Las Vegas Mass Casualty Attack

[awbuzz]

The kid who did this shooting was a 19 year old law abiding citizen who was currently expelled from his school, and had been reported to law enforcement dozens of times but had no problem legally obtaining a military style assault rifle and plenty of ammunition. You really don't see a problem there? You don't think maybe if we didn't allow 19 year olds to buy guns that it could have helped here. Maybe if he couldn't obtain a semi automatic rifle that lives might have been saved? Maybe if we had better background checks he might not have been allowed to buy the gun?

Nobody is claiming that we shouldn't study the criminals in these cases. But lets pretend that we can walk and chew gum at the same time. I really don't see what is wrong with trying to keep guns out of the hands of kids and the mentally impaired. I really don't see what is wrong with having better background checks to try to avoid letting guns into the hands of those with a troubled past. I don't see what is wrong with banning some types of guns that have no reasonable use in everyday life other than killing as many people as possible as quickly as possible. The fact that conservatives will fight tooth and nail for the right for a troubled kid to legally buy a semi automatic rifle blows my mind. This really shouldn't be a partisan issue.

Assume that you know that an AR15 is not an assault rifle. Your words - "but had no problem legally obtaining a military style assault rifle " - are a heart felt cry, which I understand, to justify something you want to have happen. But making statements that are not true, is like the Russians feeding Twitter and Facebook with falsehoods to push an agenda.

 

[awbuzz]

You’re drunk. He was NOT a law abiding citizen. He should have been in prison for making terroristic threats. 39 police visits to his house. Nobody ever entered anything into the background system. The FBI never followed up on reports about his threats. How many of these shootings are 19 year olds? You act like age banning is a no brainer, but this is the only one you can probably think of.

You’re obsessed with our high murder rate from guns, but you never bring up how much better our violent crime rate Is. we also have theb2nd amendment, so we have guns. Other countries have never had guns. I’m sure you know this. We’ve saved their asses in world wars a few times.

The biggest thing we could do to reduce gun murders and suicides is for law enforcement to do their damned jobs. If someone is a threat and making threats, prosecute them. Get those incidents into the background system. If someone is convicted of a felony, CONFISCATE THEIR GUNS. Police don’t do that today. Put an armed resource officer in every school. If we need to change the laws to give someone a gun timeout do to erratic behavior that isn’t quite mental illness, then pass a law to put a 5 year hold on them and revisit their behavior later.

There is no such thing as an assault rifle. A semi-automatic gun is not military style. Repeat after me. LOL. Bullets don’t fly unless you pull the trigger. You don’t pull and hold. 80% of guns are semi-automatic. They are not military style. They are not assault guns. They are murder guns. LOL. The little handgun someone’s wife owns is semi-automatic. She needs 10 shots - what if she misses, what if 3 people are breaking into her house? You will never ban semi-automatic guns. Nobody can protect themselves with a musket. LOL.

+1
I should have read further before making my last post.
Glad to see that someone else pointed out that the AR15 is NOT an Assault Weapon.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

True “assault rifles” are still legal to own. Fully auto M16s (a full auto AR15), full auto AK47s, full auto HK94s, full auto M14s. Also full auto sub machine guns like MP5s or Aussie (full auto carbines in pistol calibers).

They are expensive as hell nowadays (sincevthe NFA), and require a special government stamp to transfer ownership, but they are legal to own.

 

[WreckinGT]

Assume that you know that an AR15 is not an assault rifle. Your words - "but had no problem legally obtaining a military style assault rifle " - are a heart felt cry, which I understand, to justify something you want to have happen. But making statements that are not true, is like the Russians feeding Twitter and Facebook with falsehoods to push an agenda.

My apologies. Assault weapon would have been more accurate as a classification for the AR-15. Can I assume that you are ok with a semi automatic assault weapon being sold to a 19 year old who has been reported to the police dozens of times?

 

[WreckinGT]

If a murderer wants to commit murder he will find a means. Guns or otherwise. If a mass murderer wants to commit mass murder he will find a means. Guns or otherwise. See vehicle attacks, IEDS, VBIEDS.

You want to ban guns and shred 2A. Most Americans disagree. AR15s are just the first target in a long list of firearms gun grabbers want to ban / confiscate.

ARs are popular because the design is one of, if not the most, versatile and ergonomic firearms designs today. Which is a large reason why they are so prized by gun grabbers to ban. But they are not more inherently lethal than many other types of firearms.

Even if you got your way and a ban was instituted, nothing would change to decrease mass casualty attacks. There are hundreds of thousands of ARs currently owned in America. You can’t make them disappear without confiscating them.

