The 36-year-old father who took out the Silver Rail Elementary attacker called his mom afterward and told her he had killed the gunman.
The post Man Who Took Out Elementary School Attacker Called His Mom Afterward, Told Her He’d Killed the Gunman appeared first on Breitbart.
Stringer/REUTERS
Several Ukrainian companies have developed heavy-lift drones that can evacuate wounded soldiers from the battlefield, but the risks mean they should be used only as a last resort, an official involved in these efforts told Business Insider.
Denys Lohvynenko, the drone chief at Brave1, Ukraine's state-backed innovation platform, said that heavy-lift drones provide a time-sensitive means of rescuing wounded troops in highly dangerous situations where they cannot walk on their own and other evacuation methods are unavailable.
Ukraine began developing heavy-lift drones two years ago, but the complex technical requirements took time to iron out.
On Monday, a Ukrainian military unit said that it had used a heavy drone to save a wounded soldier from the front lines, carrying out what it described as a "first-ever air evacuation."
The presence of land mines and Russian drones rendered the use of ground robots — for Kyiv, an increasingly common method of casualty evacuation — too challenging.
"In these situations, heavy-lift aerial evacuation serves as a lifeline of last resort," Lohvynenko explained in remarks shared by Brave1, which has supported the development of these drones and other war technology.
Ukraine's 92nd Separate Assault Brigade said Monday that soldiers used a six-rotor hexacopter made by the Ukrainian company Gurzuf Defense to carry out the mission. Other defense companies are working on similar technology; SkyFall, for instance, recently unveiled its own hexacopter for evacuations.
Ukrainian forces also use heavy-lift drones for logistics missions, as they can typically carry more cargo than smaller variants.
A challenge is that big drones are big targets. Samuel Bendett, a drone warfare expert at the Center for Naval Analyses, a US research organization, told Business Insider on Monday that certain elite Russian military units are focused on downing such aircraft.
Ukraine's 92nd Separate Assault Brigade/Screengrab via Telegram
Lohvynenko said Ukraine understands the risk of using large drones in and around contested airspace, as is the case along most of the front lines. So they are "reserved only for high-risk, high-priority emergencies," he said.
The heavy-lift drones have also been equipped with what he described as "additional survivability systems," including electronic warfare and alternative communications. Active protection systems could be installed in the future.
"We maintain a realistic view of the technological and operational challenges associated with aerial extraction of personnel via heavy-lift drones," Lohvynenko said.
"However, establishing this technical capability is essential," he continued, arguing that a "single life saved on the battlefield justifies every engineering hour and resource invested in this program."
Combat casualty evacuation has become increasingly robotic for Ukraine as the country's officials, companies, and military units look to replace soldiers with machines in dangerous front-line missions wherever possible.
Ground robots, in particular, are seen as crucial tools for casualty evacuation and logistics. Ukraine's defense ministry said last month that the number of these kinds of missions carried out by robots has jumped more than threefold since January.
The deployment of a heavy-lift drone for an evacuation, an unusual mission, underscores Ukraine's growing efforts to use uncrewed systems in unconventional battlefield roles.
An alleged intruder was shot by a resident Saturday morning in Mesquite, Texas, then arrested and charged by police. KDFW reported the incident occurred at 4:15 a.m. Loud banging sounds awoke the home’s residents, one of whom went to investigate. Upon
The post Alleged Intruder Shot by Resident, Arrested by Police in Mesquite, Texas appeared first on Breitbart.
Greece plans to close 187 of its 831 military camps as part of an updated force structure for 2026-2035. Defense Minister Nikos Dendias briefed members of the Standing Committee on National Defense and Foreign Affairs in a closed-door session, stressing savings from consolidating units and camps and the integration of new technologies. The camps to be […]
The post Greece plans to close 187 of its 831 military camps appeared first on Keep Talking Greece.
I've seen some say yes as to that—as an objection to gun control laws, not as an objection to the man's actions—but I don't think it's quite right.
It's true that Oregon law generally criminalizes gun possession on school property, including by people with concealed carry licenses, if the school board adopts such a no-guns-allowed policy. And apparently the Bend school in which the shooting took place indeed has such a policy.
