Progressive center machine-gunned in San Antonio. One Summer Intern critically wounded. |
|
| By: Masoninblue Sunday July 18, 2010 11:03 am | |
Reporter Vivian Weinstein of People’s World reports that someone fired 15 shots with a semiautomatic rifle into the Southwest Worker’s Union in San Antonio, TX this morning. A summer intern inside the building sustained a gunshot wound to the hip. He’s in critical condition.
The organization has been actively opposing Arizona’s SB 1020 and a similar bill that the Texas legislature will be voting on next January.
No arrest(s) or suspect(s) yet identified.
Link.
About MyFDL
MyFDL is the community site of progressive political blog Firedoglake. Anyone can participate by writing a diary, commenting on others’ diaries, or joining groups to find other people in your area. Content posted to MyFDL is the opinion of the author alone, and should not be attributed to Firedoglake.
News. Community. Activism.
Firedoglake is a member-supported organization.
Help us continue our work for as little as $45/year.
Tweet
53 Comments
Awful. But we need to know. Thanks for the post!
This doesn’t really matter that much…
But semi-automatic weapons are not “machine guns”.
Good lord this is horrible.
I sure hope it’s not the first of more and worse incidents.
The fabric of our social order is being strained mightily.
Because the system as is, is unsustainable.
Wonder if the MSM will pick this up . . . . hope they catch the asshat who did this.
Rccd, cuz everyone should read this and know about it.
Mason, not a thing at CNN, MSNBC, main blog sites.
What’s up with that?
Maybe because if you check the link, it’s from last Saturday night/Sunday morning (though don’t recall seeing anything earlier in the week)
Whoa! That’s even more disturbing! I’ve been in Maryland since Thurs., but was at home in S.A. last Sun. Never heard a thing! Weeeeeeiird.
Ummmm, just back from searching the Express-News website.
Actually, I did hear about this – a shooting on Idaho St. The workers union Solidarity House is a house in an ordinary East Side neighborhood. The last couple of stories say it appears that gang members (gangs are rife in that neighborhood) shot up the wrong house.
Sadly, this is terribly plausible. For years, a big chunk of fatalities and injuries from gang violence in San Antonio has happened to innocents, because the gang members shot up the wrong house.
May I suggest some follow-up of the first piece one reads is always in order? Especially a week after the incident.
Wow! Ok.
So it’s a week old, and I haven’t heard anything about it.
MSM didn’t cover it.
And GOOGLE reveals nothing.
Wierd. This shoulda been front page headline news, and all OVER google . . .
Thanks for the date info! I read the link, didn’t check the date!
First report that Mason links says semi automatic RIFLE fire.
Since when did gangs begin using AR-15′s and the like?
Rifles!
I know the drug cartels do, they are fully militarized arms wise.
But street gangs with semi auto RIFLES?
Maybe hand held machine pistols, but that’s not what the article says.
Did any of the other reports you saw mention the type of arms used?
Lastly, do ya think the gang thang is a coverup for an attack by some Supremist or such on a center such as this?
In regards to the AZ law, immigrants, and such . . .
I saw it for the fist time this morning on Raw Story and assumed it happened this morning when I read it and linked to it. I haven’t seen any other references to it anywhere else on the web.
Sorry for fostering confusion, but it still happened.
Gangs don’t have a lot of AR-15s, but there are a lot of AK-47s and Uzis out on the street. Takes a pretty trained ear to tell the difference.
I used to work with a Libertarian/Second Amendment wingnut who took great pleasure in pointing out this distinction, ricecakes, and must therefore respectfully disagree with you. That semis are not machine guns in the purest sense is not a distinction that “doesn’t really matter that much.” It is a distinction that doesn’t matter at all.
This former colleague used to make me nuts, telling me how semis are perfectly legal, and you have to modify the clip (or whatever the hell) to make them fully automatic, and since that *modification* is illegal, that means they shouldn’t be banned, because after all, only CRIMINALS make that modification. And these weapons are perfectly reasonable and useful, because, you know, they allow you to not only kill the deer, but, with the Venison-O-Matic attachment (so you don’t forget, call in your order before midnight tonight!), you can also process CHOPPED meat right there in the woods! (Oh yeah, and, should the guvmint get outta line, these guns can be helpful in that situation as well…)
So while I appreciate the spirit of your comment, let’s not lose sight of the fact that, when somebody can do what this individual did with a “legal” gun, the distinction really doesn’t matter. Not one bit.
