five in surgery are in critical condition.


That makes me wonder. From what I heard the shooter was grabbed while reloading. But he shot 19 people and the gun he used (Glock 19) only holds 15 rounds. Hmmmm....

They said the clip used held 30 rounds. In fact some calling for a return of the ban on automatic weapons said it would have banned clips with more than 10 rounds, so fewer would have died. But people can set off bombs in this day and age if they really want to kill someone, or haven't they noticed how terrorists do it in so called backwards countries? Guns don't kill people; people kill people. :p

-
edit - sigh.... I really liked the old smiley faces better.

[Philhelm]

Extended clip, maybe?

Edit: Was beaten to it.

[dannno]

They said the clip used held 30 rounds. In fact some calling for a return of the ban on automatic weapons said it would have banned clips with more than 10 rounds, so fewer would have died.

Lol, he could have just brought 3+ guns with 10 round clips instead and holstered the others until he needed them..

[pacelli]

I find it highly suspicious that there is no video. Of course since the FBI director is personally investigating this event (where was he during the event?), maybe they seized everything.

[pcosmar]

Yeah, the focus is on the High Capacity Magazine. That still does not explain how an untrained shooter can get a Kill Ratio that police and most military shooters can't match.

There are several questions, discrepancies and curious coincidences. some video might fill in some.

That video posted was spliced clips of the area after the fact. looks like a pro shot them and edited them.

nothing has surfaced so far. at least nothing I have found.

[RCA]

Yeah, the focus is on the High Capacity Magazine. That still does not explain how an untrained shooter can get a Kill Ratio that police and most military shooters can't match.

There are several questions, discrepancies and curious coincidences. some video might fill in some.

That video posted was spliced clips of the area after the fact. looks like a pro shot them and edited them.

nothing has surfaced so far. at least nothing I have found.

What are the discrepancies? Just curious.

[coastie]

Yeah, the focus is on the High Capacity Magazine. That still does not explain how an untrained shooter can get a Kill Ratio that police and most military shooters can't match....



Good point, BUT, with all the chaos in that situation is at least plausible he hit that many--whether he meant to or not.

P.S. Police/ Law Enforcement dont train anywhere near as much most people think. Food for thought.;)

[Romulus]

Certainly there has to be parking lot or entrance way outdoor cameras.... not that the footage would be available to the public, but I"m sure there's some security camera that caught it.

[pcosmar]

What are the discrepancies? Just curious.

Just my observation of the Media reporting and spin.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kipR-HadbTs

I am on a small farm in the far north. keeping my house warm with wood, transporting my wife in bad weather and keeping things from falling apart.
The internet is my window on the world.

I am standing on the moon.
observing.

[runningdiz]

There is footage from security cameras they have said that. They won't release it to the public since that would seem disrespectful. Why would you want to see it anyway?

It was a crowd full of people. He shot people standing in a line. With 30 bullets he managed to hit 19. How is that surprising? A line of people in a crowd.

This was a town hall meeting in a shopping center after an election. It was not a rally, there was no speech, what is there to video tape? People were lining up to meet and talk to her.

[coastie]

There is footage from security cameras they have said that. They won't release it to the public since that would seem disrespectful. Why would you want to see it anyway?...



How, exactly, is viewing a crime being committed on video considered being "disrespectful"? This isn't about "wanting" to see it, you seem to allude there that people are gonna watch it purely for entertainment value. I'll concede that there are those that would, but that certainly isn't a reason to not release the video. This isn't about respect-it's about justice.

Show the video, then there will be no doubt. You don't really trust "them" to tell the truth...do you?

[pcosmar]

Why would you want to see it anyway?


I suspect a second shooter.(or more)
I want to see the shooters stance. was he aiming? or just firing wildly.? Where there hits from another direction?

It may have also captured sounds. What if anything was said or shouted. Gunfire recorded (and counted)

I also suspect that this shooter has no recollection of the event.
And he has a curiously familiar attorney.

[Acala]

This happened in a large, open shopping center. They very well might have been a hundred yards from the nearest structure. It also would not surprise me if there were not many security cameras. This is a low-crime area.

As for the hit ratio, if you are in a tight crowd of people and you don't care who you hit, I think it would be rather easy to achieve a 75% ratio. It would be nearly point blank into a wall of people. Cops have worse ratios because they are trying to ONLY hit a designated target, not spraying into a dense crowd. At least the good cops.

