
Report of Active Shooter at YouTube HQ - coloneltcb
https://twitter.com/Lavrusik/status/981259304408788993
======
sjs382
Remember the _Breaking News Consumer 's Handbook_ from WNYC's _On The Media_ :
[https://www.wnyc.org/story/breaking-news-consumers-
handbook-...](https://www.wnyc.org/story/breaking-news-consumers-handbook-
pdf/)

    
    
      1. In the immediate aftermath, news outlets will get it wrong.
      2. Don't trust anonymous sources.
      3. Don't trust stories that cite another news outlet as the source of the information.
      4. There's almost never a second shooter.
      5. Pay attention to the language the media uses.
        • “We are getting reports”… could mean anything.
        • “We are seeking confirmation”… means they don’t have it.
        • “[News outlet] has learned”… means it has a scoop or is going out on limb.
      6. Look for news outlets close to the incident.
      7. Compare multiple sources.
      8. Big news brings out the fakers. And photoshoppers.
      9. Beware reflexive retweeting. Some of this is on you.

~~~
jdoliner
This isn't limited to the immediate aftermath either. I recently learned that
almost everything I thought I knew about the Columbine shooting was actually
not true. The narrative of a shooting quickly takes on a life of its own.

~~~
nicolapede
Would you mind elaborating a little on the Columbine shooting and where to
look for trustworthy reconstruction of the event?

~~~
jdoliner
Sure, let me first say though that there's so much misinformation surrounding
that particular event that I'm not really willing to 100% trust anything at
this point. I'm always ready to find out what I think I know about the event
is actually wrong. That being said here were the major things I used to think
were true that I don't anymore:

\- The shooters were not in The Trenchcoat Mafia (TCM). TCM was a thing that
some of their classmates used to refer to themselves. Dylan and Eric were
never closely associated with it. The coats they wore during the shooting
weren't even trenchcoats, they were dusters.

\- They weren't outcasts, and the shooting was revenge against the popular
kids. They weren't the most popular kids in school either but that had fairly
normal social lives, went to parties on the weekend. If I recall correctly
prom had been a few weeks before the shooting and both had gone, with dates.

\- The infamous exchange in which they asked a classmate if she believed in
god and then shot her when she responded "yes" never happened.

This source seems pretty good: [https://www.policeone.com/school-
violence/articles/1228405-T...](https://www.policeone.com/school-
violence/articles/1228405-The-Columbine-High-School-Incident-Fact-and-
Fiction/)

I first found out about it from this podcast:
[http://www.socialmatter.net/2017/05/12/myth-20th-century-
epi...](http://www.socialmatter.net/2017/05/12/myth-20th-century-
episode-18-columbine-culture-violence/)

~~~
rdtsc
Someone told me that some of the victims ended up being shot by the police.
Based on your research is that true or it's another one of those rumors?

~~~
jdoliner
I've never seen anything mentioning that so it seems dubious to me. But it
looks like there was a motion filed in court claiming this [0]. Not sure what
ever came of it, but I assumed Google would turn up more if it had been
confirmed.

[0]: [https://www.cbsnews.com/news/family-columbine-student-
killed...](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/family-columbine-student-killed-by-
cop/)

------
dkoubsky
The police have held a press conference.
[https://twitter.com/search?q=san%20bruno%20press%20conferenc...](https://twitter.com/search?q=san%20bruno%20press%20conference&src=typd)

It looks like shooter was a female who is now deceased with 4 or 5 others
injured.

------
ProfessorLayton
This is crazy and I hope everyone is OK. Its worth pointing out that
Snapchat's heat map is pretty useful for getting insights in situations like
these.

~~~
robtaylor
Which now has a web interface
[http://maps.snapchat.com](http://maps.snapchat.com)

~~~
samfisher83
Wow this is a killer feature. I never knew snap had this. Maybe it can replace
twitter.

