America - Gun Control

[Abraham]

The fact there's no broken windows on Level 4 would suggest your foil hats on too tight.
You're not as smart as you like to think you are.
Now… Back to your crayons and more conspiracies

Did you go back and read what i actually wrote?

I said there is a video that appears to show muzzle flash from the 4th floor that is in synch with the sound of the gun fire. Anybody can go online and view the video for themself.

I didnt say its proof of a second shooter, i didnt even say its proof of secondary gunfire, in fact i made it clear that i dont know. Just that there are a number of alternative possibilities that are worth discussing.

You dont have to smash open the window to shoot out of it, as you have been insinuating. Alot of hotels in vegas, including the Mandalay Bay, have ventilation strips as the windows cant be opened. They let fresh air into the room, and a gun barrel would easily fit through a ventilation strip, meaning you don't have to smash anything to shoot into the street from inside the hotel.

Am i saying this is what happened? No. Just that it pays to keep an open mind and not dismiss things without looking into them further.

You seem to be going off half cocked about something you clearly have no clue about, and getting your panties in a knot because i raised the issue of some reported occurances that the media havnt mentioned.

Its a forum, the whole point is for people to discuss their opinions. It seems you cant do that without becoming snarky and looking for attention. Go figure.

LOL
cool story.
Got any more?

Why didn't you ask me about the windows again??

 

[Abraham]

Pot meet kettle

Are you butt-hurt about something?

 

[Abraham]

Shoulder pads? Some other protection? Would that help with the recoil?

Yeah it would definitely help. So too would a massive boost of adrenaline or potentially some other drugs he could have taken.

None of the close-up photos i have seen make it obvious he was wearing any additional protection through.

The whole scenario may have unfolded just as reported. I don't know and never claimed that i did. I just personally think its always wise to err on the side of caution with these major events, because you don't know who might be behind them, or what information may be deliberately kept from the public.

 

[innsaneink]

The fact there's no broken windows on Level 4 would suggest your foil hats on too tight.
You're not as smart as you like to think you are.
Now… Back to your crayons and more conspiracies

Did you go back and read what i actually wrote?

I said there is a video that appears to show muzzle flash from the 4th floor that is in synch with the sound of the gun fire. Anybody can go online and view the video for themself.

I didnt say its proof of a second shooter, i didnt even say its proof of secondary gunfire, in fact i made it clear that i dont know. Just that there are a number of alternative possibilities that are worth discussing.

You dont have to smash open the window to shoot out of it, as you have been insinuating. Alot of hotels in vegas, including the Mandalay Bay, have ventilation strips as the windows cant be opened. They let fresh air into the room, and a gun barrel would easily fit through a ventilation strip, meaning you don't have to smash anything to shoot into the street from inside the hotel.

Am i saying this is what happened? No. Just that it pays to keep an open mind and not dismiss things without looking into them further.

You seem to be going off half cocked about something you clearly have no clue about, and getting your panties in a knot because i raised the issue of some reported occurances that the media havnt mentioned.

Its a forum, the whole point is for people to discuss their opinions. It seems you cant do that without becoming snarky and looking for attention. Go figure.

LOL
cool story.
Got any more?

Why didn't you ask me about the windows again??

No point.
You'd just make up more BS again
Looks like you're done here…

 

[Abraham]

Did you go back and read what i actually wrote?

I said there is a video that appears to show muzzle flash from the 4th floor that is in synch with the sound of the gun fire. Anybody can go online and view the video for themself.

I didnt say its proof of a second shooter, i didnt even say its proof of secondary gunfire, in fact i made it clear that i dont know. Just that there are a number of alternative possibilities that are worth discussing.

You dont have to smash open the window to shoot out of it, as you have been insinuating. Alot of hotels in vegas, including the Mandalay Bay, have ventilation strips as the windows cant be opened. They let fresh air into the room, and a gun barrel would easily fit through a ventilation strip, meaning you don't have to smash anything to shoot into the street from inside the hotel.

Am i saying this is what happened? No. Just that it pays to keep an open mind and not dismiss things without looking into them further.

You seem to be going off half cocked about something you clearly have no clue about, and getting your panties in a knot because i raised the issue of some reported occurances that the media havnt mentioned.

Its a forum, the whole point is for people to discuss their opinions. It seems you cant do that without becoming snarky and looking for attention. Go figure.

LOL
cool story.
Got any more?

Why didn't you ask me about the windows again??

No point.
You'd just make up more BS again
Looks like you're done here…

Opinions can only be BS if they don't have any facts to back them up.

