This is disappointing. I have not looked at any news since last night. In the evening I heard a news anchor talking about calming the situation down on CNN. Which gave me hope. Sounds like that is not happening. And we are right back to our scheduled blame game.

I completely agree with @Lambykins . It appeared to me that Trump looked up to the roof top next to him. Where the SS snipers were located. Moments before the shots rang out. Like something was happening. That caught his attentiin. The shots start. He feels his ear. More shots. Then he drops to the ground. THEN the SS run to him. I to am old and have seen a few assignation attempts that were filmed. I was in the military. And paid attention to things like this. At least in a casual level. And it seemed like no one was doing anything for far to long. Far to long in terms of SS or even bodyguard time frames when shots ring out.

How is it that shots ring out. The president (isn't he supposed to always be referred to as the President? Not former or disgraced or whatever words they always use in main stream media? I remember being confused as a kid when they would refer to Jimmy Carter as the President after he left office.) turns to look at something going on, shots ring out, he grabs his ear, more shots ring out, he goes to the ground, and then SS respond? And then after some time only two guys with ARs and full kit come to the stage?

I was surprised by all of that the first time I saw the video. Then they pause in some lame body shield formation with their hands trying to cover his face. And wait for him to put his shoes on. You can hear him say "let me put my shoe or shoes on". They stay up there in the open for way to long. He raises his fist. And shouts.

In any other situation like this. No one is waiting. No one is letting him stand there. They are forcing him down into a crouch at least. And shuffling him off immediately in a low buried walk or crouch.

Saddened to here it's being politicized already.

Quote from: Anianna on July 14, 2024, 02:02:19 PMApparently, a photographer shot him before the Secret Service did:

If you look at the overhead images that roof top is very close to the stage. And even closer to the snipers stage right on a rooftop. It would be very hard to miss someone on that roof. Very hard. Less than 200m. Maybe even 100-150m. I'm really surprised that area was not secure enough to stop someone from getting on top of that building to begin with. Even your average soldier would know that is the closest sniper position to the stage. Like so close I doubt any soldier would even attempt it. The assumption being that would be secure in the first place. And you'd be picked off as soon you got there.

Looks to me like the schmuck was using open sights and no optic. Kind of hard to tell due to the trees and the blurriness of the photo when you zoom in.

Also, I can almost say with certainty that this'll probably be the end of any open air campaign rally stops for Trump and probably Biden as well.

Any stops going forward are likely to be indoors with a extremely high level of security. 

At least I'd think they ought to be.

Because you just know there's already another whacko out there that'll try this again just to get their name in the papers and their 15 minutes of fame.

Quote from: Moab on July 14, 2024, 02:03:00 PMI completely agree with @Lambykins . It appeared to me that Trump looked up to the roof top next to him. Where the SS snipers were located. Moments before the shots rang out. Like something was happening. That caught his attentiin. The shots start. He feels his ear. More shots. Then he drops to the ground. THEN the SS run to him. I to am old and have seen a few assignation attempts that were filmed. I was in the military. And paid attention to things like this. At least in a casual level. And it seemed like no one was doing anything for far to long. Far to long in terms of SS or even bodyguard time frames when shots ring out.

How is it that shots ring out. The president (isn't he supposed to always be referred to as the President? Not former or disgraced or whatever words they always use in main stream media? I remember being confused as a kid when they would refer to Jimmy Carter as the President after he left office.) turns to look at something going on, shots ring out, he grabs his ear, more shots ring out, he goes to the ground, and then SS respond? And then after some time only two guys with ARs and full kit come to the stage?

I was surprised by all of that the first time I saw the video. Then they pause in some lame body shield formation with their hands trying to cover his face. And wait for him to put his shoes on. You can hear him say "let me put my shoe or shoes on". They stay up there in the open for way to long. He raises his fist. And shouts.

In any other situation like this. No one is waiting. No one is letting him stand there. They are forcing him down into a crouch at least. And shuffling him off immediately in a low buried walk or crouch.

So I wasn't the only one that noticed all that!
Been seeing opinions from former/retired SS agents and LEOs.... some of their opinions are brutal about the TOTAL lack of situational awareness and securing the speech site. That's before they get into the lack of urgency when the shots started.

Actually it was within 140m.

For reference the Marine Corps shooting qualification (when I was in) starts at 200m. While "standing". Standing vs prone or lying down is the hardest type of shooting stance. But you can easily hit a half man sized target (it's called a dog target) from a standing position with an AR.

Why that wouldn't be within an exceptable range to secure a presidential speech is beyond me.
At least have a LEO stationed there. That could at least observe anyone climbing onto the roof.

