Why The Santa Fe Shooting Disappeared From Headlines So Quickly
Rod Thomson

Something strange happened within a few days of the mass shooting at Santa Fe High School that killed 10 people and injured 14 others.

The story virtually disappeared from the news cycle. This is quite a remarkable change from the weeks of non-stop media coverage after the Parkland, Florida shooting that resulted in huge protests around the country and bad legislation in Florida.

First, there are a lot of similarities in the two atrocities. The killer in both instances was a mentally disturbed, bullied teenage boy who had shown warning signs. However, it is well-documented that in Parkland, law enforcement and school officials (government) missed or purposely overlooked dozens of red flags regarding the killer that could have prevented the killings.

Seventeen people were killed in Parkland. Ten were killed in Santa Fe. Both are located in conservative states with strong Second Amendment protections, although Texas is more conservative. Both have happened during a time of rampant but factually ill-founded fears of school shootings, and a media that has an anti-gun agenda it pushes shamelessly — including the use of grieving teenage survivors.

So what are the differences? Three stand out .

One, the gun that the Parkland killer used was an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle. It is what the media insists on calling an “assault weapon,” without ever really explaining or describing what is meant by the term. It’s scary looking and appears similar to military assault weapons. But it is the same as any semi-automatic rifle or pistol. One shot per trigger pull.

In Santa Fe, the killer used a .38-caliber revolver and a shotgun — not the infamous “assault rifles.” There is very little support among Americans for banning revolvers or shotguns. So that was one big difference.

The second is that the Parkland killer was never stopped. Officers stayed outside and did nothing while he continued to massacre people. He just finally quit murdering and walked away from his school slaughter, later being arrested at a fast food restaurant.

In Santa Fe, men with guns stopped the killer. The teen was cornered in a room by armed school security until more police arrived and he surrendered.

A final difference is in the community and the students. Parkland is in the heavily urbanized, liberal, anti-gun corridor of Southeast Florida, from Miami through Fort Lauderdale to West Palm. The students there reflect that urbanized sense of guns as frightening, and really do not seem to grasp the purpose of the Second Amendment. They came out very strong for gun laws and the media ate it up and national, liberal organizations quickly organized them.

Santa Fe is a semi-rural area of Southern Texas between Houston and Galveston. The people there see guns as part of the culture and have a more ingrained understanding of why there is a Second Amendment. For instance, almost no Santa Fe students participated in the national school walkout in March.

Here is Alex Carvey, 16, a student at Santa Fe High School:

“I don’t think guns are the problem — I think people are the problem,” she said. “Even if we did more gun laws, people who are sick enough to do something like this are still going to figure out a way to do it. So it doesn’t matter.”

So the differences in coverage seem to be based at least somewhat on how it plays into the media narrative of blaming the NRA and gun owners and pushing for more gun control laws. Parkland — despite the myriad failures of government along the way, plays nicely into that narrative.

Santa Fe doesn’t really fit narrative.

https://therevolutionaryact.co...g-disappear-quickly/

Excellent analysis.

quote:

In Santa Fe, the killer used a .38-caliber revolver and a shotgun — not the infamous “assault rifles.”

And not even a semi-auto shotgun, but a pump. Yeah, I noticed right away how quiet the MSM was about Santa Fe. The lack of an AR-15 just doesn't support their agenda.

My mom (a huge anti-gun mom) was asking me this very question Monday night. When I said because he didn't use an AR and it doesn't fit the agenda, she just rolled her eyes, and mumbled about all guns needing to be banned.

There is no discussion with liberals

The article makes a great point. If the students could be leveraged, the media would have wrung out every publicity they could.

quote:

Originally posted by Rey HRH:
The article makes a great point. If the students could be leveraged, the media would have wrung out every publicity they could.

Don’t think they weren’t offered the temptations.... media, t-shirts, posters, plane trips, fawning, fame, fortune....

quote:

If the students could be leveraged, the media would have wrung out every publicity they could.

That's it in a nutshell IMO.

At 16 years of age, Alex Carvey already has it figured out.

But the dork I work with said, "I still don't think people should own assault rifles."

quote:

. . .“I don’t think guns are the problem — I think people are the problem,” she said. “Even if we did more gun laws, people who are sick enough to do something like this are still going to figure out a way to do it. So it doesn’t matter.” . . .

And unless and until liberals acknowledge such, they will never solve the problem. (But I am not sure liberals really want to solve the problem, they want to use the problem to justify serving themselves).

quote:

Originally posted by radioman:
But the dork I work with said, "I still don't think people should own assault rifles."

Idiots tried to ban assault rifles after the Boston Marathon bombing cuz you know "we have to do something"

Whatever the reason for non-coverage, the end result and example are positive. I actually heard this recomendation on FNC - eliminate the publicity. Eliminate the Facebook fame. Remove all traces of the shooter's name - no photos, no comments, no interviews of friends and family about what a quiet boy he was. Any budding copycat will not see a headline. Bury the news on the second page - madman kills x at school x - now today's weather. A significant part of the motivation of these proto-brain murderers is to see their name in lights, just like that other guy. Now I'll be famous. I'm somebody. Then maybe they'll just go off themselves in their retarded universe, and not trouble the rest of us....

quote:

Originally posted by Lord Vaalic:
My mom (a huge anti-gun mom) was asking me this very question Monday night. When I said because he didn't use an AR and it doesn't fit the agenda, she just rolled her eyes, and mumbled about all guns needing to be banned.

There is no discussion with liberals

See, I'm surprised the media didn't spin this story to stir up a push for all guns being banned, not just the scary black assault rifles.

quote:

Originally posted by brecaidra:

See, I'm surprised the media didn't spin this story to stir up a push for all guns being banned, not just the scary black assault rifles.

That would expose the true agenda. They know they can't win that battle yet so they stick with sensational incrementalism...

I very rarely hear Rush, but today he was all over this.....same thoughts.

quote:

Originally posted by brecaidra:
See, I'm surprised the media didn't spin this story to stir up a push for all guns being banned, not just the scary black assault rifles.

Great minds think alike. I was thinking this same thing.

I also was wondering the other day...so where is that little pussy Hoggwart and his band of merry idiots and imbeciles in all this? I'll tell you...that little pissant knows he'd get railroaded straight outta town if he showed his face and started spewing his pussified liberal agenda. Texans take care of their own! Plain and simple...

GOD BLESS TEXAS AND GOD BLESS SANTA FE!!

The leftist couldn't capitalize on this so it flamed out...The parkland crowd tried to rally them and they didn't't bite.

The other story that disappeared even quicker was the one about the armed school resource officer, who prevented mass casualties by confronting and shooting the would-be shooter. It supported the good guy with a gun stopping the bad guy with a gun theory. Can't have that.

Yes, no AR-15. I had a talk with some anti-gunners who said that hunters even think AR-15 no one needs. I replied 'I can't wait for some idiot to use a shotgun in a mass shooting. Let's hear the hunters then.'

God must have heard me, because......

No hearing on banning shotguns, yet. Shot gun is an excellent weapons choice for mass casualties. I think there have been several debates here that shot guns are better home defense systems than hand guns.

There is a reason shotguns are not allowed in war. It is interesting. Old law, considering hand grenades and cluster munitions of today.

It is in fact disgusting. They do not place the same value on lives lost with a .38 revolver as those taken with an AR, because it does not fit their agenda.

I hope others see this for what it is, absolutely disgusting!!!!!