We were done here a longggg time ago.

 

[Tiger_Watto]

One 64yr old Gunman… Yeah Right!

They will never have the platform to change the amendment and make it relevant into todays dialogue.

The movie Sloane touches on the gun lobby and is a really good movie to watch. Way better than the dribble the media is feeding us about this incident!

 

[GNR4LIFE]

The trouble is, the backlash against guns only ever happens inmediately after a massacre. Everyone is outraged, then after a week or two move on to the next shiny object. Until there is another massacre and the cycle repeats. If there was sustained outrage everyday, things might change. As it is now, the only people who live and breathe this issue are pro-gun loyalists.

Why ever only side is fighting, that side will win. Its a bit like SSM. If the yes side weren't so vocal, the issue wouldn't have come so far.

 

[Abraham]

Chicago has just had its 500th person killed with a gun this year alone.

Chicago also has some of the stricter gun laws in the USA.

Two things to take from this:

1\. The same people calling for gun control in the wake of mass shootings never say a word about handguns, which are a far worse problem than rifles. You won't see Jimmy Kimmel crying on TV or Chuck Schumer demanding handguns be taken from African Americans.

2\. Generic gun control does nothing to reduce gun crime. Criminals don't care about laws… that's why they are criminals. They will still access their illegal guns and they will still commit their crimes. If you cannot restrict the flow of illegal weapons into a geographical area, which is almost impossible even for a country as isolated as Australia (let alone the USA), then "Gun Control" is just a buzz word which means nothing where it counts.

 

[jadtiger]

Chicago has just had its 500th person killed with a gun this year alone.

Chicago also has some of the stricter gun laws in the USA.

Two things to take from this:

1\. The same people calling for gun control in the wake of mass shootings never say a word about handguns, which are a far worse problem than rifles. You won't see Jimmy Kimmel crying on TV or Chuck Schumer demanding handguns be taken from African Americans.

2\. Generic gun control does nothing to reduce gun crime. Criminals don't care about laws… that's why they are criminals. They will still access their illegal guns and they will still commit their crimes. If you cannot restrict the flow of illegal weapons into a geographical area, which is almost impossible even for a country as isolated as Australia (let alone the USA), then "Gun Control" is just a buzz word which means nothing where it counts.

Doing nothing is the easiest and worst possible option.Taking action on gun control may not achieve huge results but doing nothing continues the carnage.You have to start somewhere not ignore the problem

 

[Abraham]

Chicago has just had its 500th person killed with a gun this year alone.

Chicago also has some of the stricter gun laws in the USA.

Two things to take from this:

1\. The same people calling for gun control in the wake of mass shootings never say a word about handguns, which are a far worse problem than rifles. You won't see Jimmy Kimmel crying on TV or Chuck Schumer demanding handguns be taken from African Americans.

2\. Generic gun control does nothing to reduce gun crime. Criminals don't care about laws… that's why they are criminals. They will still access their illegal guns and they will still commit their crimes. If you cannot restrict the flow of illegal weapons into a geographical area, which is almost impossible even for a country as isolated as Australia (let alone the USA), then "Gun Control" is just a buzz word which means nothing where it counts.

Doing nothing is the easiest and worst possible option.Taking action on gun control may not achieve huge results but doing nothing continues the carnage.You have to start somewhere not ignore the problem

So what are the proposals?

Because i literally have not heard a single proposal that would have prevented what happened in Vegas.

Its easy to repeat the words 'gun control', but not so easy to come up with a meaningful idea on how to prevent these incidents from happening.

 

[Yossarian]

Chicago has just had its 500th person killed with a gun this year alone.

Chicago also has some of the stricter gun laws in the USA.

Two things to take from this:

1\. The same people calling for gun control in the wake of mass shootings never say a word about handguns, which are a far worse problem than rifles. You won't see Jimmy Kimmel crying on TV or Chuck Schumer demanding handguns be taken from African Americans.

2\. Generic gun control does nothing to reduce gun crime. Criminals don't care about laws… that's why they are criminals. They will still access their illegal guns and they will still commit their crimes. If you cannot restrict the flow of illegal weapons into a geographical area, which is almost impossible even for a country as isolated as Australia (let alone the USA), then "Gun Control" is just a buzz word which means nothing where it counts.

1\. Plenty of gun control advocates have spoken about hand guns.

2\. That's your opinion. Criminals may not care about laws but when gun ownership is so prevalent and easy they don't need to anyway. Stricter enforcement and controls over the amount of guns reduces accessibility for one. I'm all for stricter penalties for illegal gun possession.