[Brooklyn Red Leg]

Yeah, the focus is on the High Capacity Magazine. That still does not explain how an untrained shooter can get a Kill Ratio that police and most military shooters can't match.

Yea, that has me wondering as well. Other than shooting Giffords at point-blank range, its still difficult to pop a bunch of people who are presumably moving. Even center mass shots from anything more than a few feet can be difficult unless you've been doing a good deal of practice shooting. The Glock he had was semi-auto, not that the full auto would have done much anyway since its a spray weapon.

[runningdiz]

How, exactly, is viewing a crime being committed on video considered being "disrespectful"? This isn't about "wanting" to see it, you seem to allude there that people are gonna watch it purely for entertainment value. I'll concede that there are those that would, but that certainly isn't a reason to not release the video. This isn't about respect-it's about justice.

Show the video, then there will be no doubt. You don't really trust "them" to tell the truth...do you?

People in our culture think it is disrespectful to show video of innocent people's brains being blown out.

Justice? Those who will sit on the shooters jury will watch the video as evidence.

[TheDriver]

That still does not explain how an untrained shooter can get a Kill Ratio that police and most military shooters can't match.



You need an explanation:

People were standing in a LINE with the shooter, once he started firing, he simply went down the line of people, it happened so fast, many didn't run or duck!

[runningdiz]

I suspect a second shooter.(or more)
I want to see the shooters stance. was he aiming? or just firing wildly.? Where there hits from another direction?

It may have also captured sounds. What if anything was said or shouted. Gunfire recorded (and counted)

I also suspect that this shooter has no recollection of the event.
And he has a curiously familiar attorney.

I agree with you but just because you have "curiosity" does not give you the right to see video that will be evidence in the shooter's or shooters' trial. I am sure after the trial is over it will become public. If you feel that it should be public now you could go through the legal procedures and try and make it so.

[TheDriver]

Yea, that has me wondering as well. Other than shooting Giffords at point-blank range, its still difficult to pop a bunch of people who are presumably moving. Even center mass shots from anything more than a few feet can be difficult unless you've been doing a good deal of practice shooting. The Glock he had was semi-auto, not that the full auto would have done much anyway since its a spray weapon.

The people were lined-up in the corridor next to Walgreens, it wasn't like he shot people in the parking lot, more like a sidewalk (walled on one side).

[runningdiz]

Yea, that has me wondering as well. Other than shooting Giffords at point-blank range, its still difficult to pop a bunch of people who are presumably moving. Even center mass shots from anything more than a few feet can be difficult unless you've been doing a good deal of practice shooting. The Glock he had was semi-auto, not that the full auto would have done much anyway since its a spray weapon.

People were in a tight crowd standing in line. A nine year old girl probably froze in shock along with others. The congresswoman obviously turned her head or turned to run because she saw what happened (instinct). Since it was tight crowd some people probably dropped to the ground since they had no where to go.

[pcosmar]

People in our culture think it is disrespectful to show video of innocent people's brains being blown out.

Justice? Those who will sit on the shooters jury will watch the video as evidence.

I watched the film of Kennedy's assassination. It answered questions.
The One Bullet theory is complete bullshit.

A person can be shot several times by a 9mm and live. A one shot kill is rare. In fact a head shot is not a guarantee . (as Miss Giffords proves)

Multiple people wounded is not surprising. 6 dead is.

[runningdiz]

I watched the film of Kennedy's assassination. It answered questions.
The One Bullet theory is complete bullshit.

A person can be shot several times by a 9mm and live. A one shot kill is rare. In fact a head shot is not a guarantee . (as Miss Giffords proves)

Multiple people wounded is not surprising. 6 dead is.

I think video will be released eventually. You just seem to be making an argument that because they have not released the video yet it means there is a cover up or that there is something fishy.

I am not to sure what kind of quality you will get from a security camera though.... I don't think JFK video was released right away to the public though.

[TheDriver]

I watched the film of Kennedy's assassination. It answered questions.
The One Bullet theory is complete bullshit.

A person can be shot several times by a 9mm and live. A one shot kill is rare. In fact a head shot is not a guarantee . (as Miss Giffords proves)

Multiple people wounded is not surprising. 6 dead is.

Distance and ammo-type factors into this BIG TIME. I haven't heard what kind of ammo was used, but the eyewitness reports say the shootings were point-blank, or nearly point-blank. Also, I haven't heard how many times those that were killed, we're shot.

Also, if one shot hits a certain artery, it's lights-out, with perhaps even a pellet-gun. So with that in-mind, ever person shot, depending on where they were shot, factors in very heavily. For example, a neck-shot that blasts open the jugular would be tough to overcome, regardless of caliber.