As a person completely ignorant to tactical security of a dignitary. That is the first position anyone would secure in that situation. This isn't a conspiracy theory either. If you asked the neighbor kid what is the one place on this map you would station a cop? He would point to that building. This is kind of amazing that no one was there. And no one saw him climbing on a roof. Although apparently several civilians did. And their warnings to LE went unanswered.

You cannot view this attachment.

They're the closest buildings to the stage. Not directly beside and behind the stage. How was there not even an average local LEO not stationed at those buildings?

Just watched an interview with some kids that went to HS with the shooter. Appears he was severely bullied. These kids weren't even friends. Just kids at the same school. It was apparently common knowledge he was an outcast and bullied. Not offering that up as any kind of excuse. We just have to stop looking at these events as something the gun did. And why we need to ban firearms. And start looking at why young men are suddenly carrying out these various types of horrible shootings.

There is an obvious mental health crisis at hand. But every government official and administration refuses to even study or look at the root causes. This was not happening 20-30 years ago. In the 80s and maybe even into the 90s. You routinely saw rifles in rifle racks inside trucks parked in the school parking lot. And no one was shooting each other. Or going in shooting rampages. What has happened?

Yet it has become routine to blame the firearms. And turn a blind eye to the people in these events that are creating these disastrous killings.

Like a complete lack of even questioning why these people are doing this. Let alone into any solution related answers as to how we might curb or understand this. Hours of coverage on the news into any one of these. And a complete ignoring of the simple question - "why is this happening?".

The rule of the day seems to be a "gun epidemic". When in reality it's so obviously a mental health epidemic. I just don't know how long we can keep ignoring this in favor of the political hot topic of banning guns?

Quote from: 12_Gauge_Chimp on July 14, 2024, 03:02:24 PMLooks to me like the schmuck was using open sights and no optic. Kind of hard to tell due to the trees and the blurriness of the photo when you zoom in.

Yea, TMZ watermarked their logo onto it, which distorts the image in key locations. 

Quote from: Moab on July 14, 2024, 03:50:34 PMActually it was within 140m.

You cannot view this attachment.

They're the closest buildings to the stage. Not directly beside and behind the stage. How was there not even an average local LEO not stationed at those buildings?

I believe there were LEO at those buildings.  Attendees pointed the guy out to somebody they believed were security or law enforcement, so somebody was there.  

The zoomed out view of the agents on the roof showed several more standing and looking in various directions, one of which absolutely should have been watching that rooftop.  I don't see how they could have confused him for one of their own or not seen him. 

I'm interested to know how tall each of those rooftops are. 

Quote from: Moab on July 14, 2024, 02:03:00 PMThe president (isn't he supposed to always be referred to as the President? Not former or disgraced or whatever words they always use in main stream media? I remember being confused as a kid when they would refer to Jimmy Carter as the President after he left office.)

My understanding is that any person who has held the office can be addressed as "Mr. President" (or as the case will be eventually, "Madam President").  But only the current office holder is referred to in the third person as "the President".

There is more nuance than that in the present case, but I can't go there.

Quote from: Anianna on July 14, 2024, 03:51:28 PM

Quote from: 12_Gauge_Chimp on July 14, 2024, 03:02:24 PMLooks to me like the schmuck was using open sights and no optic. Kind of hard to tell due to the trees and the blurriness of the photo when you zoom in.

Yea, TMZ watermarked their logo onto it, which distorts the image in key locations. 

I hate when they do that.

If I could find a clearer photo, I could better tell whether or not the gun had an optic on it or not.

Quote from: Moab on July 14, 2024, 03:50:34 PMActually it was within 140m.

For reference the Marine Corps shooting qualification (when I was in) starts at 200m. While "standing". Standing vs prone or lying down is the hardest type of shooting stance. But you can easily hit a half man sized target (it's called a dog target) from a standing position with an AR.

Why that wouldn't be within an exceptable range to secure a presidential speech is beyond me.
At least have a LEO stationed there. That could at least observe anyone climbing onto the roof.

As a person completely ignorant to tactical security of a dignitary. That is the first position anyone would secure in that situation. This isn't a conspiracy theory either. If you asked the neighbor kid what is the one place on this map you would station a cop? He would point to that building. This is kind of amazing that no one was there. And no one saw him climbing on a roof. Although apparently several civilians did. And their warnings to LE went unanswered.

You cannot view this attachment.

They're the closest buildings to the stage. Not directly beside and behind the stage. How was there not even an average local LEO not stationed at those buildings?

