Slashdot Mirror


Congresswoman and Staff Gunned Down

tkprit writes "What a shame that a Congresswoman makes herself available to her constituents and she and six of her staff were gunned down for the effort. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona was shot, along with members of her staff, for trying to hear the concerns of the people she represents." CNN reports that at least 12 people were shot by the gunman. According to NPR, "The suspect ran off and was tackled by a bystander. He was taken into custody. Witnesses described him as in his late teens or early 20s." Update: 01/08 20:07 GMT by S : Other sources are reporting she's still in surgery, and early reports have been amended to list Congresswoman Giffords in critical condition.

35 of 2,166 comments (clear)

  1. Dude. by Pojut · · Score: 5, Interesting
    1. Re:Dude. by Dachannien · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Fox News gets the same comment trolling that every other newspaper/cable news channel website gets. Shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.

    2. Re:Dude. by Sique · · Score: 5, Informative

      The nutjob was not killed, and not even arrested with the help of a gun.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    3. Re:Dude. by kevinNCSU · · Score: 5, Informative

      Or on the other hand, the extreme that blames an entire group of people for the actions of a derranged man that has absolfuckinglutely NOTHING to do with anything that group of people?

      The shooter was Jared Loughner and if you watch his Youtube channel you'll see his simply a mentally disturbed individual who ascribes to nothing even remotely resembling Republican or Tea party beliefs. He has an entire video where he burns an American flag for God's sake, and another were he venomously declares he refuses to believe in God and that the Government is trying to mind control everyone with "grammar control". I haven't been to any Tea Party meetings but I have the feeling Flag burning and denying the existence of God prolly aint listed on their usually scheduled agenda.

      But don't let the facts get in the way of taking a tragedy and trying to use it to to further your own political preconceptions because clearly THAT is more important to you than the suffering the lives lost today.

    4. Re:Dude. by Brian_Ellenberger · · Score: 5, Informative

      No, actually, it isn't.

      People waiving the flag of false equivalence are intellectually corrupt. Violent rhetoric is not coming from both sides of the political spectrum, it's coming from the Fox News right.

      I think a lot of people buy that crap because they're too gutless to take a stand for what's right.

      You have missed a great deal if you think the Left isn't full of violent rhetoric. Forget all the stuff leveled at Bush? Heck, a CBS show literally displayed a picture of Bush with "Snipers Wanted" imposed over it. Look at Bill Ayers, who has at least some relationship with the President of the United States, and is unrepentant of the violent actions of the Weather Underground group he helped found. He has event been quoted as wishing he did more. Look at the violence at G20 conventions or the death threats against people like Ann Coulter. I could go on and on. Check out this page for a large number of links to "Left-wing Eliminationist Rhetoric" http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/?s=ELIMINATIONIST

      Take some advice from Media Matters after the Discovery Channel incident. Should be applied to all similar incidents.. "Discovery Channel hostage-taker is the perpetrator of a crime-not liberal, conservative or a chance to score points " http://twitter.com/mmfa/status/22739013962

    5. Re:Dude. by Z8 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Can you give sources for your Washington and Jefferson quotes? These websites claim those quotes were actually fabricated by pro-gun websites.

  2. sad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It is incredibly sad that people are mouthing off their vile political views even before all the facts are in.

    They don't care that this lady, and her staff members, were killed and/or severely wounded. They just want to exploit this horrible event for their own ends.

    1. Re:sad by chebucto · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In principle I agree with you, but the thing is that a lot of people saw this sort of thing coming. There has been a lot of commentary and, at least in my own discussions, worry, about the winking incitement to violence that has been broadcast since Obama was elected.

      I do feel sad when I hear of a politician being attacked this way - not just sad, but a mixture of melancholy, pessimism, pity, and a kind of sorrow for a person - a civilian - who put themselves in danger to work in public service.

      But I also feel anger, anger at the unchecked, inconsiderate, dangerous, anti-social rhetoric that I've endured for the past two years, and quite likely played a part in this attack.

      If the attacker turns out to be a tea party paranoid type, then I honestly believe people like Beck hold indirect responsibility for the attack. Incitement to rioting is a crime; so, in a (non-legal) way, is the winking threats and paranoia that's been on the airwaves for too long.