Even if you could wave a magic wand and make them disappear, other models of rifles or shotguns would be used. Wave the magic wand and make all firearms disappear and you will see more bombings and such instead.

Guns aren’t the problem. Murderers are. But the same libs who want to disarm law abiding citizens will not condone increasing prison terms of violent felons, mandate convicted murderer never be allowed parole, or allow capital punishment for murderers.

We are a violent society and we are not very serious about deterring violent crime. That being the case I will not stand for being disarmed.

2A is a deterrent for violence. And also government tyranny.

So do nothing, no matter how many kids die. Got it.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

My apologies. Assault weapon would have been more accurate as a classification for the AR-15. Can I assume that you are ok with a semi automatic assault weapon being sold to a 19 year old who has been reported to the police dozens of times?

I see you are back drinking again this morning. You really need to cut that out. No we are NOT okay, and I've been posting in CAPS ( ) to explain that we are not okay with Cruz having guns. HE SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO LEGALLY HAVE GUNS. #1, law enforcement needs to do their jobs. #2, remember Adam Lanza - even if Cruz had been rightly banned from having guns, we'll never know if that would have stopped this shooting or not. Thousands of people are murdered every year with stolen guns.

Back to the AR-15. Say it after me, there is no such thing as assault rifles or assault weapons. Well, unless you club someone with it like a hammer (by the way, as a reminder, more people are killed with hammers every year than with AR-15s). AR-15 is a brand name - ArmaLite Rifle. There are competitive products by other companies that look similar, like the Sig Sauer MCX which was used in the Orlando Nightclub shooting. There are other flavors that are hybrid in between those and hand guns. And there are all kinds of handguns.

Here is a semi-automatic handgun. It shoots 17 bullets at a time and can be quickly reloaded. It doesn't look "scary" like the AR-15, but it is just as deadly.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

So do nothing, no matter how many kids die. Got it.

STOP DRINKING.

You're still completely missing the point. Like, not even close. You're sitting here basically accusing everyone who disagrees with you of being cold-hearted towards murder and violence, but you haven't ever suggested 1 single thing that even has remotely a reasonable chance of reducing gun violence. AND THATS EXACTLY THE POINT. ITS POLITICAL. Kids are protesting outside of high schools and at the White House yelling at Trump "SHAME ON YOU!" What in the world does he have to do with any of this? Democrats had the White House, the House of Representatives, and a filibuster proof majority in the Senate for multiple years AND DID NOTHING. As best I can tell Democrats are all talk and no action. They don't truly care about fixing a problem, they just want to use it to get votes. And that is pure evil. If they did care, they'd actually suggest a policy change that would do something.

 

[BuzzStone]

STOP DRINKING.

...AND THATS EXACTLY THE POINT. ITS POLITICAL. Kids are protesting outside of high schools and at the White House yelling at Trump "SHAME ON YOU!" What in the world does he have to do with any of this? Democrats had the White House, the House of Representatives, and a filibuster proof majority in the Senate for multiple years AND DID NOTHING. As best I can tell Democrats are all talk and no action. They don't truly care about fixing a problem, they just want to use it to get votes. And that is pure evil. If they did care, they'd actually suggest a policy change that would do something.

This part here it 100% true for Democrats. Its also 100% true for Republicans. And that is the problem I see. We need to do something to stop these shootings from happening. I think a combination of all ideas is probably what we need to do. But please lets stop thinking everyone is out to disarm law abiding citizens and lets move the discussion over to things we can do to keep any more children from being murdered.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

This part here it 100% true for Democrats. Its also 100% true for Republicans. And that is the problem I see. We need to do something to stop these shootings from happening. I think a combination of all ideas is probably what we need to do. But please lets stop thinking everyone is out to disarm law abiding citizens and lets move the discussion over to things we can do to keep any more children from being murdered.

#1 thing that would reduce gun murders (BY FAR): Law Enforcement and the FBI starts doing their job. The vast majority of gun murders are inner city by felons who shouldn't have guns. Nobody ever goes to confiscate weapons when people are convicted of felonies.

#2 our gun murder rate is at an all time record low going back to the 1800s, when their data collection was probably not even good in the first place. So gun murders are nothing new and have dropped substantially in the United States. But the TYPE of targets have changed to softer targets like schools (colleges, elementary schools, movie theaters) and other "gun free zones" where the criminals know they probably won't find any resistance. Hire an armed resource/police officer for every school. NOT TEACHERS. NOT STUDENTS.

