Police press conference in Odessa was a Greg Abbott sham.

[mobeau69]

Abbott actually praised his new TX gun laws! He mentioned the Second Amendment needed to be protected.

Still refused to disclose the name of the shooter.

Didn't announce that the weapon was an AR until they were asked about it!

Unbelievable crock of shit orchestrated by Abbott and his boss, Wayne Lapierre.

[LonePirate]

1. What does naming the shooer accomplish? We already know it was a white guy.

[mobeau69]

2. Can mean a lot.

They always give the name of the killer. If his name was Arab you can bet it would have been disclosed. He could be a big supporter of the NRA. A big Abbott supporter. Who knows when we don't have a name? They always give the name.

[uponit7771]

3. +1

[LonePirate]

4. It gives unnecessary publicity to the shooter and wannabe shooters looking for notoriety.

[mobeau69]

10. BS. It's public information. If his name was Muhammed do you think they'd keep it a secret?

[LonePirate]

13. I thnk they should keep all of the names secret, regardless of ethnicity.

[oldsoftie]

33. I tend to agree, as long as we know everything ELSE. Dont give them publicity.

[MurrayDelph]

44. Think how anxious a shooter would be

if his notoriety would get him the public name "Joe Dipshit 2019 #46"

[Hulk]

64. ....but as stated, if he had a Hispanic or Arab name, you KNOW it would be disclosed

in a heartbeat. Sure.....don't publicize if that's the way we want to play it...but that's not how the system works. I'm surprised they mentioned it was a white 30 something male. Goes against their propaganda message. Watch out for those Muslim terroristas.

[4139]

7. Could be law enforcement informant or family or friend

[mobeau69]

16. Yep, it could.

[Mr.Bill]

31. They won't give his name until

they scrub all his social media.

[erronis]

36. Cynical much? Like me. And make sure the databases are sanitized if this perp

is related to law enforcement or is a known RW killer that LE hasn't bothered to worry about.

[oldsoftie]

38. Oh yes, "they" are very powerful, arent they!!

You CANNOT scrub social media. Theres no way of knowing if I or anyone else copied any of YOUR posts, tweets, etc. If its on the internet, its there forever in some fashion.

[Mr.Bill]

41. They can minimize it

and make it difficult for most to see it.

[bucolic_frolic]

32. Yes, that makes sense

There is some connection they don't want to disclose all at once, so they will leak it out slowly.

Could be a manifesto, an affiliation, an accomplice. They did say he has a criminal record but no active warrants.

My guess is this perp could become a poster child for stricter gun laws.

[busterbrown]

61. Yep Yep and a lot more Yeps....N/T

[stonecutter357]

6. What does not naming the shooer accomplish?

[mobeau69]

12. It's public information that is always released.

This information belongs to us. Not Abbott and the police.

[nycbos]

14. I agree.

Many think that we shouldn't because many of these people ] crave notoriety.

https://nonotoriety.com

[mobeau69]

19. That's a bullshit argument.

Do you want secret police forces? It's public information!

[nycbos]

27. Of corse not

There is a difference between releasing the information and 24/7 profiling of the shooter

[mobeau69]

29. See #23

[TeamPooka]

46. there might have been notoriety once when it was rare but now there are so many you

cant name the Pulse shooter or the Vegas concert shooter without Googling them.
Too many to name and remember now.
they get no fame.

[barbtries]

9. I want to know

his record, why he killed all these people, whether he was legally carrying. this secrecy is maddening to me.
how we going to identify and stop future killers? at some point, don't we want these mass shootings to end?

short answer: a lot.

[LonePirate]

15. All of that information can be released by officials without naming him.

[barbtries]

21. and we'll just take their word for it?

don't think so.

[LonePirate]

23. Your distrust and paranoia are not sufficient reasons to provide attention to a murderer,

[barbtries]

24. well deserved distrust.

it's not paranoia. it's reality.

[yardwork]

53. +1000. In a democracy, the police are accountable to the public.

[mobeau69]

25. If a network like CNN doesn't want to mention his name that's all well and good.

But the police work for the people. We are their bosses. Think about the ramifications if the police can kill someone and not have to say who they killed.

[yardwork]

52. I recommend that you rethink your position.

Your post was a personal attack, and an example of exactly the wrong way to approach this.

[LonePirate]

54. The poster expressed distrust and paranoia in the post. Should that simply be overlooked?

[yardwork]

68. I disagree that paranoia was expressed in the post.

And it's not up to us to police our fellow citizens when they demand transparency from law enforcement and elected officials.

The police in Odessa shot a man and killed him. I want to know who he was. That's my obligation as a citizen. Nothing paranoid about it.

[treestar]

65. It is not just for that purpose

There would be people who knew him who could shed light on him. Now how can they know? This is just silly. There are so many of them now, they don't get remembered anyway.

[bronxiteforever]

18. +1 public safety absolutely requires accountability

Abbott was Attorney General for many years prior to being a Governor. Did Abbott’s office handle a prior case and screw it up?

There are accountability questions relating to the criminal justice system such as, did anyone warn police about the shooter prior to the incident?