But Oregon law recognizes a so-called "choice of evils" defense, often called a "necessity" defense, that allows people to violate a wide range of laws if it's genuinely necessary in an emergency:
(1) Unless inconsistent with other provisions of chapter 743, Oregon Laws 1971, defining justifiable use of physical force, or with some other provision of law, conduct which would otherwise constitute an offense is justifiable and not criminal when:
(a) That conduct is necessary as an emergency measure to avoid an imminent public or private injury; and
(b) The threatened injury is of such gravity that, according to ordinary standards of intelligence and morality, the desirability and urgency of avoiding the injury clearly outweigh the desirability of avoiding the injury sought to be prevented by the statute defining the offense in issue.
(2) The necessity and justifiability of conduct under subsection (1) of this section shall not rest upon considerations pertaining only to the morality and advisability of the statute, either in its general application or with respect to its application to a particular class of cases arising thereunder.
That means that, even when gun possession is otherwise criminal, it is "not criminal" when it's necessary to avoid imminent serious harm. Indeed, even felons, who are generally barred from possessing guns, may pick up a gun that's physically available to them when it's necessary for imminent self-defense:
We think that the trial judge's conclusion that ORS 161.200 [the choice of evils statute] is inapplicable to the offense of being an ex convict in possession of a firearm is incorrect. The statute contains no such express exception, and we see no justification for implying one. To the contrary, one who has been previously convicted of a felony is just as entitled to defend himself from an imminent threat of injury as is any other private citizen. We hold that the defense is available to those who have been previously convicted of a felony and, in appropriate circumstances, may justify their resort to a weapon which it would otherwise be unlawful for them to possess.
Likewise, a law-abiding gun owner may go into a school where gun possession is otherwise criminal when it's necessary to try to stop a school shooting. (Even in jurisdictions that don't formally recognize a choice-of-evils / necessity defense, the separate doctrines of self-defense or defense of others may provide a defense as to bringing a gun onto school property in such a situation, just as they provide a defense as to using the gun to kill the shooter.) And while in some situations the balancing test in the necessity defense can be vaguer than the somewhat more precise terms of the self-defense defense, carrying a gun into a no-guns zone in order to stop an apparent in-progress school shooting makes for an extraordinarily clear case for the defense.
Nor is this just a matter of prosecutorial discretion. If a prosecutor does file charges in such a situation, the gun owner can raise the defense. And if the evidence is sufficient to potentially trigger the defense (e.g., if the defendant or a witness testifies to facts that a reasonable jury may interpret as sufficing for the defense), then "the state must negate [the defense] beyond a reasonable doubt."
In this respect, the choice-of-evils defense is much like the defense-of-others defense. Killing someone is generally a crime; but the law recognizes that sometimes it's justifiable (in particular, to defend yourself or others against death or other very serious harms), and thus provides a defense-of-others affirmative defense.
Likewise, carrying a gun onto school property in Oregon is a crime when the school district forbids it. But the law recognizes that sometimes it's justifiable (in particular, to defend people against a school shooting), and thus provides a choice-of-evils affirmative defense.
Naturally, the operation of the defense depends on the good sense of prosecutors, judges, and juries—just as the operation of the self-defense and defense-of-others defense do. But it's the way our legal system deals, even if at times imperfectly, with situations where an emergency need warrants what would otherwise be illegal action (whether that otherwise illegal action would be murder, as to the shooting itself, or a weapons offense, as to the carrying of a gun onto school property).
Of course, the choice-of-evils defense doesn't work for people who want to carry guns in forbidden places simply to be prepared in case the gun is needed (the usual reason most people who carry guns do so). One can certainly debate whether schools should allow at least some people, such as teachers or other school staff who are trained and licensed, to keep guns on their persons in school.
But even if you think the Oregon law (coupled with Bend's policy) is foolish in generally criminalizing gun licensees' carrying a gun onto school property, it's not so foolish as to criminalizing their carrying a gun onto school property when necessary to stop an in-progress school shooting.
The post Did Oregon Man Who Shot the School Shooter Violate Oregon Law in Carrying Gun onto School Property? appeared first on Reason Magazine.
Ukraine got no early warning from its partners of the first wave of Russian ballistic missiles on the night of 18–19 October, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy told US senators on 19 October. He also said Starlink and Starshield terminals still stop working above certain speeds on parts of the front, and that Washington has explained neither problem. In the same video call, according to a transcript obtained by Axios, he said US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is not signing off on deliveries of Patriot interceptors and AIM-9X missiles for NASAMS that NATO countries have already paid for.
