Release of Uvalde Shooting Video Sets off Fury, Including Fears of Future Violence
Receive stories like these directly to your email inbox. Subscribe to Newsletter.
Updated as of July 18.
A comprehensive 77-page report on the Uvalde school shooting was released by a Texas House committee on Sunday. The report identified "systemic failures" that allowed an 18-year-old shooter to enter Robb Elementary School on May 24 and take the lives of 19 children and two teachers. It revealed a disorganized and chaotic response from law enforcement due to a lack of leadership, missed warning signs about the shooter’s violent tendencies, and a lax approach to school security. This report is considered the most detailed account of the tragedy.
Following the release of raw footage of the Uvalde mass school shooting and the delayed response by police officers, conspiracy theories began to emerge on certain parts of the internet. Users on the fringe chat board 4Chan claimed that the 82 minutes of surveillance camera footage, which captured the deaths of 19 children and two teachers, was staged. They believed that the armed officers present were either crisis actors or participants in a harmless training exercise rather than responders to a deadly shooting. Some users even claimed that they did not witness anyone getting shot and only observed police standing around during a supposed training drill.
The footage, jointly released by the Austin American-Statesman newspaper and KVUE TV, briefly depicts the 18-year-old suspect entering the school without encountering any resistance and includes the sounds of gunshots. However, much of the footage focuses on police officers standing back in the brightly colored hallway. The news outlets chose to omit the children’s screams and any frames showing individuals being shot, which fueled conspiracy theories. These theories included claims that the footage was propaganda supporting "DEMOCRAP GUNGRABBING."
Since the release of the footage, the community in Uvalde, located west of San Antonio, has experienced additional trauma and turmoil. Anger has been directed towards the failed police response, as the footage revealed how officers armed with rifles and protective shields waited for over an hour before confronting the gunman. One officer even nonchalantly sanitized their hands using a wall dispenser.
However, for many, the focus of their anger was towards the publication of the footage itself. While some experts believed that the images were necessary for holding the police accountable, certain Texas officials criticized the news outlets for their decision to release it. Uvalde residents, particularly the families of the victims, expressed their distress, as the public release of the video before their private viewing felt retraumatizing.
Angel Garza, whose daughter Amerie was killed in the shooting, voiced her frustration on CNN, questioning the motives behind airing their loved ones’ final moments to the world. She demanded that the news outlets show some decency and consideration for the families.
Researchers who specialize in studying school shootings and online extremism warned that the footage would likely attract significant attention from fringe online communities, including those advocating real-world violence. The release of the video has sparked a debate regarding its usefulness for the general public. Some experts are concerned that the footage could provide inspiration for someone planning a future attack.
Psychologist Peter Langman, who has dedicated decades to researching the motivations and behaviors of school shooters, believes that the Uvalde shooting will fascinate a certain portion of the population. His research has shown that perpetrators often study and imitate the actions and tactics of previous gunmen. In a terror threat bulletin issued in June, the Department of Homeland Security warned that online forums glorifying domestic extremist violence have seen an influx of posts promoting copycat attacks in the aftermath of the Uvalde incident. Law enforcement officials have also cautioned that fringe online forums are being used to radicalize young individuals with violent tendencies. Some individuals have even used the Uvalde shooting to spread disinformation and fuel grievances, claiming it was a government-planned event aimed at advancing gun control measures.
According to Kurt Braddock, an assistant professor of public communication at American University, violent videos that are shared online as memes or jokes are not inherently harmful. However, he warns that these jokes have the potential to radicalize individuals. Braddock explains that young people today have access to technology in ways that older generations did not, but they may lack the necessary media literacy skills to differentiate between a joke and a call to action.
There is a concerning trend in fringe online communities, which can be traced back to the Columbine High School shooting in 1999. These communities, known as "Columbiners," obsess over every detail of the infamous shooting and share extensive photo and video archives of the perpetrators. This includes disturbing surveillance footage from inside the school cafeteria. Some individuals become fixated on Columbine and subsequent attacks out of intellectual curiosity, while others develop a twisted infatuation with the shooters. There is also a portion of the community driven by a desire for violence. Langman, an expert on mass shootings, explains that while most of these individuals are fascinated observers, some may eventually become perpetrators themselves, posing a potential danger.
Surveillance videos depicting school shootings are rarely made public, especially ones that show the chaos and violence inside a school. The limited videos that have been released, such as those from the Parkland school shooting in 2018, were not as extensive as the footage recently released from Uvalde, Texas. This Texas shooting video was published by news outlets before victims’ families had a chance to privately view it, causing disappointment and anger among some officials. The decision to release the video was criticized by Uvalde Mayor Don McLaughlin, who called it cowardly.
