Talk:Westroads Mall shooting

message: I noticed that the MIP for alcohol is mentioned as a misdemeanor, but the other misdemeanor is not mentioned.  As it reads right now, the article seems to be saying that the MIP has something to do with it specifically (uncited claim), from the impression it gives, though not outright stated.  In order to fix this POV problem, if someone knows the other misdemeanor, please add that in there too.  That gives the information without drawing conclusions, removing the emphasis on the MIP by including the other. KV(Talk) 15:15, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm going to call it POV in the meantime KV(Talk) 13:24, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I added the other charges, and removed the tag.  Someone replaced the tag.  Did I forget something? - NGC6254 (talk) 23:11, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *The reason nobody has been able to find information on the second misdemeanor is because it was a juvenile case and those records are confidential under Nebraska State law: http://www.hhs.state.ne.us/newsroom/features/docs/hawkins/timeline.pdf Cumulus Clouds (talk) 23:39, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, that should fix it then, as long as it's all mentioned.  Otherwise the article gives the impression that the alcohol was the source of the shooting by mentioning that and not whatever else was happening.  A puritanical bias if you will.  Either mention it all or none of it, preferrably all of it though, imo, I'm an inclusionist.  KV(Talk) 13:43, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you feel that this matter is resolved, please remove the tag. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 01:55, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

text: *Since this discussion seems to be only referring to "The shooter" section, I'm changing the tag. - NGC6254 (talk) 01:49, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

text: *Would removing this phrase solve the problem? --> "..one of which was underage possession of alcohol." - NGC6254 (talk) 08:40, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  perpetrator pov 

message: All entrances to the Westroads Mall are posted to prevent citizens with concealed carry permits from being able to intervene in such a situation. Laboros (talk) 21:41, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There would be huge legal issues with allowing wild west style shootouts in one of their malls for hostage or holdup situations. But I don't think any of this really relates to this incident at all, unless you can find a source that discusses it. JayKeaton (talk) 06:18, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Westroads Mall Posted Against Concealed Carry 

message: I removed this edit, as Hawkins' article is a redirect to this one, and that could create confusion (for example, people may click on his link, think that the page didn't load, and keep clicking 'til the death of the universe). However, that got me thinking; is he going to get his own article? He's certainly notable enough. Master of Puppets Care to share? 03:36, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You will find your answer in the archives; there has been much discussion on this topic already.  I probably wouldn't mind putting this in a "refactored discussions" section on the top of the talk page so people would know.  Tuxide (talk) 05:09, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah. I suppose after more information has come out we'll revisit the topic. Master of Puppets Care to share? 05:23, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Robert A. Hawkins article 

message: Surely we shouldn't give the perpetrator the fame he desired?  It would be accurate to say the "the shooter/gunman/criminal" did X, but do we have to perpetuate the problem that the next copycat will do the same, safe in the knowledge that they will be guaranteed fame? 
I would prefer that they be denounced as "the complete loser", but to maintain a neutral POV, we shouldn't use names or pictures of the culprit. Likewise, we shouldn't publish their blogs, notes, etc. Their evil doings earns their entire memory a one-way trip to society's rubish heap.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.139.175.141 (talk) 07:58, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please read most of this page Wikipedia:NOT JayKeaton (talk) 06:16, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Note that on January 11, someone has been repeatedly editing the article to replace the name of the shooter with "loser", as well as other vandalism.  The IP doesn't match the above unsigned comment asking to call the shooter "complete loser", but it's worth noting. Clockster (talk) 04:07, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Denial of Reward 

message: Further news reports and investigations have stated that there were multiple weapons in the Omaha, Nebraska mall shooting on Dec,5.  Police detectives have stated that the gunman, Robert A. Hawkins, was also weilding two semi auto-matic hand guns that he did not use in the shooting, but were found on his body. I think that this information should be included in the news report on this subject.≤diphuntanddrink≥  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Diphuntanddrink (talk • contribs) 15:06, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It appears that your conflict with the term assault rifle stems from two seperate definitions.  With regard to military use you are correct, assault rifle would probably not be applicable, however with regard to civilian firearms the weapon used by Hawkins is was covered by the Federal Assault Weapons Ban and therefore I believe the term is applicable.  Also the most recent reports i've seen have named the weapon an AK-47, it was the earliest reports (which naturally are the least reliable) that name the weapon a SKS. Parsival74 (talk) 05:49, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for replying! The Assault Weapons Ban actually refers to "assault weapons," which, if you look at the article, are essentially defined by looking scary, not any particular feature. The SKS used was not an assault rifle, but it was an assault weapon. See the difference? Assault rifle is the military term; assault weapon is the legal one. Also, you have apparently ignored my citation of the sheriff's report that it was an SKS. Although the media has widely (and inaccurately) called it an AK-47 (based, I believe, on a picture that was released and the cosmetic similarity of the two firearms), I'm going to trust the sheriff on this one. I don't really feel like edit warring, though... --MatthewLiberal (talk) 21:28, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

text: An update: the current citation is based on a Google News report that AK-47 ammunition was found at his father's house. Of course, the SKS and the AK-47 both use 7.62mm, so that's not proof that it was an AK-47. Again, I will trust the sheriff here. --MatthewLiberal (talk) 21:31, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