Gun control isn't buzz words. It's a legitimate state aim to reduce gun ownership to as small a group as practical. We can't stop every drug inportation either but not enforcing importation laws would be stupid.

Can we stop every criminal from getting a gun? Of course not but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to limit that number to as few as possible.

 

[Yossarian]

Chicago has just had its 500th person killed with a gun this year alone.

Chicago also has some of the stricter gun laws in the USA.

Two things to take from this:

1\. The same people calling for gun control in the wake of mass shootings never say a word about handguns, which are a far worse problem than rifles. You won't see Jimmy Kimmel crying on TV or Chuck Schumer demanding handguns be taken from African Americans.

2\. Generic gun control does nothing to reduce gun crime. Criminals don't care about laws… that's why they are criminals. They will still access their illegal guns and they will still commit their crimes. If you cannot restrict the flow of illegal weapons into a geographical area, which is almost impossible even for a country as isolated as Australia (let alone the USA), then "Gun Control" is just a buzz word which means nothing where it counts.

Doing nothing is the easiest and worst possible option.Taking action on gun control may not achieve huge results but doing nothing continues the carnage.You have to start somewhere not ignore the problem

So what are the proposals?

Because i literally have not heard a single proposal that would have prevented what happened in Vegas.

Its easy to repeat the words 'gun control', but not so easy to come up with a meaningful idea on how to prevent these incidents from happening.

Ban gun ownership except where a person can justify a need for one.
Make gun owners meet strict requirements for the storage and use of such guns.

 

[Abraham]

Chicago has just had its 500th person killed with a gun this year alone.

Chicago also has some of the stricter gun laws in the USA.

Two things to take from this:

1\. The same people calling for gun control in the wake of mass shootings never say a word about handguns, which are a far worse problem than rifles. You won't see Jimmy Kimmel crying on TV or Chuck Schumer demanding handguns be taken from African Americans.

2\. Generic gun control does nothing to reduce gun crime. Criminals don't care about laws… that's why they are criminals. They will still access their illegal guns and they will still commit their crimes. If you cannot restrict the flow of illegal weapons into a geographical area, which is almost impossible even for a country as isolated as Australia (let alone the USA), then "Gun Control" is just a buzz word which means nothing where it counts.

1\. Plenty of gun control advocates have spoken about hand guns.

2\. That's your opinion. Criminals may not care about laws but when gun ownership is so prevalent and easy they don't need to anyway. Stricter enforcement and controls over the amount of guns reduces accessibility for one. I'm all for stricter penalties for illegal gun possession.

Gun control isn't buzz words. It's a legitimate state aim to reduce gun ownership to as small a group as practical. We can't stop every drug inportation either but not enforcing importation laws would be stupid.

Can we stop every criminal from getting a gun? Of course not but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to limit that number to as few as possible.

1\. The emotional reaction from the Amercian Left always peaks after a mass shooting. But when literally dozens of people are killed every day by handguns, no one outside of dedicated gun control activists raises a peep. Not the democrats, not the mainstream media, and not the political pundits.

2\. I too am for stricter penalties for illegal gun possession or use. Even in Australia, i think if you committ a crime with a gun you should automatically have another 10 years added to your sentence. But this doesn't stop massacres from happening, which is what i am talking about.

Ban gun ownership except where a person can justify a need for one.
Make gun owners meet strict requirements for the storage and use of such guns.

You have to be realistic in your proposals.

You cannot 'ban' gun ownership in America. This is not what any of the discussions in the USA have been about. Not even the democrats have openly suggested this, because they know it will never happen. Its an embedded part of Amercian culture, so any proposals must bear this in mind, which is what makes it so hard to come up with anything meaningful.

Their proposals have all centered on background checks (which the vegas shooter passed), limiting magazine sizes (there are already about 60 million high capacity magazines in circulation according to Tucker Carlson the other night, so good luck in finding 60 million magazines held privately), 'Silencers' according to Hillary Clinton (not even worth discussing, due to the absurdity of the suggestion), Gun-Show 'loopholes' (the Vegas shooter didnt buy any weapons from a gunshow). None of these do a single thing to stop a determined madman from embarking on a mass shooting.

Storage proposals are a step forward, and i agree with that. But that doesn't stop massacres happening, it just stops children getting their hands on their parents guns and killing their siblings.

 

[Yossarian]

Chicago has just had its 500th person killed with a gun this year alone.

Chicago also has some of the stricter gun laws in the USA.