The Austin newspaper, in an op-ed, defended its decision to release the video after careful consideration. They believed it was important to provide clarity after weeks of confusion and misinformation. While they blurred the face of one student and excluded the sounds of children screaming, they chose to show the face of the gunman entering the school. The newspaper explained that they did not want to give notoriety to the perpetrators but decided to show the face to dispel any conspiracy theories that they were hiding something.
Conspiracy theories surrounding the Uvalde shooting had already spread on online forums like 4Chan. Users in these forums compared the Uvalde suspect to the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooter from 2012, discussing physical and strategic similarities. Screenshots of the Uvalde suspect’s social media posts flooded the forum, which has previously been frequented by multiple mass shooters.
Overall, the concern is that violent videos shared online as jokes or memes have the potential to radicalize individuals, especially young people who may struggle to distinguish between a joke and a call to action. The recent release of extensive surveillance footage from the Uvalde shooting has generated controversy, with some defending the decision as necessary for clarity and others criticizing it as insensitive and cowardly.
"That is a valid subject for public examination, especially considering the conflicting testimonies and blaming from public officials," stated Trump. "There are concerns regarding responsibility, and transparency is necessary for accountability to exist."
Senator Chris Murphy, a Democratic representative from Connecticut and a leading supporter of stricter gun control measures, also recognizes the value of the video. During an appearance on MSNBC on Wednesday, Murphy stated that it clearly disproves a common argument from the right-wing that "the only way to stop a criminal with a firearm is for good individuals to have firearms."
"If a single teenager with a high-powered weapon is so terrifying that it prevents highly trained adults from entering and saving lives, then maybe we should focus on preventing teenagers from having access to such firearms in the first place," Murphy suggested. "Because it is evident that we can never have enough good individuals with firearms. We can never have enough high-powered weapons in the possession of law enforcement to stop an attacker if we failed to accomplish that with what we witnessed in the tapes from Uvalde."
However, despite its persuasive power, Murphy acknowledges the traumatic nature of the footage and advises against people watching it.
A right to be informed?
For years to come, the video from the hallway will serve as a training tool for law enforcement in response to mass shootings, according to Jaclyn Schildkraut, a professor of criminal justice at the State University of New York at Oswego. Given the intense scrutiny of the officers’ actions, she argues that "the only way to set the record straight is to release this video."
"The footage is condemning," she explains. "Officers can be seen sitting on their phones, and one officer not only used his phone but also took the time to sanitize his hands. It is incredibly problematic."
Several officers can be observed checking their phones during the lengthy standoff in the hallway, although a Texas legislator clarified that Officer Ruben Ruiz, a Uvalde school police officer who faced particular criticism, had received a call from his wife, Eva Mireles, informing him that she had been shot inside a classroom. Mireles and her colleague, Irma Garcia, were both killed while protecting their students.
Schildkraut believes that the video has limited value in the public domain and could actually cause harm to the families of the victims, who will be forced to relive the tragedy for the rest of their lives. She argues that the families should have had a say in whether the video should be publicly released, and she also points out that the footage could fall into the wrong hands.
"There will always be people who come up with conspiracy theories and harass the families, as they did after the Sandy Hook shooting and in other instances," she warns. "This video could end up on the dark web, and individuals could idolize the perpetrator even more. What benefit does it bring to the public?"
Following the Sandy Hook shooting, conspiracy theorists inundated the internet with claims that the tragedy was a "false flag." Last year, conspiracy theorist and InfoWars host Alex Jones was found responsible for damages in a defamation lawsuit filed by the families of the victims, due to his repeated claims that the shooting was a hoax.
A similar debate over the public’s right to know crucial details also surrounded the Columbine shooting, according to Langman. Extensive footage has been made available to the public, including surveillance videos from the cafeteria and homemade videos created by the perpetrators. However, some footage was never released, most notably the "basement tapes," which reportedly contained around four hours of film revealing the motives and plans of the perpetrators weeks before they carried out the attack. The tapes were allegedly destroyed due to concerns that they could inspire more violence.
Braddock from American University argues that the Uvalde hallway video presents a dilemma. He states that transparency regarding the police response is important, but it also provides a plethora of material for online communities with morbid interests or even worse intentions.
"It’s incredibly easy to turn the images from that video into memes that can circulate within these online communities, and they can create more groups of potential mass shooters," he warns.