Trump Shot at Rally

[Greene]

He's wearing a Demolition Ranch shirt in the shooting. DR is a gun YouTube channel run by a far right person. He's also a 20 year old with an AR style rifle, so I think the odds point to him being a gun nun.

Demo Ranch videos are apolitical. They focus on the silly/fun side of the hobby. Whatever Matt Carriker's political leanings may be, they are not apparent from his channel.

From what has been released so far the rifle used Sunday belonged to the shooter's father. The rifle was described as 'nothing special'.

Joseph Price, special agent in charge of the ATF in Pittsburgh, said the weapon used by the shooter was a rifle."It was nothing special," he said in an interview in the parking lot of the Butler Township Municipal Building.

source: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/investigations/2024/07/14/thomas-crooks-trump-rally-shooter/74397935007/

There is currently no evidence that the shooter owned the rifle used, or any firearms at all.

Whether or not he was a 'gun nut' can't honestly be gleaned from the available info. The shooter grabbed what was at hand.

Remember the goal of this site is to expose truths, not reinforce biases.

 

[Greene]

So therefore it is not a good suggestion to hold political rallies indoors instead of outdoors where the building can be secured and attendees can be vetted and searched using modern scanning equipment, whereas this can't be done similarly outdoors.

Regardless, what presidents have shot in a secured building where the measures I mentioned above were in effect?

Butler, PA has a population of around 13,000. What indoor facility would you suggest to handle a crowd the size of Sunday's rally?

 

[Edward Current]

Isn't what I suggested obvious? Not outside, but inside a controlled auditorium or similar building.

When was the last time a major political figure was shot at while giving an outdoor speech? It's not like it was impossible for the Secret Service to secure that roof. Or that it would be impossible to get a weapon into an indoor facility.

 

[deirdre]

all these stories from classmates should be taken with a grain of salt, in my opinion. but i did wonder if his high school had a rotc as he came so close to killing Trump.

Article:

Crooks had tried out for his high school's junior varsity rifle team when he was a freshman, CBS reported, but classmate Jameson Myers said Crooks didn't make the team and never tried out again.

Jameson Murphy, another former classmate, told the New York Post that Crooks "was such a comically bad shot he was unable to make the team and left after the first day." Another classmate also told the Post that the rifle team coach had concerns about Crooks based on "some crass jokes" Crooks made and how he interacted with others. "Our old coach was a stickler, he trained Navy marksmen, so he knew people. He knew when someone's not the greatest person," the classmate said.

Crooks did, however, belong to a local gun club, the Clairton Sportsmen's Club, which has a 200-yard rifle range among its facilities. The club confirmed Crooks' membership in a statement provided to multiple media outlets that admonished the violence and offered condolences to the victims but said it couldn't offer any more details as investigations remain ongoing

Source: https://time.com/6998557/thomas-matthew-crooks-trump-rally-shooter-fbi-motive/

 

[yoshy]

Demo Ranch videos are apolitical. They focus on the silly/fun side of the hobby. Whatever Matt Carriker's political leanings may be, they are not apparent from his channel.

From what has been released so far the rifle used Sunday belonged to the shooter's father. The rifle was described as 'nothing special'.


source: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/investigations/2024/07/14/thomas-crooks-trump-rally-shooter/74397935007/

There is currently no evidence that the shooter owned the rifle used, or any firearms at all.

Whether or not he was a 'gun nut' can't honestly be gleaned from the available info. The shooter grabbed what was at hand.

Remember the goal of this site is to expose truths, not reinforce biases.

I am merely doing what this site always does: taking in the data, combined with priors, to rank likely outcomes. Mick likes to call it "Occamic Ranking". I call it Bayesian statistics.

Yes, Demo Ranch videos are apolitical but his twitter and other socials are full of far right extremism. It's not hard to find.
The shooter's classmates have described how he was conservative and bullied frequently.
I don't know what it means for a rifle to be "nothing special".
The FBI and Homeland Security have established over and over that the the largest domestic threats we currently face are right wing extremism.

So, yes, my current posterior beliefs place a high probability on far right gun night. I'm not sure why anyone would disagree this is the most likely reality.

