148
Local Cop Confronted Trump Gunman Before Shooting—But Backed Away: Report
(www.thedailybeast.com)
Does this cop work at Uvalde?
this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2024
148 points (98.1% liked)
News
23293 readers
6318 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Well it's not like a cop at a Trump rally is going to going to impede the ambitions of a second amendment loving white kid.
God I want this to be the talking point until november.
It won't be
Why did the FBI have this kids DNA on file?
The FBI identified Crooks by analyzing his DNA, officials told local CBS affiliate KDKA, as he did not have any identification on him.
This is the part that makes me go wtf...
How did they go from sampling his DNA and identifying him in that short amount? I don't remember the exact time, but it seemed like it took about 5 hours.
Edit: It's been a long day and I guess my timeline is way off. I thought they identified the suspect last night, but apparently it was sometime early this morning. That makes the turn around time a lot less wtf.
If any of his relatives did a 23andme or ancestry, that'd possibly be enough lol.
Cops also love tricking parents into giving them their children's DNA and fingerprint samples.
I remember registering my fingerprints as a kid as part of a Cub or Boy Scout activity. In retrospect that was really messed up.
Maybe not. When I did it for my kids, it was to create a sample that could be used in an emergency, to be held by the parents. It was never given to anyone. No one collected it. It not get added to some database somewhere
if you're even just accused (and imprisoned) of a felony you get DNA swabbed, guilty or not
Trying to assassinate the presidential candidate definitely justifies checking the "expedite" box.
Not the president.
He still technically holds the title of president. You never lose the title, just the powers. Carter's still President Carter. JFK is still President Kennedy. Trump is, extremely unfortunately, still President Trump. None of them get powers, but the title is forever.
Which, fair imo. It's a position only 45 or 46 people out of millions of Americans have ever achieved (idk how they count the one dude who skipped a term). Keeping that title for life sounds fair to me.
Which is normally fair. However after his never ending pushing of the election being stolen and claiming he was president still, I think it is necessary to clarify he is no-longer president.
Fair enough
Cases like this get special treatment.
I thought they identified him through the firearm
I was hoping daily beast's source link had more info, but no. I even looked for the full article and it is equally devoid of details. From apnews :
A local law enforcement officer climbed to the roof and found Crooks, who pointed the rifle at the officer. The officer retreated down the ladder, and the gunman quickly fired toward Trump, the officials said. That’s when U.S. Secret Service gunmen shot him, the officials said.
Honestly, I don't blame the office for not getting pointlessly shot. I hope the officer immediately messaged the situation, but it was probably too late.
In fact, one of the news sites last night showed the shooting from an angle where you could see the anti-sniper to Trump's right (left side of TV screen) as the shots came in.
I'd swear I could see the anti-sniper's recoil hitting BEFORE Trump was shot. Don't quote me on that, though. I'm not an expert.
The article says the gunman then immediately turned and fired at Trump, so I'm not sure that there's actually a problem with what this officer did. If he'd tried to charge the gunman, he'd immediately have been shot himself, then the guy would have shot at Trump anyway.
From what I see what went wrong is letting the speech continue after receiving a report of a gunmen, and then even worse they let the speech continue after visually confirming the gunmen.
The cop should have radiod "investigatig a gunmen on this rooftop" and as soon as he did they should have stopped the speech and gotten Trump to safety.
I could see them let it go on after a report - I'd expect they get a lot of threats and possibly fake reports too.
But for the rest.. yea.. as soon as he was sighted the security detail should have been on the move to cover trump.
Considering how people get shot for looking like they are thinking of a weapon when near the cops, it's shocking that the counter snipers didn't immediately shoot him once he aimed the gun at the officer.
Question, how does the cop radio it to the secret service?
I'm neither a cop nor a secret service agent, but I would expect that they cooperate to some degree at least on these events. Doesn't even need to be much, just stand a cop with a radio next to an agent with a radio somewhere so they can immediately pass on information to each other and relay it to their respective colleagues. Armed shooter sighted on roof seems like a worthy bit of intel to wanna pass along.
If they don't have the means to relay information to each other.. that seems rather shortsighted on both sides.
There will be a site command where all LE coordinate for this exact reason. The command vehicle/tent will have some relay equipment which allows radio interoperability but it's not typically used unless needed. Just coordinating via the separate branch commanders is typically preferred.
That's what I would expect too, best case is they had the same tent to work.
I suspect they might not have had that.
They put the radios on the same channel. Or they have a command center with a relay, or even just a person repeating messages.
they twatter it
Maybe. I don't know what their threshold is for validity of a report before they take action.
I do think that if the officer had tried to intervene and gotten shot, the guy would have immediately been shot by one of the snipers, maybe fast enough that he wouldn't have gotten a shot off at Trump. All I can do is speculate; I don't know what their policy is. But in his place, I probably would have done the same kind of thing, like putting my hands up and taking a step back until I get reinforcements or snipers take him out. But I guess there wasn't time for that.
But yeah, after confirming a gunman they definitely should have hustled him off the stage.
It's a weird story. It claims he aimed at the cop, who then backed off. There probably was enough time do do something but it probably would've risked the cop getting himself shot.
So he didn't do his job...
Nah the supreme court says he doesn't have to.
Truly, some of those who work forces, are the same who burn crosses.
Maybe we shouldn't screen out intelligent people from law enforcement.