Previous Post
Next Post

Garland crime scene (courtesy

“Two men with attack rifles drove in from Arizona and opened fire on officers guarding the conference center in Garland.” reports. “Both were shot dead, an officer was shot in the leg, and from the other side of the world, the Islamic State group made an unproven claim of responsibility.” The media buzz after the Texas terrorist attack was as predictable as it was predictable. All Muslims aren’t terrorists, free speech is inviolable (but you have to admit those cartoons of Muhammed were insensitive and inflammatory), we don’t know if ISIS is here and assault rifles! One aspect of the story that’s left me puzzled: how did a traffic cop with a .45 caliber GLOCK take out two bad guys with body armor and AKs? I’m thinking . . .

head shots? Nah. One head shot under stress is damn fine shooting. Two head shots is deep inside SpecOps territory. As much as our Jon Wayne Taylor has been working hard to help vets get government work, I don’t think the traffic cop was a former Ranger or suchlike. So . . .

Maybe terrorists Elton Simpson and Nadir Soofi weren’t as up-armored as the media would have you believe (to the point where MSNBC commentators were agog at the fact that you can buy this stuff online!). To its credit, CNN attempted to make strategic sense of the close-quarters combat:

“There’s no advantage for a handgun over an assault rifle,” said Dick Fairburn, a veteran law enforcement officer who is a columnist for “An assault rifle has more distance, more accuracy, more power, more penetration.

“You cannot downplay what he did there.”

Granted, the officer likely had on some sort of protective jacket. But Tom Fuentes, a former FBI assistant director and current CNN contributor, said that the thin Kevlar vests often worn by police would be useless against an assault rifle round that “will go through that like a hot knife through butter.”

The same can’t be said for bullets coming from the officer’s pistol: The attackers’ body armor likely would have blocked those.

Thus, aiming for the suspects’ torso — as officers are trained first to do, since it is their biggest possible target — is no longer an option. But still, somehow, the traffic officer managed to down both men in seconds.

“It speaks to his skill level,” Fairburn, who is a firearms trainer for law enforcement, said of the Garland officer. “In terms of weaponry, he was far outgunned. But he was far better trained.”

Maybe the huge volley of sympathetic fire from other responding officers made a head shot or two a statistical inevitability. Or again, like James Holmes, perhaps the terrorists only looked like they were wearing body armor.

Chances are we’ll never know; the authorities said they’re keeping the hero cop’s name on the down-low for, like, forever. Still, proponents of the Don’t Mess With Texas mystique and adherents of the .45 caliber über alles ballistic belief system had plenty to cheer about.

As did we all. Oh, and you do realize that the attack happened in a gun-free school zone, right? That fact somehow slipped the media’s mind. Wonder why.

Previous Post
Next Post


    • Note for future reference. If you plan to organize an event like this, don’t choose a gun free zone for the site. Also, recommend that all attendees carry firearms if they are able to do so. Imagine the shock a mass shooting terrorist would feel when half of the people present pull out their own firearms.

      • And the antis will finally have their ‘crossfire confusion slaughter’ scenario they’ve been wetting their panties over for years.

        ha ha or not.

        • The gun grabbers seem to get CCW permit holders confused with LA cops. Private citizens rarely do mag dumps in the general direction of a perceived threat.

    • Since it was a .45 acp, perhaps it was a model 1917 revolver (Colt or Smith). I like my Colt 1917.
      If you are going to carry a “service revolver”, that isn’t a bad choice since they use moon clips for rapid reloads.

      • Yeah but in that case why not shoot the gun out of their hands? Or the cowboy hat off their heads, for that matter.

        • Maybe Andy and Barney Fife could have handled them with Barney’s 1 bullet and Andy’s strong words. In Mayberry, they didn’t need fancy guns like a Glock 21. Of course they never faced down terrorists with AK’s either, just Otis and a few moonshiners.

    • Did the PD make that statement or the press, who doesn’t know the difference between a revolver and the shoulder thing that pops up.

  1. There’s a thread about this shooting over on Glocktalk that includes a photo showing FBI doing evidence collection and one of the rifles they’re collecting is clearly a Kel-Tec Sub2k, not an AK-47.

    Depending on which model of Sub2k, it’s possible the sub2k was actually *less* powerful than his .45 ACP duty weapon! No matter what, it’s a pistol-caliber carbine and not a huge jump in power like an actual AK-47 would have been.

    I wonder if there were any actual AK-47s present. Also, thinking tactical vests instead of actual body armor.

    • So a crazy terrorist guy can find a sub2k to go all “Jihad!” but us law abiding regular guys can’t find kel-tec anything on a regular basis.

      The Universe, she has a sense of humor, I think.

      Also, someone needs to photoshop up the meme: Texas cop, 20 rds, 2 dead suspects. NY cop, 40rd, 5 wounded bystanders, 1 wounded suspect.

        • Thats where they’re all at! Seriously, I have never seen one in gun shop or at a local gun show.