 

[Chacra]

Here's a video compilation of multiple view point videos. It shows people in the crowd identifying the shooter approximately 2 minutes before the first shots


Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDzxnQsSVQY


It seems like there should have been enough time to prevent the shooting

 

[deirdre]

So, yes, my current posterior beliefs place a high probability on far right gun night. I'm not sure why anyone would disagree this is the most likely reality.

where does the idea of a "gun nut" who doesnt actually own any guns, fall on your Occamic ranking?

 

[Dan Burt]

Suggested scenario (for which I have no proof, but it ties together several partial stories) - The policeman on the ground spotted the sniper and contacted the Feds. But that roof is not completely flat; could the gunman have been invisible because he was on the slope of the roof away from the rally? If the Feds were looking because they had been alerted, but saw nothing at that moment, maybe the gunman popped up at the last minute and started shooting.

There is an interview from a witness where he suggests exactly that. At 1:36 of the video is when reporter asks and he says it.


Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cG0qPDCWE9w&t=200s

 

[jarlrmai]

where does the idea of a "gun nut" who doesnt actually own any guns, fall on your Occamic ranking?

Plenty of kids / young adults are obsessed by interests and associated lifestyles they can't actually buy into, such as sports cars etc.

I'm active in some photography forums and young people are often posting fantasy posts about expensive professional camera gear they can't have.

 

[deirdre]

Plenty of kids / young adults are obsessed by interests and associated lifestyles they can't actually buy into, such as sports cars etc.

I'm active in some photography forums and young people are often posting fantasy posts about expensive professional camera gear they can't have.

rifles arent that pricey. he had a job.

 

[Dan Burt]

rifles arent that pricey. he had a job.

Yup, can buy a decent AR 15 for around $500.00

https://palmettostatearmory.com/psa...tr-classic-stealth-pistol-w-carry-handle.html

 

[jimmyslippin]

It seems like there should have been enough time to prevent the shooting

Perhaps. But there isn't a lot of urgency from the people who initially see the guy on the roof. It takes them about 30 seconds before they start attempting to alert authorities to the shooter's presence, about 1:25 before the shooting starts.

Based on the audio it also seems like the kill shot happens at 2:17, 16 seconds after the first shots are fired. The shooter seems to have been moving right before that single shot. There's a guy saying "he's turning this way, be careful" and then after the shot the same guy seems to have said "he's down."

Based on everything I've seen it seems like the shooter accessing the roof via ladder and his shooting position were obscured from view of the sniper teams by both the trees between them and the slant of the roof. The questions I would be asking is whether or not someone else was covering this blind spot from another position. and what did the officer do after being initially alerted by the first witnesses.

 

[yoshy]

where does the idea of a "gun nut" who doesnt actually own any guns, fall on your Occamic ranking?

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-rally-gunman-identified/

Crooks also had a membership at a nearby gun club for at least a year.

Wow, add it to my list. The shooter wearing a gun nut t-shirt also was a member of a gun club. I am SHOCKED

 

[Mendel]

It seems like there should have been enough time to prevent the shooting

2 minutes is only sufficient with the wisdom of hindsight.
In the developing situation, information must be verified before drastic acts are taken. Simply the time for an officer to listen to a witness, find a way up, and climb to the roof takes most of these two minutes.

This is a reason why I was wondering if there was aerial drone surveillance. It's easy, cheap, and unobtrusive nowadays to monitor any roof if you have the right equipment and operators.

 

[Chacra]

2 minutes is only sufficient with the wisdom of hindsight.
In the developing situation, information must be verified before drastic acts are taken. Simply the time for an officer to listen to a witness, find a way up, and climb to the roof takes most of these two minutes.

This is a reason why I way wondering if there was aerial drone surveillance. It's easy, cheap, and unobtrusive nowadays to monitor any roof if you have the right equipment and operators.

That is a very good point thanks for the reminder.

Having a drone seems like a logical precaution and adds another information collection tool for authorities

 

[Alexandria Nick]

Butler, PA has a population of around 13,000. What indoor facility would you suggest to handle a crowd the size of Sunday's rally?

It also attracted crowd from a large geographic area. Butler is typically well off the path for any presidential candidate. When Trump made a campaign stop in 2020, that was the first time a sitting President had ever been to Butler and just the second campaign stop ever (JFK stopped in 1960, which they actually commemorated with a bust at the local war memorial.) I know people that went to that one just because it was seen as a once in a lifetime chance to see a US President.

