Mock

I know , right. Blood money is my favorite money.




Thanks for the morning laugh though HotD

There are a lot of people spouting off that the bump stock may have saved lives, made him less accurate and all that kind of horse shit.
HOTD and FUs analysis is correct, none of that matters. Shooting from a high point and just spraying a 20000+ crowd accuracy means hitting the crowd, the individuals are in there, its like stomping an anthill.
Bump stocks were created specifically to get around the proscriptions on automatics and should have been banned. The ATF looked at them for weeks and OK'ed them because they did not meet the definition of "Automatic". That was just a case of bad semantics, the definition of automatic should have been changed to encompass these things, but that was not their charter on this issue.
Ban the damn things, there is no reason at all for civilians to own anything like an auto....Now how to word the law to do that will require a shit ton more debate and the gun grabbers will try and push for the widest possible definition that will no doubt infringe on us legal folks, and the pro gun lobby will want the definition honed to a surgical edge to the point of only banning specific model numbers.....
All that said the guy broke a LOT of laws ass soon as he popped the first round, a few dozen more laws will not matter in the slightest.
The guy killed a LOT of people purely because he was able to pour so much fire on the crowd in the 11 minutes he had period.

He had 72 minutes to fire, only used 11. Yeah thank god he had a bumpstock. You are clueless.

I agree Six. there has ben this ban and find a way to skirt around the ban game going on for decades. Remember the old triggers that increased the rate of fire. The first ones were a simple crank that mounted on the trigger guard and when spun [like a fishing real] it flipped the trigger. Well that was banned after a rewording of the law. Then came the hell fire. It was a spring loaded trigger that flipped back and forth when pressed. Then that was banned after rewording. Then they came up with the spring loaded stock that increased the rate of fire. Then that was banned and finally we come to todays bump setups. They skirted the ban because it is not a automatic device that increases the rate of fire. that only happens because a human controls the device, not springs or cranks.
They can ban these now and within 2 years someone will outsmart the new ban and we will be back in business.

You are missing the point Mark. He sat and waited for his time of choosing to unleash the firepower. He didn't have 72 minutes to do the deed. It only took 11 minutes for the cops to locate and stop him. It don't matter when, during those 72 minutes, he decided to start the killing, he still only had 11 minutes to do the shooting before he was stopped. More bullets in those 11 minutes = more dead. By your logic he would have had a higher kill number if he used a old fashion hunting boltaction.

Derp, Biggie.

Are you now calling F.U. and Six ignorant when it comes to firearms?

I think you're reading and buying into nonsense posited by nutty gun extremists. Whether those are your own thoughts or not..............take a moment and put back on your thinking cap man!

Paddock had between 9 and 11 minutes from the time he started shooting until LE honed in on his location and descended upon him.

What makes you think it would have taken LE longer than 9 to 11 minutes to get to him if he'd begun 72 minutes earlier?

Why are you insisting on something that makes no sense? If a person can fire 1.5x the bullets per minute by using a bump stock, for example, he/she will be at an advantage with a bump stock if his/her goal is to get off as many rounds as possible in ANY given time frame.

Here's what I've learned in the 5 years or so of reading this thread:

GUN LOVERS = understand that death, mayhem and destruction are just the price of their right to bear arms.

GUN GRABBERS = DON'T understand why death, mayhem and destruction need be tolerated for the right to bear arms.

He didn't have 11 minutes, he had 48 without any police at his door. The cops waited 72 before making entry.

You forgot the majority of people who fall somewhere in the middle, MS.

There is some risk and some benefit to the right to bear arms. I think most people accept that and I've heard nobody in this thread (aside from Maggot) allude to ridding America of all guns.

In my opinion, reading and listening to people on all sides of the issue, most people respect the Second Amendment and don't have a problem with responsible gun owners bearing arms for self-defense, hunting, responsible sporting... What is more widely objected-to is high capacity mags, assault rifles, bumper stocks and other related items that fall outside those parameters. I don't think the death and destruction caused by individuals bearing those items is acceptable to a large portion of the population, nor should it be.

I agree with you HotD.

My point was aimed at how gun lovers understand there is and always will be collateral damage, damn everybody who doesn't understand that.

I've stated in here too many times to count, that I personally don't want to see Americans have to give up their guns.

However, the idea that we can't do away with a few/some of the things that you mentioned above after these unbelievable atrocities, is absolutely mind-boggling.

I almost feel like we need explicit photos of the carnage plastered on our TV screens to get people to understand what's happened.

But, we cover up the images, because they're so grotesque, hideous and scary that we can't do that.

So, when a story breaks of 58 slaughtered and 500+ injured, without images, it doesn't really register.

What if we had to see pictures of 20+ 6-year olds shredded to pieces in their classrooms?

Do you think America would just *yawn* and move on so easily?

Doubt it.

(10-04-2017, 11:30 AM)BigMark Wrote: [ -> ]He didn't have 11 minutes, he had 48 without any police at his door. The cops waited 72 before making entry.

The question is the same. Why are you insisting that getting more rounds off using a bump stock in ANY given time frame wasn't an advantage in hitting as many people as possible in a dense crowd?