        • The Sub2000 is not so desirable in this area. Every LGS in town has a Kel Tec on the rack. But you have to order a Hi Point from an online vendor. The LGS has a six month waiting list for a Hi Point carbine. If you actually shoot a Kel Tec carbine you will see that the Glock magazine doesn’t matter. A 33 shot capacity is useless when you have to clear a jam every third shot.

    • I agree. On multiple occasions in the past, the media has incorrectly stated that attackers were wearing body armor when all they had was a load bearing equipment vest. Now any time I read that, I am skeptical.

      I also question the AK47, since the only photo I’ve seen was a Sub-2000 (maybe there was 1 AK and 1 Sub-2000).

      The Glock 21 is a great gun. I think it is nearly ideal for a duty gun (especially the SF version). I enjoyed mine (non SF), but ended up trading it for a Glock 19 since the 21 is big for CCW, and .45 ammo is spendy. I am now considering picking up a Glock 30SF for CCW, in addition to the 19. No more selling, or trading guns I like, only accumulating them.

      I am very thankful that the officer was able to handle this situation. It looks like his training and competency really paid off.

      Terrorist attacks like this make me wonder if I should upgrade my EDC from my S&W 642 (5 shots and no reload) to my Glock 19 with a reload. I love my J-Frame, but feel much more confident with a double stack duty type gun and a lot more rounds. I also start to think that maybe a 12 gauge in the trunk may not be a bad idea.

      • I like you, had a Glock 21 years agoand loved it. But needed money at the time some point to pay the rent and pawned it. Several years ago I bought a 30SF and really enjoy shooting it. I picked up a Glock 19 this past Christmas and enjoy shooting it as well. Trying to decide whether to get the 21 again or a 17. I’ll get both eventually.

      • Exactly what I have done these days (traded in a SW 642 for a G19 with a couple of extra mags). A long gun in the trunk is verboten where I live, unfortunately.

        • Always have to keep the 642. It is a well loved classic, and fills an important niche as a quality pocket gun. Since I already have both the 642 and the G19 (and some other pistols), it is just a matter of carrying one, the other, both, or something else. The G19 isn’t that much bigger or heavier than the 642, but it changes my mode of carry from pocket to IWB. I like pocket carry. Maybe I “need” a G26 for pocket carry with the potential of larger magazines. Somehow a Glock in the pocket (even in a holster) makes me nervous about the lighter trigger.

        • Sounds like we are on the same page. The 642 in a pocket holster fits perfectly for me, and I am very comfortable that I won’t discharge it unless I mean to. I still use it for home carry, and don’t intend to sell it. I just don’t like OWB belt carry, though I’m doing it right now as I type. But better than IWB with the G19. I can’t stand that with any holster I’ve tried (and I’ve tried a few).

      • Art out West,

        I carry a full-size pistol for the very reason that you stated: having some ability to stop one or more spree killers (whether terrorists or otherwise).

        Your J-frame revolver is totally fine for the overwhelming majority — probably 99% — of self-defense events. If you end up facing one or more spree killers or a mob, that J-frame isn’t going to be near as useful as a full-size pistol with 14+ rounds in the magazine plus a spare magazine.

      • The press in Aurora claimed the Aurora Maggot was “wearing so much body armor he was invulnerable to police gunfire. BULLSHIT on toast! He had on a 511 tactical vest and knee and groin pads. ONE armed citizen with a 1911 would have splattered his hash all over the screen.

      • 30S is the way to go for CC and just as a general purpose handgun. The 41 would be great for a uniformed sidearm. I live on the edge of two cities that have bans on mags over 10 rounds, so a 30S makes more sense than a neutered 19, and I’d like to invest in some 25-round Vector mags at some point just for fun.

      • I carried concealed for almost ten years a Glock 30 with two thirteen rnd mags. Still have it for when I carry concealed. Great gun. I now OC a Kimber 1911 regularly.

        Now if the cop had used a1911, he would have only needed two rounds, one for each terrorist. (I’m kidding) 🙂

        • With a Colt Delta Elite 10mm he could have just put a single Black Talon round in between them and the shockwave would have torn off both their arms.

        • The Kimber 1911 is certainly a much “prettier” gun for OC than the Glock 30. If you want to OC, maybe pretty is important. If I open carried, I’d probably take my Colt 1917. It isn’t pretty, but it is big, somewhat imposing, and historically interesting. It would be a good conversation piece, as well as a deterrent.

    • Sounds right to me. And I’m also guessing that the “assault rifles” aren’t.

    • I also wonder how many of those rifles were actually assault rifles or were they just semi-auto rifles?

  2. What’s with the messed up vehicle in the picture. I keep seeing this image, but have not read anything to explain it. The original story said there was no bomb in the attacker’s car… so what’s up?

    My first reaction to the idea of a man with a pistol going up against two with rifles (and I HATE this “assault” or “attack” rifle thing), was …. “Oh sure.” The more I read, the more contrived the whole thing looked.