[pcosmar]

I agree with you but just because you have "curiosity" does not give you the right to see video that will be evidence in the shooter's or shooters' trial. I am sure after the trial is over it will become public. If you feel that it should be public now you could go through the legal procedures and try and make it so.

When the police gunned down the Kanes the released (highly edited footage). When the gunned down a man in Nevada the footage went missing.

Video has a habit of being missing from several notable events.
I was more interested in privately shot video from people recording the event. and hoping it would show up on the web.

[coastie]

People in our culture think it is disrespectful to show video of innocent people's brains being blown out.

Justice? Those who will sit on the shooters jury will watch the video as evidence.

Regardless of what "people in our culture" think-it's not illegal in "our culture", and it should be released. You don't want to see it?-then dont freakin watch it. Your reasoning is walking that fine line...

People also think pornography shouldn't be viewed because it's disrespectful to some other group of people, and what you're saying isn't any different...


Anyway, it's very plausible that he could have killed that many in the situation. Measuring his results compared to Law Enforcement is pissing in the wind here-they don't shoot (training wise)anywhere near as much as most people assume they do.;)

[runningdiz]

When the police gunned down the Kanes the released (highly edited footage). When the gunned down a man in Nevada the footage went missing.

Video has a habit of being missing from several notable events.
I was more interested in privately shot video from people recording the event. and hoping it would show up on the web.

Well there does not seem to be such video. It was not an event people would be likely to videotape. So you may be out of luck.

[runningdiz]

Regardless of what "people in our culture" think-it's not illegal in "our culture", and it should be released. You don't want to see it?-then dont freakin watch it. Your reasoning is walking that fine line...

People also think pornography shouldn't be viewed because it's disrespectful to some other group of people, and what you're saying isn't any different...


Anyway, it's very plausible that he could have killed that many in the situation. Measuring his results compared to Law Enforcement is pissing in the wind here-they don't shoot (training wise)anywhere near as much as most people assume they do.;)

It is evidence in a trial. If you want to see it ask the Judge to release it you have the right to. More then likely he won't.

[Dojo]

When the police gunned down the Kanes the released (highly edited footage). When the gunned down a man in Nevada the footage went missing.

Video has a habit of being missing from several notable events.
I was more interested in privately shot video from people recording the event. and hoping it would show up on the web.

I know what your saying pcos........ usually within hours of an event some individual has posted something. I find nothing but news clips.

[TheDriver]

I was more interested in privately shot video from people recording the event. and hoping it would show up on the web.

I've heard reports of roughly 20 people in attendance, 6 to 8 being staffers, so I'm not holding out for eyewitness video, considering nearly everyone was shot, but I guess you never know, perhaps someone was shooting some phone video.

[brandon]

When a guy starts firing like a mad man at random targets, I doubt the first thought on most peoples mind is "I better capture this on my cell phone so I can upload it to youtube"

THere are probably security cameras that caught some of it but I doubt that footage will be released for a long time. Such is standard protocol for a serious crime that is under investigation.

[coastie]

It is evidence in a trial. If you want to see it ask the Judge to release it you have the right to. More then likely he won't.

??? Nobody was arguing that. I'm fine with it being "sealed" until the trial's over, and then-it should be released. Funny how your argument went from "it's disrespectful/therefore shouldn't be viewed" to "it's evidence in a trial!!!!", lol:rolleyes:

[runningdiz]

??? Nobody was arguing that. I'm fine with it being "sealed" until the trial's over, and then-it should be released. Funny how your argument went from "it's disrespectful/therefore shouldn't be viewed" to "it's evidence in a trial!!!!", lol:rolleyes:

I was arguing both before. If the msm had graphic video they wouldn't show it I was not saying it should not be viewed (note how I said because of our culture not "in my opinion") No need to get upset.

[coastie]

I was arguing both before. If the msm had graphic video they wouldn't show it I was not saying it should not be viewed (note how I said because of our culture not "in my opinion") No need to get upset.

Fair enough...and I don't get upset about stuff like this;)

[pcosmar]

I've heard reports of roughly 20 people in attendance, 6 to 8 being staffers, so I'm not holding out for eyewitness video, considering nearly everyone was shot, but I guess you never know, perhaps someone was shooting some phone video.

So 28 to 30 people in attendance. and 20 of them shot. 6 killed.
With a caliber that was rejected by most police agencies due to lack of stopping power.
That is some amazing shooting for an untrained psychopath.

