Hungry Ojos said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Quote:

---

I assume this focus on the cost the guns (throughout the thread) is to show that this was some sort of false flag, and the government supplied the arms?

---

Not at all so quit assuming.

Asking how he was able to afford that gun an optics is a legitimate question. It's not like he went to a pawn shop and bought 20 year old rifle for $300.

---

He's one of those spoiled brats that apparently lives with his grandparents and took advantage of them in every way possible. He probably said he wanted a gun, then threw a tantrum when they said "no", so rather than being good parents, they gave in and gave him the money. I don't know why this is such a relevant issue.

---

Teslag said:

---

rangerdanger said:

---

cevans_40 said:

---

rangerdanger said:

---

El_Zorro said:

---

cone said:

---

call me a squish but there's no reason an 18 year old should be able to buy a semi auto long gun

make that the same as hand guns

---

I saw plenty of 18, 19, and 20 year olds with me in Iraq carrying beltfed machine guns, frags, and anti armor weapons.

If they can do that, they should be able to buy guns, including pistols, and buy alcohol at 18.

Nobody shot each other either. Plenty of physical fights though. So it's not the guns. They didn't magically make them use them on each other.

---

I somewhat disagree because angry edge-lord 18 year old with black fingernail paint doesn't go through the same supervising/vetting that comes from basic training and military command structure.

Unless you're military or police, I say the gun shops hold back on selling weapons to anyone under the age of 25. In terms of gifting guns to anyone below that threshold, I say allow it, but if the individual commits a rare atrocity like this, the giver should be subject to severe legal retribution. Basically make the giver put their own life on the line first, before anyone else's. I'm sure a lot of you would have no problems trusting your kids with that responsibility, and are already doing that.

---

This is where I see a huge disconnect in the perception vs realty of how people actually live. I am only going to assume you have lived the majority of your life in larger cities. You seem completely ignorant of how a large portion of this country lives out in the sticks. Guns are tools that a ton of people grow up around and using in their proper manner. Maybe we should place some regulation on people that live in cities with a population of greater than 10,000.

---

All I'm saying is to not let the gun shops sell to under 25 if not military/police, and if you gift someone a weapon under that age, that you have a little more skin in the game. No mention of taking anything from anyone. Assume all you want.

---

Indiscriminately restricting a civil liberty to a large portion of the populace when they've done nothing wrong is simply a non-starter for me.

---

histag10 said:

---

WestAustinAg said:

---

Ozzy Osbourne said:

---

BlackLab said:

---

Rumor from a teacher friend from the area is this was a problem/weird kid from a broken home.

---

When I heard he shot his grandmother (instead of mother or father) I figured it was a broken home situation. That is the epidemic plaguing the country.

---

His instagram showed him in skirts and dresses and his hair done up. He was a trans. I posted a picture but it was taken down.

---

You posted a picture from his actual Instagram account of a picture he posted? Doubtful, considering his account was deactivated VERY shortly after he was identified, and quite a long time before people started claiming those pictures were him (they werent- they were of someone else who has come forward and said they aren't him and don't know why people are using their picture).

---

TAMU1990 said:

---

Hungry Ojos said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Quote:

---

I assume this focus on the cost the guns (throughout the thread) is to show that this was some sort of false flag, and the government supplied the arms?

---

Not at all so quit assuming.

Asking how he was able to afford that gun an optics is a legitimate question. It's not like he went to a pawn shop and bought 20 year old rifle for $300.

---

He's one of those spoiled brats that apparently lives with his grandparents and took advantage of them in every way possible. He probably said he wanted a gun, then threw a tantrum when they said "no", so rather than being good parents, they gave in and gave him the money. I don't know why this is such a relevant issue.

---

You obviously aren't from here. No way his grandmother had that kind of money laying around. You are probably a paid troll. That statement smacks of some liberal white guy in an upper middle class enclave with no clue how people really live.

It's relevant because you have to rule out any other criminal element and help trace back to how he got the weapons.

---

blakegrimez said:

---

Yes, I read the article. I'm just saying that I find it really hard to believe due to my first hand experiences.

