The motive still doesn’t make sense and there is reason to suspect that there was more to this guy than meets the eye and there are many conflicting stories. The media has stopped asking questions and moved on to Harvey Weinstein so I don’t mind if others continue to question the official narrative. I don’t think it’s dumb or malicious. It’s just part of any dialectic.
I very much think this author is dumb/malicious, considering he does NOT address “why?” and spends much self-lauding time asking stupid questions with obvious answers.
Yes, the motive remains. That’s for another thread. These 5 questions were asked, and are being answered.
He has no objective basis for “thousands of rounds”.
He has 3-5 limited photos of a large crime scene.
He takes one data point about police response time, ignoring other known facts of earlier contact, and wonders why humans didn’t just barge into a violent assault.
He makes a big deal about two identical guns out of dozens.
He tries to impute the stupidity of ignorant reporters onto the shooter’s method.
The article is a dumb/malicious mess.