WaPO's Uvalde shooting article.

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
As we prepared to publish this story in recent days, we sought to be sensitive to the people most directly affected — providing advance notice to many families of victims, their representatives and community leaders so they could choose to avoid the coverage if they preferred.

Ah yes, how sensitive. "We're going to use pictures of your children's blood, body bags, and scene of their death to push our point, whether you like it or not." What a moral hill these journalists sit on, above those filthy gun owners.

Eat shit, jouro scum. If you want to show pictures of dead children, then do it, but don't sit here and act like you're some beacon of morality using gore pictures against the wishes of some of the parents to push your agenda.
In incidents where guns saved lives - Jack Wilson, Eli Dicken, the SRO at Olathe East - the gun control lobby wasn't happy that lives were saved. They coped and seethed that they didn't have dead bodies to grift off of.
Well, lucky for them, many with the capacity to help in the situation were held back, allowing for more children to be killed in this case.
 
Remember this headline whenever Pravda on the Potomac tries to finger-wag at you.

Austere_Religious_Scholar_Al_Baghdadi_Washington_Post (1).JPG
 
Come onnnn, bro. Give up your constitutional riiiiiiiights, bro.

What do you mean you have to defend yourself? Don't you trust the police that we tell you are all racist power trippers?
 
That one tweet that goes like "You don't hate journalists enough; you think you do, but you don't" comes to mind.

They can eat shit and die; I will not be lectured by amoral reprobates who wag their finger at armed self defense then turn around and do shit like making excuses for some tranny who shoots up a Christian school.
 
The comments are demoralising, to say the least.
Don't read WaPo comments. They're more retarded and insane than Reddit or Twitter combined.

Once upon a time, I subscribed to WaPo just to shitpost in the combox. I learned from that place that liberals truly hate my guts and want me exterminated.

WaPo made me a right-wing extremist more than Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, Tucker Carlson, 4chan, Kiwi Farms, Donald Trump, or Libs of TikTok put together ever could have dreamed.

WaPo convinced me to become a gun owner. That's how fucking psycho their readers and columnists are.

And now you know why I a-log them at every opportunity, and wrote the OP for Taylor Lorenz. Words can only superficially describe the Supernova-levels of burning hatred I have in the depths of my soul for the Washington Post.
 
Isn't the WaPo owned by Bezos? Anytime someone brings up that rag, I mention how it's owned by him; usually gets a few folks to think for a minute about whatever they're talking about (in relation to WaPo).
 
Isn't the WaPo owned by Bezos? Anytime someone brings up that rag, I mention how it's owned by him; usually gets a few folks to think for a minute about whatever they're talking about (in relation to WaPo).
It's sometimes called the Bezos Baizuo Blogpost.
 
Article by the Washington Post Editorial Board

Don’t just be horrified. Ban AR-15s, bump stocks and large magazines.​


Even the best-written accounts cannot fully convey the carnage of mass shootings. The frequency and lethality of massacres on U.S. soil numb society to the moral outrage of slaughtered innocents. The Post this year has documented the carnage created by the AR-15 in a series about the growing prominence of the assault rifle in American life. The latest installment, published Thursday, includes gut-wrenching images from some of the 11 crime scenes they looked at over the past 11 years, alongside quotes from eyewitnesses and first responders.

Each photograph, while disturbing, is worth more than a thousand words: Blood splattered underneath a backpack that says “Love Yourself” in an elementary school classroom. Body bags holding children fill the hallway. A sticker that says “choose joy” affixed to a school door that has been penetrated by a .223-caliber cartridge. A pulverized prayer book in a synagogue. Blood mixed with spilled popcorn in a movie theater.

A responsible newspaper does not publish such upsetting images lightly, but doing so showcases the destructive force of the AR-15 in a way words fail to do. Afraid of dehumanizing victims and retraumatizing families, editors have traditionally been more willing to publish grisly photos from faraway war zones than crime scenes at home.

Far too many politicians embrace stringent gun control only after a massacre hits home. The latest example came last month when Rep. Jared Golden (D-Maine) reversed his opposition to an assault weapons ban after 18 people were killed and 13 more wounded in his congressional district. Mr. Golden was one of five House Democrats to vote against such a ban when Congress narrowly passed one last year for the first time since 1994. (The Senate never considered the bill.) “I had the false confidence that our community was above this,” Mr. Golden said.

No community is safe from a determined shooter with an AR-15. The photographs published by The Post, which capture mundane places that became macabre, should shatter anyone’s false confidence that their church or kid’s school is different. The piece includes never-before-released pictures taken by law enforcement officers after shootings inside Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Tex., in 2022. These feel hauntingly similar to pictures, also included with the piece, taken a decade earlier at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn.