#3 partly overlaps with #1, but get more aggressive above inputting police and mental health contacts into the background check database. This is probably where legislation is needed and it will start lawsuits for infringing on the 2nd and 4th and 1st amendments, but I think you can make a public welfare and safety argument that even if you can't successfully prosecute someone for making terroristic threats (or similar) that results in a felony and loss of guns, high levels of violent behavior and mental health issues should get someone a 5 year time-out or something like that. Guns confiscated for 5 years, 5 year probation.

All this stuff about confiscating all guns or guns that look scary won't do anything to move the needle.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

#1 thing that would reduce gun murders (BY FAR): Law Enforcement and the FBI starts doing their job. The vast majority of gun murders are inner city by felons who shouldn't have guns. Nobody ever goes to confiscate weapons when people are convicted of felonies.

#2 our gun murder rate is at an all time record low going back to the 1800s, when their data collection was probably not even good in the first place. So gun murders are nothing new and have dropped substantially in the United States. But the TYPE of targets have changed to softer targets like schools (colleges, elementary schools, movie theaters) and other "gun free zones" where the criminals know they probably won't find any resistance. Hire an armed resource/police officer for every school. NOT TEACHERS. NOT STUDENTS.

#3 partly overlaps with #1, but get more aggressive above inputting police and mental health contacts into the background check database. This is probably where legislation is needed and it will start lawsuits for infringing on the 2nd and 4th and 1st amendments, but I think you can make a public welfare and safety argument that even if you can't successfully prosecute someone for making terroristic threats (or similar) that results in a felony and loss of guns, high levels of violent behavior and mental health issues should get someone a 5 year time-out or something like that. Guns confiscated for 5 years, 5 year probation.

All this stuff about confiscating all guns or guns that look scary won't do anything to move the needle.

Of course I left out #4, which will do infinitely more to prevent these before they even get started. And that is the destruction of our moral and traditional values and the disintegration of the family. The statistics of those raised without a father (for example) is many many many many times larger to be involved in violence, crime, and all sorts of other dysfunctional behavior. We have a culture of moral relativism now. There is no clear right and wrong, its only right or wrong individual to individual in what they think and believe. And that's a dangerous recipe.

 

[BuzzStone]

Of course I left out #4, which will do infinitely more to prevent these before they even get started. And that is the destruction of our moral and traditional values and the disintegration of the family. The statistics of those raised without a father (for example) is many many many many times larger to be involved in violence, crime, and all sorts of other dysfunctional behavior. We have a culture of moral relativism now. There is no clear right and wrong, its only right or wrong individual to individual in what they think and believe. And that's a dangerous recipe.

All morals have always been relative. I don't see a problem with this per say. We as a society have evolved over time and as we have evolved our morals have grown to be better and better.

However lets put these things into some studies. Lets find out about the role of fathers. Lets looks at abusive homes. Lets look at exposure to drugs and alcohol. GT has a great analytics program why can we not find some of these common factors and work on solving these problems before they shoot up a school.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

All morals have always been relative. I don't see a problem with this per say. We as a society have evolved over time and as we have evolved our morals have grown to be better and better.

However lets put these things into some studies. Lets find out about the role of fathers. Lets looks at abusive homes. Lets look at exposure to drugs and alcohol. GT has a great analytics program why can we not find some of these common factors and work on solving these problems before they shoot up a school.

I'll agree to disagree. I believe in objective truth. That there are certain things true in life not subject to what someone thinks.

When I grew up, there wasn't nudity on TV. There wasn't cursing. There weren't realistic video games involving mass murder. We're not allowed to judge anybody anymore. If someone is pregnant but doesn't believe its a child, then its not a child. But when they're truly ready to be a mother and now it is a child, suddenly it is.

The #1 factor that correlates to growing up in a poor home (which leads to all kinds of societal problems) is not having 2 parents in the home.

Two-thirds of suicides are in single parent families. 90% of homeless or runaway kids come from single parent families. 70% of high school dropouts, 90% of mental illness. 75% of drug abusers. 85% of youth in prison.

All these statistics are 10-20 times the national average. Our country is rotting morally from the inside. Focusing on THIS will help decrease violence by not using bandaids. The rest of the things I listed above are bandaids which will no doubt help, but they only treat the symptoms.

 

[BuzzStone]

I'll agree to disagree. I believe in objective truth. That there are certain things true in life not subject to what someone thinks.

When I grew up, there wasn't nudity on TV. There wasn't cursing. There weren't realistic video games involving mass murder. We're not allowed to judge anybody anymore. If someone is pregnant but doesn't believe its a child, then its not a child. But when they're truly ready to be a mother and now it is a child, suddenly it is.

The #1 factor that correlates to growing up in a poor home (which leads to all kinds of societal problems) is not having 2 parents in the home.