Thanks I didn’t know that. There are instructions on how to convert an AK-47 using only a twist tie. That’s pretty scary.
Oh, well the apology makes it all better, of course.
Mason, you and the rest of the puppies may think me a Reich-wing, teabagger, racist, fascist, ignorant oppressor of the poor and trodden-down peeples, but to the best of my knowledge I have never posted anything factually incorrect.
You and anyone else who feels like it may take that as a challenge. Post links.
As the Most Humble Mother On Earth speaking: I gave my son and his friends permission to target shoot on our property assuming they were shooting the 22 rifle and pistol we own. His father and I left the premises.
What they wound up shooting were semi-automatics,9mm, scary frigging LEGAL weapons that caused us to spend the next day calling the neighbors and apologizing. With our son doing a follow up call to apologize.
We’re talking frigging scary shit here. We need these weapons banned.
I should add as a point -of-interest that I actually enrolled in gun classes[taught by the NRA] with my kids when they were tweens, because I knew guns would be in their culture and they should understand them. The men teaching the classes were great. They pounded home the danger,how far guns shoot physically,how far the bullets go through home walls, the need to clean your guns, the understanding that when you aim your gun it’s REAL, it’s your responsibility.
Which led to us buying guns. It is fun to shoot targets……………
If any woman in America wants to be praised as a Good Mom in male eyes, just take your son to a gun shop and buy his first gun. You’ll never feel better about your Womanhood As Viewed Thru Male Eyes.
Crap, we were buying a 22 pistol and all these young males were steering us towards a 9mm Glock. But they accepted the 22 as a jumping off place.They thought I was the coolest Mom on Earth. It scared me.
But now we live in a Gun Culture. Teach your children.
But, I like that little pistol. We’ve dispatched 20 chickens with it.
Or they want it to look like a gang shooting.
Agreed machine pistols are easier to hide easier to sneak into clubs and so fashionable.
I’m thinking this is the kind of crime that never gets solved and there maybe copy cats. Obama better do something the Baggers don’t think he is their President and seem to want to over throw him.
Doesn’t matter, nor does how well the NRA guys do of educating. As you say yourself, we live in a gun culture – and that must change.
BTW, wringing the neck dispatches a chicken just as quickly – and more quietly, and without the need for a gun in the house.
.S. most armed country with 90 guns per 100 people
Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:57PM EDT
By Laura MacInnis
GENEVA (Reuters) – The United States has 90 guns for every 100 citizens, making it the most heavily armed society in the world, a report released on Tuesday said.
U.S. citizens own 270 million of the world’s 875 million known firearms, according to the Small Arms Survey 2007 by the Geneva-based Graduate Institute of International Studies.
About 4.5 million of the 8 million new guns manufactured worldwide each year are purchased in the United States, it said.
yee ha!
Um, a machine-gun is mutually exclusive from a semi-automatic rifle. Thankfully the comments on the original article point this out immediately, though the headline remains brazenly and misleadingly false.
I’d like to point out again, that the issue of firearms is without a doubt the most incoherent position of the “left.” There’s no affirmative statistical correlation between per capital gun ownership and gun violence, but there is a statistical correlation between socio-economic status and violent crime.
There’s no possible way in hell that a material prohibition of firearms would do anything other than become a failed enterprise joined at the hip with the War on Drugs (which incidentally is significantly responsible firearms crimes itself).
The existing laws are completely incoherent as it is, which significantly undermines the credibility of any additional reforms. All kinds of emphasis placed on banning “scary” guns, and next to nothing comparatively done to encourage safe and responsible gun ownership.
Sick of violent gun crime? End the Drug War, create a productive economy, and instead of trying to ban all manner of spurious things; make safety training a mandated requirement for ownership, and fund the hell out of it.
