One dead, five injured in two isolated shootings in Austin, Texas

[webfact]

One dead, five injured in two isolated shootings in Austin, Texas

AUSTIN: -- Emergency service officials in Austin say a woman in her 20s has died and at least five people have been injured in isolated shootings in the Texas capital. The as-yet-unnamed female victim was pronounced dead on the scene, according to the Austin-Travis County Emergency Medical Services (ATCEMS) agency and Chief Manley of Austin Police.

Police in the southern US city confirmed separate shootings within “close proximity of each other in location and time” left multiple victims. Both scenes are said to be secure, but authorities have urged people to stay away from the downtown area. A call for information has since been put out.

Police are still looking for the first shooter. His identity and whether or not he is still armed are unknown. The second has been hospitalised with non-life-threatening injuries.

Both the Austin Police Department and ATCEMS have been publishing updates on Twitter.

What happened?

The Austin Police Department confirmed the following details in a press conference shortly after the shootings.

- Police first became aware shots had been fired at 2.17 am local time (9.17 am CET).

- A woman was reported to have been shot in the 200 block of East 6th Street.

- Within the next minute or two, police received multiple calls of shots being fired on 6th Street. Officers reached the scene immediately.

- Police could hear gunfire and called in their own reports of shots fired.

- As the officers arrived on scene, they could see additional victims.

- Five individuals were shot in the incident on 6th Street. A woman in her 20s was confirmed dead on the scene.

- Three other people were taken to University Medical Center Brackenridge with serious, but non-life-threatening injuries. One further individual refused transport. All those injured were female.

- The scene was “chaotic” due to people leaving the area’s bars at the time, but paramedics were able to reach the victims immediately to provide medical assistance.

- Police believe the shooting started as a disturbance between individuals. As this grew heated, one person is thought to have pulled out a gun and started shooting into a crowd of people.

- At 2.24 am reports were called in of an assault in a parking garage in the 800 block of Trinity, within close proximity of the initial crime scene.

- In this incident, a male in his 20s pulled out a weapon and fired it at another person. Police are not aware of anyone being struck by gunfire. Passersby reportedly engaged with and disarmed the suspect.

- The suspect was then transferred to the Brackenridge hospital to be treated for non-life-threatening injuries sustained as he was being disarmed.

- Police were initially concerned someone was engaging in active shooter tactics, but later concluded this was not the case.

- The shootings are being treated as unrelated, isolated incidents.

- Multiple witnesses are being interviewed by the police.

- One person was noted as a person of interest, but his “status is undetermined,” so he is merely being questioned, police say.

- Descriptions of one of the suspects vary, but police say they are looking for a light-skinned black or hispanic male in his 20s.

- Authorities are calling for anyone with mobile phone or video footage of either shooting to present it to the police.

-- Euronews 2016-08-01

[webfact]

Officials: 1 dead, 3 hospitalized in Austin shooting

AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — A shooting in a crowded entertainment district in downtown Austin early Sunday caused a chaotic scene, leaving one woman dead and three others wounded and police searching for a suspect.

Austin police say they want to question a 24-year-old possibly armed man in the overnight shootings. Police are circulating a photograph of a man described in a statement as a "person of interest."

Austin Police Chief of Staff Brian Manley says police received reports of gunshots in crowded Sixth Street Entertainment District shortly after 2 a.m. Sunday, and found that five people had been shot.

"It was a very chaotic scene," Manley said. "A lot of people running in different directions with all the gunshots coming out."

One woman was pronounced dead at the scene, and three other women were taken to University Medical Center Brackenridge with injuries that were serious, but not life-threatening. Manley said another victim declined to be transported to the hospital.

"We have multiple individuals, witnesses, that we are currently interviewing," Manley said. "We had one individual who was initially noted as a person of interest, however that person's status at this point is undetermined."

Manley said because of the large crowd presence, police were getting descriptions of a suspect from witnesses. However, he said the descriptions were consistent, to an extent, but not all the same.