I believe this event attracted 20 to 30,000 people. When you start talking about crowds that large, you're getting to like one venue in the whole state: Wells Fargo Center in Philadelphia. PPG Paints Arena in Pittsburgh isn't even big enough. The largest venue I can think of in the whole county is the auditorium at the community college, at a whopping 442.

 

[deirdre]

you could do a football stadium. all indoor does you is to check people going in, but you could theoretically do that with a stadium too. probably pretty pricey to rent out a football stadium though.

 

[Dan Burt]

Read that the officer that confronted shooter on the roof didn't climb a ladder. He was on the shoulders of a fellow officer. When the shooter swung his gun around at him he ducked, then fell off the fellow officer's shoulders. Supposedly the officer gave an interview to KDRA news saying this.

 

[Z.W. Wolf]

Gun nut? Is that a diagnosis in the DSM-5?

 

[Giddierone]

Humm, still seeing lots of "it was staged by Trumps people" (even given the deaths and injuries) on social media, and now I'm waiting to see one of those avid guns & ammo YouTuber's set up a super slow-mo capture of an AR-15 nicking a ballistic model of an ear at 150m...

 

[Chacra]

Humm, still seeing lots of "it was staged by Trumps people" (even given the deaths and injuries) on social media, and now I'm waiting to see one of those avid guns & ammo YouTuber's set up a super slow-mo capture of an AR-15 nicking a ballistic model of an ear at 150m...

The reason I initially assumed a smaller calibre rifle like a .22lr is because of the limited damage to his ear. A 5.56 NATO round has significantly more energy and thus I assumed it would have caused more damage. It must have just caught the very edge of his skin.

NSFW warning for results of bullet impacts on simulated human head
Here's a video comparing different calibre impacts on a ballistic gelatin skull. First the .22lr still very lethal under the right conditions but far less energy transfer compared to the 5.56.

00:08 to 00:19 are .22lr impacts
00:20 to 00:29 are 5.56 impacts
00:31 to 00:56 12ga impact
00:58 to 01:10 30-06 impact


Source: https://youtu.be/SA474bbBOE4?t=19s

 

[Chacra]

It also attracted crowd from a large geographic area. Butler is typically well off the path for any presidential candidate. When Trump made a campaign stop in 2020, that was the first time a sitting President had ever been to Butler and just the second campaign stop ever (JFK stopped in 1960, which they actually commemorated with a bust at the local war memorial.) I know people that went to that one just because it was seen as a once in a lifetime chance to see a US President.

I believe this event attracted 20 to 30,000 people. When you start talking about crowds that large, you're getting to like one venue in the whole state: Wells Fargo Center in Philadelphia. PPG Paints Arena in Pittsburgh isn't even big enough. The largest venue I can think of in the whole county is the auditorium at the community college, at a whopping 442.

Do you have a source for the claim of that many people? I have not been able to find anything that reported the number of attendees

 

[Mendel]

Do you have a source for the claim of that many people? I have not been able to find anything that reported the number of attendees

Article:

The show grounds office staff told KDKA-TV they believe there will be 15,000 tickets sold for the rally.

Source: https://www.cbsnews.com/pittsburgh/news/donald-trump-rally-butler-county-set-up/

The expected number of attendees (not the actual number) determines the size of the venue.

As an aside, security does not tell Trump where to hold his rally; Trump tells security where he holds his rally.

 

[Mendel]

From the October 31st, 2020, rally at the airport in Butler:

Article:

No official attendance number has been released, but the Penn Township Police Department told us that officers at the event estimated there were about 15,000 people in attendance.
The Butler Eagle, the county's daily newspaper, reported that "more than 10,000 people" showed up to the event. The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review said that bus drivers who ferried supporters from their cars to the airport in the afternoon were told to expect about 15,000.

Source: https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/nov/02/facebook-posts/trumps-butler-pa-rally-drew-thousands-supporters-t/

 

[captancourgette]

im not surprised at all. Trump is an absolute media expert who was extremely aware his whole adult life about how he is portrayed in the media. you cant compare him to a normal person. his first thought was probably "am I alive" and second one "how do I look on video, get up quick, be strong".

He seems very concerned about his shoes here in the aftermath of the shooting. A bit of an odd thing to be concerned with after nearly dying, then again perhaps that's how he behaves when in shock.

I have no idea why one (or both) are not on his feet?

