Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Gunman Opens Fire At LAX

Posted by Soulskill on from the this-keeps-happening dept.

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.

11 of 520 comments (clear)

  1. Great... by TWX · · Score: 5, Funny

    Just what we need, now we'll have a security checkpoint before our security checkpoint to prevent you from bringing a gun into the security checkpoint.

    Turtles all the way down...

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    1. Re:Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yo, dawg.

    2. Re:Great... by Seumas · · 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.

    3. Re:Great... by NoImNotNineVolt · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Unlikely. They're already calling his weapon an "assault rifle", despite the fact that "a dozen" shots were fired.

      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.

      --
      Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
    4. Re:Great... by intermodal · · 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.

      --
      In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
    5. Re:Great... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 5, Informative

      I'm sorry, but you've been lied to.

      The homicide rates in Australia did not decline after their gun ban. Or rather, they declined (averaged), but at the same rate they were declining before. In fact, that brief spike that you see on the graph is right after the ban.

      Suicides also do not show any correlation with gun ban. Suicides by gun declined, yes (again, at the same rate they were declining prior to the ban), but suicides by hanging actually increased.

      Violent crime rate, meanwhile, has increased, mainly due to increase in assaults, and in particular of sexual assault. Robbery rate actually spiked after the ban, but then went back to where it was. Everything else didn't change.

      So, no. Australia did not solve anything, the laws were purely "feel good" kind of stuff.

  2. Harder than killing him... by N_Piper · · Score: 5, Insightful

    My congratulations on the Police who did the difficult task of taking this man alive.

    1. Re:Harder than killing him... by Nerdfest · · Score: 5, Funny

      It could just be poor marksmanship.

  3. Re:Gunman by sjames · · Score: 5, Funny

    OMG NO! We can't allow ANY magazines of any kind. if you're bored at the airport, you'll just have to read a pamphlet.

  4. Screening areas as terrorist targets by onyxruby · · 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.

  5. Re:Article summary sucks. by PPH · · Score: 5, Funny

    For those unfamiliar with firearms, a handy guide.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.