“JSC” = Johnson Space Center (NASA)

From what I’m hearing, it sounds like a disgruntled employee (from Jacobs Engineering, a private contractor) that was going to be fired today has decided to sit down and chat with his boss about the decision. KHOU has streaming video from the site. Reports that two shots have been fired.

This reminds me of the plot of a recent episode of Medium.

Time is of the essence when a disgruntled worker with nothing to lose takes Joe and three others hostage. Allison and Ariel are plagued by an overwhelming feeling of dread, as police mobilize to bring the hostage situation to an end.

In the episode, the employer was an engineering firm that designed satellites.

UPDATE:
Here’s a map of JSC and Building 44:

UPDATE 2:
Building 44, just north of Rocket Park, houses the communications and engineering departments. It is used to test communication equipment for the space shuttle and International Space Station. There are several labs inside.

UPDATE 3:
HPD and NASA have scheduled a 4:30 p.m. news conference.

-Just before 2:30 PM, HPD called about shots fired
-SWAT was called, has now taken inner perimeter
-Suspect is a white male, 50-60 years old, 1 weapon (handgun)
-No motive known at this point
-NASA has sent employees home for the day
-Confirmed 2 shots fired, no confirmation of whether anyone’s been shot
-Negotiators are trying to establish communication with Suspect

UPDATE 4:
Tragedy. 2 dead.

From HPD Captain Dwayne Ready: While negotiators were trying to establish communication with the gunman, he shot himself, fatally. One (male) hostage was killed (presumably early on in the standoff) and another (female) hostage was bound with tape and is still alive. Weapon was a snubnose .38 or .357.

1. So tell me guys, is this a gun-free zone?

   Comment by endorendil — 4:47 pm
   

2. Yep. Federal property. Goes to show that banning guns is meaningless.

   Comment by Texas Rainmaker — 4:49 pm
   

3. No, it shows that once you allow them in private hands, you can’t stop them from showing up anywhere.

   Comment by endorendil — 4:19 pm
   

4. Just this morning A vehicle passed me on the freeway going at about 75 mph in a 55 mph zone. I wonder if we should take cars away from all people due to the fact that this man abused his right by breaking the law. You see, what do you expect when put a car into private hands. We should all give up our cars and go back to a cart and buggy civilization. Oh wait, that wouldn’t help the methane damage to the enviorment problem.

   Comment by FreeFall — 8:27 am
   

5. Just this morning A vehicle passed me on the freeway going at about 75 mph in a 55 mph zone.

   Easy access to cars! Once you allow anyone to own a car, you can’t stop them from being used. Lunacy, I tell ya.

   Comment by crushliberalism — 8:55 am
   

6. Freefall, the next time you commute to work on your gun, please post a movie of it. I’m sure we would all love to know how you do it. Cars have advantages, civilian-owned handguns and (semi)automatic firearms do not. If your gun does something that’s worth 10,000 lives a year (not counting suicides), let me know.

   Of course, you may be arguing that people breaking the law proves that it is folly to make laws in the first place. Please consider that anarchy hasn’t worked out that well for anyone either.

   Comment by endorendil — 11:14 am
   

7. endorendil,
   With technology such that it is, we really don’t need cars. We should all telecommute to work (better on the environment that way, right?). Thus, we could leave the automobile ownership in the hands of government officials (public transportation). So what’s the additional value in cars at this point?

   Just like a hunter could use a bow and arrow, everyone should ride a bike, take the bus or work from home, right?

   Comment by Texas Rainmaker — 11:53 am
   

8. TR, let me know when you figure out how a constructor telecommutes, or a factory worker. And until you can email potatoes across the country, you’ll need trucks to do the dirty work. Not everyone blogs for a living .

   Comment by endorendil — 2:05 pm
   

9. That’s what public transportation’s for. Take the dangerous cars/trucks out of the hands of irrational humans and insure only highly-trained, government employees use them.

   Comment by Texas Rainmaker — 2:10 pm
   

10. TR, you make me think you don’t live in the US. Public transportation simply isn’t an option in most of this country. My previous apartment was as far from the center of Naperville that I could be and still walk to the center on a continuous (if very crappy) sidewalk. That was 2 miles - pitiful. And this is one of the most liveable cities in the US. I could take a train - if I wanted to go downtown, nowhere else. I could take a bus to some other suburbs - if I didn’t have to be there on time. Sorry, the infrastructure simply isn’t there to either use public transportation or bikes as a reliable way to commute or shop.

    Comment by endorendil — 12:56 am
    

11. endorendil,
    Is it impossible, or is it just impractical? You see, if you’re claiming it’s hard to get to work or stores, it’s because of choices you’ve been allowed to make. If you were prevented from owning a car, then you’d likely make the choice to live closer to your job and stores. But you’re given the freedom to choose to walk, bike, take a bus or drive your own car… despite the thousands of innocent people killed every year in auto accidents - many as a result of people with diminished capacity (under the influence of drugs or alcohol) or irrational behaviors (road rage, etc).

    You make value judgements on the necessity of a car. Millions of Chinese citizens would tell you life can be lived without one. Thousands of environmentalists would tell you life should be lived without one. But you still do it, because you’ve been given the opportunity to choose for yourself whether you’ll utilize a tool that’s involved in tens of thousands of deaths every year or alter your lifestyle to live without it.

    Comment by Texas Rainmaker — 8:16 am
    

12. TR, it’s not a real choice. I can take a bike, but if there’s no bikepath, that carries large personal risks. I can walk, but if there is no sidewalk, it is dangerous. Either way, I would be seriously limited in the distance I can travel. I can move closer to where I work, but because the labour mark is fluid, that place changes faster than I can afford to move. The repercussions of eliminating private cars are vast, and would change core aspects of the marketplace.

    Guns are easy to get rid of, cars are not. Guns have no positive effect on society, cars do. The issues aren’t even remotely comparable.

    I’m fine with establishing the long-term goal of reducing car use, but I’m not blind to the amount of change that this would necessitate in society. I’ld be happy to force cars to improve by strengthening CAFE rules? I’ld be happy to bring gas prices up to 5 or 6 dollar per gallon, like it is in Europe. I’ld love it if sidewalks became more widespread, and were joined by bike paths everywhere. And of course, it would be great to see a revival of public transportation. With these kinds of measures, you can start a slow move to make cars less important. But simply eliminating cars tomorrow would lead to chaos. Eliminating privately held hand guns and (semi)automatic firearms would not have an impact on GDP, only on crime stats.

    Comment by endorendil — 10:35 am
    

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

You must be logged in to post a comment.