    Hate to say it, but “false flag” comes to mind more and more often with these things. Of course they are not all false, but it’s easier and easier to believe that many surely could be.

    • SOP to see if there are hidden explosives is to attempt to trigger them with mini-detonations. A few of those and the car would look precisely the way it does.

    • The police blew up the car to detonate any explosives. None were present, though it was claimed to be rigged.

    • Hey, don’t forget we got a cop here in Austin could’a whacked those nutjobs from *here*, and not even scared his horses. Sometimes Texas gets it right.

    • Ah, the “false flag” tinfoil brigade finally shows up. Did you guys at least bring dip?

      Cool, put it over there by the chips. And then tell me who on earth would be behind this as a ‘false flag’ operation and what possible end it could serve other than to make Texas look like it takes care of business.

    • I imagine the pair of assclowns trying to wrestle their long-guns out of a compact sedan a mere 20ft from the cops pretty much negated any advantage they had regarding range or surprise. It wasn’t so much two assault rifles vs one glock as it was two idiots vs a competent professional.

  3. From this moment forward I am going to exclusively use the term “attack rifles” in lieu of “you know what.”

  4. “…attack rifles…”

    “Associated Press reporters Emily Schmall in Dallas and Paul J. Weber in Austin also contributed to this report.”

    I despise the way AP reports on anything involving any sort of firearm. Their generally blatant anti-gun stance and firearm ignorance (or intentional misrepresentation; it’s often hard to tell) is gobbled up by the unknowing ignorant non-gunners as truth, when in fact AP is one of the biggest purveyors of untruthful progressive anti-gun propaganda out there.

    And then their misleading rhetoric is further propagated by other news organizations who simply publish AP’s copy verbatim for further dissemination.

    • I’m pretty sure there isn’t some guy at the AP that rewrites all the otherwise perfectly adequate copy submitted by staff journalists to spin it anti-gun. Rather, the AP is a huge flow of regular journalism, which means any bias is just reflecting the general bias of the journalism community.

      Maybe that’s the same thing, though ;-).

      • “…general bias of the journalism community…” is absolutely the source.

        What is so infuriating is that so many writers at AP such as Schmall and Webber seem intent on turning misleading anti-gun propaganda into an art form for public consumption which is then widely adopted and disseminated by other news organizations, verbatim.

        It strikes me as AP’s contribution to affect ‘culture change’ and demonize anything and anyone associated with guns.

      • Pretty much. The liberal/progressive lock step brain washing in most universities is almost all pervasive.

        Such a dysfunctional belief system held in such high regard is truly incomprehensible to me.

      • The formatting automatically changes gun or rifle to “high-powered assault rifle with high capacity magazines”.

  5. Insensitive and inflammatory drawings? Oh my! Give it a rest.
    What is problematic is the actual life of Muhammad. I guess it is OK to idolize him as the perfect man, but to wax satirical about the events of his life is bad?
    Nobody has ever done that about any other religious figures, right?
    I think Monty Python made millions off the idea. “Dogma” anyone?
    Mapplethorpe maybe? Mel Brooks? The list is quite long, apparently you can only poke fun at religious figures from groups that are not instructed to kill unbelievers?
    When a whacko attacks an abortion clinic do we spend our time reporting on the ills of abortion? Or do we focus on the attacker? His deeply held beliefs don’t give him a pass.
    Compared to the anti-Jewish or anti-American cartoons and rhetoric coming from the Islamic world, the drawings in Texas were tame.

    • The Broadway play Book of Mormon was attacked by waves of suicide bombers. Oh wait, it wasn’t. The Mormons bought ads in the program and probably brought over a tray of lemon squares too.

      • Christians, Jews, Mormons, Buddhists, etc. don’t usually murder people who mock their beliefs.
        Muslim fundamentalists sometimes do.

      • When I saw BoM last summer, there were missionaries waiting at the exit. At first I thought they were part of the show.

    • ^This

      RF: (but you have to admit those cartoons of Muhammed were insensitive and inflammatory)

      So. What.

    • I had my own comparison to this, as well.

      I’m Chinese. I have a CHL. If someone were to call me a chink, I don’t get to pull out my gun and shoot them. At most, I need to be on heightened awareness in case the insult is a prelude to an assault, but only then would I be justified in shooting them, and not even in all jurisdictions. Guns are to protect life and property, not in response to verbal offense.

      • Well my Chinese brethren, from the leftist narrative, we would have to wage an over 1000+ year campaign of violence, terror and threats to everyone who would dare call us “chinks” or some other demeaning word. Only than would we be justified in gunning down any perceived insulter.

      • Chinese yet you name yourself after the founder of the Yuan dynasty. Interesting.

        Anyhow, “Asian” is not a “race” (and Chinese not an ethnicity) that does poorly in school/the job market, so you get cut no slack. That explains it of course.