~~~
komali2
Here I thought snapchat was on the out - this feature alone absolutely
dominates Periscope for me. I just had no idea it existed.

~~~
taternuts
That's one of the common complaints of snapchat. I'd bet most people that even
use snapchat don't even know how to get to this feature in the app. It was
released some time last year without much press (I think they did a self-snap
story about it) and even took me a couple tries to figure out how to get there
when I knew about it. There's literally no way of knowing that view exists
without just knowing it or accidentally triggering it, and I didn't even know
there was a web interface for it.

------
pmcgrathm
Per a SWAT officer - his team has not been activated, which means the
situation is under control. Apparently an attempted murder/suicide. Female
shooter. 10-20 shots fired and multiple people being treated for gunshot
wounds. No news as to what happened to the shooter.

~~~
liberte82
A female shooter must be a relatively rare scenario?

~~~
mkempe
That's a bizarre question. Why are you asking?

~~~
liberte82
Why is it bizarre? Stories of female shooters are relatively rare. It makes it
noteworthy.

~~~
mkempe
Sadly there are many stories of people who kill their lovers, whatever their
gender. You can read about them in the tabloids, every day.

------
dennisgorelik
They allowed a surgeon (Andre Campbell [1]) to answer questions (as opposing
to have a PR person to sanitize it):
[https://www.pscp.tv/w/1zqKVrbanRAKB](https://www.pscp.tv/w/1zqKVrbanRAKB)

In this interview Andre Campbell:

1) Advertised his ("Zuckerberg") hospital capabilities (3 times).

2) Answered some tech/medical questions about the wounds/diagnostics.

3) Occasionally smiled [in response to reporters curiosity].

[1] [https://surgery.ucsf.edu/faculty/general-surgery/andre-
campb...](https://surgery.ucsf.edu/faculty/general-surgery/andre-
campbell,-md.aspx)

~~~
baxtr
This is unbelievable. How can you advertise your hospital after such a
tragedy?

~~~
dennisgorelik
That was a PR opportunity, so he used it.

If he toned it down then such advertisement would be not even noticeable.

------
spullara
Most specific stuff I have seen.
[https://twitter.com/mrwilltolive/status/981260734305918978?s...](https://twitter.com/mrwilltolive/status/981260734305918978?s=21)

~~~
throwaway2016a
That says "female shooter" but one of the other threads said "I looked right
into his eyes" [1]

It is probably too soon to get reliable information.

[1]
[https://twitter.com/etharkamal/status/981264092899037185](https://twitter.com/etharkamal/status/981264092899037185)

~~~
rhcom2
Definitely. Nearly all lone shootings have reports of multiple gunmen because
it is just so chaotic.

~~~
xxpor
[https://www.wnyc.org/story/breakingnews-consumers-
handbook/](https://www.wnyc.org/story/breakingnews-consumers-handbook/)

The Breaking News Consumer's Handbook: Active Shooter Edition

------
busterarm
Not surprised that somebody who would do this:
[http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut-peta-protests-
milit...](http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut-peta-protests-militarys-
use-pigs-training-2009aug13-htmlstory.html) would someday become responsible
for something violent towards a person or persons.

Edit: I definitely support animal welfare, in particular, the Humane Society.
PETA is its own brand of crazy though.

------
jshap70
Looks like he made it out ok
[https://twitter.com/Lavrusik/status/981263546460774400](https://twitter.com/Lavrusik/status/981263546460774400)

~~~
Analemma_
Wow, gotta love the journalist asking him for an interview when he was still
barricaded and hiding:
[https://twitter.com/NadineatABC/status/981261561057759232](https://twitter.com/NadineatABC/status/981261561057759232).
That's not even bottom-feeding anymore, I don't think there's a word for
whatever that is.

(Edit: screenshot for when it is inevitably deleted:
[https://imgur.com/a/GEtR4](https://imgur.com/a/GEtR4))

~~~
Graffite
This isn't the first time she's done this:
[https://www.salon.com/2012/12/15/abc_producer_earns_internet...](https://www.salon.com/2012/12/15/abc_producer_earns_internets_hate_for_tweeting_at_newtown_relatives/)

~~~
rmidthun
Warning: That link was replaced with a "your machine might be infected, call
us now!" type scam.

~~~
rspeer
Wow, great to see how responsible Salon is being with their ad network, after
they decided to inflict cryptocurrency-mining malware on their visitors who
use ad-blockers. It's like the Forbes thing, but stupider.

salon.com should be considered a compromised site that is unsafe to visit.

