Hollywood gunman's ex-girlfriend: Bre...

Hollywood gunman's ex-girlfriend: Breakup may have led to shooting

There are 48 comments on the Los Angeles Times story from Dec 10, 2011, titled Hollywood gunman's ex-girlfriend: Breakup may have led to shooting. In it, Los Angeles Times reports that:

A woman who has identified herself as the ex-girlfriend of the man police killed Friday after he shot at motorists and pedestrians at a busy Hollywood intersection said that a recent breakup may have triggered the man's rampage, KTLA is reporting.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Los Angeles Times.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last
White man

Minneapolis, MN

#1 Dec 10, 2011
No doubt it was a Black Biotch.

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#2 Dec 10, 2011
Girl was right to break with him - she must've known something was unbalanced.

He proved it. And got his a$$ taken down. Too bad there were innocents he tried to take with him.

Of course; Liberals will blame the gun - not the person aiming it. It's always the case in situations like this.

Since: Apr 10

Chandler, AZ

#3 Dec 10, 2011
At least he won't be a leach on society any longer.

“Uzi Does It”

Since: Nov 08

UZILAND

#4 Dec 10, 2011
lastoutlaw wrote:
Too bad there were innocents he tried to take with him.
LIAR! LOL.

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#5 Dec 10, 2011
Richard_ wrote:
<quoted text>LIAR! LOL.
I'll take that as meaning you're kidding.
You are, right?
Of course. Silly me for asking.

Since: Feb 10

Location hidden

#6 Dec 10, 2011
let's see...out of ammo pulls out a knife cop has tasers so they shoot him?

what is wrong with this picture?

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#7 Dec 10, 2011
StellarKnight wrote:
let's see...out of ammo pulls out a knife cop has tasers so they shoot him?
what is wrong with this picture?
Let's see...lunatic walks down Vine, shoots gun, injures two (one critically), causes property damage, disrupts normal activities, runs out of ammo, pulls knife, gets gunned down, gets what he deserves.
Nothing wrong here. Picture is perfect.

Since: Feb 10

Location hidden

#8 Dec 10, 2011
gets what he deserves?

threat level did not match the level of force applied once out of ammo.

did you by any chance watch Jack Bower often in the series 24?

he deserved to get arrested then help then stand trial not executed.

know what shooting someone in the leg does? it makes them drop their knife and in screams grab their leg.

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#9 Dec 10, 2011
StellarKnight wrote:
gets what he deserves?
threat level did not match the level of force applied once out of ammo.
did you by any chance watch Jack Bower often in the series 24?
he deserved to get arrested then help then stand trial not executed.
know what shooting someone in the leg does? it makes them drop their knife and in screams grab their leg.
You are mistaken. If you want to talk level of force; how about the unarmed drives and pedestrians on Vine St. Don't you think that the perp's 'level of force' was a bit excessive?
Jack Bower. A fictional character. Not even worth of being in this discussion other than to say that '24' was filmed in the town of which Sunset and Vine are a part of. Perhaps Keifer should have come out and confronted this guy? No? The why are we discussing him.
You give the cops too much credit for marksmanship. For them to aim and hit the guy in the leg would qualify them as sharpshooters; and this would mean they were SWAT members. I don't think SWAT was on scene. These were average cops; one off duty and the other undercover. They're trained to shoot and hit body mass. As for the perp running out of ammo and pulling a knife - I haven't read where he dropped the gun. Who's to say he didn't have another? Nobody knew about the knife until he pulled it, did they? Doubt it.
Back to basics. The guy went on a rampage and shot unarmed people. The situation was of his making. He was at fault. Whatever happens from that moment; he brought it on himself. Nobody forced him to go out and shoot up Vine Street.
It's gets old when the perpetrator is made to be the victim of law enforcement. LE didn't set out to end this guy's life. They reacted to the perceived threat this guy presented to the public.
I'll bet if you were in this guys sights; you'd want LE to drop him anyway they could before he shot you. Would your feeling change if he'd pulled the trigger while the gun was pointed at you and it went 'click' instead of 'boom' and he tossed it and pulled the knife?
Not me. The immediate threat and intent alone would ensure that regardless of whether he dropped the gun and pulled the knife - or another gun in the back of his waistband - drop the guy. He brought it on himself.
Just think - if the gun was pointed at you and it went 'boom'- we wouldn't be having this discussion. You'd never even hear the sound of the shot that air-conditioned your skull.
And your survivors would wonder why the cops didn't take him out sooner.
Ask the guy who got shot in the Silver Mercedes.
Wait.
He got shot in the jaw. He can't talk right now. He'll have to get back to you.
He's lucky that he lived. I wonder what he thinks about what the police did.
I'm willing to bet his opinion is different from yours.
After all - he was there. You weren't.
And he got shot. You didn't.'Cause you weren't there.
Or should the guy have been somewhere else, but because he was driving through the intersection he's automatically at fault for putting himself there?
Puh-leeze.
Stan and Kyle