Police originally reported an active shooter scene in the area, but Manley said two separate incidents caused the confusion. He said there was another confrontation in a nearby parking garage and that a shot was fired there. A man was transported to the hospital after that confrontation, but his condition was not immediately known.

___

This story has been corrected to show that Manley's title is Chief of Staff, not Chief.

-- AP 2016-08-01

[DM07]

No Muslims involved? 

Nothing to see here, just move on!

Just another day in gun- loving 'Murica!

[ClutchClark]

1 minute ago, DM07 said:

No Muslims involved? 

Nothing to see here, just move on!

Just another day in gun- loving 'Murica!

Innocent lives lost and thats all you can say...get a life man.

 

 

[DM07]

15 minutes ago, ClutchClark said:

Innocent lives lost and thats all you can say...get a life man.

 

 

So...what is your answer to these lives lost?

Ready to talk about gun-control?

Didn't think so!

[ClutchClark]

5 minutes ago, DM07 said:

So...what is your answer to these lives lost?

Ready to talk about gun-control?

Didn't think so!

So you show disrespect to the shooting victims because you are angry about gun control?

O....K

And what is with the one man argument you are having with yourself? 

You should get two User accounts and then you can ask questions and then answer them in your own thread.

You could have a different User account for each voice in your head. 

It would keep things organized that way.

 

[Emster23]

about 92 per day die from guns in USA. That includes suicides and accidents, for sure, but the number is still insane any way you cut it.

[ClutchClark]

4 minutes ago, Emster23 said:

about 92 per day die from guns in USA. That includes suicides and accidents, for sure, but the number is still insane any way you cut it.

 

92 per day ?

[williamgeorgeallen]

11 minutes ago, Emster23 said:

about 92 per day die from guns in USA. That includes suicides and accidents, for sure, but the number is still insane any way you cut it.

i read some stats and if you take out suicides the number comes down quite a bit. still very high of course. 

[dunroaming]

America's gun culture has a price and you either accept it or do something about it.  The likelihood of doing something about it by gun control is unlikely in the extreme so live with it.  Sorry for the innocent victims but the guilty are not just the shooters but also those who endorse it.

[Usernames]

1 hour ago, DM07 said:

No Muslims involved? 

Nothing to see here, just move on!

Just another day in gun- loving 'Murica!

No, not a muslim but black killing black.  So no concern from BLM either.  http://kxan.com/2016/07/31/multiple-people-shot-throughout-downtown-austin/

[smotherb]

2 hours ago, DM07 said:

So...what is your answer to these lives lost?

Ready to talk about gun-control?

Didn't think so!

Sure, I'll talk about gun control. First, unless you are an American, it makes no difference what you say or think. Second, something you who do not have the right to own a gun don't seem to understand; gun ownership is one of our American rights, guaranteed by our Constitution. Americans; therefore, are unwilling to lose one of their rights. Perhaps more importantly, if the majority of the American people wanted more gun control, there would be. In fact, the states which have the worst death rates by guns have stronger gun control laws.  The second amendment to our Constitution—which guarantees gun possession—can be repealed; there is a mechanism in place to repeal any amendment to the Constitution, if there is enough support to do so.  To date, there has never been enough support.

Do I think there should be more gun control; yes, I do. I would not only control the sale and ownership of guns, but I would control the purchase and possession of ammunition. Certainly, anyone with criminal, psychiatric or politically-aggressive behavioral history should be denied the right to purchase or  possess guns or ammunition and surely there should be a waiting period to help dissuade impetuous actions, but that won't cover everyone with devious agenda. However, in a country with so many guns that no one has an accurate accounting—most likely, there are more guns than people—guns cannot simply be taken away and guns will always be available, even if control is tightened drastically. Consequently, there is no simple solution.

However, the gun-supporters’ undertone argument may have merit. The argument goes something like this: It seems the majority of gun deaths in the US are suicides; and the majority of the gun death homicides are committed during crimes and/or involve the lower socio-economic classes.  Those minority gun-related homicides which involve middle- and upper-class Americans, are simply collateral damage in the overall plan to cull the dregs of society. 