A semiautomatic weapon means the shooter must pull the trigger to fire a single shot. If the shooter wants to fire another shot, he or she must pull the trigger again.
A semiautomatic weapon can be converted to fully automatic, which means the the weapon will continue firing bullets after the shooter pulls the trigger until he or she releases the trigger, or the weapon runs out of bullets.
I believe, but do not know, that most semiautomatic rifles can be converted to fully automatic. Some are easier to convert than others and kits are available on the black market to do it.
Unless you have a license, possession of a fully automatic rifle is a felony under federal and state laws.
I don’t know why the reporter, Vivian Weinstein, used the term machine gun in the title of her article, or why her editor didn’t catch the apparent error. I merely used her title because it’s her article.
Even though she described the weapon as a semiautomatic rifle in the body of her report, I don’t know how she knows that. Automatic weapons fire many shots in quick succession. The rate is much faster than a semiautomatic. Perhaps witnesses described hearing a series of single shots as opposed to a staccato blur of automatic fire. I also don’t know if more than one weapon was involved. I believe she reported that 23 shell casings were found in the street. That suggests that 23 shots were fired, but her report only mentions 15 shots. Semiautomatic rifles automatically eject shell casings after a shot is fired, so I suspect 23 shots were fired.
I doubt this was a gang related shooting, although it might have been. I assume the house was sufficiently well known that a gang would not have mistaken it for another gang or gang member’s house. No, I suspect the shooter or shooters was/were right-wing wacko(s) who decided to shoot up the house because of the organization’s publicized and well known opposition to the AZ let-me-see-your-papers law and a similar proposed law pending in the Texas legislature. I doubt area gangs would have been pissed at the center for its position on anti-immigration laws.
Hell, without knowing the caliber(s) of the shots fired, I can’t even rule out that the shots were fired from a machine gun! For example, maybe it was a .50 caliber machine gun mounted to the back of a pickup. A right wing wacko is far more likely to possess a machine gun than a gang member and he might even have a license to possess one legally.
I suspect the right wing media has refused to report the story because it regularly suppresses stories about right wing attacks on minorities, progressives, and liberals. They certainly won’t report this story, given the lack of a suspect. I also doubt the local police department is actively investigating this matter, although I’m sure they would claim otherwise.
Not a good sitch, as Larue likes to say.
SNAFU! (situation normal, all fucked up)
Eh….
Yes, my CJUS undergrad program one of the first and most important things they taught, over and over, is that poverty is extremely strongly correlated with crime.
And yes, the ownership of guns in general, at a *species* level, if you will, does not lead directly to violence. But: in America and other quasi-failed states, it most certainly does.
It’s a mistake to blame the tools we use to feed our diseased violent culture for the disease itself. That being said, you don’t hand a sharp knife to a lunatic if you can help it.
Putting aside the issue of intentional violence, the staggering, breathtaking statistics on accidental gun deaths, especially amongst children in America, put the lie to the idea that Americans are fundamentally ready for the responsibility of widespread gun ownership. This Guardian article is always a real eye-opener on that subject.
On the other hand, what can we do? There are literally hundreds of millions of guns in this country, and countless billions of bullets.
That fact, unfortunately, makes your suggestion of mandated training as fruitless as most forms of gun control, Nathan. We have no way of knowing who owns a gun, and no way of finding out, unless and until they choose to use it. If we could deduce who owns guns to force them to train for safety we could take any number of actions. We can’t, though. For the same reason that banning firearms in a country awash in unregulated and untracked grey market weapons won’t work, a requirement to train won’t work. It’d be like trying to ban the Bible.
Make it so for all new sales. Given time and attrition the situation will be improved, as is the case with every educational harm-reduction initiative. You can increase the points of contact by including requirements for training to get all manner of permits and licenses for hunting/recreation, or take it the extra step to ammo purchases.
The most important thing to do is make sure it’s accessible and funded.
There are street gangs in San Antonio using AK-47′s and Uzi’s?
Really?
Sorry, that was to Adam @11 . .
Until the firing pin is modified in the semi rifle, making it full auto.
