Two journalists killed in shooting during live newscast at Smith Mountain Lake

I've watched both videos, the news cast and the one the shooter recorded.
Here's something that I found very odd. While watching the new cast video, I wondered what or who the shooter was shooting at while the news reporter said "Omg!".
Then I watched the shooter video, and I could see he was REALLY close to the news crew...almost point blank! And then to my surprise I saw the shooter, at very close distance, fire directly at the reporter. I could hear 3 direct shots while the shooter's gun was pointed at the reporter. The 4th shot had the camera move down and I couldn't see if the gun was still pointed at the reporter. It might have still been. The surprising part is that the reporter said "OMG omg!" and ran in the opposite direction.

Shouldn't she have dropped like a sack of potatoes after being shot at least 3 times at close range...no matter the caliber of the gun? Even 3 shots from a .22 would drop you at that close range. How could she have run? From the video, his aim seemed to be on the report so I don't think he would have missed all 3. The first one, according to where he had the gun pointed, would have penetrated her right ribs and more than likely her lung...preventing her from saying OMG OMG.

a reply to: TruthxIsxInxThexMist

I really do not get the point you are trying to make. Are you suggesting that the victims willingly ignored their impending deaths because...
What?

originally posted by: TruthxIsxInxThexMist
a reply to: Realtruth

The interviewer and Interviewee were to the side of him, not infront of him looking forward. As i said in my post above, the interviewee should definately have seen him out the corner of her eye when he points the gun at alison the first time but doesn't shoot... he is only a couple meters away pointing the gun

She has peripheral vision at best while interviewing, and most likely gets nosey people from time to time, while interviewing. Most people aren't expecting a gun toting coward during an interview, so most likely the side vision reaction didn't set off any alarms.

I don't see anything strange at all.

originally posted by: Blue_Jay33
Very sad.

People with anger issues like this shouldn't be allowed guns, it's just too easy for them to to kill people in a fit of ultimate rage and then themselves. Mental health is more of an issue than the guns, but people can be pushed to lose it at any time that is how our society is pushing people. People had guns fifty years ago and you didn't see this type of thing happening, people aren't coping well these days.

Were you around counting murders 50 years ago?
People having been doing exactly the same thing since Cain and Abel.
Filming themselves doing it is pretty new though - maybe ISIS started that?

a reply to: TruthxIsxInxThexMist

So the woman who has her head angled away from where the shooter is standing should have seen him while she was in mid-conversation and maintaining eye contact with the reporter?

Seems legit.

I hate that these things bring up the mental health debate. While it's valid, it's not a universal truth. For twenty years I have been both mentally ill and actively engaged in helping other mentally ill people - and I've encountered maybe three, in that entire time, who made me nervous or who was violent.

I guess I'm saying that while it's obvious that anyone who would do something like this is freaking nuts... not all mentally ill people are anywhere near nuts. They're just people. Pigeonholing it into a single category is unfair IMO.

I hope this doesn't get to be a new trend of shooters strapping go-cams on their body to film their targets to sate millions of peoples desire to see carnage and death. I am not sure whats worse, the fact that he did it, or that so many people want to see it from his point of view(myself included).

a reply to: Elldren

When I got shot, in the femoral artery, I didn't bleed at all for maybe ten to fifteen seconds. Once the blood did begin flowing, I passed out almost instantly. But it took long enough for me to reach the person who shot the gun, disarm them, and begin choking them.

a reply to: Elldren
It only happens like that in the movies. Yes, that is how someone acts who gets shot at point blank range. You don't even feel pain at first.

a reply to: Shamrock6

You can see things 90 degree either side! the guy is only 2 metres away pointin a gun at her with his arm outstretched so lets takeaway half a metre, that leaves the gun 1 and half metres away from her

originally posted by: Hefficide not all mentally ill people are anywhere near nuts. They're just people.

i completely agree.