      --
      The English word fart is one of the oldest words in the English vocabulary.
  3. Re:Really, Slashdot? by kenrblan · · Score: 5, Informative

    This type of story is news for everybody, including nerds. Secondly, she serves or served on the House Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics which affects funding for one of Slashdot's favorite government programs called NASA. Her husband is also an Astronaut for NASA.

    --
    Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler. - Albert Einstein
  4. Re:Ban guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This was an assassination, asshole. Education about gun safety had nothing to do with it.

  5. wife of astronaut Mark Kelly by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 5, Informative

    Representative Giffords is the wife of astronaut Mark Kelly, and seems to be one of the few congresspeople who are knowledgable about science and technology.

    This is a great tragedy.

    Politics should not be conducted by gunfire.

    --
    http://www.geoffreylandis.com
  6. Re:LOL@"Progressives" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Interesting, one of the by-standers, who helped hold the gunman down, said he was white and clean shaven. Where did you hear he was hispanic?

    "The gunman was young, mid-to-late 20s, white, clean-shaven with short hair and wearing dark clothing and said nothing during the shooting or while being held down, although he struggled at first."

    http://gawker.com/5728501/arizona-congresswoman-shot-outside-grocery-store

  7. Palin by philj · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Seems somebody looked at the gun sights on this http://www.alan.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/sarahpac_0.jpg and acted on it. Scary.

    1. Re:Palin by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      When you post a graphic with people's names and gunsight logos ... and you know that a fair number of the people looking at the graphic are vocal loons ... and then one of those people gets shot ... it's a reasonable speculation.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
  8. Re:Ban guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Take a look at what happened in Australia when guns were banned.

    http://www.snopes.com/crime/statistics/ausguns.asp

  9. Knock it off, people! by roc97007 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Regardless of her political party, regardless of YOUR political party, we did not need this. We are all, on both sides of the aisle, diminished when this happens.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  10. welcome to the new hyperpolarized america by circletimessquare · · Score: 5, Insightful

    you preach hate, you get hate. you preach violence, you get violence

    a certain unnamed political movement is reaping what it sows

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  11. Re:Ban guns by Sir_Lewk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Technically speaking, their role in killing people is exactly the reason for the 2nd Amendment. The amendment's purpose isn't to ensure the ability to hunt, it's to ensure the ability to engage in acts of war.

    In short: everybody knows the purpose of guns is to kill people, your argument brings nothing new to the table.

    --
    "linux is just DOS with a UNIX like syntax" -- Galactic Dominator (944134)
  12. Important news [Re:Really, Slashdot?] by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 5, Informative

    How so? She's a minor member of a minority party.

    Um, since the Democrats hold two out of three of the elective branches of the US government, I don't see how you can call them "a minority party."

    She is also the wife of astronaut Mark Kelly, a member of the House committee on Science and Technology, and the chairwoman of the House subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics; so this is news of interest to anybody interested in science and technology.

    --
    http://www.geoffreylandis.com
  13. Re:Ban guns by DurendalMac · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The article states that he was using an automatic weapon. They aren't clear on what type, but it's quite possible that the gun used in this incident was ALREADY illegal.

  14. Re:Ban guns by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Take a look at what happened in Australia when guns were banned.

    What? Gun nuts produced far more FUD about banning guns? Or where the previous ten years before the ban there were 13 mass killings, and there were NONE in the ten years after?

    I find it interesting that one of the local TV station's call letters in Tucson is "KGUN".

    Too bad the Fox News crowd and other right wing paranoid freak tea baggers can't figure out that there are far more people killed in the United States by gun toting fools than any "terrorist" could ever hope to match. Since 9/11, there have been tens of thousands killed in gun violence in the United States (over 90,000 firearms related murders when extrapolated over nine and a half years). Maybe these idiots should recognize that gun violence needs far more attention than plane passengers X-rayed crotches. Seriously, there are third world countries that are far safer to live the United States. You are far less likely to die from a gun crime related death in Israel (even from terrorism... even from bombs... even surrounded by enemies) than you are in the United States. Idiots like you are the reason so many people die. You stick your head in the sand whenever the truth about firearms is mentioned.