*G*
Love your comment, BTW, I agree with you about guns and gun laws as you posit.
Completely agree with you.
Class war, that’s the issue . . . that’s the violence . . income disparity is where the criminal activity kicks in.
Well said, hoss.
Thanks Mason, I’m with you all the way on this one . . . not likely a gang issue = a cover up to not panic the people OR give credence to copy catters of the same right wing ilk.
Regardless of how this one resolves out (other than simply fading away) there will likely be more.
This was proof that one COULD do this and get away with it.
Who knows, the authorities might just be looking the other way in order to intimidate progressive efforts on any level . . .
Interesting theory, HC, but, regarding that quote . .
HOW did they die? At their own hands? At the hands of others?
How many died in line of a crime by others, perhaps even at the hands of their parents?
That stat alone is rather nebulous, in of itself.
Who do you think they work for, Larue? They aren’t here to inform anyone and they just serve as the leftish version of FOX.
Heard Rachel or Keith or Schultz talk recently about the genocide going on in Gaza? Don’t hold your breath.
Laws that ban the possession of things, or the use of things that lots of people want and like to do, never have worked in the past and never will work in the future.
Didn’t work with alcohol; didn’t work with drugs; and it sure as hell isn’t going to work with guns.
Those types of laws are very effective, however, at creating extremely profitable black markets and vast criminal enterprises operated by ruthless gangsters.
This reasonably foreseeable consequence creates a need to hire more police, prosecutors, jail guards, and prison guards, plus build more prisons to house a torrential flood of new inmates. Another alarming and foreseeable consequence is increasing pressure placed on legislators to pass tougher laws with longer sentences, and on judges to cutback civil liberties. All hail the PIC (prison industrial complex).
The war on drugs has not reduced drug use. Drugs are more plentiful and cheaper today than they’ve ever been. It has put lots of people in jail, however. We have by far the largest prison population in the world.
GROK on these stats: At the end of 2008, for example, 2.4 million people, or 1 out of every 100 adults were incarcerated in federal and state penitentiaries. The official rate of incarceration reported by the U.S. Bureau of Statistics at the end of 2008 is 754 per 100,000. More than half of the people in prison were convicted of nonviolent offenses. The United States incarcerates 23.4% of the world’s prison population even though it has less than 5% of the world’s population. In stark contrast, consider the incarceration rate per 100,000 in the following countries: United Kingdom (153), Australia (129), China (119), Canada (116), France (96), Italy (92), and Germany (88). The racial composition of the prison population in the United States suggests that racism plays a significant role in determining who goes to prison. Although 12% of the population is African American, they make up 44% of the prison population.
I think we’d better go with the flow on guns, if you get my meaning, if you get my drift, eh what?
What reasonable grounds do you have for that suspicion?
Three reasons:
(1) the type of weapon(s)used,
(2) they are the only people I know of with a motive to do this, and
(3) they are the only people crazy, stupid, and mean enough to do something like this.
Crap.
(1) You don’t even know the “type of weapon(s)used” and said so.
(2) It might have been a gang related shooting and you said that, too (though you doubt it, for reasons unspecified).
(3) LOL! Right-wing wackos are the only crazy, stupid, mean people in the world?
Face it, Mason: you’re on ground just as shaky as that of an Arizona cop whose “reasonable grounds” for demanding papers is that the guy is hispanic. Honestly, what would you say to a cop who claimed your 1, 2, and 3 constituted “reasonable grounds” for accusing someone?
Hey, this was what you quoted from Mason:
Suspect. Suspect.
You have your filter turned off? I suspect you are looking for a fight.
Now that is ironic.
Yes, I know he said “suspect.” Isn’t that pretty obvious from my question, “What reasonable grounds do you have for that suspicion?”
Look at his #33 and tell me that constitutes “reasonable grounds,” if you can. I won’t hold my breath.