Border Patrol agent Travis Shrewsbury recalled to investigators that he noticed upon entering the classroom in Uvalde that it looked as if somebody had written LOL in blood on the whiteboard. Alexander Cuellar, another Border Patrol agent who responded to the scene, remembered “slipping and sliding” when he entered the classroom, trying not to fall because there was so much blood pooled on the floor. It’s one thing to read this. It’s another to see the puddles of blood.

The speed of its small and light bullet makes the AR-15 especially deadly, tearing apart organs. In March, The Post published 3D animations — based on a review of nearly 100 autopsy reports — to demonstrate why it’s harder to survive being shot with an AR-15 than a 9mm.
While a single bullet can kill instantly when it hits a vital organ, the newly published photographs also illustrate how many rounds have been fired during high-profile mass shootings. High-capacity magazines also enable mass killing. A picture from the Aurora movie theater massacre shows a drum magazine with 65 unspent rounds. An image from First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Tex., where the gunman rapidly fired 450 rounds, shows a wall riddled with bullet holes and shell casings littering the floor. Another photograph shows a pile of guns in the Las Vegas hotel room of the man who killed 58 people and wounded hundreds more by firing on a music festival in 2017.

Bump stocks, which speed up how quickly bullets can be fired, enabled the shooter to fire over 1,000 rounds. This prompted then-President Donald Trump to sign an order directing the Justice Department to ban these devices. The Supreme Court announced this month that it will review a challenge to that order. The Biden administration argues that bump stocks fit the legal definition of machine guns, which have been banned since 1986, since they allow a shooter to fire hundreds of bullets a minute with a single pull of the trigger.

About 1 in 20 U.S. adults, roughly 16 million people, own at least one AR-15. Two-thirds of these were manufactured in the past decade. Just as there is no excuse for the widespread availability of these weapons of war, there is no legitimate purpose for civilians to be able to fire so many rounds with one pull of the trigger. The justices should uphold the Trump-era ban on bump stocks, but Congress should also show the courage to enact the common-sense restrictions into law.

Archive
 
Do they mention the fact Uvaldale was only as bad as it was because the cops did fuck all? Bit of a issue with wanting to ban guns and leave the only guns in the hands of incompetent doughnut munchers no?

Like what was previously stated they want to grift off dead children. Trying to use this shooting as a reason for the typical liberal reasons to disarms whites fails for a number of reasons:

1) Police inaction (as previously mentioned)
2) Shooter's name was Salvador Rolando Ramos. Sounds foreign, and they can't claim white supremacist shooter gone mad.
3) A good guy with a gun finally saved the day (an officer from CBP who took a break from deporting doctors and engineers to save some kids).

This is 100% appeal to emotion to get people to vote away their legal right to self-defense.
 
Article by the Washington Post Editorial Board
Well, at least they outright admitted what they're trying to force people to do instead of being cowardly bastards and pretending like this is for the good of the dead.

The worst part is that shit like this is so hard to speak out against because "you're against dead children how dare you". Nobody ever thinks past the dead children because they're dead children, making any point against it hard to argue lest you be immediately branded satan himself. Even if you bring up something reasonable like the parents' consent (or lack thereof) in the article's publishing, the worst it might do is get someone to stop and think for a minute before immediately concluding that you're wrong again because you "want more kids to die in mass shootings".

Ugh. This whole conflict leaves such a bad taste in my mouth. Fuck journos, fuck shooters, and fuck everyone using the deaths of children to subvert the American populous' natural rights.
 
Last edited:
Pics are pretty sketchy, people don't just explode into blood when shot like in pulp fiction so unless Salvador was double tapping the bodies or shot the victims in arterial zones that kind of blood splatter wont appear. Also giving the benefit of the doubt the splatter might also be from the police dragging out the corpses.
 
Pics are pretty sketchy, people don't just explode into blood when shot like in pulp fiction so unless Salvador was double tapping the bodies or shot the victims in arterial zones that kind of blood splatter wont appear. Also giving the benefit of the doubt the splatter might also be from the police dragging out the corpses.
A lot did look like blood smears from after the bodies were moved. People have a lot of blood and 77 minutes is a long time to bleed out.
 
Pics are pretty sketchy, people don't just explode into blood when shot like in pulp fiction so unless Salvador was double tapping the bodies or shot the victims in arterial zones that kind of blood splatter wont appear. Also giving the benefit of the doubt the splatter might also be from the police dragging out the corpses.
From what I've heard before, given that he was allowed to sit in there and stew for well over an hour, police apparently heard gunshots for quite a while after everyone was most certainly dead. It's been a long time since I read it, but I seem remember an account of a wounded teacher who survived, and he stated that the shooter went back and basically magdumped into a bunch of corpses when he got bored
 
Back
Top Bottom