Just watched an interview with some kids that went to HS with the shooter. Appears he was severely bullied. These kids weren't even friends. Just kids at the same school. It was apparently common knowledge he was an outcast and bullied. Not offering that up as any kind of excuse. We just have to stop looking at these events as something the gun did. And why we need to ban firearms. And start looking at why young men are suddenly carrying out these various types of horrible shootings.

There is an obvious mental health crisis at hand. But every government official and administration refuses to even study or look at the root causes. This was not happening 20-30 years ago. In the 80s and maybe even into the 90s. You routinely saw rifles in rifle racks inside trucks parked in the school parking lot. And no one was shooting each other. Or going in shooting rampages. What has happened?

Yet it has become routine to blame the firearms. And turn a blind eye to the people in these events that are creating these disastrous killings.

Like a complete lack of even questioning why these people are doing this. Let alone into any solution related answers as to how we might curb or understand this. Hours of coverage on the news into any one of these. And a complete ignoring of the simple question - "why is this happening?".

The rule of the day seems to be a "gun epidemic". When in reality it's so obviously a mental health epidemic. I just don't know how long we can keep ignoring this in favor of the political hot topic of banning guns?

I edited and added comments to this post. You might want to read it again.

A local LEO confronted the scum and did not act.

https://nypost.com/2024/07/14/us-news/local-cop-confronted-sniper-thomas-matthew-crooks-before-he-shot-former-president-trump-report/

Pretty pathetic reaction.

A bunch of people need walking papers.

Quote from: Raptor on July 14, 2024, 05:00:43 PMA local LEO confronted the scum and did not act.

https://nypost.com/2024/07/14/us-news/local-cop-confronted-sniper-thomas-matthew-crooks-before-he-shot-former-president-trump-report/

Pretty pathetic reaction.

A bunch of people need walking papers.

I wondered where some of the fired Uvalde PD guys ended up. Looks like one of them made it to PA.

Quote from: Raptor on July 14, 2024, 05:00:43 PMA local LEO confronted the scum and did not act.

https://nypost.com/2024/07/14/us-news/local-cop-confronted-sniper-thomas-matthew-crooks-before-he-shot-former-president-trump-report/

Pretty pathetic reaction.

A bunch of people need walking papers.

The photo in that article appears to show a very clear line of site between the roof the Secret Service was on and the one the shooter was on.  This is nuts.

NBC Nightly News is reporting that those building were just outside of the secured perimeter.  Who made that ridiculous call?? 

Kind of sounds like a too many cooks sort of deal with Secret Service focused inside the perimeter and expecting local LEO to handle people outside of it.

Quote from: Raptor on July 14, 2024, 05:00:43 PMA local LEO confronted the scum and did not act.

https://nypost.com/2024/07/14/us-news/local-cop-confronted-sniper-thomas-matthew-crooks-before-he-shot-former-president-trump-report/

Pretty pathetic reaction.

A bunch of people need walking papers.

Wow. Worse than I thought.

This brings up an issue I've thought of for a long time. The number of counties in a state.

It sounds like county sheriff's were the back up force to the Secret Service. But this issue does not end there.

I don't know why the reason is for so many counties. I assume smaller fiefdoms. But western states tend to have far fewer counties than eastern states. Georgia for example has 159 counties. The state I am originally from, Washington, has 39.

County (United States)
254– Texas.
159– Georgia.
120– Kentucky.
115– Missouri.
105– Kansas.
102– Illinois.
100– North Carolina.
99– Iowa.

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/County_(United_States)

Assuming each county has its own sheriff's department. How much resources does each of these tiny counties have for equipment, training and personnel?

In a state like Washington, a county in Georgia would be more like the size of a city. Texas has 254 counties.

I've always wondered, for better or worse depending on how you looked at it, what difference this made in the quality of law enforcement in a given county. Especially training, education concerning the law, equipment and how many personnel they could afford to hire.

Law enforcement training is already at a severe low nationwide. I think the average training just shooting a firearm is something obysmal.

ChatGPT says it's 16-36 hours per year. I have read statistics much lower than that. And that would just be range days qualifying with your side arm or rifle. Not actual tactical training.

So just because someone is a "county" law enforcement officer or sheriff. Does not necessarily mean he or she is well trained or well equipped for higher level situations like a Presidential event.

Quote from: Moab on July 14, 2024, 06:01:33 PM

Quote from: Raptor on July 14, 2024, 05:00:43 PMA local LEO confronted the scum and did not act.

https://nypost.com/2024/07/14/us-news/local-cop-confronted-sniper-thomas-matthew-crooks-before-he-shot-former-president-trump-report/

Pretty pathetic reaction.

