What kind of handgun did the gunman used to kill the United Healthcare CEO?

[mehavey]

I'm concerned we're entering another era of 1970s-style political violence.)

"Entering"? I believe we're already there -- and widespread on the Left..
That was never complained about -- while it was on the Left.

But now....

> Law enforcement officials have been warning for years of a heightened risk
> of political violence from a small minority of Americans, mainly on the right,
> radicalized on social media and marinating in conspiracy theories. (emphasis added)
https://www.nbcnews.com/investigatio...ate-rcna183017

But in fact....
"Checking people’s profiles, it’s coming from across the political spectrum: leftists,
normie Dems, MAGA, a libertarian or two, and many people whose presence on here
is otherwise entirely apolitical.”
(Op Cit)

That has changed.

Interesting thing is that it's likely to fan the flamed of nationalized healthcare, and
that's jumping from the frying pan to an absolute blazing inferno.

That... and more "gun control.'

Watch for it

[TunnelRat]

Originally Posted by 44 AMP

Whether he illegally built or illegally bought his silencer, it seems to me that someone who could do that would TEST the gun with the silencer on it, with the ammo he was going to use, and if so, then he would know what the combination would do, and allow for that in his plans.

While I agree that’s the prudent thing to do, I don’t think that’s a given. What we here on this forum might do with our experience with firearms versus what some layman might do are not always the same. Owning a firearm and its accessories is not proof positive of experience.

Over the course of just this year there have been some rather high profile examples of people attempting to commit violence with questionable levels of planning. As I said above, this seems to have been a competent attempt. A shooter that was proficient enough to hit his target repeatedly (yes even though from close range), who ambushed the shooter from behind not allowing the target the chance to see it coming (even if that would be personally satisfying), a shooter who attempted to hide his sound signature, who then could deal with the malfunctions associated with that suppression, who purported stashed a bicycle nearby for an escape, who decided to escape into as large and complex of a public space as Central Park, and who attempted to hide his face in that vicinity.

I’ve seen responses to this vary between, “He was a trained assassin!”, to, “So what, anyone with a brain would have done the same.” I think this incident represents someone who was dedicated (you can be dedicated to something that may not be inherently good, I am not complementing the shooter). If this was someone who had been impacted by United Healthcare, this isn’t a typical crime of passion, imo. This seems fairly methodical to me. I do agree with Tom that the rampant comments I’ve seen online of people treating this man as some sort of Robin Hood are concerning.

[JohnKSa]

...it seems to me that someone who could do that would TEST the gun with the silencer on it, with the ammo he was going to use, and if so, then he would know what the combination would do, and allow for that in his plans.

I think he did. That's why after the first shot, he immediately cycled the action instead of trying to shoot a second time and then spending time diagnosing why the trigger didn't work for the second shot.

Found another link and watched the video again. When the first shot breaks, he immediately hand cycles the slide for the second shot.

I'm not going to post the link because the site is questionable and is doing some hinky stuff that is probably not secure.

[buckhorn_cortez]

No one has commented on how effective the extremely strict New York City gun laws were in this incident...

[44 AMP]

While I agree that’s the prudent thing to do, I don’t think that’s a given. What we here on this forum might do with our experience with firearms versus what some layman might do are not always the same. Owning a firearm and its accessories is not proof positive of experience.

I think the only thing in life that is a "given" is that life ends.

I'd say the successful attack and escape demonstrates the killer's competence in that regard.

It has been reported (accuracy unverified) that the "person of interest" traveled by bus from a southern state to NYC, and stayed in a NYC "hostel" using a fake New Jersy ID. The details of the attack indicate he knew who his target was, and where and when he would be at a certain location. He used a weapon with a silencer device (not something you can just pick up at Sportsman's Warehouse) and the video shows no confusion or hesitation when the pistol did not function as a semi automatic, and it seems he had his escape route planned and prepared in advance.

He did what he set out to do, and he got away. Random chance/blind luck might account for some, or possibly all of that, but, I doubt it,

[FrankenMauser]

I haven't seen mention of it in this thread, yet; but there are multiple designs available now for reliable 3D-printed suppressors for 9mm and 'lower powered' cartridges.
They have been shown to be worth the $200 tax stamp, as far as effectiveness and durability.
There are also at least a dozen effective designs for 3dp baffles, which use a fuel filter housing for the suppressor body and end caps.
And, of course, there's the straight-up option of an unmodified fuel filter or oil filter. (Such as the Wix 4003 series.)