Newville, AL

#10 Dec 10, 2011
Brilliant Outlaw

Since: Feb 10

Location hidden

#11 Dec 10, 2011
lastoutlaw wrote:
<quoted text>You are mistaken. If you want to talk level of force; how about the unarmed drives and pedestrians on Vine St. Don't you think that the perp's 'level of force' was a bit excessive?
Jack Bower. A fictional character. Not even worth of being in this discussion other than to say that '24' was filmed in the town of which Sunset and Vine are a part of. Perhaps Keifer should have come out and confronted this guy? No? The why are we discussing him.
You give the cops too much credit for marksmanship. For them to aim and hit the guy in the leg would qualify them as sharpshooters; and this would mean they were SWAT members. I don't think SWAT was on scene. These were average cops; one off duty and the other undercover. They're trained to shoot and hit body mass. As for the perp running out of ammo and pulling a knife - I haven't read where he dropped the gun. Who's to say he didn't have another? Nobody knew about the knife until he pulled it, did they? Doubt it.
Back to basics. The guy went on a rampage and shot unarmed people. The situation was of his making. He was at fault. Whatever happens from that moment; he brought it on himself. Nobody forced him to go out and shoot up Vine Street.
It's gets old when the perpetrator is made to be the victim of law enforcement. LE didn't set out to end this guy's life. They reacted to the perceived threat this guy presented to the public.
I'll bet if you were in this guys sights; you'd want LE to drop him anyway they could before he shot you. Would your feeling change if he'd pulled the trigger while the gun was pointed at you and it went 'click' instead of 'boom' and he tossed it and pulled the knife?
Not me. The immediate threat and intent alone would ensure that regardless of whether he dropped the gun and pulled the knife - or another gun in the back of his waistband - drop the guy. He brought it on himself.
Just think - if the gun was pointed at you and it went 'boom'- we wouldn't be having this discussion. You'd never even hear the sound of the shot that air-conditioned your skull.
And your survivors would wonder why the cops didn't take him out sooner.
Ask the guy who got shot in the Silver Mercedes.
Wait.
He got shot in the jaw. He can't talk right now. He'll have to get back to you.
He's lucky that he lived. I wonder what he thinks about what the police did.
I'm willing to bet his opinion is different from yours.
After all - he was there. You weren't.
And he got shot. You didn't.'Cause you weren't there.
Or should the guy have been somewhere else, but because he was driving through the intersection he's automatically at fault for putting himself there?
Puh-leeze.
brevity is the breathe of wit.
you sound as if suspicion is on the front page of your most requented realty.

did you know drones in Afganistan and pakistan are now merely killing "suspects?" whose to know that one day that will not become you or me?

Since: Feb 10

Location hidden

#12 Dec 10, 2011
I might have known my post would not be understood in california.

everytime a spaceships land out there they start ten new religions. LOL

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#13 Dec 10, 2011
StellarKnight wrote:
I might have known my post would not be understood in california.
everytime a spaceships land out there they start ten new religions. LOL
Well, if I were associating with known terrorists and I chose not to get away from what the entire world knows are known targets, then I guess I would deserve to be considered 'collateral'.
Not much different than some kid hanging out with the homies on the corner. Perhaps he's NOT a banger, he's just a kid in the neighborhood who is friends with these guys but not PART of these guys. And a drive-by occurs. And he gets dropped. We're not talking about somebody shot through a bedroom wall in this example and we won't, don't try baiting me. We're talking about a group of bangers on the corner and one or two aren't bangers but they associate with them and one gets dropped.
Guilt by association. Tragic and unfortunate. But the kid knew they were bangers, the kid knew that drive-bys by rivals happen, and the kid should have know than sooner or later it would happen on that corner with that group.
Guilt by association. Choose to hang with trouble; become a part of trouble. Adopting the dress and colors doesn't help the case either. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and flies like a duck - it's a duck unless prove to the contrary can be produced.
But we're talking apples to oranges here. We have a shooter on Vine shooting people and cars at random. You want to hold a hug-fest? What if you were in the line of sights of this guy; you never answered that? You want Oprah or Dr. Phil to come out and have an encounter with him?
If it were me - drop the bas+ard. I don't want to die; I don't want to be disfigured or paralyzed or in any way, shape or form have my life altered by somebody who no right to do that to me.
He got what he deserved.
You can't prove otherwise. It was a clean take-down. And only then was it shown he didn't have another gun behind his back. He could have. And if he did, and he pulled it and used it - somebody could have been killed.
Would THAT have made a difference to you?
And all because some chick dumped him.
Good move on her part. It could someday have been her that he shot. Up close and personal. Like you read in the papers every day.
I'd say the police did society a favor. Prisons do not rehabilitate. And we've all read about repeat offenders - and sometimes when they reoffend - the accomplish what they set out to do.
This is once case where it won't happen.
He brought it on himself.
There is no other way to look at it.
Hey, S&K!
Long time!