A bunch of people need walking papers.

Wow. Worse than I thought.

This brings up an issue I've thought of for a long time. The number of counties in a state.

It sounds like county sheriff's were the back up force to the Secret Service. But this issue does not end there.

I don't know why the reason is for so many counties. I assume smaller fiefdoms. But western states tend to have far fewer counties than eastern states. Georgia for example has 159 counties. The state I am originally from, Washington, has 39.

County (United States)
254– Texas.
159– Georgia.
120– Kentucky.
115– Missouri.
105– Kansas.
102– Illinois.
100– North Carolina.
99– Iowa.

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/County_(United_States)

Assuming each county has its own sheriff's department. How much resources does each of these tiny counties have for equipment, training and personnel?

In a state like Washington, a county in Georgia would be more like the size of a city. Texas has 254 counties.

I've always wondered, for better or worse depending on how you looked at it, what difference this made in the quality of law enforcement in a given county. Especially training, education concerning the law, equipment and how many personnel they could afford to hire.

Law enforcement training is already at a severe low nationwide. I think the average training just shooting a firearm is something obysmal.

ChatGPT says it's 16-36 hours per year. I have read statistics much lower than that. And that would just be range days qualifying with your side arm or rifle. Not actual tactical training.

So just because someone is a "county" law enforcement officer or sheriff. Does not necessarily mean he or she is well trained or well equipped for higher level situations like a Presidential event.

Was that the number of annual hours for firearms training, or for all training?  If I had to guess, it's probably the latter.  Specialty police roles (K-9, SWAT, riot control, mounted, SAR, etc.) frequently require much more ongoing training than "regular" police officers.  So the 'average' might be higher than the 'median' when looking at the statistics.  

I'm not sure what the training requirements are for our local PD as to firearms.  I do know that they do live, scenario training at least once a year (wax bullet training with volunteers who act out roles and force the officers to make shoot / don't shoot decisions and go hands-on with the actors).  That might count as "firearm" training, although it's really much broader than that.  They do have their own range in the basement.  No idea how much use it gets.  Recently there has been quite a bit of focus on mental health and they've gotten some grant money for a full-time mental health professional to assist with calls and also for some specialized training materials for mental health scenarios. 

As is almost always the case in every line of work, there's never enough training you can have, and never enough time / budget to take it all.

Quote from: EBuff75 on July 14, 2024, 07:28:58 PM

Quote from: Moab on July 14, 2024, 06:01:33 PM

Quote from: Raptor on July 14, 2024, 05:00:43 PMA local LEO confronted the scum and did not act.

https://nypost.com/2024/07/14/us-news/local-cop-confronted-sniper-thomas-matthew-crooks-before-he-shot-former-president-trump-report/

Pretty pathetic reaction.

A bunch of people need walking papers.

Wow. Worse than I thought.

This brings up an issue I've thought of for a long time. The number of counties in a state.

It sounds like county sheriff's were the back up force to the Secret Service. But this issue does not end there.

I don't know why the reason is for so many counties. I assume smaller fiefdoms. But western states tend to have far fewer counties than eastern states. Georgia for example has 159 counties. The state I am originally from, Washington, has 39.

County (United States)
254– Texas.
159– Georgia.
120– Kentucky.
115– Missouri.
105– Kansas.
102– Illinois.
100– North Carolina.
99– Iowa.

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/County_(United_States)

Assuming each county has its own sheriff's department. How much resources does each of these tiny counties have for equipment, training and personnel?

In a state like Washington, a county in Georgia would be more like the size of a city. Texas has 254 counties.

I've always wondered, for better or worse depending on how you looked at it, what difference this made in the quality of law enforcement in a given county. Especially training, education concerning the law, equipment and how many personnel they could afford to hire.

Law enforcement training is already at a severe low nationwide. I think the average training just shooting a firearm is something obysmal.

ChatGPT says it's 16-36 hours per year. I have read statistics much lower than that. And that would just be range days qualifying with your side arm or rifle. Not actual tactical training.

So just because someone is a "county" law enforcement officer or sheriff. Does not necessarily mean he or she is well trained or well equipped for higher level situations like a Presidential event.

Was that the number of annual hours for firearms training, or for all training?  If I had to guess, it's probably the latter.  Specialty police roles (K-9, SWAT, riot control, mounted, SAR, etc.) frequently require much more ongoing training than "regular" police officers.  So the 'average' might be higher than the 'median' when looking at the statistics. 