When hit with a small handgun the bullets make a small entry hole and probably lodged inside the person. Only the movies make it seem like 1 shot from a handgun and blood fly's everywhere. Just like when hunters shoot a deer right in the heart , it runs away only to fall dead after 5 to 10 steps or more depending on the hit. I am surprised by the lack of blood but the shooter let the camera drop during shots 4 and on. She probably had the bullets go thru her into the wall . Bleeding begins shortly after the shots I am guessing from the video. probably a 9mm or 22. I think the male reporter complained on the guy . He was fired then saw the woman replace him . I am speculating but he blamed the guy and took it out on his girl right in front of him. Trully evil society . Many people wonder why I cross the street when I see anyone appearing to have even 1 percent possibility of being bad news . Too much unpredictability in the society now.

originally posted by: Hefficide
a reply to: Elldren

When I got shot, in the femoral artery, I didn't bleed at all for maybe ten to fifteen seconds. Once the blood did begin flowing, I passed out almost instantly. But it took long enough for me to reach the person who shot the gun, disarm them, and begin choking them.

Wait, you're not seriously saying it wasn't like in the movies? You weren't blown off your feet with tissue and bone shooting in a graceful, yet morbid arc behind you?

originally posted by: Hefficide
a reply to: Elldren

When I got shot, in the femoral artery, I didn't bleed at all for maybe ten to fifteen seconds. Once the blood did begin flowing, I passed out almost instantly. But it took long enough for me to reach the person who shot the gun, disarm them, and begin choking them.

Interesting, well I've never been shot before and would assume you just drop after getting hit 3 times. Maybe they missed vital areas that would have cause that to happen otherwise. As for the blood part, I retracted that statement but not in time I guess I went back to the reporter video and could clearly see there was blood on the floor boards.

a reply to: Elldren

at least you and me agree that it does seem weird.

The guy is pointing the gun at Alison for a few seconds and the the interviewee didn't see it??

( Wall-text coming, from a non-english guy ( French/Quebecer ) + USA hate on your policy and NRA control your gouvernement ) One day you will all wake up maybe...

Once again, you USA look so "dumb" with your gun policy...

I know people here dont want to talk about it, but this is the only "political/news" USA forum i go. And gun WAS the probleme here.

Here from Canada, this is the #1 topic about this drama.... News media here even said : "We all know how American are with their gun... If 1 guy can kill more then 10 kids and proffessor (Sandyhook) and STILL they can't get law for gun control.... this will change nothing"

You let the NRA control your life and dead... and the funny thing is this is a conspiracy website but here, you NEVER confront the political power of NRA.... You let them take your money and your live ( by letting them Lobbying your gouvernment ).

And to people that will said : "The guy could kill them with a Machete or knife". It's true, BUT they could survive + the fat-coward was out of shape. The girl could have run away + the cameraman try to fight off.

How can you fight off a guy with a gun??? Even if you have a gun, we all saw the video... You can't do nothing with a guy with a gun on your back ! + When you GET attack by a gun person while you have your gun in your holster ( not in your hand ) you are DEAD MEAT. You can do NOTHING, you can just get lucky + hide then take out your gun and attack back. But this is just luck because GUN MAKE KILLING EASY.

Gun can make KIDS kill adult easly... ( exemple : the girl at shooting range + the KKK leader being shot/kill by his kid )

A Gun that can't kill is a faulty gun, a useless gun. Gun are tool to KILL.
And you let stupid people own them... because it's in "the 2nd amendement"...... We are in 2015 !!! The 2nd amendement didnt think Glock pistol could be so deadly! We have now gun that can pierce TANK... Technology advanced

You know why the NRA dont want ANY control on gun or background check? TO SELL MORE GUN. Even to drug user, people with mental problem to ANYONE

Anyway, every gun story that "pop-in" international media i came here, trying to explain to you all why you look so BAD to the eye of the world.

I dont know why, maybe it's all started with columbia... But your love of gun have gone too far. Like it look uncontrollable... Like you are a doomed country. Maybe your violent game/movie + the EASY AS HELL acces to gun make that ?