------
minimaxir
A good account from a YouTube PM:
[https://twitter.com/tdd/status/981262640830754817](https://twitter.com/tdd/status/981262640830754817)

~~~
huac
i liked the part where he called an uber to an active shooting scene

~~~
izzygomez
We are all taking ubers/lyfts back home from a different Google building in
the area per police/company protocol.

Source: I'm a YT employee working out of 901 Cherry Ave.

------
sna1l
Some live updates:
[https://twitter.com/erinjeanc](https://twitter.com/erinjeanc)

------
EngineerBetter
I hope everyone is safe.

Please, America: sort it out. Politics aside, it hurts to see this stuff
happening again and again so needlessly.

~~~
oh_sigh
Any ideas? Banning handguns and jilted lovers or angry people is a whole
different ballgame than banning automatic weapons or the sort.

~~~
celticninja
Banning firearms in general worked for the UK and Australia, 2 places that
have experienced this type of massacre while having a significant number of
legally held firearms. Since the firearm bans there has been a huge reduction
in these types of incidents. It is entirely possible to do the same in the
USA, however it may take longer to remove all weapons simply because you have
been so slow to respond to this problem.

Basically when things like this happen and people think that the government
are going to take their guns, a certain type of person will buy more guns,
just in case. If there is a gun amnesty or ban then these people will not turn
in their guns, it will be these guns that are then sold illegally or stolen
and will perpetuate the problem for longer.

~~~
thatswrong0
Banning firearms in general won't work in America. There are already more guns
than people in circulation, the right to own them is codified into the
Constitution and requires an amendment to fix (and amendments are ridiculously
hard to pass), and of course there's the huge section of the population that
would probably rather die than let their right to own guns be infringed. Not
to mention that we do have a giant border with Mexico to our south that would
probably make any attempt to remove all guns from America pointless.

~~~
seanmcdirmid
Many of those guns are smuggled out to Latin America (guns for drugs trade),
while the rest are owned by an increasingly small segment of the population.

Mexico doesn’t mass produce enough guns to feed the American market in any
significant way, and their gun laws are much more strict than ours. It’s the
other way around: the bad guys in Mexico get most of our guns from us, the gun
shops in the USA with the highest sales are near the border.

~~~
jakeogh
Then Mexico should build another wall like the one on it's southern border.

I'm serious, but the reason I have used from your comment is taking your
assumptions as true. I'm all for the wall for a different reason; countries
must control their borders or the people living there are not sovereign.

I have been to Mexico a few times (it's an awesome place!), right near the
border, and much further south, but I did not feel it was a safe place. I know
enough people with stories that I would rather not try to tell here. In
Mexico, only the criminals and police are armed. Cross the border to the US,
and volla, we all are equals. You can watch nearly endless TY* of cartel
shootouts in Mexico (on residential streets), that stuff is practically
impossible here, the elderly person down the street has weapons capable of
hitting a body 200+ meters away. Mexico will be much safer when it's not just
the criminals in the general population who can defend themselves.

It's going to be an interesting conversation when it's only US citizens that
have DRM-free DMLS systems.

*I didn't check today, but I bet the memory hole is working on that...

------
rwhitman
Live feed on CBS: [https://www.cbsnews.com/news/police-respond-youtube-
possible...](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/police-respond-youtube-possible-
shooter-today-2018-04-03-live-updates/)

------
dmode
Seems like live video here:
[https://www.pscp.tv/w/1jMJgqYERyPKL](https://www.pscp.tv/w/1jMJgqYERyPKL)

------
oh-kumudo
Stay safe people! You life matters, don't listen to those vile political
trolls that couldn't contain themselves to inject their own agenda into this
tragedy.

------
timkpaine
Does anyone have some good statistics on school-shootings vs workplace
shootings? I have to imagine the latter is far more prevalent than the former

------
jen729w
“Active shooter” is just the term used now? Does anyone know how that came to
be?

It sounds like a too-calm euphemism that an interest group thought up.

~~~
gkoberger
There's a long Wikipedia article about it that's interesting:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_shooter](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_shooter)

But basically, it's a law enforcement term for someone looking to randomly
kill as many people as possible, without a specific victim. So, no need for
hysterics – it's just a police term.

~~~
oiannahahah
what hysterics?

