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

[Jason Harvestdancer]

There is no mention of abundance.

Your illiteracy is your problem.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

There is no mention of abundance.

Your illiteracy is your problem.

Can you present a point with disinterested evidence that demonstrates your claim?

 

[James Brown]

America's Gun Fantasy

Three percent of the nation owns half the firearms—to prepare for an ultraviolent showdown that exists only in their imagination...

 

[J842P]

America's Gun Fantasy

Three percent of the nation owns half the firearms—to prepare for an ultraviolent showdown that exists only in their imagination...

Yes. They seem to have a lot of fun though. Fast forward to minute 2.

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7DTjSla-O8[/YOUTUBE]

But seriously, I never knew these things existed. Apparently, there are all sorts of contraptions that do similar things.

 

[laughing dog]

Your illiteracy is your problem.

I provided evidence to support my argument. As usual, you failed to do so. In fact, you have now explicitly ignorec the relevant content of my response twice in order to focus on yet another one of your boring and obvious straw men. So let's see if your next response either provides evidence to support your claim or if it continues to support my argument (as your response did).

 

[DBT]

Australian sporting shooters have a different attitude to guns than Americans, for us it's not gun ownership for self defense or solving problems, just hunting and/or target shooting, competition, etc.

Background checks, including mental health work to stop those with the wrong attitude or mental health issues from obtaining firearms....which works quite well in conjunction with secure gun storage.

Attitude and safe handling being paramount. I think that there are American gun owners with this attitude, but unfortunately not enough.

More needs to be done to educate American gun owners instead of letting these events get out of hand.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Australian sporting shooters have a different attitude to guns than Americans, for us it's not gun ownership for self defense or solving problems, just hunting and/or target shooting, competition, etc.

Background checks, including mental health work to stop those with the wrong attitude or mental health issues from obtaining firearms....which works quite well in conjunction with secure gun storage.

Attitude and safe handling being paramount. I think that there are American gun owners with this attitude, but unfortunately not enough.

More needs to be done to educate American gun owners instead of letting these events get out of hand.

I think on the whole american gun owners are very responsible people. The problem is with the availability of guns to irresponsible and unfit owners.

Today I had a conversation with a couple of those owners about bump stocks. They didn't get it. Their position was that if you automatic fire or bumpstock fire a semi automatic you lose all accuracy, and therefore it isn't a dangerous weapon. It amazes me how things go right over some people's heads. It is precisely this behavior about bumpstock weapons that makes them something that should be regulated. The Vegas killer knew precisely that bumpstocks would give him the mass killing he desired. Even the NR fucking A can see this.

 

[WAB]

A world with guns.

And the world before guns were invented was peaceful and joyful and everyone held hands and sang in great peaceful joy and happiness?

Not.

 

[WAB]

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.

I'm less interested in the why, and more in the how. We likely can't fix the why. We could at least, in theory, try to address the how. As a nation, we won't, but it is always nice to pretend for a moment, that as a nation, we'd try to see to it that this doesn't happen again... and that not requiring me to take off my clothes and empty my bags before entering a hotel.

Aw, poor baby, the inconvenience. What you worry about concerns me.

Edit: No. Amuses me.

 

[barbos]

Interesting numbers here
According to them, there were estimated 122 deaths due to auto accidents on the day of Las Vegas massacre.
That's twice as many.

 

[Patooka]

Interesting numbers here
According to them, there were estimated 122 deaths due to auto accidents on the day of Las Vegas massacre.
That's twice as many.

Twice as many people died from auto accidents at a country music concert? Otherwise not sure what you're trying to compare or what your point is. Should firearms be similar to cars in terms of cost? If you own a firearm, must you have compulsory third party insurance? Or is the point that more people died from auto accidents so clearly the current control method don't work and people should be able to drive as fast as they want as drunk as they like?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I'm less interested in the why, and more in the how. We likely can't fix the why. We could at least, in theory, try to address the how. As a nation, we won't, but it is always nice to pretend for a moment, that as a nation, we'd try to see to it that this doesn't happen again... and that not requiring me to take off my clothes and empty my bags before entering a hotel.

Aw, poor baby, the inconvenience. What you worry about concerns me.

Edit: No. Amuses me.

Hmmmm, I don't remember crossing a bridge.

 

[untermensche]

A world with guns.

And the world before guns were invented was peaceful and joyful and everyone held hands and sang in great peaceful joy and happiness?

Not.

If the guy only had a sword he probably would have killed less people.

He probably would have killed nobody.

Having that machine of instant death at a distance makes it all so easy and impersonal.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Interesting numbers here
According to them, there were estimated 122 deaths due to auto accidents on the day of Las Vegas massacre.
That's twice as many.

Twice as many people died from auto accidents at a country music concert? Otherwise not sure what you're trying to compare or what your point is. Should firearms be similar to cars in terms of cost? If you own a firearm, must you have compulsory third party insurance? Or is the point that more people died from auto accidents so clearly the current control method don't work and people should be able to drive as fast as they want as drunk as they like?

I get that same response. Someone told me that guns don't need regulated because if someone wants to kill a lot of people they can just run them over in a truck. This kind of thinking is so strange. By this line of thinking we should all be allowed to keep VX nerve agent in our pantries too.

