Another mass shooting - largest in a good while, by a few victims

[J842P]

It will change nothing. Shooting six-year-olds in their classroom didn't. I have cousins who spout this "What we need is more guns" line. I've learned not to discuss this issue.

Yes, I've heard this said many times. If the cold-blooded murder of innocent schoolchildren didn't get this country to change our gun laws, then we're beyond help, and the shootings will continue. I'll never understand how Sandy Hook wasn't the point where America collectively got up and said, "Enough is enough!" Families of the slain should sue the fucking NRA for not even allowing sensible gun legislation to move forward.

Oh yeah. It became quite evident that any sort of gun regulation is a non-starter after Sandy Hook.

- - - Updated - - -

I have to admit to having shameful thoughts after first hearing about it - that the gunman was probably a trumpsucker, and that probably most of his victims were too. I forgive myself for that thought though; at least I didn't immediately assume it was a black guy or a muslim.

Right. Because that is so much better.

 

[TV and credit cards]

Glad there's lots of thoughts and prayers. Sounds like a statement who's time has come to be used against these politicians who offer little else.
https://m.clevescene.com/scene-and-...ed-by-ohio-republicans-who-oppose-gun-control

 

[ZiprHead]

There's no evidence of any connection between the shooter and ISIS or Islam.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/las-vegas-shooting-stephen-paddock-what-we-know-about-shooter/

His brother said he had no affiliation to anything, religious or political.

My money's on him being a Trump follower.

My money's on a gambling addiction and a split with his partner.

 

[Horatio Parker]

There's no evidence of any connection between the shooter and ISIS or Islam.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/las-vegas-shooting-stephen-paddock-what-we-know-about-shooter/

His brother said he had no affiliation to anything, religious or political.

My money's on him being a Trump follower.

My money's on a gambling addiction and a split with his partner.

He reminds me of Charles Whitman, the U/Texas sniper, who had a brain tumor.

 

[J842P]

Since it's a 64 year old, retired white male, whose motivations are unknown...

anyone want to speculate as to why he did it?

Voices. Drugs. Anger at increasing socioeconomic inequality. Anger at increasing socioeconomic equality.

Same thing I think is responsible for any of these shootings: He was bat-shit crazy. Everything else is just an excuse to act.

This, I think, is a grave error. One doesn't need to be "bat-shit" crazy to kill a lot of people. One merely needs some internal motivation, and a lack of conscience.

Neither of those two things require one be "bat-shit" crazy. It is inside all normal people to commit terrible acts, and it is important not to forget that.

Of course, one needs the means as well.

 

[J842P]

Mental illness.

Bad break up. Seriously. His female roommate seems to have left the country. Possibly if she had not fled, it would have been a simple murder suicide instead of mass murder/ suicide.

Oh and mental illness.

I think mental illness is a cop out. Sometimes, there is clearly an element of that, but not always.

But yeah, there seems to be something going on with the roommate. Also, I read something about gambling debts. Although, it is hard to tell whether he did this big casino transactions because he already knew he was going to commit suicide, or the other way around.

 

[J842P]

The sheer volume of fully legal and unrestricted guns and transfer of guns that are nearly identical to fully auto rifles is what allows the estimated half million fully auto weapons in citizens hands to be possessed and transferred easily with no realistic hope of eliminating them.

Nearly identical. NEARLY.

Read what Horatio wrote in post #72. Fully autos are very expensive and heavily tracked.

I'm still having a hard time dissecting the point you are trying to make, other than quibbling about definitions.

Are you seriously denying that the easy access to guns didn't facilitate this?

 

[ZiprHead]

Nearly identical. NEARLY.

Read what Horatio wrote in post #72. Fully autos are very expensive and heavily tracked.

I'm still having a hard time dissecting the point you are trying to make, other than quibbling about definitions.

Are you seriously denying that the easy access to guns didn't facilitate this?

As I understand from gun nuts on another board that kits to convert the standard semi-auto AR15 or AK47 to full auto are easily obtained for about fifty bucks.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Nearly identical. NEARLY.

Read what Horatio wrote in post #72. Fully autos are very expensive and heavily tracked.

I'm still having a hard time dissecting the point you are trying to make, other than quibbling about definitions.

Are you seriously denying that the easy access to guns didn't facilitate this?

Easy access to semi-automatics and easy access to firearms with even lower firing rates does not equate to easy access to fully automatics. Fully automatic firearms are not easily accessible.

Hell, before I left the military, they were switching over from M-16s with a fully automatic setting to M-16s with a three round burst setting.

 

[ronburgundy]

The sheer volume of fully legal and unrestricted guns and transfer of guns that are nearly identical to fully auto rifles is what allows the estimated half million fully auto weapons in citizens hands to be possessed and transferred easily with no realistic hope of eliminating them.

Nearly identical. NEARLY.


Read what Horatio wrote in post #72. Fully autos are very expensive and heavily tracked.

Nearly is more than enough to allow the tens of thousands of people who sell guns with zero over sight to traffic and sell the illegal one's in almost plain sight.
They only track the half million that are officially on the books, not the many more millions that are off the books. Legal guns dealers are responsible for most illegal guns transfers. There should not be any legal gun transfers allowed without being directly mediated by law enforcement. That would expose all transfers of illegal guns or of legal guns to nefarious people, by making every exchange of weapons outside that controlled context something that law enforcement must investigate.

