UPDATE: 3 Killed, Attacker in Custody in Planned Parenthood Shooting

151127194539-23-colorado-springs-shooting---suspect-cuffs-exlarge-169

Reports are coming in that the attacker in this afternoon’s attack near a Planned parenthood facility has been apprehended following a standoff with police. Three people were killed in the incident, and while the exact motive of the attacker is still unknown (as well as his actual target) Planned Parenthood has come out and made a statement blaming the “extremists” that fuel “domestic terrorism” in the United States.

From their statement:

We share the concerns of many Americans that extremists are creating a poisonous environment that feeds domestic terrorism in this country. We will never back away from providing care in a safe, supportive environment that millions of people rely on and trust.

No matter your political position I’m pretty sure we can all agree that indiscriminate violence is not the right way to change people’s minds.

comments

  1. avatar Aerindel says:

    It is good to remember that even if you support killing people to stop abortions the vast majority of people inside a planned parenthood are not there to have abortions or to give them but just for perfectly normal reproductive health reasons, even getting checkups for new babies.

    There is a time and a place for militant action for the sake of your beliefs but this isn’t that place.

    1. avatar BigDinVT says:

      I agree and well said. The ripping of a developing fetus from the womb is reprehensible but what this attacker did is equally egregious.

      Moreover what he has done is given the Obama crowd more justification for gun confiscation (as if they needed it). (Hey! Spell check thinks Obama is misspelled. Go figure.)

      1. avatar Tyler Durdan says:

        Really dipshit? I suppose being forced to carry the child of the rapist or sneaky uncle Din is preferred huh… Take your outdated theology and fuck off.

        1. avatar Matt says:

          Tyler, you’re assuming that the unborn child shares guilt equally in the crimes that you described. And could you check out the correlations between the number of rapes either by family and non family actors and the number of abortions that occur in the US? Using your rationale, there seems to be a whole lot of raping going on.

        2. avatar Sambo82 says:

          Pulled out the rape and incest card already huh? Kinda like claiming that the 2A isn’t an individual right because of ‘nukes or something’. Going extreme fringe isn’t the most reasonable argument.

          But lets be honest, and I’ve done this before; even if a pro lifer agrees with you says “you’re right, lets allow abortion in the case of rape and outlaw all other abortions of convenience”, you still won’t agree with that. Because you don’t really care about rape victims. It’s just an argument you use in lieu of conversing in good faith. You’re just feigning sympathy to make your argument seem more credible.

          There are some decent arguments for abortion (government overreach, medical privacy rights, etc).

          “OMG but rape!” isn’t one of them.

        3. avatar JR_in_NC says:

          “Take your outdated theology and fuck off.”

          Where did anyone mention theology except you?

          You don’t do “logic,” do you?

        4. avatar Steve says:

          Clearly you’re ignorant in the subject, as a good portion, if not the majority, of those against late-term abortion do so under NO religious view.

        5. avatar BigDinVT says:

          @Tyler Durdan

          “Dipshit”!? Really?

          That’s some real intelligent rhetoric there. I suppose I should come back with “I know you are but what am I?”

          This isn’t really the right venue for a discussion about abortion but…

          Since the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973 there’s been somewhere between 54 and 57 Million abortions (for comparison that’s about one sixth of the U.S. population). According to the information I found .3% to 1% of those were due to the mother having been raped.

          If you use the same logic you propose, then it’s perfectly valid for gun grabbers to justify making personal firearm ownership illegal and confiscating every privately owned gun in the country because that would stop accidental death by firearms in homes where firearms were present.

          I never said that there are no conditions where abortion might be reasonable, appropriate or a medical necessity. However the most common reasons given for abortion appear to be because the mother couldn’t afford a baby or didn’t feel they were responsible enough to care for a child.

          Nor did I ever bring theology into the conversation. It’s more a matter of morality but it appears you may have a trouble with that concept as well.

    2. avatar Fred says:

      its the exact opposite of a proper time.
      Tragedies like this are not only spun to attack gun owners but also to advance the cause of pro-abortion interests. If the gunmans intentions were to push people away from planned parenthood, he’s had the opposite effect.

    3. avatar Jimmyjames says:

      “It is good to remember that even if you support killing people to stop abortions…” Say what? If you support killing people to stop abortions, you need to call 911 now and turn yourself in.