     

[dunroaming]

Actually this shooting in Austin made headline news in the UK as did the disco shooting.  Not for long though, as soon as it was established there were no terrorists involved it was classified as just another day at the office for the USA.

[dunroaming]

smotherb

Interesting outlook.  If I understand your post you think that there should be gun control but given the amount of guns out there it is not possible.  You also feel that as most gun crime is committed by criminals (obviously true by definition) and psychopaths that it is just a form of natural selection and that is OK.  So what is your take on the police officers that were shot?  Surely your expectation for these criminals with firearms only shooting other socio-economic lowlifes is somewhat flawed.  How do you justify the mass killings in the schools and colleges?  They may be committed by criminals and psychopaths but the victims are your sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, mothers and fathers.

 

Maybe Trump's suggestion that everyone in the USA should be armed makes sense.  Just go back to the wild west and it's every man, woman and child for themselves.  Of course the problem with that is that the rich can afford the serious weapons and even have their own little armies which would give them something of an advantage over the poor who can't even afford an afternoon at the firing range to practice. I guess that is Capitalism for you.

  

[DM07]

10 hours ago, smotherb said:

Sure, I'll talk about gun control. First, unless you are an American, it makes no difference what you say or think. Second, something you who do not have the right to own a gun don't seem to understand; gun ownership is one of our American rights, guaranteed by our Constitution. Americans; therefore, are unwilling to lose one of their rights. Perhaps more importantly, if the majority of the American people wanted more gun control, there would be. In fact, the states which have the worst death rates by guns have stronger gun control laws.  The second amendment to our Constitution—which guarantees gun possession—can be repealed; there is a mechanism in place to repeal any amendment to the Constitution, if there is enough support to do so.  To date, there has never been enough support.

 

Do I think there should be more gun control; yes, I do. I would not only control the sale and ownership of guns, but I would control the purchase and possession of ammunition. Certainly, anyone with criminal, psychiatric or politically-aggressive behavioral history should be denied the right to purchase or  possess guns or ammunition and surely there should be a waiting period to help dissuade impetuous actions, but that won't cover everyone with devious agenda. However, in a country with so many guns that no one has an accurate accounting—most likely, there are more guns than people—guns cannot simply be taken away and guns will always be available, even if control is tightened drastically. Consequently, there is no simple solution.

 

However, the gun-supporters’ undertone argument may have merit. The argument goes something like this: It seems the majority of gun deaths in the US are suicides; and the majority of the gun death homicides are committed during crimes and/or involve the lower socio-economic classes.  Those minority gun-related homicides which involve middle- and upper-class Americans, are simply collateral damage in the overall plan to cull the dregs of society. 

 

     

Blah blah 'Murica blah blah blah right to own guns blah blah!

Would this have been a Muslim- influenced shooting, we would be reading about a ban of all Muslims ...because THEIR FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS does not count as much as an Americans second amendment right!

Some -those who never seem to have more then crocodile tears when some white suprmacist-christian ahole shoots a bunch of kids- want to turn this into a discussion about BLM...the OVERBEARING THEME IS GUNS! 

It get's so tiresome to discuss anything with you gun nuts!

[ClutchClark]

12 hours ago, dunroaming said:

America's gun culture has a price and you either accept it or do something about it.  The likelihood of doing something about it by gun control is unlikely in the extreme so live with it.  Sorry for the innocent victims but the guilty are not just the shooters but also those who endorse it.

 

I don't know anyone who endorses the illegal use of firearms or the killing of innocent people.

 

[ClutchClark]

3 minutes ago, DM07 said:

Blah blah 'Murica blah blah blah right to own guns blah blah!

Would this have been a Muslim- influenced shooting, we would be reading about a ban of all Muslims ...because THEIR FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS does not count as much as an Americans second amendment right!

Some -those who never seem to have more then crocodile tears when some white suprmacist-christian ahole shoots a bunch of kids- want to turn this into a discussion about BLM...the OVERBEARING THEME IS GUNS! 

It get's so tiresome to discuss anything with you gun nuts!

R-E-L-A-X.