Obviously, some people that have built the above options didn't bother with the tax stamp.

[TunnelRat]

Originally Posted by buckhorn_cortez

No one has commented on how effective the extremely strict New York City gun laws were in this incident...

While I get where you’re going with this comment, I don’t think pointing out that reality represents a “win”.

Assuming the shooter did come from out of state, someone who is in favor of more gun control could easily spin this to point out that maybe if other states had similar levels of gun control then this wouldn’t have happened. Do I believe that personally? To me the assassination of Shinzo Abe in Japan illustrates that if there is a will there is a way. However, someone coming from a state with less restrictive gun control into a state with more restrictive gun control and then committing a crime with a firearm that was in their possession illegally at that time and place doesn’t, in my experience, convince gun control advocates that gun control failed. Some people will view that as a reason to double down on gun control nationwide.

[Metric]

Originally Posted by TunnelRat

While I get where you’re going with this comment, I don’t think pointing out that reality represents a “win”.

Assuming the shooter did come from out of state, someone who is in favor of more gun control could easily spin this to point out that maybe if other states had similar levels of gun control then this wouldn’t have happened. Do I believe that personally? To me the assassination of Shinzo Abe in Japan illustrates that if there is a will there is a way. However, someone coming from a state with less restrictive gun control into a state with more restrictive gun control and then committing a crime with a firearm that was in their possession illegally at that time and place doesn’t, in my experience, convince gun control advocates that gun control failed. Some people will view that as a reason to double down on gun control nationwide.

I call that the "True gun control has never been tried" narrative. Needs to be preemptively mocked.

[Metric]

Originally Posted by Tom Servo

(What worries me is that people are coming out of the woodwork to imply this sort of thing is justified if the victim is an "evil CEO." Given events over the last couple of years, I'm concerned we're entering another era of 1970s-style political violence.)

Not like the 1970's. Anyone who is unfamiliar should look up the 4th Turning, and recent interviews by Neil Howe, who has been predicting this since the 1990's: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yn0ThI...cgbmVpbCBob3dl

We are in the early stages of the 4th Turning now, and it's projected to reach maximum intensity around 2030, or shortly thereafter. The outcome will likely determine a new equilibrium for the next 80-some years.

The last three 4th Turnings (in America) culminated in WW2, the American Civil War, and the Revolutionary War.

Due to the fact that WW2 established a new global order, I expect this one to go global as well. The growing tensions in Europe and Asia appear to support this.

[Double Naught Spy]

Wellrod? Appears rear top ported https://www.newsweek.com/what-we-kno...nation-1997033

[mehavey]

https://www.newsweek.com/what-we-kno...nation-1997033

Duuuuuh.......
See https://thefiringline.com/forums/sho...4&postcount=13

[JohnKSa]

Probably not. The bolt has to be twisted and pulled to eject, then manually pushed forward and twisted closed.

1. The video appears to show a person manually cycling a standard semi-auto, not doing the twist pull, push twist that a Welrod type pistol would require.
2. Although the video is blurry, the characteristic cutout on top of the Welrod doesn't appear to be present.
3. There's a clear puff of smoke from the breech area upon firing which would not happen with the Welrod type action.
4. Ian, of Forgotten Weapons who has fired Welrod type pistols is on record saying that after having watched the video that it was not that type of firearm.
5. If it really was a Welrod type pistol, the BATF would likely have only a few hundred fingerprints and photos to go through to locate the owner.
6. The suppressor appears to be longer than the Welrod type actions.
7. Although the video is blurry, the slide appears to be rectangular in profile, not cylindrical like the Welrod type actions.
8. The shooter appears to be grasping a conventional slide to cycle the gun rather than a knob situated at the very rear of the action.
9. At one point the gun appears to jam after a shot (beyond just needing to be manually cycled) after a shot. Since the Welrod type actions are locked closed before firing, they can't really jam like a conventional semi-auto.

My guess is that the shooter bought a threaded barrel for a conventional semi-auto pistol, made a silencer but couldn't make a booster/Nielsen device and didn't want to go on record by buying one.