      1. avatar Aerindel says:

        I am pro-choice but as a 2a supporter it would be hypocritical not to acknowledge the right of people to use deadly force in support of their beliefs, that in fact is the entire point of 2a, if I am to belive in this right for myself then I cannot rightfully deny it to those I disagree with. I can condemn them however for attacking those who are innocent of violating their belief system. There is no honor in terrorism, and attacking innocent people makes this terrorism rather than rebellion against what they belive is wrong. There choice of target violates not only my personal morality but general morality as well, but I cannot condemn the raw act of killing for your beliefs no matter how opposite to my own they are.

        1. avatar Tile floor says:

          Whoa whoa whoa wait. Just be sue something is someone’s BELIEF(!) does not give them freaking authorization to use deadly force. You say that innocents should not be harmed but they can use deadly force against those involved? So you’re saying its hunky dory to murder the planned parenthood staff?

          That’s the exact same freaking mentality that radical Islamists use.

          Get real

        2. avatar Sambo82 says:

          Violence to protect defenseless innocent people is the same philosophy that radical Islamist use? Sounds more like a GI liberating a death camp to me.

          And being pro life is not just a religious position. There are plenty of philosophical and humanistic arguments for protecting unborn human life, and some atheists like Christopher Hitchens are/was pro life.

        3. avatar Mazeofthemind says:

          Looking for legal sanction of this man’s actions, outside of the moral cartwheels possible in extreme conditions like inter-societal conflict, is a fools errand. There is no possible interpretation of self-defense here and the law of the land does not represent the person/citizen-hood of the unborn. If you attempt to look for protection outside the law, you trod the exact same ethical grounds as radical Islam.

          This man an indiscriminate murderer with the possible intent of using lethal force to create a public perception of fear in connection with this issue. I dislike the loaded word “terrorist” but in this case the shoe fits. Make no mistake, this is a worst case scenario for second amendment rights. The moment the disarmed majority views the armed minority as an violent bully threatening their safety and interests, the second amendment will vanish.

        4. avatar neiowa says:

          Grow up Aerindel. Waving the pro”choice”/proinfanticide flag may get moronic amoral libtard chicks in your bed but it still marks you as a amoral fool.

      2. avatar Swarf says:

        if you support killing to stop abortions, you need to call 911 on yourself right now.

        TTAG would lose a heavy third of it’s readership in one fell swoop.

        1. avatar PhilWilson says:

          I’m guessing you are wrong about that. I doubt very many people here would support the killing of abortionists. If they break the law (like Gosnell and his crew of butchers), they should be brought before a criminal court. But if certain atrocities are legal, then we need to work to change the laws.

    4. avatar William says:

      I just want to know if that Planned parenthood office was a gun free zone?

    5. avatar Charles says:

      It is good to remember that if you support killing people to stop abortions you support murder, criminals, and terrorism; are opposed to the rule of law, the democratic process, and the Constitution; and are a traitor.

  2. avatar Former Water Walker says:

    BS-murdering babies is their main money maker. And a specious argument-like all Germans weren’t SS but all SS were German. Hey- how about all NRA members are terrorists? Sound familiar? And no I don’t support violent action against planned infanticide… oops parenthood. Can’t we all just get along?…NO- we can’t.

    1. avatar Tyler Durdan says:

      You and sneaky uncle Din need to go back to Sunday school and get your facts straight…

      1. avatar Matt says:

        Tyler, you may need to look up the true origins of Planned Parenthood and get your facts checked. The term “Eugenics” and “Negro” are very prominent in the history books entries.

        1. avatar Swarf says:

          Yeah, and the Democratc Party Used to be the party of Southern racists. And the Whigs used to exist.

          Lots of things used to be true, what’s your point?

      2. avatar Joseph Quixote says:

        Tyler in Sunday school we learn that God commanded “thou shall not murder.” Read the original translation, thou shall not kill is inaccurate. There’s a difference.
        What this guy did was murder, just like the abortionist.

        1. avatar Pwrserge says:

          Killing someone to save another is not murder. Try again.

        2. avatar Joseph Quixote says:

          We don’t know this guys motivations. And do you think kill and murder mean the same thing? It’s you that is confused. Two wrongs don’t make a right.