The only reason gun nuts are even on this thread is because its such fun watching you get so worked up.

As for crocodile tears, that is really a wild and exaggerated claim.

Americans do not like to see their fellow Americans killed whether it is by a Muslim Extremist or anyone else.

BTW, where did it say these shootings were the result of a white supremacist? 

Or was that just a straw position?

 

[ClutchClark]

10 hours ago, dunroaming said:

Actually this shooting in Austin made headline news in the UK as did the disco shooting.  Not for long though, as soon as it was established there were no terrorists involved it was classified as just another day at the office for the USA.

The Disco shooting in Florida was a terrorist shooting.

[kamahele]

14 hours ago, ClutchClark said:

So you show disrespect to the shooting victims because you are angry about gun control?

O....K

And what is with the one man argument you are having with yourself? 

You should get two User accounts and then you can ask questions and then answer them in your own thread.

You could have a different User account for each voice in your head. 

It would keep things organized that way.

 

I don't see any disrespect by invoking talk of gun control after a mass shooting. Quite the opposite.

 

[smotherb]

4 hours ago, DM07 said:

Blah blah 'Murica blah blah blah right to own guns blah blah!

Would this have been a Muslim- influenced shooting, we would be reading about a ban of all Muslims ...because THEIR FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS does not count as much as an Americans second amendment right!

Some -those who never seem to have more then crocodile tears when some white suprmacist-christian ahole shoots a bunch of kids- want to turn this into a discussion about BLM...the OVERBEARING THEME IS GUNS! 

It get's so tiresome to discuss anything with you gun nuts!

And you believe you have provided an intelligent critique or even response to what I said?

[DM07]

2 hours ago, smotherb said:

And you believe you have provided an intelligent critique or even response to what I said?

As inte;lligent as your "if you are not an American"- idiocy?

Hell yeah!

[smotherb]

Just now, DM07 said:

As inte;lligent as your "if you are not an American"- idiocy?

Hell yeah!

What's the matter Bunky? Did I write too much for you to comprehend and all you could fathom was it was none of your business?

I too do not like the fact innocent people are killed, and as I said, I too would like to see more gun control, but as I also said, it is not so simple as to take away our guns.

What do you have to worry about? If we kill all Americans, the world may be better off—those mean nasty arrogant Yanks would stop putting their noses in your business.

If you are not American, you don't have to go there or do business there—in fact, even if you are American, you don't have to go or do business there. So, I submit, what business is it of yours?

If you are claiming to be the monitor of world laws, or on some humanitarian tact about the senseless loss of life, go for it. However, fact is fact, you have no say in American laws.

[neverdie]

19 hours ago, smotherb said:

Sure, I'll talk about gun control. First, unless you are an American, it makes no difference what you say or think. Second, something you who do not have the right to own a gun don't seem to understand; gun ownership is one of our American rights, guaranteed by our Constitution. Americans; therefore, are unwilling to lose one of their rights. Perhaps more importantly, if the majority of the American people wanted more gun control, there would be. In fact, the states which have the worst death rates by guns have stronger gun control laws.  The second amendment to our Constitution—which guarantees gun possession—can be repealed; there is a mechanism in place to repeal any amendment to the Constitution, if there is enough support to do so.  To date, there has never been enough support.

 

Do I think there should be more gun control; yes, I do. I would not only control the sale and ownership of guns, but I would control the purchase and possession of ammunition. Certainly, anyone with criminal, psychiatric or politically-aggressive behavioral history should be denied the right to purchase or  possess guns or ammunition and surely there should be a waiting period to help dissuade impetuous actions, but that won't cover everyone with devious agenda. However, in a country with so many guns that no one has an accurate accounting—most likely, there are more guns than people—guns cannot simply be taken away and guns will always be available, even if control is tightened drastically. Consequently, there is no simple solution.

 

However, the gun-supporters’ undertone argument may have merit. The argument goes something like this: It seems the majority of gun deaths in the US are suicides; and the majority of the gun death homicides are committed during crimes and/or involve the lower socio-economic classes.  Those minority gun-related homicides which involve middle- and upper-class Americans, are simply collateral damage in the overall plan to cull the dregs of society. 