  6. Fox News reported Monday morning that the perps were armed with “barrel-loaded” AK-47’s – probably a misnomer for drum magazines. One of my business partners called me from the parking lot during the exchange of gunfire. He was in very close proximity when it came down and counted dozens of rounds being fired. One of the perps struggled for some time, without the benefit of medical attention, before bleeding out. Final score Texas 2 / islam 0. God Bless America.

  7. “Maybe the huge volley of sympathetic fire from other responding officers made a head shot or two a statistical inevitability.”

    The current story is that this officer was the only one who fired at the upstanding young gentlemen. The SWAT team got there after the perps were being introduced to their 72 virgins. This is a 60-year old Texas cop with 25 years of experience. Not a bystander-killer from the NYPD. I have no problem with believing that he demonstrated some serious marksmanship.

    Some things are rather clear. He was not using a revolver: the yellow flags show where the 20 cartridge casings were found, and that would not be the pattern for a revolver.

    Also, he was advancing as he was shooting. This is Texas, people.

    • “Also, he was advancing as he was shooting. This is Texas, people.”

      +1000 on this, great unknown. And already the east coast anti-gun lamentations have started trying to undermine this guy’s forthright bravery—last night Greta claimed that Pam Geller intentionally placed the Garland in danger by being “provocative”.

      Listening to the various talking heads try to come to grips with weapons terminology is a laughable example of just how culturally and technologically isolated these people actually are. Most of them don’t know how to fix anything, have never been around people who know how to fix things, and wouldn’t know the difference between a Sub-2000 and an AK if you laid them side by side. Even worse, they don’t think they should try to find out before they start talking about them.

      Fortunately, the two “lights of Allah” appear to be even less skilled than the sundry news dummies trying to decipher the attack.. These great warriors apparently just drove up and started shooting. Why plan anything when you’re on a mission from God? Good thing they never saw the “Blues Brothers” .

    • If you have only a handgun and your attackers have long guns, advancing on your two attackers while shooting at them is quite possibly the best strategy there is. Why? For one thing, you are moving rather than standing still which makes you a much more difficult target. More importantly, you take away the advantage of their long guns which is farther range. At 12 feet and in, a long gun can actually become a liability compared with a large caliber handgun.

  8. These terrorists are gonna get smarter and wait until inside a crowd to attack… Concealed carry is more important than it ever has been.

    • Concealed carry is more important than it ever has been.

      Carry, period. One might argue that open carry would be equally or moreso beneficial. But in the end: it is law-abiding people carrying that is imperative.

    • Nah, that would force them to leave the AKs at home, why not just fly to Paris, instead? There, a guy can have a really fun time before collecting his Virginians!

      • As a proud Virginian, the only thing a jihadist spree killer will get from me is lead. :p

  9. If you have anything from a chest-rig, to a hunting vest, the media will say its body armor.

  10. With multiple attackers that 15 round magazine looks pretty good. Oh yah that has been banned correct? No need for more than six bullets right?

  11. If the attackers actually were wearing body armor, how about a .45 to the pelvis? I bet that would slow a guy down.

    • So when you see an incident that had two attackers with maybe 30 rounds magazines you decide to go with something that holds 8 rounds?

      • *9 rounds. No one carries 7 round magazines anymore. Plus whatever you have in spare magazines.

  12. “One aspect of the story that’s left me puzzled: how did a traffic cop with a .45 caliber GLOCK take out two bad guys with body armor and AKs?”

    I had the exact same question. And remember, not only did the traffic cop take out both attackers who purportedly had ballistic vests and AK47s, he did it while taking fire. I can only see three possibilities here:
    (1) The traffic cop has average (e.g. awful) marksmanship skills and was extremely lucky.
    (2) The traffic cop has fantastic marksmanship skills via a personal hobby (such as IDPA) or previous intensive military Special Forces training.
    (3) Someone else shot one or both of the attackers.

    I am going with option (2) or (3). Was there a grassy knoll nearby?

    • As with many above, I’m considering #4: It wasn’t body armor and they weren’t AKs. Still, the guy had to be pretty damn competent, certainly relative to the opponents, to take out two guys armed with long guns.

      • Well there was an AKM, there are some crime scene photos that show an AKM next to the bloodied armor

    • Could be at least one of the terrorists off’ed themselves when meeting serious resistance; at the moment, I’ll go with the officer being an awesome force to be reckoned with.

    • “(2) The traffic cop has fantastic marksmanship skills via a personal hobby (such as IDPA) or . . .”

      In a part of the country where “People Of The Gun” is something more than a political slogan, it isn’t at all out of the ordinary that the shooters ran onto a patrol officer (who apparently worked school crossings—lucky kids) who could drive nails with his Glock. AK’s or not, he had a clear shot and those guys were 15 seconds.

    • He wouldn’t have to be SOF. SGM Basil Plumbly was known to take down the enemy at 50+ yards with a 1911.

    • I submit possibility (5):
      The attackers slam on the brakes, shift into park and awkwardly dismount from their rental car <10yds from the police, then stand still while spraying fire in the general vicinity of the security guard, hitting him once IN THE FOOT. In the mean time the other officer draws his handgun and fires. Cool nerves and good shooting but something tells me this wasn't exactly their A team.