  3. avatar AnonInWA says:

    From what I read the guy ran from a nearby bank to PP building, not sure why the story is spin as if he attacked the PP. We’ll see.
    http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/11/27/active-shooter-co-springs-planned-parenthood-clinic-officers-injured/
    At 5:56 pm
    “Fox News Channel and The Gazette report witness accounts that claim the shooting at the Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood clinic actually began at a nearby Chase Bank location.
    Fox News talked on-air to a witness at a nail salon near the Planned Parenthood clinic who “first thought [the incident] was a bank robbery.” Cell phone video captured by the witness appeared to show a Chase Bank branch as the first location where law enforcement moved in.
    The witness said the suspect ran from the bank to the Planned Parenthood clinic.”

    1. avatar Aerindel says:

      It may not be spin, just simply all the info they have so far and they are running with it. Time will tell.

    2. avatar CarlosT says:

      A later update on the story said he started the attack at Planned Parenthood.

      It’s the usual: everything you hear in the first 24 hours can flip at any time. We don’t know anything right now.

  4. avatar Former Water Walker says:

    This guy will get the death penalty if he attacked PP…a bank robbery gone awry? Not as likely…

  5. avatar Mk10108 says:

    “No matter your political position I’m pretty sure we can all agree that indiscriminate violence is not the right way to change people’s minds.”

    Discriminate violence in a womb, sanctioned by the state, directed towards minorities, funded by taxpayers and monetary kick back to Democrat Politicians. If this is the right way, alternatives need to be explored.

    1. avatar Aerindel says:

      Indiscriminat violence is always wrong….discriminate violence on the other hand is why people own guns in the first place.

    2. avatar tsbhoA.P.jr says:

      which costs me more in the long run?
      was this a ttag commentor?

      1. avatar Pwrserge says:

        Only if you insist that the government has the right to take your money by force to pay for the laziness of others.

  6. avatar Hannibal says:

    Can’t help but notice the police using those scary military vehicles (according to Obama and the demilitarization folks) to get the wounded out of the line of fire. I imagine they used scary black rifles, too.

    1. avatar DJ says:

      There’s no question that this scenario is precisely why SWAT exists. Those guys did good job.

      Unfortunately, this is not they way they are normally employed.

      1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

        “There’s no question that this scenario is precisely why SWAT exists. Those guys did good job.

        Unfortunately, this is not they way they are normally employed.

        Exactly.

        If one goes back to those “police militarization” discussions, the issue was always over-reach.

        In regard to SWAT in general and things like no-knock entry in particular, there always has been a recognized exception for things like hostage situations.

        Trying to shoehorn a story like this into the larger “militarization” question is a major league straw-man. Cases like this have always been very clearly outside the bounds of the militarization complaints.

    2. avatar Swarf says:

      No one says SWAT shouldn’t exist, Hannibal, only that it shouldn’t be the force of first resort that it so often is.

      Try harder.

  7. avatar Steve Day says:

    Why would Planned Parenthood think extremists are behind the shooting? They haven’t been having “Draw Mohammed” contests for Muslims have they?

  8. avatar Jimmyjames says:

    “It is good to remember that even if you support killing people to stop abortions…” Say what? If you support killing people to stop abortions, you need to call 911 now and turn yourself in.

  9. avatar CZ Guy says:

    The words “extremist, domestic terrorist” are the lefts new propaganda words and will be used all the time now…..stay tuned…

    1. avatar Rad Man says:

      Extremist = Anyone who doesn’t agree with our ideology.

      1. avatar Swarf says:

        That didn’t take long.

        So this (assuming it was an attack on PP) isn’t terrorism?

        But any time a Muskim fires a gun or tries to it still is, right?

        1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

          “So this (assuming it was an attack on PP) isn’t terrorism?”

          Do you have actual evidence at this point that it WAS terrorism?

          How do you know he was not a disgruntled employee? Or maybe his ex worked there and he was after her? Or, maybe he was just crazy and picked the place at random?

          The point of the earlier comments is that the term “terrorist” is losing its once specific meaning. This COULD be ‘terrorism.’

          Or, it might not be, but because we allow the Progressive Idiots in this country to redefine every word in the language to suit their own agenda.

          I know waiting for actual evidence in the ADD world of “I have to post FIRST” Internet is passe, but to have arguments over which speculative fantasy applies just seems….a waste of time.

  10. avatar Indiana Tom says:

    Planned Parenthood abortion clinics are usually where a lot of evolution in action takes place.

    1. avatar Indiana Tom says:

      Elimination of the unfit of those with maternal instincts of a brick.