My original $400 credit limit coming out of highschool made sense. $400 is about all I would have trusted an 18 year old with. But $8,000? Would you loan an 18 year old $8,000 without a cosigner or something similar?

Maybe the $8,000 limit is why the credit scores in that age range are so bad.

---

45-70Ag said:

---

I'd be good with concealed carry, open carry I'd be against. I can think of 100 kids here that can overpower any teacher/coach on campus if they wanted to.

Most of them would never consider that but there's a couple that would make me nervous.

---

cctexagMD said:

---

Grandma is out of surgery and in ICU and expected to recover.
Leads me to believe LEO/ EMS were on the initial scene at the the house rather quickly if she was transported and sent to San Antonio so quickly.
Would also think that he was in a car chase, and crashed and then fled to the elementary school.
Probably intended to go to the high school and adjusted.
Ditch he crashed into is right next to a field used by the school.

---

agsalaska said:

---

We need to stop pretending that we don't already know who these kids are. We do know. Somewhere out there a teacher, coach, neighbor, whatever have already said to themselves 'this kid is going to do something next' and they will be right. The next school shooter has already been identified by probably everyone around him but we will do nothing about it.

---

HeadGames said:

---

blakegrimez said:

---

Yes, I read the article. I'm just saying that I find it really hard to believe due to my first hand experiences.

My original $400 credit limit coming out of highschool made sense. $400 is about all I would have trusted an 18 year old with. But $8,000? Would you loan an 18 year old $8,000 without a cosigner or something similar?

Maybe the $8,000 limit is why the credit scores in that age range are so bad.

---

You wouldn't, because you're smart. But the government has no problem giving 100k loans to 18 year olds for college.

---

PhatMack19 said:

---

I dropped my kid off for his second to last day of 3rd grade this morning with a Cop standing at the front door. It's said that we have do things like this.

---

blakegrimez said:

---

Yes, I read the article. I'm just saying that I find it really hard to believe due to my first hand experiences.

My original $400 credit limit coming out of highschool made sense. $400 is about all I would have trusted an 18 year old with. But $8,000? Would you loan an 18 year old $8,000 without a cosigner or something similar?

Maybe the $8,000 limit is why the credit scores in that age range are so bad.

---

FireAg said:

---

Something that is bothering me...

The police exchanged fire with the assailant before he made entry into the school...why wasn't a lockdown immediately ordered at that point? It seems that the police engaged him (perhaps a chase) before he crashed the truck. As soon as police were involved, why weren't the schools in the area immediately locked down? May simply have happened too fast.

Further, if the assailant had time to 1) make entry and 2) barricade himself, then he was inside the school for a period of time while LEO stayed outside and (I'm guessing here) secured the perimeter... One of the lessons from Columbine was to enter, pursue, and engage the assailant immediately, and give them an armed target to shoot at so that they don't focus their efforts on unarmed innocents...Children aren't going to try and overpower someone like that, and for all we know, the teachers who were killed did try and failed. It is a good question as to why LEO did not immediately pursue inside. Maybe they were hoping the shooter was only going to use them for cover, not slaughter.

There's a lot to this story that I think hasn't come to light yet, and I'm afraid we are going to learn that certain protocols, in the heat of the moment, weren't followed...Agree, somewhat. Once some of the fact begin to emerge, we'll likely have answers to your questions. The LEOs may very well have properly followed protocol, but it was a bad protocol.

---

Booma94 said:

---

With it being end of year, I would imagine there were various programs and awards ceremonies taking place and security in general was much more lax. Having worked on a campus I've experienced the easing of security for heavily attended events in an effort to give access to as many people as possible as quickly as possible. Having 200 parents lined up waiting to scan IDs and register visits to attend an award ceremony puts a huge strain on office personnel.

Not saying that's what happened, but it is within the realm of possibility.

---

2/ There's a bit of ambiguity about just when in the process the two pd cops engaged the shooter. The video above sounds like all three engaged the shooter prior to entry into the school. But I recommend listening to the account itself in the video above.