Based on the video, he immediately cycles the action after the first shot suggesting that he had fired it with his setup and knew it was going to require manual cycling.

I could be wrong in all of this. We'll have to wait and see when the pistol is recovered.

[5whiskey]

I'd say the successful attack and escape demonstrates the killer's competence in that regard.

It has been reported (accuracy unverified) that the "person of interest" traveled by bus from a southern state to NYC, and stayed in a NYC "hostel" using a fake New Jersy ID. The details of the attack indicate he knew who his target was, and where and when he would be at a certain location. He used a weapon with a silencer device (not something you can just pick up at Sportsman's Warehouse) and the video shows no confusion or hesitation when the pistol did not function as a semi automatic, and it seems he had his escape route planned and prepared in advance.

He did what he set out to do, and he got away. Random chance/blind luck might account for some, or possibly all of that, but, I doubt it,

This is my take honestly. I don't know that we should run around screaming "professional hitman," but we should acknowledge this occurred in broad daylight in Manhatten, against a very prominent victim, police were called within moments, the shooter had a little more than a basic modicum of firearm proficiency, and most of all... one of the largest law enforcement agencies on this planet, with near infinite resources to bear if focused on one infamous crime, along with assistance from the FBI itself, has yet to identify who this man is.

They have him on cameras all over NYC... but he remains anonymous. This guy isn't amateur hour. Maybe not a professional Sicario, but he's no chump.

Honestly this is a case I think investigators should keep an open mind on. Sure the popular theory is that this is someone who was denied coverage, especially based on the message on the shell casings. While that very well may have been the killer's motivation, and that theory certainly can't be discarded, I would do all of the traditional investigative strategies as well... such as considering who may benefit from the victims death. Based on the who the victim is, it would be very easy to lead investigators down a politics-motivated dead end when they really need to investigate messages sent by a potential heir or life insurance beneficiary.


And lastly, and to me the most important of all... perhaps this will be a nail in the coffin of acceptance of public masking.

[TunnelRat]

Originally Posted by 5whiskey

And lastly, and to me the most important of all... perhaps this will be a nail in the coffin of acceptance of public masking.

To me that would be a gross overreaction. There are medical reason someone might wear a mask. If my right to own a suppressor shouldn't be lost as a function of this event, and my right should remain, then my right to wear a mask should remain as well.

[mehavey]

We'll have to wait and see....

That ( ^^^ ) we can agree on.

[5whiskey]

To me that would be a gross overreaction. There are medical reason someone might wear a mask. If my right to own a suppressor shouldn't be lost as a function of this event, and my right should remain, then my right to wear a mask should remain as well.

To me that would NOT be an overreaction at all. There have been laws against adults traipsing around in public places with their faces covered so as to conceal their identity for decades in many states. Actually strike decades, more like over a century. It was long ago recognized that there is oft no good intent in covering your face during routine day to day interactions, barring a few isolated exceptions. I do understand that some elderly or immunocompomised individuals do wear mask as a precaution. Please also understand that theives and robbers (and now murderers) often use masks to conceal their identity while committing crimes. A number of laws are written with a desire to address both concerns, both making it illegal to prance around masked up while you commit crimes but also providing medical exceptions for bona fide needs. I mentioned not one word about a suprresor... although the use of masks to conceal identities during crimes outnumbers the use of suppressors by a VERY VERY wide margin.

[44 AMP]

This is my take honestly. I don't know that we should run around screaming "professional hitman," but we should acknowledge this occurred in broad daylight in Manhatten, against a very prominent victim, police were called within moments, the shooter had a little more than a basic modicum of firearm proficiency, and most of all... one of the largest law enforcement agencies on this planet, with near infinite resources to bear if focused on one infamous crime, along with assistance from the FBI itself, has yet to identify who this man is.

A couple of points worth considering, first one being that "professionals" get PAID. Competence, and great skill are not requirements, only enough skill to do the job to your employer's satisfaction is needed.

Broad daylight in one of the worlds largest cities? Bold, but possibly easier than somewhere else at a different time. Hiding in plain sight can be very effective in some circumstances.