Two-thirds of suicides are in single parent families. 90% of homeless or runaway kids come from single parent families. 70% of high school dropouts, 90% of mental illness. 75% of drug abusers. 85% of youth in prison.

All these statistics are 10-20 times the national average. Our country is rotting morally from the inside. Focusing on THIS will help decrease violence by not using bandaids. The rest of the things I listed above are bandaids which will no doubt help, but they only treat the symptoms.

We can agree to disagree on morals. If you think there is objective truth who gets to determine what that truth is? Now you see its all relative.

Nudity is not a problem. I get naked every day I see naked people on a regular basis.
Cursing is not an issue. Saying God Damn is the same thing as saying Darn it. Its all about context.
I don't see how any of that can cause issues for someone.

Now down to some real facts you wrote lets look at how to solve some of these issues. Maybe looks at why so many families are single parent families. Is it poverty, drugs, social pressure? I don't have the answers to these but this board is full of intelligent people like yourself. How do we help ease the single parent issues?

 

[Deleted member 2897]

We can agree to disagree on morals. If you think there is objective truth who gets to determine what that truth is? Now you see its all relative.

Nudity is not a problem. I get naked every day I see naked people on a regular basis.
Cursing is not an issue. Saying God Damn is the same thing as saying Darn it. Its all about context.
I don't see how any of that can cause issues for someone.

Now down to some real facts you wrote lets look at how to solve some of these issues. Maybe looks at why so many families are single parent families. Is it poverty, drugs, social pressure? I don't have the answers to these but this board is full of intelligent people like yourself. How do we help ease the single parent issues?

These are connected.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

On a side note, I read an article recently that from 2000-2015 most of Europe had a higher per capita rate of deaths from gun mass shootings than the US. That of course is not the narrative in the news, so I started looking up countries (Great Britain, Norway, Netherlands, Switzerland, Germany), and lo and behold they were all higher than ours.

We have a tremendously high gun murder rate compared to the rest of the world, but its largely the 1sies and 2sies from inner city gang violence. I was surprised to learn our mass shooting death rate isn't actually worse than everyone else - what a total and utter failing from the media.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

So do nothing, no matter how many kids die. Got it.

No. Just do something that will actually succeed in mitigating these incidents. And do so without violating my civil rights.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

This part here it 100% true for Democrats. Its also 100% true for Republicans. And that is the problem I see. We need to do something to stop these shootings from happening. I think a combination of all ideas is probably what we need to do. But please lets stop thinking everyone is out to disarm law abiding citizens and lets move the discussion over to things we can do to keep any more children from being murdered.

The DNC has demonstrated their desire to disarm civilians though. Incrementally sure but the end goal is the same. DNC has no credibility saying otherwise anymore.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

The DNC has demonstrated their desire to disarm civilians though. Incrementally sure but the end goal is the same. DNC has no credibility saying otherwise anymore.

Its not just the DNC - they are just an extension of the people who vote for them. Look at people on this board that are on that side of the political spectrum. They want to ban and confiscate semi-automatic guns - that's 80% of what people buy. That's an effective universal disarmament. I think that's actually a reasonable position to take and debate from, even if I don't agree with it. But its best to own it and say it rather than beat around the bush about it.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

On a side note, I read an article recently that from 2000-2015 most of Europe had a higher per capita rate of deaths from gun mass shootings than the US. That of course is not the narrative in the news, so I started looking up countries (Great Britain, Norway, Netherlands, Switzerland, Germany), and lo and behold they were all higher than ours.

We have a tremendously high gun murder rate compared to the rest of the world, but its largely the 1sies and 2sies from inner city gang violence. I was surprised to learn our mass shooting death rate isn't actually worse than everyone else - what a total and utter failing from the media.

Yes murder rates in inner city economically depressed areas are a problem. Many homicides are domestic violence and not relegated to inner cities. Also have to keep in mind that gun death stats always include suicides so appear to inflate gun murder numbers.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

Its not just the DNC - they are just an extension of the people who vote for them. Look at people on this board that are on that side of the political spectrum. They want to ban and confiscate semi-automatic guns - that's 80% of what people buy. That's an effective universal disarmament. I think that's actually a reasonable position to take and debate from, even if I don't agree with it. But its best to own it and say it rather than beat around the bush about it.

They refuse to admit it openly nationally, but have less fear of doing so in anti 2a areas of the country and are more honest about their desires there. See CA, MA, WA, NY etc.

They won’t admit to their true end goals nationally as they fear the backlash that would ensue. Thus their use of incrementalism. Bit by bit they aim to dismantle 2A.