Fair enough. But that is a ton of pre-planning you are describing. Which again is weird for the lone gunman who just snaps one day.
Lots of calls for gun control to stop mass shootings and gun violence.
- Thread starter Headhunter
- Start date
Fair enough. But that is a ton of pre-planning you are describing. Which again is weird for the lone gunman who just snaps one day.
None of the vids I've seen show muzzle flashes from his location - which also indicates a level of pre-planning because a guy with no precious military or notable gun experience knows to shoot from deeper in the room to conceal his position. That made it harder to find him.
Interestingly, there are videos that appear to show muzzle flash on 4th floor. But could be a reflection from a stage light or something.
Whatever test or control you are thinking of adding to gun ownership, you should test that control against any of the other constitutionally protected rights.
For example: If you say you have to pass a background check or competency test to own a firearm... Are you okay with having to pass a similar background check or competency test to vote, speak out, or freely assemble? If so, then go for it. If not, it isn't a valid control.
I have to get a permit to have a parade but not to stand on a street corner and stand on a soap box. I can say what I want as long as it is true (slander) and not inciting violence in others. Put those same limits on gun control. Okay, let's talk. But those laws still doesn't prevent BLM from blocking an intersection - which is already illegal.
Should you have to pass a mental illness test to vote? Maybe. If you are willing to impose that control on the ability to vote? But the supreme court has already ruled that voting tests are unconstitutional.
Lastly, you don't lose your rights in this country until properly adjudicated. So any process to remove someone's right to bear arms (or any other), must have some jurist prudence and due process. By that I mean you can't have a mental health professional say someone is crazy and they lose their gun ownership rights. You can take them away temporarily for their immediate safety and the safety of those around them. But you can't do it long term unless ordered by a judge. We just don't have the structure in our judicial system to process these en mass.
For example: If you say you have to pass a background check or competency test to own a firearm... Are you okay with having to pass a similar background check or competency test to vote, speak out, or freely assemble? If so, then go for it. If not, it isn't a valid control.
I have to get a permit to have a parade but not to stand on a street corner and stand on a soap box. I can say what I want as long as it is true (slander) and not inciting violence in others. Put those same limits on gun control. Okay, let's talk. But those laws still doesn't prevent BLM from blocking an intersection - which is already illegal.
Should you have to pass a mental illness test to vote? Maybe. If you are willing to impose that control on the ability to vote? But the supreme court has already ruled that voting tests are unconstitutional.
Lastly, you don't lose your rights in this country until properly adjudicated. So any process to remove someone's right to bear arms (or any other), must have some jurist prudence and due process. By that I mean you can't have a mental health professional say someone is crazy and they lose their gun ownership rights. You can take them away temporarily for their immediate safety and the safety of those around them. But you can't do it long term unless ordered by a judge. We just don't have the structure in our judicial system to process these en mass.
This wasn't a guy who snaps one day. This took weeks to plan as getting specific suites overlooking the strip aren't just available everyday. And with the festival going on across the street Mandalay Bay would have been prime rooms.
Looking at some articles involving his spending habits and money transfers are interesting also. Allegedly, he was regularly gambling up to 30k per visits to poker tables daily. He also supposedly wired 100k to the Philippines the day before. Lots of cash for a retired accountant. Of course if he knew he was going to kill himself maybe he wanted to enjoy life before ending it.
Lots of fishy looking stuff coming out. Of course, maybe it's all conspiracy theorists. But will we ever really know?
Are you saying it is illegal to buy a tank? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4938390/Man-installs-600-000-WWII-tank-outside-home.html
One of the first things I heard yesterday morning was that's how people figured out where the shots were coming from was muzzle flashes. Plus, two big broken out windows are easy to spot.
Not sure how easy it is to get today, but the Japanese used flash less gunpowder in WWII. Not sure if it was during the whole war or in every theatre, but do know that was one of the big issues on Guadalcanal. Shots were heard, but couldn't pinpoint the location. Especially difficult to fight at night.
Their image still shows one large suite, how the rooms are laid out in the suite doesn't change the fact that he was not running through the public hallway between two different room numbers. He was in one room, so he could easily go back and forth between the windows.
I had a case once where some gang bangers took cheap uzi knockoffs and converted them to fully automatic. They went out to practice and melted the clips and both guns were inoperable less than one full (high volume) clip in. That was just a 9 mm as I recall. They figured it out and they were definitely full automatic -- for a few rounds.
Anybody know if select-fire military AR's have heavier components than civilian semi-auto models?
Dude may have had a brain tumor like Charles Whitman did. Nothing really made sense in that deal, either.
The truth is, there may not be a way to prevent things like this from occurring in a country that values freedom.