Clearly, the speaker has already made up their mind and is simply trying to rationalize their feelings. Lots of people mistake cleverness for intelligence.

 

[barbos]

Twice as many people died from auto accidents at a country music concert? Otherwise not sure what you're trying to compare or what your point is. Should firearms be similar to cars in terms of cost? If you own a firearm, must you have compulsory third party insurance? Or is the point that more people died from auto accidents so clearly the current control method don't work and people should be able to drive as fast as they want as drunk as they like?

I get that same response. Someone told me that guns don't need regulated because if someone wants to kill a lot of people they can just run them over in a truck. This kind of thinking is so strange. By this line of thinking we should all be allowed to keep VX nerve agent in our pantries too.

Clearly, the speaker has already made up their mind and is simply trying to rationalize their feelings. Lots of people mistake cleverness for intelligence.

I am all for banning assault rifles. I am just also for banning tobacco, alcohol, drugs, old cars and islamic terrorism.
It just turns out that cars kill way more people than assault rifles and you can't really argue with that math.
Also I find it interesting that most leftists are obviously for banning guns but at the same time they usually give a pass to islamic terrorism saying that chances of dying in terrorism act are negligible compared to car accident.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

I get that same response. Someone told me that guns don't need regulated because if someone wants to kill a lot of people they can just run them over in a truck. This kind of thinking is so strange. By this line of thinking we should all be allowed to keep VX nerve agent in our pantries too.

Clearly, the speaker has already made up their mind and is simply trying to rationalize their feelings. Lots of people mistake cleverness for intelligence.

I am all for banning assault rifles. I am just also for banning tobacco, alcohol, drugs, old cars and islamic terrorism.
It just turns out that cars kill way more people than assault rifles and you can't really argue with that math.

You CAN argue with the fact that cars are vehicles and not weapons, and therefore the use of a car in a public place is very unlikely to cause a fatality.

Assault rifles, which ARE weapons, are dangerous enough that almost ANY use in a public place has a high probability of causing a fatal or near-fatal injury to other. It's relevant in this case that the 122 traffic deaths in Las Vegas that day were all ACCIDENTS that the drivers in those cases tried and failed to prevent; the Route 96 Massacre was a DELIBERATE attempt to kill large numbers of people that had to be terminated by law enforcement.

These two things are not logically equivalent. Cars are designed to safely transport people from one place to another. Assault rifles are designed to kill people.

Also I find it interesting that most leftists are obviously for banning guns

"leftists" can speak for themselves. The majority of Americans favor a ban on assault weapons, the implementation of strict licensing and background checks, strict limits on magazine sizes, and the strict regulation of the sale and transfer of firearms to others. For the most part, I think most people would actually support a blanket prohibition on semi-automatic rifles, leaving just bolt, leaver and pump action rifles and shotguns for hunters and sportsmen.

they usually give a pass to islamic terrorism saying that chances of dying in terrorism act are negligible compared to car accident.

Interestingly, the chance of dying in an act of Islamic terrorism is negligible compared to the chance of dying in a mass shooting perpetrated by a pissed off white guy with an AR-15.

 

[Angry Floof]

There's a huge difference between examining your stance and justifying it after the fact.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I get that same response. Someone told me that guns don't need regulated because if someone wants to kill a lot of people they can just run them over in a truck. This kind of thinking is so strange. By this line of thinking we should all be allowed to keep VX nerve agent in our pantries too.

Clearly, the speaker has already made up their mind and is simply trying to rationalize their feelings. Lots of people mistake cleverness for intelligence.

I am all for banning assault rifles. I am just also for banning tobacco, alcohol, drugs, old cars and islamic terrorism.
It just turns out that cars kill way more people than assault rifles and you can't really argue with that math.
Also I find it interesting that most leftists are obviously for banning guns but at the same time they usually give a pass to islamic terrorism saying that chances of dying in terrorism act are negligible compared to car accident.

The gist of your response seems to be that we should be making the world safer, and I agree. We have taken steps to improve all aspects of car safety. We have taken steps to limit the use of tobacco. We seem to be addressing the use of drugs in a rational manner, some may disagree, and I think we're unanimous that islamic terrorism is bad.

So what in the name of Paul Bunyan's balls has that got to do with assault rifles and bump stocks? If you are for banning them as well, is there some greater point I am missing?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Interesting numbers here
According to them, there were estimated 122 deaths due to auto accidents on the day of Las Vegas massacre.
That's twice as many.

Were these intentional deaths?

 

[barbos]

I am all for banning assault rifles. I am just also for banning tobacco, alcohol, drugs, old cars and islamic terrorism.
It just turns out that cars kill way more people than assault rifles and you can't really argue with that math.
Also I find it interesting that most leftists are obviously for banning guns but at the same time they usually give a pass to islamic terrorism saying that chances of dying in terrorism act are negligible compared to car accident.

The gist of your response seems to be that we should be making the world safer, and I agree. We have taken steps to improve all aspects of car safety. We have taken steps to limit the use of tobacco. We seem to be addressing the use of drugs in a rational manner, some may disagree, and I think we're unanimous that islamic terrorism is bad.

So what in the name of Paul Bunyan's balls has that got to do with assault rifles and bump stocks? If you are for banning them as well, is there some greater point I am missing?

My point is, cars without computer assist safety features should be banned before assault rifles. Simple math says so.