    If you want to protect your country from the government join the army... it is made up of normal citizens who are just as patriotic as anyone else, and who want the best for their country.

    --
    -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
  15. Re:Ban guns by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 5, Informative

    Careful with those stones. The US has one massive genocide on its hands as well, one which it has never properly acknowledged either.

    --
    Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
  16. Re:Ban guns by arikol · · Score: 5, Insightful

    He did, in his own inimitable style.

    I will do so in a different style.

    USA has 90 guns per 100 residents, Sweden has 30 per 100.
    Yet USA has almost 6 times the murder rate (the same goes for all the scandinavian countries)
    Why?

    Well, guns in Sweden are mostly hunting weapons. We don't have concealed semi-automatic weapons. Semi-automatic or fully automatic weapons generally have only one intended use, and that is to kill people (usually at short or medium range). Sprayfire weapons (MAC-10, Uzi and the like) are no good for ANYTHING except trying to injure or kill a crowd. That's what the "spray" in spray-fire stands for. The spray is powered by the recoil of 1000 rounds per minute powering out of the barrel of a snub-nosed weapon with little in the way of stabilization.
    Semi-automatic handguns are similarly useless for any legitimate use. Well, handguns in general are useless.
    Hunting weapons don't need to be semi-automatic or fully automatic for any hunting (I think Cthulhu hunting doesn't count, as that is in imaginaryland)

    So, does that fill in the lines enough?

  17. Re:Website by david@ecsd.com · · Score: 5, Funny

    Well, of course she did, she has to update it...

  18. Re:LOL@"Progressives" by suomynonAyletamitlU · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You'll notice "Ammo" is at the end of that list, and it usually comes with the admonishment, "In that order". Do you think that guy (or the people he represents, if any) went through any of the other steps, except maybe possibly the ballot box?

    Politics (which I hate, by the way) encompasses the first three. The reason the fourth is there is both in order to point out that it's at the end of the list, and also to remind people that if it all really does go down shit creek, you shouldn't sit there and take it.

  19. Re:Ban guns by IamTheBren · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Arizona is an unrestricted state, meaning no permit is required to carry a handgun. Presumably, anyone who wanted to be armed at that event, could/would have been. So, permissive gun laws did not prevent/mitigate this shooting, i.e. by resulting in a sheepdog (armed civilian) taking down the gunman. Early reports say the gunman had an "automatic" weapon. It remains to be seen whether this means a semi-auto pistol (like those used at Virginia Tech, acquired legally), or a fully automatic "assault weapon". Chances are, it will turn out that the gunman used an illegal firearm, either acquired illegally or modified. So, it's unlikely that tighter gun laws would have prevented/mitigated it either. This is a failure of security (to protect the congresswoman, staff, and the public at the event) and possibly law enforcement (to prevent an illegal firearm from getting into the gunman's hands), though Arizona gun laws being as permissive as they are, it's possible the gunman's firearm will turn out to be completely legal.

  20. Re:Edit this now, please by choprboy · · Score: 5, Informative

    According to the live news conference that just occurred at UMC:

    Congresswoman Giffords was shot in the head, thru-and-thru, and is now out of surgery. She is in critical condition, but is alert and responding to commands, the surgeon believe she will come thru this in good condition.

    Updated numbers indicate a total of 18 people injured, 5 of which are dead including a young girl about 9yrs old.

  21. Re:Ban guns by segedunum · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You're also implying that without guns, people wouldn't find some other ways to kill each other. That's another fundamentally unsound assumption: guns make killing easier in some ways, but that's all.

    I hear this bullshit all the time from Americans trying to justify widespread gun ownership and it's real crap. Guns don't make killing easier 'in some ways' - guns make killing easier period. It's the first killing weapon where you don't have to be within physical contact of your victim to kill them, and it's accurate

    If someone wants you dead, he doesn't need a gun.

    That's the wrong logic. If someone would like you dead and they don't have a gun then the obstacles are nearly always insurmountable and the feeling passes. With a gun you can do it any time you want, and that increases the temptation.