There is speculation that he wears lifts in his shoes and lies about his height all for appearances, perhaps this is why he was so concerned about his shoes? Though this could be another topic, does Trump misrepresent his height, the mug shot didn't answer it

 

[Giddierone]

The top left video of this montage seems to show some kind of hydraulic failure of the yellow JCB behind the green tractor. The arm holding the speaker rack beside the spectator stand is collapsing. Was it hit by a round?
[Timestamp 2:13:04]

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/1e3v06c/plenty_of_time_to_stop_the_threat_synced_video/

 

[Paladinhgwt]

I had the same impression. I'd bet the sniper team in the video were alerted to the guy via their comm net and was looking for him. They finally spotted him, possible from his muzzle flash, then opened fire.

I'd be shocked if the rules of engagement (RoE) under which the Secret Service operates do not allow them to shoot first if they believe there is a legitimate threat. Who actually makes that call real time would be interesting to know. Do the teams have autonomy to make the decision to fire, or must they wait on an order to fire?

The rule is, if you see a threat of deadly force, you can immediately act to end the threat using deadly physical Force. If you need to clear it up the chain people would be dead. Law enforcement is always being second guess for these split second decisions.

 

[Landru]

The rule is, if you see a threat of deadly force, you can immediately act to end the threat using deadly physical Force. If you need to clear it up the chain people would be dead. Law enforcement is always being second guess for these split second decisions.

Do you have a source for this? HE Secret Service Rules of Engagement?

 

[Z.W. Wolf]

Trump's shoe

He says the agents hit him so hard, his shoes came off.

 

[Paladinhgwt]

Do you have a source for this? HE Secret Service Rules of Engagement?

https://www.justice.gov/jm/1-16000-department-justice-policy-use-force#1-16.200

"Law enforcement officers and correctional officers of the Department of Justice may use deadly force only when necessary, that is, when the officer has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or to another person."

Edit:
But ss is under dhs, it's the same as above.

Https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/f...sQFnoECA4QAQ&usg=AOvVaw2uBlqI-RARdOEhbUujWzUR

 

[Duke]

https://www.justice.gov/jm/1-16000-department-justice-policy-use-force#1-16.200

"Law enforcement officers and correctional officers of the Department of Justice may use deadly force only when necessary, that is, when the officer has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or to another person."

Edit:
But ss is under dhs, it's the same as above.

Https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/f...sQFnoECA4QAQ&usg=AOvVaw2uBlqI-RARdOEhbUujWzUR

Not sure "policy" as cited is the same as "RoE." Policy is big picture, overarching. Of course deadly force is used "only when necessary." The RoE will define what action(s) their officers may take and under what circumstances.

If you submitted a FOIA request to the DHS/Secret Service asking them to provide RoE for use of deadly force by their officers, uniformed and/or plain clothes, while performing official protection duties, I'd bet they'd politely decline under the exemptions detailing national security and law enforcement. You'd also probably get a visit from federal officers.

 

[Mendel]

https://www.justice.gov/jm/1-16000-department-justice-policy-use-force#1-16.200

"Law enforcement officers and correctional officers of the Department of Justice may use deadly force only when necessary, that is, when the officer has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or to another person."

Don't skip the first part:

It is the policy of the Department of Justice to value and preserve human life. Officers may use only the force that is objectively reasonable to effectively gain control of an incident, while protecting the safety of the officer and others, in keeping with the standards set forth in Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989). Officers may use force only when no reasonably effective, safe, and feasible alternative appears to exist and may use only the level of force that a reasonable officer on the scene would use under the same or similar circumstances.

"Look, he has a gun" is not a license to kill.

 

[Paladinhgwt]

Don't skip the first part:

It is the policy of the Department of Justice to value and preserve human life. Officers may use only the force that is objectively reasonable to effectively gain control of an incident, while protecting the safety of the officer and others, in keeping with the standards set forth in Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989). Officers may use force only when no reasonably effective, safe, and feasible alternative appears to exist and may use only the level of force that a reasonable officer on the scene would use under the same or similar circumstances.

"Look, he has a gun" is not a license to kill.

I'm talking about deadly force, there are other levels of force which is what you cited.

A guy with a gun on a rooftop at a political rally 130m away from a speaker, in civil clothes, is reasonable to believe the person is about to use deadly force against another person.

My only point was there is no chain of command for a "green light" to shoot.

 

[Mendel]

I'm talking about deadly force, there are other levels of force which is what you cited.

