Gunman Opens Fire At LAX 520
McGruber tips news that today at 9:30AM PST, a man removed an assault rifle from a bag at Los Angeles International Airport and opened fire. The shooter moved into the screening area, and then further into the terminal. One TSA agent was killed; roughly six more people were injured. The gunman was a ticketed passenger. (Early reports suggested he worked for the TSA — this does not seem to be the case.) Police engaged him in gunfire, and he's now in custody. His motive is unknown at this time.
Harder than killing him... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Great... (Score:5, Insightful)
More like, prepare for this to look like a warzone as airports start to resemble third-world combat zones. Soldiers with assault rifles on their arms staking out every airport entrance and jeeps on patrol around the airport every hour of the day. This is exactly the sort of justification they needed to ratchet things up.
That said, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that I don't think even a TSA agent deserved to be murdered in cold-blood.
Re:Great... (Score:5, Insightful)
I have been saying for the longest time, terrorists don't need to get on the plane. Now they just need to blow them selves up getting into the security line. What then is TSA going to do? It's a cat and mouse game and unfortunately the TSA isn't going to win
Re:damn (Score:5, Insightful)
Screening areas as terrorist targets (Score:5, Insightful)
How many years have people been complaining that the only the thing the long lines at the screening areas do is make for a target rich environment? Attacking waiting points for security lines is a time honored practice in some parts of the world, the only surprising thing is that it took this long for it to occur here.
Security theater isn't just an inconvenience, it's a security risk in and of itself. I used to travel for a living and I have easily seen times in major airports where there were thousands of people queued up to go through the security checkpoints. It's a target rich environment where you can't miss for trying in some airports.
It's time to end security theater and demand real security.
Impossible! (Score:4, Insightful)
a man removed an assault rifle from a bag at Los Angeles International Airport and opened fire.
Assault rifles are illegal in California; therefore this could never have happened!
Re:Those poor people (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm glad it's only six. It's really hard to believe there weren't more. A guy with an assault weapon aimin' to misbehave at a busy airport terminal? You'd think there would be dozens dead and many more injured.
Re:How is this news for nerds? (Score:4, Insightful)
Maybe it's because some nerds travel by airplane.
Maybe it's because Slashdotters have been pointing out that the line at the screening checkpoint is, itself, a target, and they have unfortunately been proven correct.
I seem to recall there are a number of gun-rights advocates in the Slashdot community, who may be concerned about a legislative (over?)reaction to this atrocious act.
Then there are people like me who check Slashdot a lot more often than they check mainstream news sites, and learned about the shooting just now.
I don't mean to be too hard on you, because your question is legitimate. My best answer is, "news for nerds" is in the eye of the beholder and sometimes the editors will post a story that doesn't interest you, but does interest someone else.
The NRA must be pleased (Score:1, Insightful)
That guy exercised the *shit* out of his second amendment rights. It's too bad Thomas Jefferson isn't around to high five him.
Conspiracy theory (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Great... (Score:2, Insightful)
or we could have a rational discussion about gun control...Nah
Re:Great... (Score:4, Insightful)
"Rational discussion" meaning "groups of people coming to the same conclusion I did."
Re:Great... (Score:5, Insightful)
An assault rifle fires "a dozen" shots in about one second (automatic) or at most 4 trigger pulls (3 round burst).
Unless the fire selector is set to single-shot. In which case I'd have to wonder why someone would go through the trouble of procuring an illegal firearm for themselves (assault rifles have been illegal since at least 1986) simply to use it in a manner that any legal (and easily obtained) semi-automatic rifle would suffice for.
Maybe he's military, and it's his service weapon. Or maybe the news outlets are in a race to see who can offer the most hysterical coverage.
Re:Great... (Score:4, Insightful)
Until then, it's not a discussion, it's just you telling me "you don't need a gun because I said so", and me responding back with "fuck off".
Re:Great... (Score:2, Insightful)
or we could have a rational discussion about gun control...Nah
Don't waste your breath. Not even the death of tens of children has had any effect whatsoever in "kicking the second amendment right where it belongs". That is into the wastebasket of History.
Americans love guns. Good for them. Have them deal with the aftermath of these anounced tragedies.
Re:Great... (Score:5, Insightful)
Assault rifles don't exist until someone commits assault with a rifle. At that point, any rifle is an assault rifle.
Any time I see a news article or press release with the term "assault rifle" in it I know I'm dealing with someone who doesn't know anything at all about guns. A quick scan of TFA, BTW, does not name or picture the weapon. For all we know, it could be a deer rifle with a black stock, a Warsaw Pact semiauto AK, any of dozens of M4/M14/M16/AR15 semiauto clones, or a really tricked out Ruger 10-22 (and a lucky shot on the one kill). A more attentive reading might tell us more, but I doubt it.
Re:Impossible! (Score:2, Insightful)
They have not been illegal. All you need is a $200 tax stamp to own one (and the usual, no felony, etc.) All the assault rifles that are legal for purchase were manufactured before 1986 when the machine gun registry was closed. The states have the right to decide that they don't want machine guns at all but there is no federal prohibition.
Re:Those poor people (Score:0, Insightful)
Sorry, but I can't really get sad over a jackboot thug groper getting the bullet. It's the price you pay for doing the job. Stop groping me and making me walk through cancer-causing nudie scanners and I might get some sympathy. This like crying over a guard of a concentration camp getting shot. Don't have the tears to waste.
Re:Great... (Score:4, Insightful)
Did you know a .22 short fired from a revolver can penetrate 12-inches of wetpack with roughly a 1-inch wound channel?
Sure, .22 is a tiny caliber - but that doesn't mean it's not dangerous. [youtube.com]
Re:Impossible! (Score:4, Insightful)
Assault rifles are illegal in California; therefore this could never have happened!
So is murder, so not only did he not use a gun, but he didn't kill anyone either, right?
So not only is 'gun control' moot since only criminals will have guns, but we may as well repeal murder laws since criminals will ignore those too, right? Indeed, why have laws at all, since it just means more things on the books for criminals to ignore?
Is that argument you are making? Because that's what it sounds like.
Re:Great... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Great... (Score:2, Insightful)
Well yeah, but the body count would be a lot lower.
One of those stories (Score:4, Insightful)
You guys have a massive cultural blind-spot when it comes to this stuff. It's incredible.
Re:Great... (Score:5, Insightful)
That's my point Airports are full of armed guards and police... At least UK ones are. Men and women, with guns, loaded, maintained, trained in their use and ready to act. Didn't seem to help here.
Re:Great... (Score:4, Insightful)
Chart one on the police report you linked to shows there were fewer crimes where firearms were used in 2011 than in 1997, the year the handgun ban went into effect. That's despite the fact that
If you look at the second chart then you can even see that the "big increase" of firearm use in 2003 was nothing to do with handguns anyway, it was mostly from air guns.
Whatever (Score:4, Insightful)
Another shooting in the USA ... yeah yeah whatever. I really don't care anymore. You guys shoot yourselves up and scream about the 2nd amendment to your hearts content, sure as the sun rises tommorrow there will be another shooting soon and you won't do shit to change it
One thing for sure kiddies - it ain't news for nerds or stuff that matters, if it was, something constructive would be done. After all this time we have to conclude you idiots like it this way.
Re:Great... (Score:1, Insightful)
Sorry but that is irrelevant. Before we got rid of the guns we had 13 gun massacres in 20 years. None in the 20 years since. Clear proof it worked to anyone but US gun nuts.