Was the shooter a prior police informant? Was he prematurely let out on parole/probation? Were there deals given to him that should be subject to public scrutiny.
Did a judge make a horrible decision on a prior case? Texas elects Judges and voters would have a right to know this.
https://www.tpr.org/post/why-do-we-elect-judges-texas

After Jeffrey Epstein’s case, transparency is absolutely essential.

[Laurian]

39. I agree.

Something stinks about this decision, but I think the name will become known.

[struggle4progress]

17. Will you allow the police to kill people without telling you who they killed?

"We killed a mass shooter. We killed a terrorist! We killed a drug dealer! We killed a suspect!"

If you would allow the state to kill people without telling you who they killed, would you allow them imprison people without telling you who they imprisoned?

"We've imprisoned seventy people as threats to the public safety!"

[bronxiteforever]

22. +1

[MarcA]

42. +1,000 n/t

[yardwork]

51. Exactly.

[Ferrets are Cool]

62. Great response. nt

[dawg day]

28. It should be public information. If you get a DUI, your name is released-- why protect a murderer?

And the victims and families and people in the vicinity have a right to know.

I don't know that the precise motive is so important. I mean, these guys are haters, and they want to hurt. It might be useful for sociologists and psychologists and criminologists to add this guy to their database to help understand...

(But we know... haters gonna hate. Don't give them guns.)

[LonePirate]

30. People do not emulate someone when they get a DUI. They do when they kill a bunch of people.

[TeamPooka]

45. Naming the shooter allows the media to research past police interactions with an unstable

individual and expose his white privilege/connections/or LEO mistakes.

[Sucha NastyWoman]

49. It keeps his ideology secret

I’m guessing he’s got right wing/republican views they don’t want you to associate with them and their party.

They did this when Gabby Gifford’s was shot. Eventually it will come out, but they try to keep it quiet while people are at their angriest.

[yardwork]

50. In a democracy we need to know the name of a mass shooter.

I understand the point about not wanting to give the murderer publicity, but the public still has a right to know. And, not releasing his identity just fuels speculation and conspiracy theories.

[barbtries]

5. it was so disgusting

i stopped watching.

[spanone]

8. abbott & company give lip service to the victims....they are worthless 'leaders'

they work for the NRA

[Paladin]

11. Abbott is a bought-and-paid-for NRA whore. Always has been.

The odds of him and the morons in the legislature doing anything to curtail gun violence in Texas are less than zero.

[OrlandoDem2]

20. I wanna know if the gun man had a record. The gun nuts always say that gun laws

hurt the law abiding citizens. My hunch is this type of gun crime is mostly committed by people with no record to start with - proving we need some sort of laws to get ARs and other similar guns off the streets.

[mobeau69]

26. Hell, they didn't even want to say "AR" but the press asked the bastards.

They didn't have an excuse for keeping that secret!

[mfcorey1]

34. Anytime a rethuglican wants to hide a name like this is not because they want to take

away the possible notoriety for the person. It is likely because it is something that will validate the evilness of them and their party. That's okay. Someone will have it before the week is over., and whatever they are scrubbing from his profile. This one needs to be known.

[EveHammond13]

35. he is such a stubborn goddamned zealot and consummate rightist motherfucker

[MarcA]

43. And a hypocrite who will gladly sue when he gets hurt by a random act.

Wonder what he would have done if it were a stray shot from somewhere.
Would he have sued the gun manufacturer?

[EveHammond13]

37. pretty clear the shooter was a MAGAt and he's trying to hide it

[still_one]

40. That was the most pathetic news conference I have seen. I really feel sorry that Texas has to put

up with that POS

[gldstwmn]

47. This could be one of the things that

turns Texas blue in 2020. People are tired of hearing a bunch of nonsense and no action from these guys.

[jalan48]

48. Texans must go for this bullshit otherwise they would vote him out.

[Quemado]

55. That was the most bogus new conference I had ever seen.

LE refused to identify the killer.

LE refused to comment on the motive for the killings.

So-called "journalists" present wouldn't challenge LE.

I think this news conference was one big set-up.

[Gothmog]

56. From the head of Moms demand action

Link to tweet

[bsiebs]

57. Shooters name is Seth Arron Ator

[ancianita]

58. Secrecy is a feature of tyranny. 7 of the last 20 mass murders have been in TX.

If Beto isn't nominated, he should go after Abbott's job.

[bucolic_frolic]

59. If the shooter didn't have a gun this would never have happened.

Face up to it Repukes.

[SunSeeker]

60. Same guy who sits in a wheelchair paid for by taxpayers but wants to deny healthcare to the poor.

He is an evil, sick asshole.

[GeorgeGist]

63. The shooters name is always the same:

Second Amendment.

[bronxiteforever]

67. +1000

[RandySF]

66. The mayor is a pro-gun Republican shill.

[Gothmog]

69. CNN panel explodes at Texas governor for hiding mass shooting details with pathetic press

Link to tweet

[DeminPennswoods]

70. I saw the last part of that

The two guests were truly disgusted.

[Gothmog]

71. I know Greg and I am also disgusted