Gunman opens fire inside Los Angeles International Airport Terminal

[Mr. Laz]

LAX shooting: Gunman opens fire inside Los Angeles International Airport Terminal 3

At least two people were injured in California after a gunman opened fire with a rifle at a security checkpoint. An evacuation is underway and the LAPD is on the scene.

BY NANCY DILLON AND JOE KEMP / NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

PUBLISHED: FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 1, 2013, 12:45 PM

UPDATED: FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 1, 2013, 1:58 PM


PrintSHARE THIS URL:



KTLA

At least two people were shot when a gunman opened fire inside a busy terminal at Los Angeles International Airport.



At least two people, including a TSA worker, were shot when a gunman opened fire inside a busy terminal at Los Angeles International Airport, according to a report.
The shooter apparently confronted the security worker before firing a round in the man's leg and squeezing off several shots inside Terminal 3 about 9:30 a.m., NBC Los Angeles reported.
At least one other person was shot before authorities managed to nab the suspect, who was reportedly armed with a rifle.
“There looks to be a rifle on the floor guarded by a police officer,” one person tweeted with a picture of the weapon.
It was not immediately clear how badly the two people were hurt or if any other victims were shot in the gunfire. The victims are 25 and 29, NBC LA reported.
One person was being treated for a sprained ankle.
CBS

Police ran a man out of LAX after a shooting Friday.


Brian Adamick, 43, told the Los Angeles Times he was about to board a flight for Chicago at Gate 32 when he saw a crowd of people running away from the security area.
He followed a group of people through an emergency exit outside.
“While I was on the tarmac, I heard two gunshots from the same area where the people had been running and screaming,” he told the paper.
He said he boarded a bus that came later to pick up the stranded passengers and boarded with a TSA agent bleeding from his ankle.
“I got shot, I’m fine,” the agent told him.
“It looked like it was straight out of the movies,” he told the newspaper.



Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...#ixzz2jPyyCxiY

[Dayze]

Originally Posted by Marcellus

They already do it.

They pull 90 year old granny over to give the impression to your crazy ass and the bad guys that they are randomly selecting people. See how that works?

My brother looks like he could be Arabic or of not American decent, though he is not. He travels a lot and travels extremely light and with 1 way tickets quiet a bit.

He regularly gets pulled aside for additional search.

how well do you know your brother? How long have you known him?

[Marcellus]

Originally Posted by Dayze

how well do you know your brother? How long have you known him?

I guess my mother could have been the original terorist and I was born and raised as a decoy while my brothers were trained to fight for Jihad.

Anythings possible, at least many people here seem to think so.

[T-post Tom]

Originally Posted by Pestilence

Well we can safely assume he wasn't Asian.

[Sassy Squatch]

[Kiimo]

Originally Posted by A Salt Weapon

Don't care.

You're a giant moron.

[A Salt Weapon]

Originally Posted by Superturtle

[A Salt Weapon]

Originally Posted by Kiimosabi

You're a giant moron.

Yeah probably. However I can't seem to find a care that someone used a firearm in one of the most oppressive states for firearm possession (california), in one of the most oppressive industries for firearm possession (airports).
Forgive me for not giving a ****. Maybe shit like this might wake up some of the sheep to realize that govt will not protect them and they have been regulating and restricting the wrong thing. Another shooting in a gun-free zone.......surprise.

[J Diddy]

Originally Posted by A Salt Weapon

Yeah probably. However I can't seem to find a care that someone used a firearm in one of the most oppressive states for firearm possession (california), in one of the most oppressive industries for firearm possession (airports).
Forgive me for not giving a ****. Maybe shit like this might wake up some of the sheep to realize that govt will not protect them and they have been regulating and restricting the wrong thing. Another shooting in a gun-free zone.......surprise.

Nah, you're still a giant moron.

[Bump]

Mark it down: TSA agents will wind up getting guns after this...and, it will be a giant cluster****.

[jerryforeverrice80]

cali has guns who would have thought.

[Demonpenz]

ban assault weapons.

[CrazyPhuD]

Originally Posted by A Salt Weapon

Yeah probably. However I can't seem to find a care that someone used a firearm in one of the most oppressive states for firearm possession (california), in one of the most oppressive industries for firearm possession (airports).
Forgive me for not giving a ****. Maybe shit like this might wake up some of the sheep to realize that govt will not protect them and they have been regulating and restricting the wrong thing. Another shooting in a gun-free zone.......surprise.