This comes as the US presses Kyiv to stop its strikes on Russian oil refineries, which Trump has blamed for high fuel prices at home. Washington supplies both the early launch warnings and the Patriot interceptors Ukraine needs against Russian ballistic missiles, and Zelenskyy says both are now failing at once, as Russia keeps firing ballistic missiles at Ukraine’s grid ahead of winter. If neither the warnings nor the interceptors come through, Ukrainian cities would face winter strikes with less notice and fewer means to stop them.
On the morning of 20 October, Zelenskyy wrote that he had spoken with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio about interceptors against ballistic missiles, early warning of Russian ballistic attacks, and restoring Starlink and Starshield. He thanked Rubio for his readiness to help and his clear position, and said they had agreed to speak again soon. He did not say whether anything had been resolved.
“We have almost no Patriot interceptors left from the US partners,” Zelenskyy told the senators.
Hegseth “has the contracts for Patriot missiles on his desk,” a Ukrainian official told the Kyiv Independent, adding that allies had already paid for them. Another senior official called the batch “significant.” One of the main channels for Ukraine’s Patriot supply is NATO’s PURL mechanism, under which allies fund purchases of US weapons for Ukraine, a senior Ukrainian military official told the outlet.
On 19 October, Zelenskyy wrote that some types of vital supplies were being delayed at the US Department of War, as the Trump administration also calls the Pentagon. He added that some political agreements had not been carried out at the working level.
A NATO official told the Kyiv Independent that PURL deliveries, including air defense, were continuing. Another said some shipments could face delays, but that political reasons were unlikely to explain them. A US government official called Ukraine’s claims “not true.” The Pentagon did not respond to the outlet.
On 18 October, Zelenskyy said on NBC that US warnings of ballistic launches had resumed after three days without them. That night, Russia launched two ballistic waves at Ukraine, and information from partners did not arrive before the first, Air Force spokesperson Yurii Ihnat said. Zelenskyy told the senators Ukraine had not received US warnings on three occasions in the past week. “We have received no clear explanation from Washington,” he said.
“All of this suggests that some political decision has been made to slow down support for us,” Zelenskyy said.
Zelenskyy told the senators he had offered US envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner a 30-day halt on strikes against Russian refineries. In return, the US would supply Patriot interceptors to cover that period. He said the envoys had shown no openness to the idea.
On 20 October, Norway announced talks in Oslo that day between Zelenskyy, Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre, and Finnish President Alexander Stubb, with Witkoff attending in person and Kushner by video.
Senator Thom Tillis said he and his colleagues remain committed to standing with Ukraine and its European allies, while Senator Richard Blumenthal wrote that bipartisan support was “clear and unequivocal” and would be expressed “in upcoming action.”
US President Donald Trump told reporters on 19 October that Washington is still sharing intelligence with Ukraine and that he did not know who ordered the throttling of Starlink, Axios reported.
“Zelensky doesn’t know what he is talking about,” Trump said.
US Army photo by Sgt. David Rincon
Intense missile and drone attacks in global conflicts are showing the US Army how it needs to train its air defenders, as well as how to protect them from threats, Army officials said.
Lessons on protecting MIM-104 Patriot surface-to-air missile systems and crews are coming in, and Army leaders say those observations are being quickly incorporated into training to help troops keep pace with evolving threats and tactics.
In their war against Ukraine, Russian forces have hunted Patriot batteries and other air-defense systems while also trying to overwhelm them with complex barrages of one-way attack drones alongside ballistic and cruise missiles, providing lessons in mobility, concealment, deception, and dispersal. The war with Iran, meanwhile, has exposed American and allied air defenders to the challenge of defending against large-scale drone and missile bombardments while managing interceptor stocks. The Army is learning those lessons, officials say.
Lt. Gen. John Rafferty, the head of Army Space and Missile Defense Command, told reporters at the Association of the United States Army conference last week that air defenders have been "probably the most aggressive community in the Army for learning lessons from Ukraine," with an emphasis on survivability and the protection of critical assets.
"How have we embraced those observations from Ukraine and then put them into action?" Rafferty said this was one of the first questions he asked when he took command earlier this year.