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#14 Dec 10, 2011
StellarKnight wrote:
I might have known my post would not be understood in california.
everytime a spaceships land out there they start ten new religions. LOL
Well, in Texas, where the citizens have the right to carry loaded, the police get there for clean-up duty. Excessive? Or self-defense.
I guess the difference is whether it's LE or not. LE - it's excessive force. Civilian - self-defense.
Even though the result is the same - the perp is down.
You're not misunderstood in California.
You're pitied.
Because you have a closed mind.
What would you do if it were you?
You never answered that.

Since: Feb 10

Location hidden

#15 Dec 10, 2011
Welcome to Texas...eh?

IN San Antonio that is my direct line blood cousins statue you all glean so much tourism from at the Alamo

James MeGhee

Delaware Historic Library? Oh about 3 inches thick back to Ireland.

now..what about those spaceships? lol

Since: Feb 10

Location hidden

#16 Dec 10, 2011
Allow me to reset your moral compasses.

Abscent brevity.

Sci Fi warfare isnít coming to our future, it is here. And there will be consequences for every human on the planet. A new battlefield has been created, one in which the odds are tipped decidedly in favor of technological prowess over and above humanity.

Witness the recent announcement that yet another Al Qaida Number Three Man, the fifth Number Three, has been eliminated in Pakistan by a drone attack. Eliminate is an interesting word. In military operations, it is impolitic and impolite to use words like kill and murder against enemy forces, thus we donít kill people, but eliminate or take out Al Qaida. People donít die, they are merely deadly enemy combatants removed from the gaming field. There is no war here, no human cost, no violation of due process, violation of allied air space, just a surgical strike upon a target. In the words of Officer Barbrady,ďMove along, nothing to see here.Ē

From the military perspective, drone warfare is really cool, make that really really cool. Human assets no longer need to be deployed at great personal risk to conduct surveillance or attacks. For the side that owns the drones, warfare might be expensive, but it is quite risk-free. This profoundly changes the risk reward ratio for warfare. There is no need to consider the value of information or destruction of a target weighed against real lives of soldiers.

Since: Feb 10

Location hidden

#17 Dec 10, 2011
But more importantly, gone is the need to consider psychological blow-back or mutiny from oneís own forces. Within the joystick world, a US soldier need never get up front and personal with blood and guts on the ground. They need not be present for the mayhem and loss which follows the attack. They not only donít risk even slight injury, they donít even have to stick around to hear the screams of the dying.

[efoods]This brings me to a disturbing conclusion. Throughout most of history, war for all of its brutality consisted of battles between and among men, real men, fighting men. From the Iliad onward it was a place where courage, ingenuity, and grit prevailed. Thus one did not bomb innocents, those who were not uniformed participants on the battlefield. All soldiers were cognizant of the horrors they participated in. It was recognized as honorable to face down the enemy, defend oneself and oneís country, confront the evil, and prevail. While brutal, warfare was still regarded as battles amongst men, thus honor was required. Over time, wars took place on a larger scale, but as Americans we still believed that defense was the only proper use of force and honor required standards of conduct.

Thus as it was commonly regarded to be cowardly and inhuman to shoot a man in the back, attacking an unarmed man far from the battlefield wasnít war, but murder. In law courts, which might be regarded as war without lethal weapons, the accused is given the right to confront his accuser. To kill the unarmed, unsuspecting, and those who do not present immediate threat to life and liberty was simply unacceptable. A platoon of the enemy surrounded and outgunned, always retained the right of surrender and proper treatment.

Which raises the question, how does drone warfare fit into the American world view? As a military planner, it is delightful to be able to spy and kill without risking men. But, picture it from the point of an innocent Afghan or Pakistani, who has nothing to do with Al Qaida or the war on terror. They now live in constant fear, not of a knock on the door, but silent sudden death from the sky. Picture the potential for this technology to be used against anyone, anywhere at any time. Picture the impossibility of any defense or escape or surrender against the man behind the joystick.

Since: Feb 10

Location hidden

#18 Dec 10, 2011
The final limitation of war has always been the cost of human capital. There are limits to what human soldiers can and will endure, limits to the actions they will take, all wars ultimately end when the soldiers themselves declare they have had enough of the blood letting. Drone warfare changes that equation, probably in a way we will soon regret.

It is only a matter of time, before the drone is used against us.

Luke Skywalker (L)
truth is stranger than fiction

Since: Feb 10

Location hidden

#19 Dec 10, 2011
Yo California!

When they build a statue of a man, do they start construction from the front? Or the rear?

Since: Feb 10

Location hidden

#20 Dec 10, 2011
Efoods insert dot com

did you know? the passing of legislation last Thursday night made anyone storing up food more then 7 days a potential terrorist?

research S- 1867 which makes America a Battlefield.

Yes. he is suspect until PROVEN guilty. and suspects are not executed when higer moral options are available.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories - Gunman Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News LA cops fatally shoot man near CNN Hollywood af... Feb '17 Pessimistic1 7
More from around the web