"more than a basic modicum of firearms proficiency" ?? Define that, please. Shooting an unsuspecting victim 3 times in the back at short range, even with a manually operated repeater is not a feat requiring great skill or proficiency.

perhaps this will be a nail in the coffin of acceptance of public masking.

I doubt that, considering that only a few years ago the government REQUIRED us to be masked in public.

[TunnelRat]

Originally Posted by 5whiskey

It was long ago recognized that there is oft no good intent in covering your face during routine day to day interactions.

Past laws and practices can have value, and they can also be wrong. Just because something was done in the past doesn't inherently mean it needs to be done now.

Originally Posted by 5whiskey

Please also understand that theives and robbers (and now murderers) often use masks to conceal their identity while committing crimes.

Sure, and I am no more convinced that laws against masks will stop those crimes than I am that laws against guns/suppressors will stop those crimes.

It's not that I haven't thought of your points or that I don't understand where you're coming from, but I personally do not agree with banning masking even with those points. If you do, fair enough, vote accordingly.

[L-2]

Somebody on whatever news I was watching on TV mentioned a B&T Station Six, which I'd not heard of previously and have zero experience with as I've not even read the referenced website:

https://bt-usa.com/products/station-six-9/

12/10/24 edit.
Now that a suspect is in custody, the news is now reporting the suspect was in-possession of a 3D-printed-gun at the time of arrest. So far, no firearm was located nearby the shooting in NYC. I've not heard any further speculation on the murder weapon being a B&T Station Six.

[5whiskey]

My comment was meant to be taken as a whole, not dissecting half of the points. I'm tracking that hitting a target and manually cycling a slide is not next level... but it does mean that it's likely that wasn't the first time the offender fired that pistol, and he was more than base level familiar. I've taught all of my kids to shoot (save my youngest, who is still a touch young). Even after a number of sessions, and even after all of them started becoming proficient at marksmanship, I would often see blank stares for a few moments if there was a FTF or the weapon was empty.

And yes, "hiding in plain sight" is a legit thing. Don't glaze over the fact that this guy is in the wind despite vast quantities of camera footage... and apparently the fingerprints and DNA that NYPD was hoping would solve this has turned up nil on an identification, unless it's being withheld from the public (possible... if the FBI and Marshalls are preparing kick in his door as we discuss it). Usually fingerprints or DNA take a little time to come back, but a rush request can make DNA be processed and run through CODIS in a couple days. Fingerprints... hours. This guy out some forethought to this, and used a level of discipline, that most people can't or won't do.

[5whiskey]

It's not that I haven't thought of your points or that I don't understand where you're coming from, but I personally do not agree with banning masking even with those points. If you do, fair enough, vote accordingly

I briefly thought about responding more in depth, but I think that comment is the best way to leave this. That feeling is completely mutual, I understand there are exceptions where masking should be not be outlawed. But I also feel there should be a general skepticism with a ~30 year old running around in public constantly wearing a surgical mask. That said, if you feel that way I respect that and... as you told me... vote accordingly.

[TunnelRat]

Originally Posted by 5whiskey

But I also feel there should be a general skepticism with a 30 year old running around in public constantly wearing a surgical mask.

I think in a world where public surveillance is as prominent as it is today (far more so than in times passed, especially going back 100 years as you mentioned), by both government and private entities, that if an individual wants to maintain a level of privacy by wearing a mask while engaging in legal activities that is their call. Not everyone wearing a mask is committing a crime, just like not everyone owning a firearm is committing a crime. I see the issues as similar. To be clear, I only wear a mask when I am actively sick and knowingly contagious (even though I am not elderly) to avoid getting others sick. However, I wanted to mention privacy because I have seen that argument as well.

I brought up the suppressor point above because there are already those that have called for bans on suppressors in response to this murder. Those individuals likely do not own or care to own suppressors, so banning a thing they don't care about it is of no consequence to them. That is human nature. I'm far from perfect, but I try to consider the intentions of others and how those intentions fit in with the notion of the "greater good". Again, for me masking is acceptable. We have a difference of opinion. I will say I can appreciate that in your examples individuals are traipsing, prancing, and running around in masks. I generally walk normally when I wear a mask as I'm usually sick, but I will vary my motion more in the future .

Originally Posted by 5whiskey

This guy out some forethought to this, and used a level of discipline, that most people can't or won't do.

