TexasCHLforum.com

suthdj wrote:

LAYGO wrote:A photo of the dead gunman (he doesn't deserve to be named anymore) & his rifle have surfaced. The photo can be deemed graphic, but I've seen worse.

https://www.conservativeoutfitters.com/ ... ne-graphic

Turns out it's not an SKS, but a Saiga AK74 variant.

From what i heard from FOX news was there wasn't enough left to do a toxicological test so i doubt that is him or news was wrong.

The photo does look kinda like him (see the beard) and the clothing seen in the other video.

A photo of the dead gunman (he doesn't deserve to be named anymore) & his rifle have surfaced. The photo can be deemed graphic, but I've seen worse.

https://www.conservativeoutfitters.com/ ... ne-graphic

Turns out it's not an SKS, but a Saiga AK74 variant.

puma guy wrote:

mojo84 wrote:That video turns my stomach. It's a shame the guy didn't have a rifle instead of a camera.

I thoroughly agree. Any method used to take out that sack of slime is fine by me.

I had that same thought, but figure, how do you not draw fire from police OR the gunman? It looks like the video that he shot towards the camera, I don't know if he was aiming UP or not, but that crack was a lot clearer. It'd be pretty hard to be not depicted as a sniper.

How different is that from 1966 when citizens were all shooting their rifles back up at Charles Whitman?

I intend to visit that spot sometime soon if it's not cordoned off.

I searched the forum/thread, but I did not see this video posted anywhere, or if there was a rule against it. It is disturbing.

This video shows that the gunman was on the ground & mobile, probably for the entire event. You can also see how he baits the officer by firing on the left side of the pillar to get the officer to back up, then fires from the right side, never giving the officer a chance. :(

I can guarantee that just about all SWAT teams have C4, a plastic explosive, but not a 'bomb'. C4 is used to breach doors/walls. It's explosive playdough, but only when used with det-cord.