Or maybe that the gun you make are more and more faster/powerfull. So any LOSER can have pistol that fire 12 bullet in 4 second... I play/love violent game, i KNOW how piston are freaking powerfull as hell... But i can't get a gun easly + HERE it's not normal to have a gun. If you have 1 pistol here, you are surely a criminal ( I'm talking about pistol, not hunter rifle, here it's normal/ok to have hunter gun for hunting )
In USA, it seem normal to have pistol, you are 340 million and have 315 million gun in circulation... You are doom...

Anyway, i will get hate for this, but writing it to you USAer i hope to you open your eye. All media are talking about you... and you look so dumb with your gun law... But like i started... if "Sandyhook" changed nothing.... This live murder will change nothing too... Gun for all... nut and crazy killer... NRA is rich as hell + control your gouvernement...

NRA = Worst then Illuminati ( because NRA is real and have REAL power on your gouvernement... they even start here to try to get Conservateur Steven Harper re-elect.... by funding him like hell.... ) ANnnnny ways....

originally posted by: TruthxIsxInxThexMist
a reply to: Shamrock6

You can see things 90 degree either side! the guy is only 2 metres away pointin a gun at her with his arm outstretched so lets takeaway half a metre, that leaves the gun 1 and half metres away from her

Assuming you're not completely focused on what's right in front of your face, that's correct. You're talking about a woman who probably isn't used to being on TV being interviewed live....on TV.

And god knows everybody on the planet has absolutely excellent situational awareness. That's why sucker punches never work, and nobody ever gets surprised by anything!

originally posted by: Elldren
I've watched both videos, the news cast and the one the shooter recorded.
Here's something that I found very odd. While watching the new cast video, I wondered what or who the shooter was shooting at while the news reporter said "Omg!".
Then I watched the shooter video, and I could see he was REALLY close to the news crew...almost point blank! And then to my surprise I saw the shooter, at very close distance, fire directly at the reporter. I could hear 3 direct shots while the shooter's gun was pointed at the reporter. The 4th shot had the camera move down and I couldn't see if the gun was still pointed at the reporter. It might have still been. The surprising part is that the reporter said "OMG omg!" and ran in the opposite direction.

Shouldn't she have dropped like a sack of potatoes after being shot at least 3 times at close range...no matter the caliber of the gun? Even 3 shots from a .22 would drop you at that close range. How could she have run? From the video, his aim seemed to be on the report so I don't think he would have missed all 3. The first one, according to where he had the gun pointed, would have penetrated her right ribs and more than likely her lung...preventing her from saying OMG OMG.

I was coming to post the exact same thing- he lingers around points his gun, then points it down then back up again and he's like 5ft away in the video from his POV.
He fires right at her and she just screams and runs - he points right around chest and neck height.
Very strange indeed.

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: TruthxIsxInxThexMist
a reply to: Shamrock6

You can see things 90 degree either side! the guy is only 2 metres away pointin a gun at her with his arm outstretched so lets takeaway half a metre, that leaves the gun 1 and half metres away from her

Assuming you're not completely focused on what's right in front of your face, that's correct. You're talking about a woman who probably isn't used to being on TV being interviewed live....on TV.

And god knows everybody on the planet has absolutely excellent situational awareness. That's why sucker punches never work, and nobody ever gets surprised by anything!

5 seconds is enough time to see a gun pointed at your face surely?

Anyway i doubt anything would have been done about it anyway... if they had screamed or shouted when the guy was pointing the gun for those 5 seconds (the first time he pointed it), he probably would have shot them then instead of withdrawing!

This is a hate crime. He hated these people for who they were and, based on previous lawsuits and social media, I would say he does not like being black in what he perceives as a white dominated world. The fact he recorded it adds one more layer to the fact that he was not crazy but cognizant of his actions. He knew who he would kill, how he would do it and could not even end his own life correctly...