I said it myself earlier, and I don't think it's a hot take either. This may not have been a Mission Impossible movie plot, but it involved more planning than other attacks we've seen.

[44 AMP]

For at least the past few hundred years in western civilization there was a general belief that honest people did not conceal their faces, OR their weapons, and that people who did were up to no good.

This general belief held true through the age of our Founders, through the wild west and through the 20th century, masked men were suspect just for being masked, and masked heroes were rare things until 20th century fiction popularized them.

Then the recent "panicdemic" and our state and Federal governments essentially ordering people to stay home, not go to work (other than certain "essential" services) and wear masks in public along with "social distancing". Without a mask, you were refused entry into those businesses still open, and if you wanted to get something to eat while out, the drive through wasn't a convenience option anymore, most places it was the ONLY option for quite some time.

when the govt orders the good guys to wear masks, that tend to blur the line more than a bit. There are people I see when I go out that are still wearing surgical masks today, then most people quit doing it when they were no longer required to do so,

There are a certain percentage of the people who call for the ban or restriction of any object used in a crime, apparently in the belief that the object is responsible and we need to have it "taken away for our own good."

We can, and have expounded often on the fallacy and flawed logic of this concept, but, people keep on doing it.

In the case of the assassination of the United Health Care CEO (and that's what it was, an assassination) the killer clearly took more than casual planning and preparation than the common street criminals and the deranged mass killers we have seen in recent decades.

This uncommon level of detailed preparation means that, for the present at least one cannot rule out the possibility that the evidence so far recovered was also part of the plan to get the investigation focused in a certain direction.

I'm thinking that if/when they catch the guy and if/when determine his actual motive they may have to write an entirely new "profile" to cover him.

The only thing I see certain at this time is that once again, the violence against someone rich and influential is being seen as a message. However it seems different segments of society are drawing different conclusions about what the message was meant to mean.

As to the exact weapon used?? My personal opinion at this time is that it will turn out to be a commonly available 9mm semi auto, with a threaded barrel and a home built suppressor. And that the shooter either knew from the start, or learned while testing that it would not cycle normally and learned how to cycle it manually, and expected to do so during the attack. Which is what the video shows he did.

[Nathan]

I’m surprised they have not found him. They could basically blood trail him using cameras and ai image processing. This exists. Feeding it the images is all that is required. The had video showing him in several places, so I would guess they are doing this. They cannot tell us because I believe the NSA/Patriot Act has the .gov folks stealing network video and asking for it later.

With an id, they cannot tell us look at financial transactions and pinpoint a home base, family/friends.

There are reasons not to go public. These are huge rights violations.

Then there is the news coverage. Thank you for all the specifics. Why has the story transitioned so quickly to other forms of gun. IMO Colion Noir is likely correct. The form factor is quite close to a Glock 19 suppressed without the gap between gun and suppressor of the mentioned device for cycling.

The lack of gun trace has nothing to do with any of this other than it needs covered to promote gun registration which still doesn’t matter and mostly exists through networked records, video and ai. The only reason to pass registration now is to make the ill gotten information admissible in court.

I’m a little stunned by the Welrod, B&T, vet gun discussion. This is a new line of discussion. How did all major networks get the same talking points. Is there something Bloomberg groups do to share a coordinated line of news coverage in the background? It is like they have a business plan to provide a coordinated story line for all national news stories….what is this? How does it work? Is it only gun control or is there a bigger citizen control project?

Does this tie to any pre-written legislation? Who is sponsoring it? Who are their donors?

Last, who is controlling the shooters? What group manages that end?

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by 5whiskey

Please also understand that theives and robbers (and now murderers) often use masks to conceal their identity while committing crimes. A number of laws are written with a desire to address both concerns, both making it illegal to prance around masked up while you commit crimes but also providing medical exceptions for bona fide needs.

Poorly crafted laws make poor public policy -- and vice versa.

In my state, personal body armor is legal to wear and own, but is illegal to wear in the commission of a crime. In fact, in most states (even the most liberal in terms of firearms ownership) it is illegal to use a firearm in the commission of a crime even though ownership and carry are otherwise legal. Masks should be treated the same. I still occasionally see someone wearing a medical-style mask in the supermarket. I think they're being silly, but I don't automatically assume they are there to rob the joint.