      In the words of Jeff Cooper, "You're only outgunned in you miss."

  13. “Still, proponents of the Don’t Mess With Texas mystique….”

    What does a hiway anti-littering campaign have to do with this? 😮

  14. Just curious, but is there an endless supply of virgins in Muslim heaven? Do they have some sort of inventory control or mail order system?

    • I agree with Billy Connolly on this. 57 virgins is not a reward, that’s a punishment! Give me three fire breathin’ whores any day.

      • The Qur’an and al-Hadith actually go into considerable lurid detail on this. There is not as much for female jihadists, though. They are told that they will have a single made and “be satisfied” with that.

        ===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle

  15. How about everyone takes off their police bashing caps for a day and give credit where it is due. Regardless of where the Islamic Terrorists were hit, they were stopped in their tracks by a cop. The cop hit his targets. America 2 and terrorists 0, a perfect score by me.

    • Indeed. You wouldn’t know it by reading TTAG, but some cops can actually shoot.

      • It’s mostly “Only Ones” backlash. There are cops who know their way around guns and clearly this guy is one of those.

  16. It is definitely the way to go where you are restricted to ten round magazines. Fortunately, I’m not restricted on magazine capacity. The G30 is still a great gun, and may or may not be better than a regular G19 for general use. I do feel a little more confident with .45 but also think quality 9mm is just fine.

  17. What does it matter that the officer’s name has not been released? They have the bodies. Surely there must be someone in Texas qualified to say whether the holes were in the head or not. Mustn’t there be?
    This is just yet another example of keeping the sheep forever in the dark. You can keep them afraid and ignorant better if you offer them no information ever. Think about it, what possible excuse can they use for withholding the state of the dead perps? Luckily, they don’t even need any excuses, the stock line; “uhhhh, national security…”, works every time.
    When we had a sniper shooting where I live they wouldn’t even release the caliber of the perps firearm. They actually said in a ‘grief session’ afterwards that they didn’t know. REALLY? You don’t know the caliber of a firearm that is in your possession at this time? Well let me see it, I DO know how to read!
    I never said that, for I already knew it was a 10/22(and a poor choice for a mass shooting it was. Only one dead, thanks to an armed bystander in the parking lot picking up his wife. He is the hero, but he doesn’t want his name to be known. Typical of REAL heros). The benefits of a small town, everybody knows everything….

      • So then you believe that they DON’T know the locations of the fatal wounds, what with the bodies right there in their morgue and all? What a rube. That means really naive, just FYI…

  18. Can anyone say “Mozambique drilll” twice, really fast? Whatever, the officer won’t be buying his beer for a while, the other officers will pick up the tab.

  19. Enjoying not only the ignorant media stumbling backwards on this but the 9 “It’s in the gel tests!” guys, too.
    Defying the laws of physics can only last so long.
    Meanwhile, I won’t guess this copper was an IDPA guy, but a USPSA guy… the move forward and shoot all the time, unlike the vesty-crowd.
    Some sensational work there, Officer.

  20. Was he prior service? If so MOS and tour of duty. I suspect he is a veteran having served with special-ops. Or Dirty Harry has a son.

  21. I find the position that the violent reaction to the Draw Mo Cartoons is reason to stifle the exercise of free speech is like saying the civil rights movement should have been toned down because it might provoke the KKK to violence.

  22. I’m guessing this cop knew how to shoot and kept his cool while the terrorists were scattering bullets everywhere shooting from the hip Mogadishu style. That said, it could also be a case of a typical cop shooting center mass and missing high by a couple of feet. The third option is the the media is completely incompetent. That one’s true regardless of the other two.

    Why is everyone in the media, including supposed conservatives (like Bill O’Reily) trashing the organizers of the event? What they should be saying is that these morons (the terrorists) got what they deserved for getting so worked up over cartoons. What are they going to say when the Islamists start going after people who make wedding cakes for gay couples?

    • Because it was an event held by conservatives in Texas. They are not allowed to. /sarcasm

      Only leftist Europeans like Charlie Hebdo and others get a pass when they do it.

      • Progressives value victim hood above all else and condemn any acts of self sufficiency. Weakness is strength! Lies are truth! Take your raping with a stiff upper lip like a good little peasant. Had everyone there been slaughtered I’m sure there would have been a catchy ironic hashtag showing support for all the valiant little victims. #texasstrong or something equally demeaning to all the victims. I much prefer #welcometoTexas myself. 🙂

  23. “Attack Rifles”, “AKs”, “Tactical Body Armor” ….these people are all full of buzzwords and zero knowledge. You’d think by now they’d at least have half a clue. What a joke.

    • Too bad that was only the 1st inning. There is still a long game to play with these d-bags and they won’t be shut out forever.

      • I would suspect this is merely a pre-season scrimmage, I imagine they will at least learn something about time/place from this.