 

     

The second amendment allows for American Citizens to be gunned down randomly as they go about remedial daily tasks.

 

what a fantastic piece of freedom, if only the rest of the world were so lucky!

 

woooot wooooot

[smotherb]

1 minute ago, neverdie said:

The second amendment allows for American Citizens to be gunned down randomly as they go about remedial daily tasks.

 

what a fantastic piece of freedom, if only the rest of the world were so lucky!

 

woooot wooooot

Is that supposed to be funny? The second amendment allows us to have guns, gunning someone down is illegal. 

[ClutchClark]

23 hours ago, DM07 said:

No Muslims involved? 

Nothing to see here, just move on!

Just another day in gun- loving 'Murica!

 

8 hours ago, kamahele said:

I don't see any disrespect by invoking talk of gun control after a mass shooting. Quite the opposite.

 

Kamahele,

I was responding to the top post from DM07 which was not attempting to talk about gun-control. It was just a disrespectful post that showed complete indifference to innocent victims of gun violence. 

[neverdie]

3 minutes ago, smotherb said:

Is that supposed to be funny? The second amendment allows us to have guns, gunning someone down is illegal. 

Are you sure?

im fairly certain one situation leads to an increase in the other but no doubt your going to tell me, the way to solve this problem is by handing more guns out.

 

if every man, woman, child and pet dog carried an ak47 and a few clips, the problem would eliminate itself?

[DM07]

2 hours ago, smotherb said:

What's the matter Bunky? Did I write too much for you to comprehend and all you could fathom was it was none of your business?

 

I too do not like the fact innocent people are killed, and as I said, I too would like to see more gun control, but as I also said, it is not so simple as to take away our guns.

 

What do you have to worry about? If we kill all Americans, the world may be better off—those mean nasty arrogant Yanks would stop putting their noses in your business.

 

If you are not American, you don't have to go there or do business there—in fact, even if you are American, you don't have to go or do business there. So, I submit, what business is it of yours?

 

If you are claiming to be the monitor of world laws, or on some humanitarian tact about the senseless loss of life, go for it. However, fact is fact, you have no say in American laws.

 

Bunky yourself!

"...it is not so simple to take away our guns"

- who wants to "take away your guns"?

- it is! Have a look at Australia!

"What do you have to worry about?"

- Maybe that is the empathy, you feel I lack?!

"you have no say in American laws"

- therefore: discussion is over

- if Trump wins the next election, so won't have you!

[DM07]

3 minutes ago, ClutchClark said:

 

Kamahele,

I was responding to the top post from DM07 which was not attempting to talk about gun-control. It was just a disrespectful post that showed complete indifference to innocent victims of gun violence. 

 Says the guy, who has no respect for anyone, especially of a certain belief, when someone, even remotely connected to that belief, kills someone, somewhere in the world!

It is like Trump, playing the victim in the Khan- incident!

Ridiculous!

[ClutchClark]

25 minutes ago, DM07 said:

 Says the guy, who has no respect for anyone, especially of a certain belief, when someone, even remotely connected to that belief, kills someone, somewhere in the world!

It is like Trump, playing the victim in the Khan- incident!

Ridiculous!

I have respect for quite a few TVF posters. Basically all of them who have a sense of humor...which is why you are not on the short-list.

The rest of your post is too cryptic for me to follow.

 

[smotherb]

3 hours ago, neverdie said:

Are you sure?

im fairly certain one situation leads to an increase in the other but no doubt your going to tell me, the way to solve this problem is by handing more guns out.

 

if every man, woman, child and pet dog carried an ak47 and a few clips, the problem would eliminate itself?

Yes, I am sure. Obviously, you don't know me because you are wrong about what I would say. The fact that having guns makes using them in crimes easier does not take much thought. However, following that same logic it appears you would advocate curtailing car ownership, because even more people are killed by cars than by guns. However, blaming inanimate objects for the acts of people is part of the problem.