He said that he has seen how command teams have "put those lessons in place and how they are taking steps to protect their soldiers, to protect the critical systems of Patriots and sensors, protection, camouflage, deception, all of that."
Officials with the 32nd Army Air and Missile Defense Command told Business Insider that observations and lessons from Ukraine are shared with its headquarters at Fort Bliss, Texas, where training materials for air defense soldiers are updated. The information is also shared with the larger Army and industry partners.
The 32nd Army Air and Missile Defense Command recently transferred to Army Space and Missile Defense Command and is tasked with missile defense planning across different regions. Its responsibilities include both active defenses, such as intercepting incoming missiles, and passive measures, such as camouflage and dispersal, as well as coordinating intelligence and command-and-control.
Courtesy of the Missile Defense Agency
Rafferty and other officials said that the US war with Iran, which has stress-tested American air defense units, is providing valuable data on air defense. According to Rafferty, roughly 2,500 soldiers from his command are deployed to the Middle East, including both air defense formations and space specialists.
He said that roughly 25% to 30% of the command's air defense formations are deployed. These forces consist primarily of Patriot units and Terminal High Altitude Area Defense anti-ballistic missile defense crews.
"We're taking the things that we're seeing in the Middle East and feeding it back to the other brigades in the formation," Col. Matthew Ingils, deputy commanding officer for operations with the 32nd Army Air and Missile Defense Command, said.
Lessons include "the types of threats" as well as "the scale, the scope, the complexity of what we're seeing," and then training new formations on that insight so that individual soldiers who join an air defense unit can quickly catch up.
The conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East present different challenges, giving the Army a broader range of lessons to incorporate into its training.
To prepare to counter new threats or employ new tactics, soldiers use combat simulations that are being updated with lessons from the Middle East and Ukraine.
Current conflicts have shown the Army and broader US military that air defenses are essential for intercepting missiles and drones, protecting critical assets, and challenging aircraft.
Heavy expenditure of air-defense interceptors and other munitions, however, have raised concerns about whether the US is sufficiently stocked for future fights.
At the same time, air defenders themselves have become priority targets for enemy forces, making dispersal, camouflage, and mobility increasingly important to their survival.
Sergei Grits/AP Photo
Over two dozen US processors, chips, and other components have been found in Russia's anti-jamming antenna systems, according to Ukraine's military intelligence.
The Ukrainian agency, GUR, published a list of foreign parts on Monday that it said were discovered in 16-element Kometa modules, one of Russia's more advanced systems that help drones and ballistic missiles suppress electronic warfare and navigate the skies.
US-headquartered firms produced 28 out of 37 foreign components — or just over three-quarters — listed on Monday, per GUR.
Ten American brands and their components were identified in the catalog, posted on GUR's War and Sanctions page. These include digital processors from Intel subsidiary Altera, radio-frequency and precision components from Analog Devices, a memory chip from Micron, and supporting electronics from Texas Instruments.
Another three components are built by Chinese companies, while the other six come from Japanese, Taiwanese, and Swiss manufacturers, GUR also indicated.
In a statement to Business Insider, a Texas Instruments spokesperson said the company "strongly opposes the use of our chips in Russian military equipment."
"Any shipments of TI chips into Russia are illicit and unauthorized. We devote significant time and resources to developing, implementing, and refining policies and procedures to combat illicit diversion and keep chips out of the hands of bad actors," they added.
Intel, Analog Devices, and Micron did not immediately respond to requests for comment sent outside regular business hours by Business Insider.
The new list from GUR, which regularly publishes information on foreign parts in Russian equipment, comes as the electronic warfare race grows more vital to Ukraine's air defense.
Kyiv's forces try to stop Russian drone and missile attacks with a mix of jamming tools and interceptors, but the latter are facing difficulty as Moscow has begun mass-launching faster, jet-powered drones — the slowest of which can fly at about 185 mph.
Kometa antenna panels are among the most common anti-jamming tools on Russian long-range weapons, such as Shahed drones, Iskander-M ballistic missiles, and glide bombs.
Each antenna receives satellite signals and helps to counter jamming or spoofing.
The 16-element Kometa, which essentially has an array of 16 antennas, is one of Russia's newer versions of the system in mass production. Two years ago, Moscow was regularly using eight-element Kometas on its Shaheds instead.
Login