    2. avatar Goodacre says:

      I don’t know much about the procedure, but I’m pretty sure the “patients” are able to breed at a later date. True evolution would be either adoption, or sterilisation during the procedure – you’re here because you are too irresponsible to raise a child? So be it! Adoption is still evolution, because of environmental factors such as not having two dads leads to better outcomes for upbringing.

      And by “two dads” I mean the ghetto version, not the San Francisco version.

      P.S. If a person’s profession is to disperse industrialised death, I don’t feel any pity if some gets back their way.

      1. avatar Swarf says:

        Ha ha ha! Black people are terrible parents, right?! I hear ya!

      2. avatar Indiana Tom says:

        but I’m pretty sure the “patients” are able to breed at a later date.
        Sometimes, sometimes not.
        But eventually there will be fewer of the defective morons walking the earth than before if enough of their lame offspring get aborted or grow up and get shot.

  11. avatar Don Prather says:

    Imagine the psycho meeting in which it was decided that shooting up a PP operation and killing people was the best conclusion.

    I am of the “two wrongs do not make a right” persuasion. The wrong of PP abortions is not made right by the wrong of murder.

    1. avatar Pwrserge says:

      So it would have been equally wrong to shoot up guards at concentration camps? Really?

      1. avatar Swarf says:

        The very fact that the anti-abortion movement exists in any numbers is proof that life is too easy in the US.

        You are just filled with outlet-less rage and not enough enemies, so you pick an esoteric ideal that is incapable of being anything but completely innocent- “the unborn”- and rally around it, ignoring the actual real problems facing actual real children who actually really exist as living, breathing, sentient entities.

        But screw those kids, because some trollop might be doing something you think is icky, and she must be punished for her fornicating ways, right?

        Guess what? We have enough people. We’re full up. We don’t need any more, so grow up and direct all that energy towards helping people who need it down here in the real world.

        Or ignore them. At least then there would be a net effect of less harm to humanity overall.

        1. avatar KayOhVee says:

          ^^^ Nailed it. ^^^

        2. avatar Stuki Moi says:

          You might “need” any more people (Just as most people don’t particularly need you), but 3 generations from now, linearly extrapolated, there will be 125 Isis fighters to 2/3rds of Kaitlyn Jenner. The latter voluntarily disarmed because guns aren’t PC. The future will always belong to those that don’t get aborted. Kind of why a common thread of all religions with enough staying power to be properly termed world-, is not that they originated in a bathhouse in Sodom. Nor that they preach “thou shalt not be a prude.”

  12. avatar Montesa_VR says:

    The instant I heard about this last night, my first thought was, “what terrorist attack in our lifetime has resulted in more police officer deaths than non police officers?” How did the police get there so quickly? If his target was Planned Parenthood, why wasn’t a single PP staff person harmed?

    I suspect the only link to Planned Parenthood is geography. But we’ll see.

  13. avatar Fuque says:

    “No matter your political position I’m pretty sure we can all agree that indiscriminate violence is not the right way to change people’s minds”

    I had to laugh at this..
    Anyone you know have success at changing anyone’s mind on Political issues?… I’m pretty sure what we are seeing is the shift to Just saying @# ck it….

  14. avatar Phil says:

    It’s quite surprising that when a fanatic extremist muslims kill people, article here are immediately assuming it’s a religious terrorist attack and it’s perfectly fine with most of people here. But when a fanatic extremist christian kill people, it’s suddenly wrong to assume it was a religious terrorist attack.

    We can’t base our opinion of this kind of tragic events solely on the motives of the shooters, regardless how right or wrong they seem to you. People “rights” don’t start or stop with the second amendment only. And even if you’re pro-life, two wrongs won’t make a right.

    If you can’t get that, you will actually give every single reason to anti-gunners to despise all “middle-age right-wing christian white male” and NRA members as potential domestic terrorist.

    1. avatar Paige says:

      The reason that happens is that a religious terrorist attack, that does not involves Islam, is just a little more common than a unicorn. Are we supposed to not notice that fact, in the name of being fair?

    2. avatar Paige says:

      Is 31 middle aged? I’m basically white, not a man, yes an NRA member. Do I fit enough stereotypes to be hated or disregarded? The truth is, it is a mistake to give a damn about those who are bigoted against, white middle aged men, Christians, or NRA members. Hate filled, anti gun social justice warriors are not a demographic I would ever care to be loved by. I would find their approval as personally insulting to me, as an award from the KKK.