~~~
gkoberger
That's a response to "It sounds like a too-calm euphemism that an interest
group thought up."

------
tzakrajs
Can we get any more detail on this from people over in San Bruno? Be safe!
Thoughts are with you.

~~~
machinesmachine
tweets man, nearly live feed, its scary

~~~
isostatic
> its scary

So is 'Saw'. Doesn't make it true.

------
nerfhammer
[https://twitter.com/etharkamal/status/981264092899037185](https://twitter.com/etharkamal/status/981264092899037185)

~~~
matte_black
Reports of “guy in full body armor”. Keep this in mind later to see if it’s
true.

Usually it isn’t.

~~~
stevenwoo
Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable and this sort of mistaken
memory is to be expected. Wonder what that guy actually saw - just a bulky
person or law enforcement or just repeating what someone else mistakenly
thought they saw.

------
mattsfrey
Pretty incredible to see people making jokes in response to the tweet
literally in real time. Journalists trying to get him to call them and give
updates. Our society is completely fucked.

~~~
ggregoire
Pretty incredible to see as first response “If you had a gun may not need to
hide”. From an European point of view.

~~~
rmdashrfroot
Is it not true? What did they do in response to an active shooter? They called
the police and SWAT -- _people with guns_.

~~~
toomuchtodo
> Is it not true? What did they do in response to an active shooter? They
> called the police and SWAT -- people with guns

 _Qualified_ people with guns (ideally).

~~~
rmdashrfroot
America's obsession with credentials at its finest... _these people are
allowed to have guns because we say so, but no one else! (except those pesky
criminals and shooters who don 't abide by laws)_

~~~
toomuchtodo
I own an AR15 and a shotgun. Law enforcement is the right call for rapid
response versus someone like myself with limited range time.

I don't care about your credentials; if you have actual training, that's what
matters. Your average civilian has almost no training, therefore law
enforcement is the preferred response. Can you prove training without
credentials? Certainly, but we're not all going to the range together to see
who we are and aren't going to trust to respond to active shooters.

~~~
komali2
It's not just the training in a broad sense - if you're armed with your
concealed carry, and you witness a shooting, are you duty-sworn to act?

Put it another way, in that it actually happened: If you're duty sworn to act,
and _don 't_, are you partly responsible for further deaths? See: The on-
campus resource officer for a recent highschool shooting who _did_ hide.

I for one support a _clear_ division between who is responsible for general
civilian safety. I draw the line at buckling my seatbelt and not drinking
cleaning product - beyond that, I don't think I should be in charge of making
sure I don't get shot, or smashed into by a drunk driver, or ensuring the
train I get on doesn't derail. I want my government to take care of that and
I'm happy to pay for it.

~~~
banned1
The country was founded on the notion that all you have is the right to life,
liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. So I rather defend myself.

If you want to “happily pay for” your own protection, you should hire your own
bodyguard. I don’t want my taxes to go to your protection just because you
want the government to solve all your problems.

~~~
komali2
The community is better at self defense than the individual.

If your family member was murdered while you were out, do you have the
expertise to find out who did it and meter justice?

Do you have the resources to guarantee mutually assured destruction with
another community?

~~~
banned1
"The community is better at self defense than the individual." \- Not sure
what this means. My own experience comes from someone abusing someone at a
bus. Nobody intervenes. Just a bunch of sheep until I have to say "Stop it".
So while the community may be better defending, they don't, and it is up to
the individual to secure his / her own protection.

If my family was murdered while I was out, then by definition I cannot defend
them. The law system will take care of it presumably, but that is not
"defense", it is post-fact "justice."

Unclear what your mutually destruction comment was.

~~~
komali2
In your first example - why aren't there more assaults on buses? Why wasn't
there a gang member on the bus demanding a secondary fare or "protection fee"?
Because your taxes pay for a local police department and a federal policing
force. I'm not talking about "bystander effect" here, I'm talking about
government resources designed to protect the population at whole. Isolated
incidents will still happen. The Law, and Government, is about doing as much
good as possible.