Picture of two of the rifles he used on the hotel room floor. The rifle on the right has a Slide Fire stock and what appears to be a Surefire 100 round magazine. Also has a muzzle brake. The rifle on the left looks like standard AR 15 fare with a scope, bipod, and Magpul 30 round magazine.
These fixes you are sure of, do they come with any negatives or do they just safely deliver us to a world where we have utmost freedom, zero responsibility and healthcare this always free and on time?
I love the approach: Either it's "utmost freedom, zero responsibly and healthcare this always free an on time" or it's the status quo.
Hey, at least you're not having to pay taxes for a public school to educate someone else's kid, right? This is exactly the kind of third world shithole you want -- no education and no concerts without first setting up a defensive perimeter.
Not heavier, but definitely different. The bolt carrier, the trigger group, and the milling of the lower receiver are very different for automatic military assault rifles vs civilian semiautomatic rifles.
Evidently he videoed it all
http://nypost.com/2017/10/03/las-vegas-gunman-filmed-himself-during-slaughter/
http://nypost.com/2017/10/03/las-vegas-gunman-filmed-himself-during-slaughter/
Wow. A retired FBI Profiler said that typically if you do this for notoriety and fame it is someone young trying to make a name for themselves and not someone this old. Profiler said based on age either was doing this for religious or political reasons, etc... (does not appear to be at this time), or the actions taken would cause a focus on issues that the person was trying to make a statement about.
I am starting to wonder if this person breaks the normal profile, did he do this for the notoriety? Was this an anti-gun statement? Seems strange to video it to me if it was, although I am no profiler.
I love this position. Willing to sacrifice any freedom for the illusion of safety. Then, when the illusion proves to be false, you nip at the next layer. That is the exact same reasoning that gets people to buy into a government provides all North Korean style shithole living.
Man, the more I think about this, the more horrific it is. This MF'er was sick. So, sick he wanted to create the greatest snuff film of all time. No wonder he shot himself, he would have never made it out of Vegas alive. Who does something like that?
Before we pass any new laws I would ask the following questions:
1) Were any laws broken by this individual in the acquiring of the guns used for this crime? If so, then we likely don't need new laws but rather stronger enforcement of the existing laws.
2) If no prior law had been broken, and we want new laws written to explicitly prevent this type of event, how will that law address the 350 Million guns already in the U.S.?
3) Will your new law make outlaws of individuals whose only crime was owning a weapon that was legal prior to the passing of the law.
If your recommendation cannot adequately answer each of these questions, then it should not be passed.
1) Were any laws broken by this individual in the acquiring of the guns used for this crime? If so, then we likely don't need new laws but rather stronger enforcement of the existing laws.
2) If no prior law had been broken, and we want new laws written to explicitly prevent this type of event, how will that law address the 350 Million guns already in the U.S.?
3) Will your new law make outlaws of individuals whose only crime was owning a weapon that was legal prior to the passing of the law.
If your recommendation cannot adequately answer each of these questions, then it should not be passed.
Man you just can't engage in dialogue without twisting your opponent's words to be something extremist, can you? Now I'm willing to sacrifice "any" freedom. ANd it's not an illusion. Check out the comparable firearm deaths in Europe and Australia since the Point Arthur shooting.
Surely the guy left a note or something. Why make such a public spectacle and then not say why he did it?
And it looks like his first choice was the Life is Beautiful festival but couldn't get a room with an elevated position.
http://nypost.com/2017/10/03/vegas-shooter-may-have-been-targeting-another-music-festival/
Totally agree. However, I would add that even if he didn't break any laws, it does not mean that changes are off the table. For example, how about making it illegal to modify a semi-automatic weapon to shoot more than X rounds per minute? How about making the items that speed up the rounds per minute illegal?
A good question, and one that would need to be answered. Maybe they are grandfathered in. Maybe the government buys the ones that are made illegal and pays more than their real value. Maybe there is a registration, and you only have to worry if you don't register yours. Maybe something I haven't thought of.
Seems illogical and preventable (see #2 above).
Its already illegal to modify a semi-automatic weapon to make it automatic.
But not illegal to add attachments which artificially increase the rate of fire. That's probably a good compromise here.
This may be the most hypocritical thing that you have said to date
I could see a law outlawing the modifying (parts or a weapon with modifications) of the rate of fire for semi automatic weapons. I wouldn't even grandfather it. Just make it illegal to have such modifications on a weapon. And outlaw the manufacture of such modifications.
But it won't stop the criminals that want such things from manufacturing and installing them themselves.
Criminals going to commit crimes.
But I don't see how law abiding citizens would object to the criminalization of those type of modifications.
But it won't stop the criminals that want such things from manufacturing and installing them themselves.
Criminals going to commit crimes.
But I don't see how law abiding citizens would object to the criminalization of those type of modifications.
A similar law prohibits sawed off shotguns below a certain length.