text: All of the newer sources state it was an AK-47.  The sheriff also claimed it was an SKS that used 7.66 (sic) ammo which is clearly incorrect.  Let's stick to the newer sources, rather than insisting on citing with the older ones, that had claimed it was an SKS erroneously.  Yaf (talk) 21:58, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There seems to be a consensus against me, so let's agree to AK-47 for now. I'll keep checking the news, though ;D Thanks for your input!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by MatthewLiberal (talk • contribs) 22:33, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, it was in all likelyhood an AK-47 rifle. Note how I didn't add any politically-charged adjectives to that description :) WP:NPOV and all. All the more recent sources describe it as such, and, the Sheriff may not have been working from firsthand experience, or, may not in general be great at identifying firearms. I recall, in training, there were a few officers there, taking the same course, for recertification. I got a good chuckle out of it, when one of the other folks in my group, took an interest in one officer's sidearm (he was looking to get a baby glock himself). He asked the officer "Is that a glock 23 or 27?", not knowing that much about them at the time himself. The officer responded with "No, it's a Glock 40" (For those of you that aren't familiar with glocks, there is no "Glock 40", .40SW is the caliber of the firearm). :) Not to say he was bad with the sidearm, heck, he outshot me. Just illustrating, that the police aren't always the end-all-be-all, when it comes to firearm identification, particularly when it comes to arms that are fairly similar. SQLQuery me! 01:25, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weapons column in news report concerning the weapons used in the Omaha, Nebraska mall shooting. 

message: The article alternates between 3 and 4 injured.  KETV has an article from 2007-12-22 that lists it at five injured, including one person who did not seek medical assistance.  Since this seems like an area that could lead to dispute on different sources I wanted to post here instead of updating myself. Big Merl (talk) 22:39, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We've discussed that before; however, two weren't injured by the gunman, but rather in other ways (one hit his head on a counter or something, I think). Those weren't included. I'll get you a diff in a second... Master of Puppets Care to share? 22:48, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Here you go. Not exactly a diff, but that works better in my opinion. Master of Puppets Care to share? 22:51, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I updated the article per the Omaha World Herald and KETV, with the report of another injury by a bullet fragment. Shawn W (talk) 22:52, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good, just make sure to check your s before you save.  Master of Puppets Care to share? 22:54, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Number Injured 

message: Thank you ThreeOneFive for nominating this as a Good Article.  Thanks to the actions of several editors, this is a concise, well-written article which spans all pertinent information.  It's well-researched with terrific sources and appears to be stable.  My only concern was with using 2 images from news sources, but fair use rationales were applied correctly. Clockster (talk) 11:35, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: As one of the editors of this article, I greatly appreciate the kudos. - NGC6254 (talk) 16:46, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good Article 

message: The shooter allegedly posted a forum on 4chan saying he was taking a gun to Westwoods mall in Omaha, Nebraska. 
Will post a picture when needed.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.184.135.203 (talk) 22:19, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prior to the Shooting 

message: Two very, very cynical memes were made out of quotes from Robert Hawkins’ suicide note: ‘I DIDN'T EAT THAT FUCKIN [sic] SANDWICH OR THAT TOILET THING EITHER!’ and ‘I fuckin [sic] you guys]’. You can find them both on Encyclopædia Dramatica (not for the faint of heart... naturally). Should they be on this article? Siúnrá (talk) 16:39, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Memes 

message: Just follow this link. It will explain it.
http://funnyjunk.com/funny_pictures/1305037/I+am+now+officially+afraid+of+4chan/
Anyone think that it should be included in the article?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.163.134.204 (talk) 01:00, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: To what purpose? It doesn't add anything useful or important, and is unverifiable. (I've seen that image in several places. Reposted does not mean verified.) -- Erik Siers (talk) 03:03, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible 4chan connection? 

message: Isn't the story of Robert A. Hawkins the plot of the song Pumped up Kicks by the band Foster the People?
I'm not sure, but I just realized it might be. If it is, shouldn't it be mentioned in the article?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.161.184.199 (talk) 02:52, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pumped up Kicks 

message: Why is he (Hawkins), by all sources, an American and not British if he was born in the UK?
Because he was born on a US military base. Matuko (talk) 19:32, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Maybe a silly question

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Westroads Mall shooting. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071207220504/http://abcnews.go.com:80/TheLaw/story?id=3958863&page=1 to http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=3958863&page=1
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Offline 01:06, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Westroads Mall shooting. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20081029152550/http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hVYXjOfGYMebpWYh7i02fTan43VQD8TGTGT80 to http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hVYXjOfGYMebpWYh7i02fTan43VQD8TGTGT80
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:01, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Was Robert A Hawkins Released from State Supervision after just 4 years due to him becoming 18 and the age of an adulthood or because a Medical Physician found him to no longer be a Homicidal Threat to the Public?FSI201mnovak (talk) 01:21, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why was Robert A Hawkins release from being a ward of the State: 

message: Was the Stepfather's gun secured at the time it was taken from the home? Since the Stepfather had knowledge of Hawkins history of violence and possibility of Homicidal violence toward others? Were any criminal charges brought against the stepfather as a result of this criminal act. FSI201mnovak (talk) 01:25, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Charges brought on StepFather for failing to Secure Gun 

message: Why didn't he hold UK citizenship also?, Total ignorance from me on the matter --LLcentury (talk) 19:07, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citizenship 

message: *On January 7, 2009, Rodriguez was featured on season 7 episode 77 of the Dr. Phil show*
Who is Rodriguez? 72.182.70.51 (talk) 01:50, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Context: Rodriguez?