The problem is that you cannot enlighten the unconscious and this won't be a wake up call for the bigots who run much of the California government, instead they will try to use it to market against the people they hate.

That said right now you are helping them to market. No one deserves to die, especially just trying to do his job. Yes the TSA may be functionally useless to prevent incidents and likely violates many of the principles this country stands for, BUT there are much bigger fish to fry, they are a small issue in comparison.

Being insensitive reflects poorly on everyone else associated with what you would like to support and helps the bigots market to those in the middle that all are out on the extreme. Sometimes the best strategy is to say nothing, even if you feel the way you do.

No loss of life should be used as marketing to push any agenda either pro or con.

[CrazyPhuD]

Originally Posted by Demonpenz

ban assault weapons.

While you're likely NOT serious the reality is that weapon as pictured was already banned in California. Since banning it 10X won't prevents incidents like this what do you do now?

The motivation of CA politicians has NEVER been about fighting crime when it comes to guns. It has always been about pushing a moral agenda. The fight that California is making isn't about reducing crime it's about criminalizing being a gun owner because they don't morally approve of ANYONE owning guns.

Case in point, certain cities in California, led by San Francisco, are pushing to make it a misdemeanor for anyone(including retired LEOs) to own a magazine capacity > 10 rounds. They claim this is about crime and it will be a 'deterrent'.

NYTimes did a survey recently of criminal shootings, they found that >90% of all the people prosecuted had extensive criminal history. It's safe to say for 85+% of those people it would have been a felony to even possess ANY gun regardless of the capacity of a magazine.

If it's already a felony to posses a firearm by most criminals involved in shooting and it STILL doesn't deter them, how will adding a misdemeanor based on the capacity of the magazine deter them further? Simply put it won't, adding a misdemeanor to a crime that's already a FELONY will have no added deterrence.

So if it's not about deterring crime then what it is about? Frankly who's going to be affected more by said regulation, criminals(which it won't deter) or a much larger number of otherwise legal gun owners?

In all cases these laws could be narrowly written to directly target crime. They aren't because crime isn't the target, gun owners are. So they make these laws as broad as possible so the vast majority of people affected by them are otherwise lawful citizens.

This isn't a left or right issue, this a power and politicians issue. On the left they morally object to ANYONE owning guns so they make it a crime to do so. On the right they object to anyone getting an abortion and so they make it a crime to do so.

At some point we have to tell both sides to stop making it a crime to disagree with your moral point of view.

[lewdog]

How is Salt weapon not in the red yet??

CP, I am disappointed.

[2bikemike]

Originally Posted by CrazyPhuD

While you're likely NOT serious the reality is that weapon as pictured was already banned in California. Since banning it 10X won't prevents incidents like this what do you do now?

The motivation of CA politicians has NEVER been about fighting crime when it comes to guns. It has always been about pushing a moral agenda. The fight that California is making isn't about reducing crime it's about criminalizing being a gun owner because they don't morally approve of ANYONE owning guns.

Case in point, certain cities in California, led by San Francisco, are pushing to make it a misdemeanor for anyone(including retired LEOs) to own a magazine capacity > 10 rounds. They claim this is about crime and it will be a 'deterrent'.

NYTimes did a survey recently of criminal shootings, they found that >90% of all the people prosecuted had extensive criminal history. It's safe to say for 85+% of those people it would have been a felony to even possess ANY gun regardless of the capacity of a magazine.

If it's already a felony to posses a firearm by most criminals involved in shooting and it STILL doesn't deter them, how will adding a misdemeanor based on the capacity of the magazine deter them further? Simply put it won't, adding a misdemeanor to a crime that's already a FELONY will have no added deterrence.

So if it's not about deterring crime then what it is about? Frankly who's going to be affected more by said regulation, criminals(which it won't deter) or a much larger number of otherwise legal gun owners?

In all cases these laws could be narrowly written to directly target crime. They aren't because crime isn't the target, gun owners are. So they make these laws as broad as possible so the vast majority of people affected by them are otherwise lawful citizens.

This isn't a left or right issue, this a power and politicians issue. On the left they morally object to ANYONE owning guns so they make it a crime to do so. On the right they object to anyone getting an abortion and so they make it a crime to do so.

At some point we have to tell both sides to stop making it a crime to disagree with your moral point of view.

First off I agree with your post. I have not seen a picture of the gun and have no knowledge of what the gun was that he used. But I would like to know why you think it was already an illegal firearm in Calif? Because you can own an AR-15 in the State. All be it with a huge amount of Caveats.