  24. This officer did absolutely nothing wrong. In the face of a real, tangible threat, he stood his ground and did his job. It is counterproductive to sit here and try to monday quarterback this incident with as little info as we have. The only thing to say at this time: “Well done, Officer.”


  25. A sub 2000? Man I wish I had kept mine…little did I know I had an “assault rifle!”. God bless America,Texas and this unnamed guy with a 45!

  26. How many times has load-bearing gear been mistaken for body armor? My count is pretty much every time. Were the AK’s assault rifles or just semi-auto WASRs or such, or illegally converted (I doubt these two had such skill.)? I shall withhold opinion until we actually know more facts. Everything the media reports in the first 72 hours after an incident like this is wrong.

  27. Hey TTAG, if you’re going to talk about the fine details of rifle classifications, maybe you should also stop using government-manufactured propaganda words like “terrorism” to describe attempted murder.

    • T, it was attempted terrorism. It was acknowledged by the president as such. Social media postings from the attackers made it clear that it was such. There is not a more clearcut case than this. It wasn’t ‘sudden jihad syndrome’ like Ft Hood or ‘workplace violence’ like the navy yard. Poorly planned, amateurish terrorism? Sure, but still terrorism.

    • No one is claiming that terrorists are not murderers. That designation — terrorist — simply describes the motive (in broad terms of course) of the attackers. We often use other labels as well like “psycho” which means the attacker’s motive was mental illness.

      • The word “terrorist” has no objective meaning and is only useful in a propaganda context. The word was re-purposed by governments to try to distinguish their own government violence (i.e. so-called legitimate violence) from non-state violence, or violence perpetrated by states deemed hostile to the said governments.

        For the etymology of the word, look up the original meaning of the word, for example, the terrorist bombing of Helsinki by Soviet Russia. This was back when the word actually had a meaning that can be clearly applied, as opposed to the meaningless propaganda of today.

  28. Media are simply morons when it comes to reporting anything firearms related.

    The talking head idiots on CNN were going on and on about how the guy who shot at the cops in Ferguson was “clearly highly trained and must have had an assault rifle and many clips of ammunition” in order to get multiple on target shots at the range of *gasp* 30 yards.

    Then a day or two later we find out it was a gang banger with an illegally obtained .40 handgun and one magazine of ammunition.

    The good news for those of us who own guns is that there are more of us every year, more of us getting training every year and we are starting to see the media side show about guns for what it is, a circus act.

  29. The rifles were originally reported by Reuters and others as “automatic rifles,” with “drums” that had “far higher than the 30 round magazine capacity.”

    The “automatic” confusion in the media is all too common, and likely intentional. But did any of these drums turn up?

    ===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle

  30. Interesting that in one example we have good guys with guns preventing a mass murder attempt attacking the 1st amendment.

    1. Good guys with guns stop mass murders.
    2. The 2A is necessary to protect the 1A.

  31. For all the federal apparatus of Homeland Security and various other 3 letter agencies, in the end, like always, it’s a man on the scene with a gun that stops them. No great bust, no cracking down on terrorism, no swooping in at the last moment to prevent a tragedy. Just a Texan with a gun. Makes one wonder what the hell we need them for.

  32. According to the anti’s, things like concealed carry are useless because if a mass shooter or terrorist (s) come along, they’ll be armed with AR-15s or AK-47s and body armor and the pistol-wielding Good Guy With A Gun will be gunned down. This disproves that notion.

  33. Courage. Balls. Fortitude. Sometimes skill or lack of same can be overcome by the proper mindset. See a threat, phuck a threat up.

    2 terrorist wannabes up against a real man. No way else for it to end.

  34. Artist puts a crucifix in a jar of urine? Art. Christians need to stop being overly sensitive. (Christians do nothing)

    Artists draw caricatures of Mohammed? HOW INSENSITIVE AND INFLAMMATORY. (Muslims attempt a terrorist attack)

    I for one am glad they tried this in Texas. Only way this could have been better was if a concealed weapons license holder had stopped it. Though I must admit, considering they were using AK’s I’m surprised there wasn’t a real body count. A nice success story regardless.

  35. If RFwants to feel good about himself because he can “admit those cartoons of Muhammed were insensitive and inflammatory”, well then good for him. I for one, not being Muslim, don’t care. It’s this phony feel good stuff that gets us into trouble and the fear of seeming “unreasonable”. But then again, he is in Austin and can tend to ruin one’s self confidence over time.

  36. The cartoons were insensitive ? More like a group trying to show the world that we will not be coerced into doing what the radical muslims (caps left out on purpose) want under the threat of violence. How is what these extremists want different from what the Nazis did in Germany? How about the Communists under Mao or Stalin. That is, kill anyone that does not agree with your philosophy. It is perfectly OK to mock a religious symbol. That is what free speech is all about. It is also OK to protest that mockery. Just another version of free speech and its partner free assembly. It is NOT OK to kill someone that exercises their free speech rights by mocking your idols. Once we start giving in to these radical groups or kowtowing to them it is the beginning of the end of freedom in this country. Much the same as giving in to the folks that want to restrict gun rights (2A).