      1. avatar Raoul Duke says:

        The problem is that these SJW’s run the media, government, and academia in this country. The establishment is bending to their will and forcing their ideals on the rest of America regardless of what we think passing laws, policies, PC bullshit, etc. and essentially getting away with it.

        Couple that with the brain-dead majority who automatically accept everything spewed to them not wanting to be labeled a “racist” making them a real threat so ignore them at your own peril.

    3. avatar Pwrserge says:

      If you deny others the right to life, you lose it yourself. Simple. It’s no more morally wrong to shoot people who murder children than it was to shoot staff at concentration camps.

      1. avatar Dev says:

        So you would deny women their right to life and their right to protect themselves by being able to have a medical procedure safely performed?

        1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

          “medical procedure”

          Just to throw this out there…nice ‘newspeak’ there. Redefine the murder of a human being with its own, unique DNA as a “medical procedure” is as Orwellian as it comes.

          Call a spade a spade and the conversation is much more honest. “Pro Choice” equals “putting the Mom’s choice at a higher plane of ethical importance than any choice the child will ever make.”

          If you want to argue that position…fine. But at least call it what it is.

      2. avatar SteveInCO says:

        @Pwrserge:

        Oh?

        Put your money where your mouth is.

        Or shut the fuck up because you don’t really believe what you’re saying.

        1. avatar R says:

          He is from 4chan’s /pol/ board. Just something to keep in mind when reading the cartoonishly reactionary bullshit he vomits here and elsewhere…

        2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          SteveInCo and R,

          Most people believe that every human being has a right to life — that right is unalienable and NOT dependent on another person’s will. Furthermore, most people believe that a person has a right to defend their life or the lives of other innocent human beings who have not attacked anyone.

          That being the case, it is quite rational to argue that abortionists are murderers and mothers who seek abortions are accomplices to murder.

          Or are you going to argue that human beings do NOT have an unalienable right to life that is NOT dependent on another person’s will?

          Are you going to argue that an unborn baby is not a human being? If so, why? What does autonomy, environment, location, cognitive ability, developmental level, size, or another person’s will have to do with whether or not someone is a human being?

      3. avatar Swarf says:

        Man, you really need to get it that you are using f’ing verbatim arguments, justifications and rationalizations from the IS and Hezbollah play book.

      4. avatar int19h says:

        Since you have just expressed the desire to deny others their right to life, I guess it’s okay if I shoot you on sight?

      5. avatar Joseph Quixote says:

        It seems that you again conflate murder and kill. There is a degree of difference. You keep bringing up camp guards in the holocaust so let’s use that. If you shoot a camp guard who is defending the camp or is actively gassing Jews you are justified in your actions. If you shoot an unarmed, surrendered guard most people would call that murder. In my thoughts you might be justified to shoot an abortionist as they began to kill the baby, however in the end two wrongs don’t make a right. You can never do evil hoping that good will come from it. This guy is obviously a freak show, he has done nothing for gun rights or babies. Defending him is simply asinine.

        1. avatar Joseph Quixote says:

          Who says it’s morally wrong, you?

      6. avatar Stuki Moi says:

        It’s morally wrong to meddle in the lives of people who do not threaten you or yours. Whether that be Isis dudes beheading eachother halfway around the world (or, honestly, halfway across the country), or dumb broads tearing to pieces their statistically equally dumb brood.

        If it ain’t your baby, it ain’t your business. And even if it is, you’re a man, and can quite cheaply crank out a largely undifferentiated replacement. While letting the rabble go extinct as they best see fit.

        1. avatar JT says:

          +1,000,000,000,000,000

        2. avatar Joseph Quixote says:

          Who says it’s morally wrong, you?

  15. avatar Sprocket says:

    Guess the christian nut jobs were jealous the muslin nut jobs were getting all the press.

    1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

      “Guess the christian nut jobs were jealous the muslin nut jobs were getting all the press.”

      Citation to credible source (published before 0738 on 28 Nov) that he was a “Christian nut job?”

  16. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

    So, anybody wanna actually talk about guns on this thread… Bueller? Bueller?

    1. avatar jwm says:

      I’m going coyote hunting this evening. Taking a 12 ga. and a .38. Does this count as talking guns?

      1. avatar Lotek says:

        You hunt coyotes with a 12 ga? I use a 270 or 25-06.

        1. avatar jwm says:

          At night I use a 12 ga. and an All Predator headlamp. CA won’t allow lights mounted to guns. In the daylight I use a .243.