The sole purpose of such a weapon is mass indiscriminate killing of many people, and the sole context where that might be legal is a soldier during military battle. Thus, it is absurd that every such gun other than by a soldier acting in a military capacity is not immediately confiscated and any possession met with decades in prison.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Okay, you've descended into conspiracy theory with many millions of undocumented fully automatic firearms.

 

[Elixir]

Okay, you've descended into conspiracy theory with many millions of undocumented fully automatic firearms.

Actually, I don't recall a full-auto ever being used before by a lone wolf shooter. I'm not a big lead-flinger, but do know more than one person who has converted an AR, so maybe there ARE millions of fully automatic weapons out there un-tracked. But they aren't so ubiquitous that your garden variety violent nutbars regularly choose them for their rampages.

 

[J842P]

I'm still having a hard time dissecting the point you are trying to make, other than quibbling about definitions.

Are you seriously denying that the easy access to guns didn't facilitate this?

Easy access to semi-automatics and easy access to firearms with even lower firing rates does not equate to easy access to fully automatics. Fully automatic firearms are not easily accessible.

Hell, before I left the military, they were switching over from M-16s with a fully automatic setting to M-16s with a three round burst setting.

Again, what is your point? That the easy access to guns *did not facilitate this*? Can you just answer that? You seem to be dodging around without a firm commitment on that point.

Look, if people who unquestionably support the right to own guns would just admit that it is worth more of these sorts of mass shootings, it would be easy to take the argument seriously. But it seems like you are constantly trying to bullshit me, and say "No no, guns have *nothing* to do with this."

Indeed, this reminds me *exactly* of a recent thread on religion and bigotry. It's not the guns, its something *else*.

You know, since guns are neither sufficient nor necessary clearly, it isn't a *cause*.

 

[ronburgundy]

Okay, you've descended into conspiracy theory with many millions of undocumented fully automatic firearms.

You've descended into the fallacy of discounting something by labeling it a "conspiracy theory" when such a concept doesn't remotely apply. So now you are denying that there are any significant numbers of guns that the Fed doesn't know exactly where they are and who has them. Or do think the the laws of nature and human behavior get magically suspended when a gun is labelled "fully automatic", and thus what we know is true of guns in general is not true to those guns? The fact that fully auto guns are so expensive to obtain legally makes it far more likely that the % of such guns possessed and trafficked illegally is much higher than the % for other types of guns, which is already pretty high.

The logical conclusion is that for each of the half million fully auto guns the Fed has accurate track of, there are several they do not. Do the math, and you get "millions".

 

[Elixir]

Easy access to semi-automatics and easy access to firearms with even lower firing rates does not equate to easy access to fully automatics. Fully automatic firearms are not easily accessible.

Hell, before I left the military, they were switching over from M-16s with a fully automatic setting to M-16s with a three round burst setting.

Again, what is your point? That the easy access to guns *did not facilitate this*? Can you just answer that? You seem to be dodging around without a firm commitment on that point.

Look, if people who unquestionably support the right to own guns would just admit that it is worth more of these sorts of mass shootings, it would be easy to take the argument seriously. But it seems like you are constantly trying to bullshit me, and say "No no, guns have *nothing* to do with this."

Indeed, this reminds me *exactly* of a recent thread on religion and bigotry. It's not the guns, its something *else*.

You know, since guns are neither sufficient nor necessary clearly, it isn't a *cause*.

Hey, anything else that can kill people who are 1700 feet away from you would have done just as well...

 

[J842P]

Again, what is your point? That the easy access to guns *did not facilitate this*? Can you just answer that? You seem to be dodging around without a firm commitment on that point.

Look, if people who unquestionably support the right to own guns would just admit that it is worth more of these sorts of mass shootings, it would be easy to take the argument seriously. But it seems like you are constantly trying to bullshit me, and say "No no, guns have *nothing* to do with this."

Indeed, this reminds me *exactly* of a recent thread on religion and bigotry. It's not the guns, its something *else*.

You know, since guns are neither sufficient nor necessary clearly, it isn't a *cause*.

Hey, anything else that can kill people who are 1700 feet away from you would have done just as well...

Yeah, the guns are just an excuse. They people have been killing people long before guns even existed!

 

[Angry Floof]

There's no evidence of any connection between the shooter and ISIS or Islam.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/las-vegas-shooting-stephen-paddock-what-we-know-about-shooter/

His brother said he had no affiliation to anything, religious or political.

My money's on him being a Trump follower.

My gut says just a fucking dumbass, possibly mentally ill, who wasn't trying to prove anything.

I'm sure you're right. I'll still bet on it, though.

 

[Elixir]

Hey, anything else that can kill people who are 1700 feet away from you would have done just as well...

Yeah, the guns are just an excuse. They people have been killing people long before guns even existed!

When, long before guns existed, was any single person credited with killing more than 50 and wounding more than 500 people from 1700 feet away?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Remember it's not terrorism unless it's some lone Muslim, or group of Muslims.

If it's done to forward some movement it's terrorism. If it's done for notoriety or the like it's not.

 

[untermensche]

Let's suppose the guy is a loner with dysfunction.

It is the same old issue of guns and the result of having a society saturated with them.

But to some you take away their gun, and even though nobody has ever threatened them, they feel frightened.

But fully automatics, which this guy appeared to have used, are already heavily restricted and society is not saturated with them. They are essentially forbidden. If he used this, which it seems he did, then he didn't get them from a gun shop, and most black market firearms are the same firearms (albeit unrecorded) of the ones in the gun shops.

Society is not saturated with fully automatic firearms.

Semi-automatics are everywhere.

And turning them in to automatics is not hard.