Two things to take from this:

1\. The same people calling for gun control in the wake of mass shootings never say a word about handguns, which are a far worse problem than rifles. You won't see Jimmy Kimmel crying on TV or Chuck Schumer demanding handguns be taken from African Americans.

2\. Generic gun control does nothing to reduce gun crime. Criminals don't care about laws… that's why they are criminals. They will still access their illegal guns and they will still commit their crimes. If you cannot restrict the flow of illegal weapons into a geographical area, which is almost impossible even for a country as isolated as Australia (let alone the USA), then "Gun Control" is just a buzz word which means nothing where it counts.

1\. Plenty of gun control advocates have spoken about hand guns.

2\. That's your opinion. Criminals may not care about laws but when gun ownership is so prevalent and easy they don't need to anyway. Stricter enforcement and controls over the amount of guns reduces accessibility for one. I'm all for stricter penalties for illegal gun possession.

Gun control isn't buzz words. It's a legitimate state aim to reduce gun ownership to as small a group as practical. We can't stop every drug inportation either but not enforcing importation laws would be stupid.

Can we stop every criminal from getting a gun? Of course not but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to limit that number to as few as possible.

1\. The emotional reaction from the Amercian Left always peaks after a mass shooting. But when literally dozens of people are killed every day by handguns, no one outside of dedicated gun control activists raises a peep. Not the democrats, not the mainstream media, and not the political pundits.

2\. I too am for stricter penalties for illegal gun possession or use. Even in Australia, i think if you committ a crime with a gun you should automatically have another 10 years added to your sentence. But this doesn't stop massacres from happening, which is what i am talking about.

Ban gun ownership except where a person can justify a need for one.
Make gun owners meet strict requirements for the storage and use of such guns.

You have to be realistic in your proposals.

You cannot 'ban' gun ownership in America. This is not what any of the discussions in the USA have been about. Not even the democrats have openly suggested this, because they know it will never happen. Its an embedded part of Amercian culture, so any proposals must bear this in mind, which is what makes it so hard to come up with anything meaningful.

Their proposals have all centered on background checks (which the vegas shooter passed), limiting magazine sizes (there are already about 60 million high capacity magazines in circulation according to Tucker Carlson the other night, so good luck in finding 60 million magazines held privately), 'Silencers' according to Hillary Clinton (not even worth discussing, due to the absurdity of the suggestion), Gun-Show 'loopholes' (the Vegas shooter didnt buy any weapons from a gunshow). None of these do a single thing to stop a determined madman from embarking on a mass shooting.

Storage proposals are a step forward, and i agree with that. But that doesn't stop massacres happening, it just stops children getting their hands on their parents guns and killing their siblings.

You asked for proposals and ideas to stop the violence. If they did that they'd have less gun deaths. That it seems impractical in the US is sad but accurate as things currently stand. But moving even incrementally in that direction is, IMO, a worthy cause.

 

[MG1962]

2\. Generic gun control does nothing to reduce gun crime. Criminals don't care about laws… that's why they are criminals. They will still access their illegal guns and they will still commit their crimes. If you cannot restrict the flow of illegal weapons into a geographical area, which is almost impossible even for a country as isolated as Australia (let alone the USA), then "Gun Control" is just a buzz word which means nothing where it counts.

Which sounds wonderful until we notice that 60% of guns used in crimes in Chicago in 2013 were purchased legally outside Cook county. Criminals dont have to get illegal weapons. They can buy them legally because the NRA makes sure any attempt at increased background checks gets stopped dead.

 

[MG1962]

You asked for proposals and ideas to stop the violence. If they did that they'd have less gun deaths. That it seems impractical in the US is sad but accurate as things currently stand. But moving even incrementally in that direction is, IMO, a worthy cause.

The NRA runs a very specific play book for this situation. Argue that a law should not be enacted unless it can be guaranteed 100% successful.

They rely on this argument knowing that there is virtually not a law in the land that achieves 100% detection or deterrent. Every state in the US has speeding laws and 41 million speeding tickets are handed out each year.

When this gets mentioned the person running the play book will go with one of three options.

A - Thats irrelevant you are comparing apples with oranges

B- You obviously dont know enough about the issue to be commenting

C- Personal attack.

If this fails to slow the argument they will then run the "Guns dont kill, people do" play

And if that fails they will always go for the Armageddon play and describe to you the level of anxiety you should be feeling because you are not armed 24/7

 

[Abraham]

2\. Generic gun control does nothing to reduce gun crime. Criminals don't care about laws… that's why they are criminals. They will still access their illegal guns and they will still commit their crimes. If you cannot restrict the flow of illegal weapons into a geographical area, which is almost impossible even for a country as isolated as Australia (let alone the USA), then "Gun Control" is just a buzz word which means nothing where it counts.

