this post was submitted on 01 May 2024
169 points (97.2% liked)

News

23311 readers
4034 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Nobody said anything about a second shooter.

[–] circuscritic@lemmy.ca 3 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Great, so then we agree. The article only describes someone being killed, and all it does to justify that killing is to label them an active shooter.

But the only person the article describes as firing any shots, is the one who killed the supposed threat.

Maybe that person was a threat, I don't know. I just know the article was so poorly written and sourced, that it shouldn't have been published.

"Man kills another man, but pinky promises that guy was about to kill a bunch of kids. No further information necessary, obviously checks out".

[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

It doesn't actually say the police fired any shots either. (Edit: actually it does, scratch that part.)

But if you read this quote:

“It was maybe like pow-pow-pow-pow,” Keller told The Associated Press by phone. “I thought it was fireworks. I went outside and saw all the children running ... I probably saw 200 children.”

She heard gunshots, then there were kids running. That sounds like the start of the event, not the resolution.

Ultimately we don't have enough detail to say for sure, but given it was reported as an active shooter, that's enough to justify the headline.

[–] circuscritic@lemmy.ca 4 points 6 months ago

Right, and that scenario along with the quote could just as easily been applied to the hypothetical alternative scenario I laid out on my last comment.

This is just a terribly written and poorly sourced article that no editor should have allowed to be published.