Am I looking for a fight? Not exactly, but because I think that complete, accurate, and undistorted information is important I will jump on people who post BS. That attitude often leads me into fights, like with the guy who claimed only one Dem Senator voted against Gramm-Leach-Bliley, or the one who claimed the highest US tax rate ever was 20-something percent, or the one who claimed Israeli helicopters strafed the MM with machine gun fire…
It’s easy to win an argument with me, newtonusr: you just have to (A) be right, and (B) able to prove it. Of course, I rarely argue with such people in the first place…
The phrase ‘I suspect’ is the height of surety….
Right. I am shocked that he would bet the farm that way.
Glad you are here to ensure that when someone has a twinge of intuition, you are here to make them pay.
Far too busy reporting on the scary voter intimidatin’ types, doncha know.
Are you seriously claiming that this was an unreasonable question?
“What reasonable grounds do you have for that suspicion?”
Are you seriously claiming that he has reasonable grounds? Suspicion is supposed to be based on something other than bigotry, especially if you’re going to voice it publicly.
For suspicion? Absolutely.
His #1? #2? #3? Some combination thereof?
I suppose he could interview the suspect, as you have certainly done, so he could concrete his ‘suspicions’ and make you all warm and fuzzy.
But I don’t know how far he would have to travel.
Yes, except for the fundies of all religions. They are too.
Same for the rich.
Come to think of it, maybe Dick Cheney did it.
In other words, he’s got nothing and you know it.
The police have a suspect? That’s news to me: who is it?
Come on, newtonusr: what reasonable grounds exist for making public statements about right-wing whackos with a 50 caliber mounted to their pickup? You said there were “absolutely” reasonable grounds for suspicion: is it so crazy of me to ask what they are?
Oh, so contrary to your #33 right-wing whackos aren’t “the only people crazy, stupid, and mean enough to do something like this.”?
I guess that means that it’s just as likely (by your standards) that the place was attacked by Islamo-terrorists…
I suspect that President Obama sees himself in the stead of Ronald Reagan.
• Do I know it? I do not.
• Should I be able to air my suspicion? Absolutely.
• Do I need you to sign off before I air my suspicion? Jeebuz, I hope not.
I have reasons, as do you.
Does Obama’s policy agenda strike you as Reaganesque? It does me.
Did Obama give reason to believe that he admires Reagan? Yes he did.
Do I need to check with you to air my wholly unconfirmed but heartfelt suspicion?
I do not.
Are you the arbiter of reasonable suspicion of anything? You are most assuredly not. Quite the opposite I suspect.
So you have reasons but refuse to state them? Fine: your privilege, but don’t expect me to place a high value on the pig in the poke.
I would ask why you suspect that, but of course we’d just be going in circles…
Thank you for confirming what I suspected.
Yeah, I hear San Antonio is infested with Islamo-terrorists this time of year. They’re commandeering vessels all up and down the Riverwalk and cutting off heads that the cops Fed Ex to the wicked witch Jan Brewer so she can shrink and string them together into a necklace she can wear around her neck to prove the Hispano-terrorists are cutting off heads in AZ.
Yeah, the Islamo-terrorists swam the length of the Mediterranean and across the Atlantic with AK-47s clamped between their jaws and hitched rides to San Antonio so they could shoot up a house owned by the nefarious Southwest Workers Union, long a thorn in their side.
Why do you want to put pigs in jail?
Because pigs have opinions.
Touche, my friend!
Sorry for the lack of an accent on the e. No gizmo key on my keyboard.
Devil’s advocate: why should the state fund the education process for an extremely hazardous hobby? If it has to be state-mandated, shouldn’t it be funded out of a gun tax?
Wow, I expected this thread to be dead and here I come back to it.
I also don’t buy the attrition angle, unfortunately, because there are an estimated 200 million guns in the United States today. Despite laws on the books, those flow around like water. New gun sales are by comparison a vanishingly small portion of the market.
Plus the NRA would be out there screaming bloody murder to stop any such mandated training, the current Supreme Court would instantaneously overturn it, etc.
(editing to add one final point: guns have an extremely long shelf life as they are extremely durable and easily transported. Whereas a safety program for cars, or booze, or drugs might be expected to bear fruit in a human lifetime, I think the half-life of a gun would make any results far, far less easily achieved by regulating new sales)