PTSD-stricken Army vet kills one, wounds six in Houston shooting
10 replies, posted
[img]http://i.imgur.com/4Fp50GX.jpg[/img]
[I]Dionisio Garza III, shooter[/I]
[quote]HOUSTON - ​Two people are dead and six others were injured in a shooting in west Houston Sunday, according to the Houston Police Department.
The motive behind the shooting is unknown at this time.
One of the deceased is a suspect who was shot by a SWAT officer. The other is a citizen who was shot and killed inside a vehicle, police said.
According to authorities, the civilian was in his 50s and was a customer at an auto detail shop where the suspect shot him with a pistol. Police say the suspect was also armed with an AR-15 that was used to shoot at officers.
A second suspect was wounded in the shootout and was taken to the hospital in critical condition. Authorities say he was armed with at least one weapon, but it is unclear what his role in the shooting may have been at this time.[/quote]
[url]http://www.khou.com/news/crime/active-shooter-situation-reported-in-west-houston/220585167[/url]
The "second suspect" is Byron Wilson, a CCW holder who intervened. He was injured by return fire from the shooter.
[quote]HOUSTON – Police sources have identified the suspect in Sunday's deadly west Houston shooting as Dionisio Garza III.
According to police sources, the suspect previously served in the military and served several tours of duty overseas. Sources also said he had recently expressed anti-government sentiments.
A second man identified as Byron Wilson is no longer a suspect and was in fact a Good Samaritan trying to help in the shooting.[/quote]
[url]http://www.khou.com/news/crime/motive-in-deadly-w-houston-shooting-remains-a-mystery/222758873[/url]
Most news outlets are downplaying Byron's involvement by avoiding mentioning he was a CCW holder. Interesting.
I'm surprised this isn't receiving more national attention since it's such a multi-layered issue. It's a good example of what PTSD can do.
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50433791]
Most news outlets are downplaying Byron's involvement by avoiding mentioning he was a CCW holder. Interesting.
I'm surprised this isn't receiving more national attention since it's such a multi-layered issue. It's a good example of what PTSD can do.[/QUOTE]
Its probably because it doesn't fit with the narrative the media wishes to push. If a armed citizen helps to stop a mass shooter incident then it doesn't fit with what they've been pushing in other mass shootings. Plus, for the media, the body count wasn't high enough. The saying "if it bleeds it leads" is pretty common with the media. Because emotions sell, facts do not.
So a guy intervened to stop the shooter and got shot dead by the police? Yet this is a course of action recommended to people with concealed carry?
[highlight](User was banned for this post ("Didn't read the OP" - OvB))[/highlight]
[QUOTE=meek;50434085]So a guy intervened to stop the shooter and got shot dead by the police? Yet this is a course of action recommended to people with concealed carry?[/QUOTE]
No, not at all what happened. Guy who intervened was hit by the shooter. First details were murky on if he was a suspect but it was later found out he was not.
[QUOTE=meek;50434085]So a guy intervened to stop the shooter and got shot dead by the police? Yet this is a course of action recommended to people with concealed carry?[/QUOTE]
the article says he was injured in a shootout with the original perpetrator, and is currently in the hospital under critical condition
nowhere does it say he was shot by police
[QUOTE=meek;50434085]So a guy intervened to stop the shooter and got shot dead by the police? Yet this is a course of action recommended to people with concealed carry?[/QUOTE]
Nice flagdog you got there, did you go into shitpost overdrive as soon as you read the word GUN?
[QUOTE=meek;50434085]So a guy [B]intervened to stop the shooter[/B] and got shot dead by the police? Yet this is a course of action recommended to people with concealed carry?[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50433791]The "second suspect" is Byron Wilson, a [B]CCW holder who intervened. He was [I]injured[/I] by [highlight]return fire from the [U]shooter[/U][/highlight][/B].[/QUOTE]
Supposedly the literacy rate in the UK is 99%. Congrats on finally being a 1%er.
[QUOTE=meek;50434085]So a guy intervened to stop the shooter and got shot dead by the police? Yet this is a course of action recommended to people with concealed carry?[/QUOTE]
No its not. CCW holders are taught that its a self-defense measure and that they're supposed to use it to help themselves get to safety, not to run in and stop it themselves because this will end up happening. The recommended priority is flee, then hide, then fight as a last resort. Just, no one's going to get on someone's shit and take their gun away if they helped? People either wanting to be a hero or wanting to stop further bloodshed isn't something you can really stop.
Please stop talking if you dont know what you're talking about, if you even read the OP you would know he wasnt "shot dead" either.
I've been wondering. In a situation with an active shooter(s) and intervening CCW holder(s)
How can anyone tell them apart? How do the police know not to shoot them, or even moreso the CCW holders know not to shoot each other?
I can't think of any events recently where multiple CCW holders intervened in a crime at the same time. However generally the CCW holder will attempt to communicate with police/disarm himself/surrender at the first opportunity. They are usually arrested as suspects and cleared later. Often times they do not get their carry weapon back for a variety of reasons.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.