  37. Regarding Gun Free Zones, a good comparison is the US…where guns can be easily purchased at any gun store…to Japan…a “gun free zone”

    2008 is the most recent year where comparative figures for Gun homicides in the US and Japan are available.

    2008 gun homicides in the USA where the 2nd Amendment guarantees the right to own a weapon=12,179
    (Homicides per 100,000 population in 2008=4.01)

    2008 gun homicides in gun free zone Japan in 2008: =11
    (Homicides per 100,000 population in 2008:=0.00011)

    That’s right, you are
    a staggering 36454 times more likely to be murdered by a gun in the US than in a gun free zone like Japan

    • Regarding your statement, your logical fallacy is:

      A) Anecdotal
      B) False Cause
      C) Personal Incredulity
      D) Black-or-White
      E) The Texas Sharpshooter
      F) Strawman
      G) All of the Above

    • In a related note, you are much more likely to have a Japanese speaking neighbor if you live in Japan.
      That little tidbit is just as useful as yours is when discussing crime and firearms statistics. I just didn’t try and pretend that mine was relevant.

    • “Regarding Gun Free Zones, a good comparison is the US…to Japan”
      No its not. That is a horrible comparison, not even analogous to apples and oranges, which are at least both fruit. More like comparing the surface of the earth to the surface of the sun. No similarities at all.
      Japan, which has never had firearms available, will naturally not misuse them much, since they are almost non existent there. You might just as well compare the number of misuses of guns in Somalia today, with the number in Somalia in 1341AD. Since the number before they existed was zero, and the number today is massive(even though they are totally illegal there), the ratio between a large number and zero will be infinity. The ratio of any positive number to zero is infinity. Does this mean the odds of being shot in Somalia is infinite? OFC not. It only means that you don’t understand math and valid comparisons. Invalid comparisons like this mean nothing at all.
      You misunderstand, like most statists, that making an item illegal(gun-free zones) is NOT the same as making them just vanish(Japan). Somali’s understand that very well, you should research that.

    • That is kind of funny. Japan has a homicide rate of 0.3 per 100,000. That is almost identical to the city I live in in Texas. Every single household I know in my city has at least one gun.

      It is well established that there is no correlation between the “strength” of gun laws and murder rate. There is however, a weak inverse correlation between gun ownership and violent crime (more law abiding people with guns = less violent crime).

      Your problem is that there are many other factors that come into play when comparing Japan to the US that have not been accounted for. To make comparisons, one needs apples and apples.

      • That’s because an irrational anti thinks being stabbed to death or having your skull fractured with a rock is somehow LESS DEAD than if you get shot. I guess that’s just another symptom of their hoplophobia. If someone gets killed by something OTHER than a firearm, it doesn’t count, because they aren’t irrationally afraid of knives, rocks, cars, planes, bats, sticks,…….etc.

    • you just compared a country who has had its warrior class culled, the males so emasculated they still live at home with their parents, women dont have much of a sex drive anymore and a society that has a rich heritage of school girl and tentacle erotica…. to texas.

  38. It is not incredible that a Texas police officer, a traffic officer, is capable of overwhelming these two amateurs with a handgun. Visit any International Defensive Pistol Association (IDPA) match in Texas and you will see some great shooting skills. Some will unload a magazine on multiple targets at various distances, moving targets, within seconds and not miss. And they are just playing a game.

    A semi-automatic AK-47 works just great when used by an amateur against unarmed targets, but is no match for a highly skilled officer or citizen with a pistol. A good pistol shooter could have a bullet to each head before such an amateur could pull the trigger a second time.

    The point is, it is not the tool, it is the skill of the individual who wields it. This officer has skills. Many others do too.

  39. Three notes:

    1. The media never gets the facts straight. Trying to parse this with facts from the media is a waste of time.
    2. I seriously doubt those guys with the swat get up were there randomly. Remember one of these Islamonitwits was known, and got off the hook in AZ because of a dip$hit move by the DA. The FBI didnt forget about him, I am sure.
    3. Who were those guys all tacced up, in the area and on the spot, anyway?
    Two headshots by a street cop, under stress, with little warning. Not likely.

    • If I might be allowed to add a fourth note:
      For those who might be unaware, Rita Katz is the head of the Garland event. One might also take note of this from the above source: “And also we’re very suspicious about this last one because Rita Katz is a long time MOSSAD front operation, which for years… her group manufactured the fake Bin Laden tapes, which really became a joke”

      • I’d be interested in your sources for any of this.

        Those that believe that Usama bin Ladin died in 2001 and that the Evil Jooos were responsible for the 9/11 attacks believe that all bin Ladin videos after then are fake. I have looked into this and have never found any of it compelling, though you can tell a good story by omitting evidence.