Yes. You originally wrote, "The rule is, if you see a threat of deadly force, you can immediately act to end the threat using deadly physical Force." And that's not true; the officers are supposed to end the threat using reasonable force, and that's often less than deadly.

A guy with a gun on a rooftop at a political rally 130m away from a speaker, in civil clothes, is reasonable to believe the person is about to use deadly force against another person.

My only point was there is no chain of command for a "green light" to shoot.

Right. But if they can't clearly identify a gun, snipers may need to rely on observers who can.
Or it may be reasonable to hail the suspect and command them to step away from the gun, which can end the threat with zero force. It depends entirely on the circumstances of that specific situation.

 

[Domzh]

the only issue here is if they can properly ID a deadly weapon and therefore a situation that allows them to use deadly force.

which is why they probably have to confirm with others that what the subject is actually holding a rifle and not a camera with a tele or isnt a stupid kid pointing with a broomstick and playing assassin.

the law is pretty clear.

if they misinterpret a situation its most likely a trial case.

if they saw a gun and the subject was actually not only having a gun but also aiming at someone, then they can use deadly force without having to get an OK from a superior.

this would be ridiculous. the superior maybe isnt even seeing what they see at this moment.

if the person in charge defined the ROE in this case that they have to get confirmation first before they shoot then this changes things a bit but the law is the law. i also cant see why they would be told to not fire to save a (former) president.

 

[M Bornong]

I grew up about 4 miles from where this happened. My literal next door neighbors were in the grandstand behind Trump. Going to the Farm Show was just something you did in August. The Honda Accord I used to own was bought across the street. This was practically my back yard.

I am just astonished that they did not have that roof secured. When I first heard that Trump had been shot at, I had two thoughts: either someone in the crowd or a sniper firing from the rooftop of the plant just to the south. There's no other site (other than the water tower) with line of sight to the Farm Show grounds. The whole area is a bit of a rise, probably why they built it there in the first place. You can't even really see into the grounds from the surrounding roads and that's the only real gap in the trees that also provide you with a shooting platform. It should have been immediately apparent in their security planning because it is hilariously obvious that it could be a shooter's position to an event at the Farm Show.


In Pennsylvania, if you know someone's legal name, birthday, and zip code, you can pull their party affiliation from the public database. I don't see any reason to doubt it, because anyone can confirm it.

Would the jumbotron above the bleachers that Trump was pointing at, have been high enough and in line to block line of sight to the water tower? I have not found a camera angle with the jumbotron that he was pointing at

 

[yoshy]

Gun nut? Is that a diagnosis in the DSM-5?

I think guns and large pickup trucks should be considered gender affirming care since they are often purchased to assert one's manliness .

Back to being serious, my claim (that was somehow considered outlandish by some here) of the shooter being a gun nut enthusiast is appearing more likely.

• More than a dozen guns were found at Crooks' family's home, four senior law enforcement officials told NBC News.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/live-b...attempt-rally-shooting-live-update-rcna161972

His father was also libertarian, a political party/movement that LOVE guns.

 

[Dan Burt]

What's the cut off for "Gun nut" versus "someone that has more than a couple guns"?

 

[FatPhil]

Don't skip the first part:

It is the policy of the Department of Justice to value and preserve human life. Officers may use only the force that is objectively reasonable to effectively gain control of an incident, while protecting the safety of the officer and others, in keeping with the standards set forth in Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989). Officers may use force only when no reasonably effective, safe, and feasible alternative appears to exist and may use only the level of force that a reasonable officer on the scene would use under the same or similar circumstances.

"Look, he has a gun" is not a license to kill.

USSS is part of Department of Homeland Security, so I'd be surprised if they're covered by any DOJ document that refers to "Law enforcement officers and correctional officers of the Department of Justice".

 

[Z.W. Wolf]

What's the cut off for "Gun nut" versus "someone that has more than a couple guns"?

I have six. So is that past the threshold?

2 Garands (WWII) (not currently functional)
1 Mauser Model 1892
1 Krag-Jørgensen Rifle (the first repeating rifle adopted by the US Army)
1 Colt Model 1860 Army Revolver (reproduction)
They're all weapons of war!

1 Full stock Hawkins rifle (muzzle loader)

So am I mentally ill or not?

When I was a kid I built a couple of dozen free flight model airplanes - some rubber band some nitro engine powered. Was I an airplane nut? After all, I only needed one.