I guess that the answer is no. No one else has found any video of the event.

[runningdiz]

Fair enough...and I don't get upset about stuff like this;)

Haha ok same :) Just hate when people take it offensively. I like a good debate!

[coastie]

So 28 to 30 people in attendance. and 20 of them shot. 6 killed.
With a caliber that was rejected by most police agencies due to lack of stopping power.
That is some amazing shooting for an untrained psychopath.

I guess that the answer is no. No one else has found any video of the event.

I've looked, haven't seen anything. It was the first thing I looked for, TBH, how could you not in this day and age of the youtubz.

[runningdiz]

So 28 to 30 people in attendance. and 20 of them shot. 6 killed.
With a caliber that was rejected by most police agencies due to lack of stopping power.
That is some amazing shooting for an untrained psychopath.

I guess that the answer is no. No one else has found any video of the event.

I have not heard any solid figures but prob 30 or more people including the congresswoman and her staff. He was at close range and they were all in a line waiting to see her.

Well it may have had a lack of "stopping power" for their use but any gun can be lethal at close range.

It was not the first time he shot a gun his friends said they went with him to a shooting range before. Even still does it really take that much skill to do what he did?

[TheDriver]

So 28 to 30 people in attendance. and 20 of them shot. 6 killed.
With a caliber that was rejected by most police agencies due to lack of stopping power.
That is some amazing shooting for an untrained psychopath.


Don't get confused, these people weren't charging the shooter, so he didn't need "stopping power." I wouldn't for one-second think a single 9mm shot can't kill, it was developed by the Germans, and they have a history of knowing how to kill people. Any gun within just a few feet of a target is extremely deadly.

From my understanding, the people were so close to him and enclosed near the building, that most anyone could have made contact with the weapon. Now if he was over 15 feet away when he shot at people, I don't think he would have hit hardly anyone, however eyewitness tell a story of him walking down the line shooting people, so that doesn't seem difficult.

[TheDriver]

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7234358n&tag=related;photovideo
Tucson Survivor Recalls Shooting

[MelissaWV]

When a guy starts firing like a mad man at random targets, I doubt the first thought on most peoples mind is "I better capture this on my cell phone so I can upload it to youtube"

THere are probably security cameras that caught some of it but I doubt that footage will be released for a long time. Such is standard protocol for a serious crime that is under investigation.

Not to mention that video that actually shows the death of a 9-year-old child is probably not going to be played or released quickly. My first thoughts would not be about video, either. I guess we're the only ones.

* * *

Pete, most of the people killed were elderly with the exception of the little girl. Most of the people were shot very, very close-range; I don't really doubt the kill rate here.

I do doubt the "untrained" part, but feel that will pop up later as part of the gun control push. He'll be found to have been training somewhere with these awful weapons :(

[jmdrake]

People in our culture think it is disrespectful to show video of innocent people's brains being blown out.

Justice? Those who will sit on the shooters jury will watch the video as evidence.

Except in this case the crime is already being tried in the media. And congressmen are already proposing legislation in response. Under these circumstances the video should be released sooner rather than later. It's not just out of "curiosity" or even a sense of justice for the victims. These victims are being used as pawns and our freedom is act stake. Maybe the video shows, for example, that he really didn't have a 30 round clip? Maybe it shows that the judge was the main target? Who knows.

[HRD53]

Regardless of what "people in our culture" think-it's not illegal in "our culture", and it should be released. You don't want to see it?-then dont freakin watch it. Your reasoning is walking that fine line...

People also think pornography shouldn't be viewed because it's disrespectful to some other group of people, and what you're saying isn't any different...


Anyway, it's very plausible that he could have killed that many in the situation. Measuring his results compared to Law Enforcement is pissing in the wind here-they don't shoot (training wise)anywhere near as much as most people assume they do.;)

People in porno are participating in it of their own volition. People getting their brains blown out are not.

That is quite possibly the dumbest comparison i've ever heard in my life. Thanks!

[pacelli]

You just seem to be making an argument that because they have not released the video yet it means there is a cover up or that there is something fishy.

I don't think JFK video was released right away to the public though.

How long was it until the film was released in its entirety (not photos of it)? In what manner did the Warren Commission consider the film? How did the release of the full Zapruder film influence theories surrounding the reality of the assassination?

After answering those questions, perhaps you can understand why NOT releasing a film of the event makes things seem quite suspicious. We've got precedent.