I'm not sure what the training requirements are for our local PD as to firearms.  I do know that they do live, scenario training at least once a year (wax bullet training with volunteers who act out roles and force the officers to make shoot / don't shoot decisions and go hands-on with the actors).  That might count as "firearm" training, although it's really much broader than that.  They do have their own range in the basement.  No idea how much use it gets.  Recently there has been quite a bit of focus on mental health and they've gotten some grant money for a full-time mental health professional to assist with calls and also for some specialized training materials for mental health scenarios. 

As is almost always the case in every line of work, there's never enough training you can have, and never enough time / budget to take it all.

Generally speaking, all reports I have read from trainers and law enforcement personnel as well. It is woefully inadequate over all. It came up a lot during and after the riots. When everyone was discussing the police, shootings etc. (Number of police shootings is widely inaccurate in the media too. There's an excellent class by a well known professor on YT. And a study done by a black professor at Harvard iirc. That did not turn out like they thought it would. About how many actual people get shot by police who were not actually holding a weapon and threatening police officers or citizens lives. It's like less than 30 nationwide. Maybe even lower than that. I want to say 15.) But the amount of training we spend on officers is terrible. We need to support them alot more.

The numbers I quote are for firearm training. No distinction between just qualifying and tactical training. But I think the real number is closer to 8 nationwide. Many departments require a qualification once a year. And that's it. But it varies widely. And is generally agreed by law enforcement that it is not enough. Liberal sources do that cite this. And way over report number of police shootings per year.

The first video breaks down number and types of police shootings per year. You'll be surprised how few it actually is. As the media has over blown this massively.

EDITED REMOVED-   The third video is a black Harvard professor who did a study on police violence. Watch that one. The study did not support the official narrative of an out of control law enforcement community. And he received a major about if backlash for it. It's a short video.


https://youtu.be/FBpPSVQHSmk?si=8NV6L_cEeR7P2OiW


https://youtu.be/nSfVcGI6T4A?si=ryGXBSPBZTYHTsSo
******************************
EDITED REMOVED:

******************************
Additional reading on police training. Seems fairly balanced. There are many biased sources trying to support high rates of police shootings because of lack of training. Then other sources that are probably police. Simply trying to get more support for more and better police training. Google was no help due its inherent bias. But the Brave browser did uncover some better sources.

https://www.police1.com/police-training/articles/a-letter-to-the-american-public-we-need-to-increase-the-quantity-and-quality-of-police-training-PEIoRJqWTIG55dqy/

This video does not have a watermark blocking anything. 
Trump rally shooting photo: Image shows gunman on roof (wtae.com)

This ad came up on Aljezeera while I was browsing around various news sites.



Yikes.  I assume they use a third party ad generator, but, wow. 

Quote from: Anianna on July 14, 2024, 09:37:17 PMThis ad came up on Aljezeera while I was browsing around various news sites.



Yikes.  I assume they use a third party ad generator, but, wow. 

Kind of reminds me of when Dimebag Darrell Abbott got killed in 2004 and some dude on Ebay was selling Pantera shirts with actual bullet holes in them and making fun of Dime getting killed.

Ebay nuked his account really quick after severe backlash.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13634219/Veteran-longest-confirmed-sniper-kill-Trump-assassination-attempt.html

(I was on the old forum years ago, and decided to check out here to see what people were talking about). The dailymail article above shows different counter snipers on a rooftop- some wear different uniforms, have hats with brims, and bipods on their rifles (on top of the fixed tripods on the roof). Makes me wonder if this is a second team? Or earlier in the day on the same building as the guys with caps who took the shot (or the one guy with cap who did whilst the other fell over). Did the rally go on long enough to need two teams?
I like the bellingcat website where they look at stuff like this. After the shooting I was looking at google streetview myself as I've read enough bellingcat to know how to do some stuff.
It's surprising after the Las Vegas shooting (that was at 450m- though downwards) that there's not a dot on the google maps with a radius traced around it.
Listening to the shots it's hard to figure out which are the shooters and which the counter sniper. Did the shooter need to have auto or a bump stock? Or semi auto enough? What are the gun laws in the state?
On another issue- when the local cops got the info there was a potential shooter on the roof, before going up a ladder to look, did they communicate with the counter snipers? One would think it was a good idea, otherwise the aforementioned cop could have got a bullet in the head from the counter sniper.
Or was it like Grenada- where everyone is on a different radio channel? (I think that's correct. The UK had the same problem in the Falklands from memory- but this was the 80's- 40 years ago- was meant to be fixed).