  22. Re:Sick Political Ad - Eerily Prophetic by digitaltraveller · · Score: 5, Informative

    "Sarah Palin has the crosshairs of a gun sight over our district and when people do that, they’ve gotta realize there are consequences to that action.”
    --Gabrielle Gifford March 25, 2010, MSNBC Interview.

    http://kateoplis.tumblr.com/post/2655554409/msnbc-talks-to-rep-gabrielle-gifford-about-the

  23. Re:Ban guns by dgatwood · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This was an assassination, asshole. Education about gun safety had nothing to do with it.

    Indeed. This is what happens when you have prominent candidates for major political office throwing ad hominem attacks at their opponents, telling people the world will end unless they win, and advocating violent insurrection if they don't win. At least three Tea Party candidates advocated actions like what happened today:

    It's inevitable. If your rhetoric involves implying that violent acts are an acceptable means of political pressure, some percentage of people will believe your bulls**t, and eventually, somebody will take it too far. It's okay to disagree. It's not okay to act like these Tea Party idiots acted in this election season. When you act that way, events like those of today are what you get.

    If there is any justice in the world, the three political candidates above will be arrested promptly and charged with treason.

    --

    Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  24. Re:Ban guns by BasilBrush · · Score: 5, Informative

    Number one murder weapon - knife. You might wanna revamp your arguments.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ushomicidesbyweapon.svg

    Handguns are the number one murder weapon by far, outnumbering all the other weapons added together. Will you take your own advice and revamp YOUR argument? Or will you be a hypocrite?

  25. Re:Shooter leftist anarchist, so now who's to blam by HappyEngineer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The shooter hardly seems like a clear leftist. In the article you point to they also favorited Mein Kampf, are against federal laws, and insists on the gold and silver standard. That's a good mix of hard right and hard left. I'd say they're just pure anarchist with a mix of pure crazy.

  26. Re:Ban guns by haeger · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The thing is, Sweden has actually quite strict gun laws. You have to be a hunter or an active member of a gun club to own a gun. If you don't go to the gun club often and practice/compete, your licence will be revoked. Generally you give it to the police, or sell it, or the police will come pick it up for you if you break the law by having it without license. I believe there will also be some legal aftermath from that.
    I think that if you're a hunter the license is unlimited in time but you can only buy hunting rifles. And if your doctor notices that you have a drug problem you'll lose the license. Someone with a hunting license could probably clear this up a bit as I'm uncertain.
    So, would you concider Sweden, or most/all scandinavian countries as opressive? Like limiting the press or other freedoms?

    And we have quite an open society where most politicians regularly meet "the people". Not at all what you described.

    Another funny thing. We actually have more guns per capita than the US has. And yet we have very few shootings. Most murders here are done with a knife or blunt force.
    I think there's something in the US culture that glorifies guns and their use, which makes this a much bigger problem there than here. Probably some manliness issue that sais that you have to be the biggest and strongest at all times, and the guy with the biggest gun is the strongest. And I think you have a social problem that aggravates this, meaning that when people have very limited options they'll use whatever resort they can to improve their situation.

    This from my limitied view here overseas. I'm sure I've fallen for a few myths and misconceptions, but I try to keep up on current events, even in the US.

    --
    You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. -- Harlan Ellison
  27. Re:Ban guns by Radcliffe_V · · Score: 5, Informative

    As one of the few native Muskogee left in Southwest Georgia, I can attest to that. The local museum here is named Thronateeska, after our capital that was located in my home town, yet it has nothing about the Muskogee and the cities history starts with white settlement and most of the exhibits are from the late 19th early 20th century concerning plantation work and the Flint River. Most of our people were transplanted to Oklahoma, and our history in our native land is all but wiped out.

  28. Very spot-on (and unexpected) insight from a "Law by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 5, Informative
    The Pima County (Arizona) Sheriff Clarence Dupnik nailed it:

    "When you look at unbalanced people, how they respond to the vitriol that comes out of certain mouths about tearing down the government. The anger, the hatred, the bigotry that goes on in this country is getting to be outrageous," the sheriff said. "And unfortunately, Arizona I think has become the capital. We have become the mecca for prejudice and bigotry."

    Very spot-on (and unexpected) insight from a "Law Man".

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.