        2. avatar Lotek says:

          Ahh, makes sense. On my way out my door to try for feral hogs at bottom of hill behind my house. It’s been rainy and cold last few days in central Texas. Using 308

    2. avatar JR_in_NC says:

      Sure. How ’bout this.

      Guns in the hands of SWAT stopping a spree shooting murderer from killing innocent people (which includes the SWAT officers) = Okay.

      Guns in the hands of Law Abiding Non-LEO citizens stopping a spree shooting murderer from killing innocent people (including the Law Abiding Non-LEO gun carrying citizen himself) = Not Okay.

      Or…”Good guys with guns never stop/can’t stop/don’t stop bad guys with guns.”

      Discuss.

  17. avatar Rick says:

    Try to remember that the incident happened “near” planned parenthood, not in, and that no one knows yet what the shooter’s reasons were.

    1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

      Agree with your second statement.

      But, the incident did in fact take place, at least partly, inside PP. Listened to the (semi-)live stream of the police “scanner,” and they were making references to “ultra sound room” and “reception area” and other similar things. Plus, they were referring to maps of that specific building.

      I don’t think it is in dispute where the pseudo-stand-off phase took place.

      What does remain unclear is where it started and what his ‘target’ was.

  18. avatar Rob K says:

    So much for being a guns forum.

    1. avatar Swarf says:

      This has been a “Right wing puppet show with many articles tangentially related to guns as a justification to not put the S on Democrats” website for going on three years now.

      Robert’s no fool– he sees the clicks–and he’s got the Mercedes and the Wilson Combat EDC to prove it.

      TTAG just rolls off the tongue better.

      1. avatar Charles says:

        Well said, and all to true.

  19. avatar neiowa says:

    http://gazette.com/active-shooter-situation-reported-near-planned-parenthood-in-colorado-springs/article/1564419

    This is the photo of another crazy ass demtard. Likely though he was in a potshop.

    1. avatar int19h says:

      Looks more like a typical Trump supporter at a rally. The only thing that’s missing is a trickle of saliva from the corner of the mouth after all the shouting, but you can easily imagine it there – it would fit quite organically.

      1. avatar Geoff PR says:

        “Looks more like a typical Trump supporter at a rally.”

        H’mm.

        Planning to vote ‘D’ in the 2016 election? 🙂

        1. avatar jwm says:

          Putin–2016.

  20. avatar P T Mc Cain says:

    Murder is murder no matter where, when, why, how or to whom it happens. Period.

    It is however a sign of our times that the murder of adults at an abortion center is newsworthy, the murder of unborn children is not.

    1. avatar Former Water Walker says:

      Is that the REAL you rev.Paul? WE miss you(assuming you’re not an imposter). Good point…need to check out your You-tube channel again.

  21. avatar DJ says:

    And… Obama is already talking about the need for more gun control.

  22. avatar Model 31 says:

    9mm is better than .45 acp. There, now this is a guns thread too and we can have that discussion again. Gun topics cover a lot more than just calibers and powder. This event will impact the political narrative of the leftists and will result in bloody shirt waving, standing on coffins and demands for background checks on family firearm transfers. As time goes forward in the next couple of days, I will find out more verifiable facts in the comments section of this site than I will watching the news media Barbies who don’t want to know anything about the firearms they’re misinforming about. –Looking at you FNC. Facts are what wins arguments with those on the fence with gun control.
    If this thread bothers you…wait around, very soon, there will be another “why I carry this” article about a piece most here will never remember seeing unless they’re looking for it.

  23. avatar troutbum5 says:

    It may be that planned parenthood was his target, and yeah, nothing’s been sorted out yet, but initial reports from the cops and eyewitnesses don’t really support that. He was shooting at cars out in the parking lot, left “devices” out there, and eventually holed up inside the building. It seems he was shooting out more than in. Nearly all of the victims were recovered before he holed up and started shooting again. He had a rifle, reportedly an AK. If pp was his target, why didn’t he kill everyone in there?

  24. avatar William says:

    I just want to know if the Planned parenthood office was a gun free zone?

  25. avatar Mack Bolan says:

    The director of Planned Parenthood has stated all staff are accounted for and safe. All patients are as well accounted for and safe.

    Nobody was shot inside Panned Parenthood.

    This really has nothing to do with Planned Parenthood at all, there is no agenda there. Its all spin and propaganda from the MSM. The headline here is just as dishonest as the MSM.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email