        Note that your article is making much of the word “staged” (referring to the production values of the material produced by ISIS, as noted by a forensic media analysis). That source does not believe the video was faked, just very well put together compared to the earlier al Qaida efforts.

        Please provide links that demonstrate that Rita Katz was “the head the Garland event” and that the Sotloff video is faked, i.e., Sotloff was not beheaded. Or even that this woman is “a long time Mossad front operation.”

        ===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle

        • Well, first off I already provided my source right up front, ‘veteran’s today’! You clicked on it, yes?
          In any case here is a better one.

          Plenty more where these came from, just search “rita katz”.
          But I doubt that you will do so. There is a lot of information available. You could have searched her yourself already, but failed to do so. I’ll bet you won’t now either.
          One other error, related to this; none of this info is mine, as you assume(“your article is making much of…”). I didn’t write, edit, or control any aspect of it. All I did was read it and pass it on, which you seem to really resent for some reason. I’m also not affiliated with any of the other sites above. I read, evaluate, and move on.

          • @Ken, who wrote:

            Well, first off I already provided my source right up front, ‘veteran’s today’! You clicked on it, yes?

            Indeed I did, as demonstrated by noting the article’s treatment of the word “staged.” The fellow believes, evidently, that this meant “faked” — so I did some quick research to find out what was going on. His assertion was unsupportable from that original source, as I also mentioned.

            You accuse me of not reading your article, despite my having referenced its content. And you accused me of doing no other searches, despite my having described the results. Odd.

            And no, the phrase “your article” doesn’t mean I think you wrote it. Nor do I hold any resentment for your posting it. I specifically asked you for more/better sources, and I am glad that you offered some — though the accompanying attitude is rather peculiar.

            In any case here is a better one.

            This one bases its source on Michael Ledeen, based on stories that make much of the similarity between “Ledeen” and “bin Ladin.” Yet Ledeen, who suggested (based on Iranian sources) that Usama bin Ladin had died (again) in 2006 (evidently twice in that year, and several times previously going back to 2001), later admitted that he was wrong, and wrote commentaries on Usama bin Ladin when he was taken out in 2011. So this case is not well-supported.


            I followed this to other stories, some of which (like “The Ugly Truth”) have suffered from bit rot.

            They accuse Rita Katz of being the source for all the ISIS videos. They base this, in part, on a snapshot of James Foley’s sister looking like a classmate of Adam Lanza, offering as evidence a screenshot of a very comparable “Stan Laurel grimace” between the two similar-looking women. However, going back and actually watching those interviews, it is obvious that these are two different women when they are not making that grimace. The screenshot of the unusual expression was the point at which they looked most similar, so the site used that — and did not offer the video and sound (different voices) showing otherwise.

            Also, the assertion that every video had come from Rita Katz was not supportable. The “Fallout 3” images business was completely mischaracterized. And I was amused to see a Wikipedia editor suggesting to stick “mossad and cia” into the article about her organization, because despite the lack of evidence, “innuendo is the language of our times.”

            I’ve read articles at about 20 sites just now, almost all of which are putting forward the same story, that these videos are “faked.” None of the evidence pans out on close inspection so far. And as the same evidence tends to be recycled across sites, I am not thinking that this is likely to change.

            Plenty more where these came from, just search “rita katz”. But I doubt that you will do so. There is a lot of information available. You could have searched her yourself already, but failed to do so

            I don’t know where the hostility came from. It seems unwarranted. Particularly since I had already evidenced doing some research in my initial reply. Well, to be fair, I was mocking the linked article, which is one of any number of Jew-hating/Zionist-hating/Isreal-hating websites who are unwittingly assisting the other side in the Jihadist War. They seem to feel that jihadists have only been slaughtering and conquering the West for nearly 1400 years because of the creation of Israel in 1948. This reflects a rather glaring lack of historical context — a read-through of Qutb’s Milestones would set them straight. He’s the fellow whose philosophy now drives the Muslim Brotherhood and all of its spin-off jihadist operations.

            I don’t know how much background you have on this, and whether it is interesting to you that the evidence is weak for ISIS being the poor innocent victim of a “Mossad front operation.” But I thought I’d pass it on. Most of the sites express incredulity that a small operation could “scoop” the government in monitoring jihadist forums. I am not at all surprised at this.

            The US federal government under the current administration seems loath to expend its energies on this sort of pursuit, and probably finds SITE and similar organizations (like MEMRI and StratFor, which I’ve been tracking for more than a decade) to be a nuisance. In each case, these are small groups doing excellent work, and who know their territories. SITE appears to fit right into this designation.

            ===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle

      • Pam Geller was the head of the event. It was an AFDI event. American Freedom Defense Initiative, that is.

        • Despite the attacks on Pam Geller in recent days (by the media who benefit from free speech, and political leaders charged with defending it), the Saturday Night Live skit on “Drawing the Prophet Muhammad” did an excellent job of skewering how frightened Hollywood is of jihadists. Even the SNL crew, who knowingly parodied themselves in the skit. Nicely done.

          ===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle

Comments are closed.