— Josh Marshall (@joshtpm) May 25, 2022

Booma94 said:

---

With it being end of year, I would imagine there were various programs and awards ceremonies taking place and security in general was much more lax. Having worked on a campus I've experienced the easing of security for heavily attended events in an effort to give access to as many people as possible as quickly as possible. Having 200 parents lined up waiting to scan IDs and register visits to attend an award ceremony puts a huge strain on office personnel.

Not saying that's what happened, but it is within the realm of possibility.

---

Squadron7 said:

---

Quote:

---

Apparently he was also stopped by a BORTAC agent, who are basically border patrol special forces.

---

Basically, someone who Concerned Moderates would like to see defunded out of a job.

---

cctexagMD said:

---

Grandma is out of surgery and in ICU and expected to recover.
Leads me to believe LEO/ EMS were on the initial scene at the the house rather quickly if she was transported and sent to San Antonio so quickly.
Would also think that he was in a car chase, and crashed and then fled to the elementary school.
Probably intended to go to the high school and adjusted.
Ditch he crashed into is right next to a field used by the school.

---

CDUB98 said:

---

FireAg said:

---

Something that is bothering me...

The police exchanged fire with the assailant before he made entry into the school...why wasn't a lockdown immediately ordered at that point? It seems that the police engaged him (perhaps a chase) before he crashed the truck. As soon as police were involved, why weren't the schools in the area immediately locked down? May simply have happened too fast.

Further, if the assailant had time to 1) make entry and 2) barricade himself, then he was inside the school for a period of time while LEO stayed outside and (I'm guessing here) secured the perimeter... One of the lessons from Columbine was to enter, pursue, and engage the assailant immediately, and give them an armed target to shoot at so that they don't focus their efforts on unarmed innocents...Children aren't going to try and overpower someone like that, and for all we know, the teachers who were killed did try and failed. It is a good question as to why LEO did not immediately pursue inside. Maybe they were hoping the shooter was only going to use them for cover, not slaughter.

There's a lot to this story that I think hasn't come to light yet, and I'm afraid we are going to learn that certain protocols, in the heat of the moment, weren't followed...Agree, somewhat. Once some of the fact begin to emerge, we'll likely have answers to your questions. The LEOs may very well have properly followed protocol, but it was a bad protocol.

---

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

We all have choices to make. I would rather maintain my personal freedom and have to arrive at an event an hour early to get cleared in than to lose my God-given rights because of someone who won't follow laws anyway.

---

Booma94 said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

We all have choices to make. I would rather maintain my personal freedom and have to arrive at an event an hour early to get cleared in than to lose my God-given rights because of someone who won't follow laws anyway.

---

I don't disagree with you, but unfortunately we are in the minority. The amount of gritching and whining that took place over having to wait while everyone was scanned in was next-level.

---

FireAg said:

---

CDUB98 said:

---

FireAg said:

---

Something that is bothering me...

The police exchanged fire with the assailant before he made entry into the school...why wasn't a lockdown immediately ordered at that point? It seems that the police engaged him (perhaps a chase) before he crashed the truck. As soon as police were involved, why weren't the schools in the area immediately locked down? May simply have happened too fast.

Further, if the assailant had time to 1) make entry and 2) barricade himself, then he was inside the school for a period of time while LEO stayed outside and (I'm guessing here) secured the perimeter... One of the lessons from Columbine was to enter, pursue, and engage the assailant immediately, and give them an armed target to shoot at so that they don't focus their efforts on unarmed innocents...Children aren't going to try and overpower someone like that, and for all we know, the teachers who were killed did try and failed. It is a good question as to why LEO did not immediately pursue inside. Maybe they were hoping the shooter was only going to use them for cover, not slaughter.

There's a lot to this story that I think hasn't come to light yet, and I'm afraid we are going to learn that certain protocols, in the heat of the moment, weren't followed...Agree, somewhat. Once some of the fact begin to emerge, we'll likely have answers to your questions. The LEOs may very well have properly followed protocol, but it was a bad protocol.

---

---

The lesson from Columbine was very clear and has been written about extensively...the right approach is to enter and engage immediately...

---