Are you suggesting that Paddock thought to himself, 'hmmm, I believe I killed 58 people and injured 527, my exact goal. AND, I think I still have about 48 minutes before the cops come a knockin'. What a laugh, I probably didn't need those bump stocks after all. Silly super efficient me!"

I guess it's remotely possible that happened, but highly unlikely. Paddock was watching the activity and monitoring via hidden cameras, according to LE. I think it's more likely that he went into the final phase of his plan and hunkered down when he got the signs that LE was honing in. But, that's just my opinion.

(10-04-2017, 11:43 AM)Midwest Spy Wrote: [ -> ]I almost feel like we need explicit photos of the carnage plastered on our TV screens to get people to understand what's happened.

But, we cover up the images, because they're so grotesque, hideous and scary that we can't do that.

So, when a story breaks of 58 slaughtered and 500+ injured, without images, it doesn't really register.

What if we had to see pictures of 20+ 6-year olds shredded to pieces in their classrooms?

Do you think America would just *yawn* and move on so easily?

Doubt it.

I get your point and prefer unedited reality myself, even when it's painful.

Personally, I could view such photos. But, I don't need to see the carnage with my own two eyes to imagine it, feel deeply for the loved ones of the victims, be incensed about it, and feel compelled to engage in discussion about how to minimize the problem and number of incidents.

However, I don't know the answer to your question about how the whole of the country would react if such photos were released. I'm not sure whether many of the deceased victims' loved ones would want those images in the public realm. But assuming some of them consented, I imagine the impact would be mixed.

Some people respond much more strongly to visuals than anything else. So, it might stimulate more empathy, longer lasting impact, and engagement from some Americans.

On the other hand, ................I believe there's some credible research suggesting that people can tend to become more desensitized with increased exposure to shocking images; it kind of normalizes the horrific.

Tonight's press conference on the Las Vegas mass shooting case was very weird.

Sheriff Lombardo was all over the place. His demeanor was very different than it has been at the previous press conferences and during his team's meetings with Trump today. He must be exhausted, understandably. But, I got the sense something else had him really frazzled. Maybe it was the public presence of the FBI starting today and some of the previous information released through the Metro PD now being corrected?

Anyway, the sheriff said he didn't know the answers to a lot of the questions that were asked, that he hadn't been privy to the FBI investigation, and that he wasn't gonna make assumptions for the press (he made that last statement seconds after making several assumptions preceded by "I assume"). Hope he's okay.

Here's what's new in the Las Vegas mass shooting case, according to tonight's televised press conference.

1. Fatalities confirmed as 58, not including the killer.

2. Injuries reduced by about 100; the sheriff explained that there was some duplication of counting between various hospitals + some patients who shouldn't have been counted because their injuries were in no way related to the mass shooting.

3. The FBI interviewed Marilou Danley, the killer's girlfriend, today. The FBI special agent at the press conference wouldn't comment on it. She is a Person of Interest, meaning LE still wants to talk to her (not that she's a suspected accomplice at this time). It was released to the press earlier today that she said she had no idea what Paddock was planning and that he sent her to the Philippines a couple of weeks ago to visit her family. When Paddock wired her $100,000 to buy a house for her and her family there, she figured he was breaking up with her.

4. The sheriff said LE has very little on Paddock and then shared his assumptions that: (a) Paddock had a secret life, (b) other people must have known something due to the amount of firearms, ammo and explosive material found at Paddock's home and in his vehicle, (c )the reason Paddock stopped shooting is because the hotel security guard showed up and Paddock's focus left the concert crowd and turned to himself.

5. The sheriff said there was definitive evidence that Paddock planned to escape, but he wouldn't comment on that evidence at this time.

6. It was 12 minutes from the first shots to Las Vegas Metro PD getting to Paddock's room, and 75 minutes until they breached the room. Police officers were about 60 seconds behind the hotel security guard.

7. The sheriff stated the security guard was shot at through the hotel door with 200 rounds, got injured, but continued to assist LE clear the floor of occupants (that's what took so much time, which was okay because Paddock had stopped shooting). The security guard didn't leave until he was forced to go seek medical assistance.

8. The sheriff confirmed that a couple of Paddock's guns were jammed, but there were plenty of functional guns still available to him and lots of unspent ammo in the room when police forced entry to find him dead. There was a second door that was locked inside the room, but no one other than Paddock was present.

9. The sheriff doesn't know if Paddock killed himself as LE was preparing to breach the room or as soon as he saw officers through the room service cart camera.

10. The sheriff said Paddock did not record the events.

11. The sheriff doesn't know yet if anybody visited Paddock's room at Mandalay Bay.

12. The sheriff confirmed that Paddock had rented rooms at the Ogden Condos across from the Life Is Beautiful musical festival week before last, but he doesn't know if that was a dry run, scoping, a dropped massacre plan, or unrelated.

The people at the "Life Is Beautiful musical festival" week before last didn't know just "how lucky hey were"!

They do now.

Life "was beautiful" for them!

Some conspiracy theories are talking about the possibility of multiple shooters but I haven't seen any evidence to substantiate that. Furthermore, their reasoning is that the additional shooters are the terrorists, thereby brining clarity to the motive.

And P.S.
I am just now watching SNL from the weekend and it is kind of eerie knowing this happened just shortly after and they had no idea, some of the jokes seem so sad looking back now.