Which sounds wonderful until we notice that 60% of guns used in crimes in Chicago in 2013 were purchased legally outside Cook county. Criminals dont have to get illegal weapons. They can buy them legally because the NRA makes sure any attempt at increased background checks gets stopped dead.

Washington DC banned guns outright in the mid-70's, literally only the police had legal access to guns. However the murder rate doubled every few years while this total gun ban was in place (overturned in Heller case).

Yet as legal gun ownership has increased nation-wide, the rate of gun violence actually decreased (Center for Disease Control statistics between 1993-2013).

Stats can tell you a million things or nothing at all, but it is worth taking these sorts of findings into consideration before declaring that Gun Control will somehow be the magic pill that everybody is seeking.

 

[MG1962]

Yet as legal gun ownership has increased nation-wide, the rate of gun violence actually decreased (Center for Disease Control statistics between 1993-2013).

Nice cherry pick given all violent crime involving any sort of weapon dropped during the same period.

 

[Abraham]

Yet as legal gun ownership has increased nation-wide, the rate of gun violence actually decreased (Center for Disease Control statistics between 1993-2013).

Nice cherry pick given all violent crime involving any sort of weapon dropped during the same period.

Its intellectually lazy to just cry "cherry pick" instead of attempting to figure out the relationship between crime and legal gun ownership. The fact that all violent crime decreased does absolutely nothing to invalidate the statistics.

Since you are not disputing the figures, then what exactly are you arguing against?

 

[cochise]

Chicago has just had its 500th person killed with a gun this year alone.

Chicago also has some of the stricter gun laws in the USA.

Two things to take from this:

1\. The same people calling for gun control in the wake of mass shootings never say a word about handguns, which are a far worse problem than rifles. You won't see Jimmy Kimmel crying on TV or Chuck Schumer demanding handguns be taken from African Americans.

2\. Generic gun control does nothing to reduce gun crime. Criminals don't care about laws… that's why they are criminals. They will still access their illegal guns and they will still commit their crimes. If you cannot restrict the flow of illegal weapons into a geographical area, which is almost impossible even for a country as isolated as Australia (let alone the USA), then "Gun Control" is just a buzz word which means nothing where it counts.

1\. Plenty of gun control advocates have spoken about hand guns.

2\. That's your opinion. Criminals may not care about laws but when gun ownership is so prevalent and easy they don't need to anyway. Stricter enforcement and controls over the amount of guns reduces accessibility for one. I'm all for stricter penalties for illegal gun possession.

Gun control isn't buzz words. It's a legitimate state aim to reduce gun ownership to as small a group as practical. We can't stop every drug inportation either but not enforcing importation laws would be stupid.

Can we stop every criminal from getting a gun? Of course not but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to limit that number to as few as possible.

1\. The emotional reaction from the Amercian Left always peaks after a mass shooting. But when literally dozens of people are killed every day by handguns, no one outside of dedicated gun control activists raises a peep. Not the democrats, not the mainstream media, and not the political pundits.

2\. I too am for stricter penalties for illegal gun possession or use. Even in Australia, i think if you committ a crime with a gun you should automatically have another 10 years added to your sentence. But this doesn't stop massacres from happening, which is what i am talking about.

Ban gun ownership except where a person can justify a need for one.
Make gun owners meet strict requirements for the storage and use of such guns.

You have to be realistic in your proposals.

You cannot 'ban' gun ownership in America. This is not what any of the discussions in the USA have been about. Not even the democrats have openly suggested this, because they know it will never happen. Its an embedded part of Amercian culture, so any proposals must bear this in mind, which is what makes it so hard to come up with anything meaningful.

Their proposals have all centered on background checks (which the vegas shooter passed), limiting magazine sizes (there are already about 60 million high capacity magazines in circulation according to Tucker Carlson the other night, so good luck in finding 60 million magazines held privately), 'Silencers' according to Hillary Clinton (not even worth discussing, due to the absurdity of the suggestion), Gun-Show 'loopholes' (the Vegas shooter didnt buy any weapons from a gunshow). None of these do a single thing to stop a determined madman from embarking on a mass shooting.

Storage proposals are a step forward, and i agree with that. But that doesn't stop massacres happening, it just stops children getting their hands on their parents guns and killing their siblings.

You are using one "madman" to disagree with those arguments, the discussion is about gun control, not one isolated incident.