Your family is de-facto defended from murder because it is harder to commit
murder and get away with it when the FBI exists, generating criminal
investigation resources and distributing them among local police detectives.
Your taxes pay for this and are protecting you _right now_. The very
_existence_ of a justice system is preventing crime. Not all crime, obviously,
but a great deal. The remainder is more a socioeconomic failure of this
country than a justice system failure (or, a justice system failure in that
the war on drugs is policy failure enforced by the justice system).

Mutually assured destruction is more a macro-comment. Why aren't hordes of
Russian barbarians coming over the hill? Because the US exerts its sovereignty
within its borders. Why doesn't an organized community (government) challenge
that? Because both communities would be vaporized.

Since we're on the subject, your taxes are a much cheaper way to get clean
water, medicine that you are guaranteed actually contains the active
ingredients you're looking for, food that won't poison you, and ensure that
the city upriver doesn't dump toxic waste into the river. If you wanted to
"take care of those problems yourself," you'd be running around like a
headless chicken. Communitize, instead.

------
fish2000
Vice has it: [https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/qvx3wp/active-shooter-
re...](https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/qvx3wp/active-shooter-reported-at-
youtubes-headquarters-in-california?utm_source=vicetwitterus)

------
jrobn
As a US citizen hearing about __another __mass shooting, I 'm honestly not
shocked. There will be more next month as well until eventually they will
become the "price" of our great "freedom". Sickening.

Edit: Not sure why people are down voting my comment. America has a gun
violence problem[1].

[1] [https://www.vox.com/policy-and-
politics/2017/10/2/16399418/u...](https://www.vox.com/policy-and-
politics/2017/10/2/16399418/us-gun-violence-statistics-maps-charts)

~~~
DanBC
One mass shooting a month would be a drastic reduction. The US had 30 mass
shootings by the end of February.

[https://www.abc15.com/news/data/mass-shootings-in-the-us-
whe...](https://www.abc15.com/news/data/mass-shootings-in-the-us-when-where-
they-have-occurred-in-2018)

(terrible music choice for that autoplaying video).

In 2017 there were over 340 mass shootings. The US has nearly one mass
shooting per day.

~~~
ams6110
From your link:

"There doesn't seem to be an official definition for a "mass shooting" in the
United States, but according to the Gun Violence Archive, a mass shooting is
described as four or more individuals being shot or killed in the same general
time and location."

So, that doesn't specifically say that the shootings are by the same person or
even related. It would include any given day in Chicago, which had on average
7 shootings per day in 2017[1]. Yet nobody was really holding rallies or
protests about that, because it's mostly inner city gang-related shootings,
and Chicago is already heavily gun-controlled which doesn't support the
narrative that we need more laws regarding guns in order to protect the
children.

[1] [https://www.cbsnews.com/news/chicago-sees-drop-in-
homicides-...](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/chicago-sees-drop-in-homicides-
shootings-in-2017/)

~~~
DanBC
> So, that doesn't specifically say that the shootings are by the same person
> or even related.

It's baffling that these threads always have people saying "sure, a bunch of
people got shot and some of them died but that's not gun violence".

------
bitxbitxbitcoin
More information from local news: [http://www.kron4.com/news/bay-
area/possible-active-shooter-a...](http://www.kron4.com/news/bay-
area/possible-active-shooter-at-youtube-in-san-bruno/1098585330)

~~~
rokhayakebe
Can you please remove this link. It seems it hijacks the browser session.

~~~
paulcole
What do you mean by this? It's a link to a local news site.

~~~
myko
It looks like it may have a malicious ad or something. It takes over my entire
session and says my bank information has been stolen. It locked up Chrome as
well and I had to kill the process myself (on Windows).

~~~
calebh
I've had problems with malicious ads redirecting me lately. I began to suspect
that my phone was infected, but it turns out that this is now a common
occurrence:

[https://www.wired.com/story/pop-up-mobile-ads-surge-as-
sites...](https://www.wired.com/story/pop-up-mobile-ads-surge-as-sites-
scramble-to-stop-them/)

I don't know why the ad platforms even allow custom JavaScript...

~~~
jsgo
I don't even understand why governments haven't made a case of this generally
speaking. If an ad network allows this kind of behavior, they can be blocked
by countries. Sites won't want networks that can't serve traffic in as many
countries as possible, so it should solve itself.

And it isn't that far removed from what happened to Podesta or whatever. They
could make it a case that it is important to the state.

