# The LV Shooting Megathread (no more threads on this!)



## Parallax (Oct 2, 2017)

Las Vegas police are telling people to avoid the area around the Mandalay Bay Casino due to reports of an active shooter. Las Vegas Metro Police issued the warning in a post on Twitter early Monday.

Multiple people with gunshot wounds have been taken to the University Medical Center in Las Vegas, Nevada, according to hospital spokeswoman Danita Cohen.

Eyewitness Bryan Heifner spoke to CNN from a room in a hotel across from the Mandalay Bay, which he said he could see from his window.
"Mostly I heard the shots, just so many shots -- I just thought it was a semi braking with the air brakes, but then I went downstairs and saw people running and looking for family," he said.
"I immediately went back to my room, locked the door, turned the lights off."
Developing story - more to come


----------



## Neo Arcadia (Oct 2, 2017)

I've heard there are multiple shooters and they're sporting automatics.
Take it with a grain of salt though.

Also,


----------



## Huey Freeman (Oct 2, 2017)




----------



## Zef (Oct 2, 2017)

Heard there was at least 20 dead.


----------



## stream (Oct 2, 2017)

So is it a Muslim terrorist or a redneck homophobe? I've got two messages ready, but I need to know which one I should post...



One suspect is down, the police say they don't believe there's another gunman, but please don't go in the area. At least two dead and 24 injured.


----------



## GrimaH (Oct 2, 2017)

At least 20 dead and over a hundred injured.


----------



## GrimaH (Oct 2, 2017)

Eyewitness reports (and videos...jesus) note that the shooter(s) was spraying bullets from a high vantage point into people for up to 2 minutes.

Confirmed casualties are expected to increase significantly.


----------



## EJ (Oct 2, 2017)

WOW

man..


----------



## Al Mudaari (Oct 2, 2017)

Thought this was about Iraq for a second, but then I realised the big media coverage on it.

Reactions: Useful 1


----------



## Foxve (Oct 2, 2017)

Apparently they're looking for a woman who was traveling around with the gunman.


----------



## White Wolf (Oct 2, 2017)

Damn that's awful. Hope they can stop the shooters ASAP.


----------



## Foxve (Oct 2, 2017)

Update:



> *Gunman is '64-year-old white man'*
> The gunman in Las Vegas who slaughtered at least 20 people and injured more than 100 has been identified as a 64-year-old white man, according to ABC News.
> 
> Police have not released the name of the man but are searching for a woman, identified as Marilou Danley, who was believed to be his roommate.
> ...


----------



## White Wolf (Oct 2, 2017)

stream said:


> or a redneck homophobe




I guess that answers that question.


----------



## Xhominid (Oct 2, 2017)

I just got told about this now...for something horrific like this to happen at my backyard is beyond messed up...

RIP in peace to the dead and I hope those injured pull through.


----------



## WT (Oct 2, 2017)

RIP

Tragedy......


----------



## wibisana (Oct 2, 2017)

rip.


----------



## Soca (Oct 2, 2017)

Yea I've been following this for a minute. Shit was crazy

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## GRIMMM (Oct 2, 2017)

My condolences to the victims. My thoughts are with the families and friends.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Oct 2, 2017)

Fifty dead is a lot. They named the shooter. Stephen Paddock


----------



## Soca (Oct 2, 2017)

damn..


----------



## wibisana (Oct 2, 2017)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Fifty dead is a lot. They named the shooter. Stephen Paddock


50? It is new record? or close one IIRC


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Oct 2, 2017)

The gun was fully automatic and it sounds like he was shooting from up in the hotel down into the crowds.


----------



## Nighty the Mighty (Oct 2, 2017)

wibisana said:


> 50? It is new record? or close one IIRC



previous "record" (maybe lets not use this word) was 49 I believe so if it's really 50+ then yes, it's the most people killed in a single shooting

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## Mider T (Oct 2, 2017)

Marcelle.B said:


> Yea I've been following this for a minute. Shit was crazy


Wow, that's nuts.  Here come the body scanners at the Vegas hotels.


----------



## dr_shadow (Oct 2, 2017)

Confirmed deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history.

RIP victims.

But in b4 Trump and the GOP do nothing to restrict gun ownership, as usual.

Reactions: Like 2 | Agree 5


----------



## Mider T (Oct 2, 2017)

wibisana said:


> 50? It is new record? or close one IIRC


I think the guy who shot up the movie theater in Aurora, Colorado for The Dark Knight Rises premiere a few years ago killed the same amount of people.


----------



## Jin22 (Oct 2, 2017)

Mider T said:


> I think the guy who shot up the movie theater in Aurora, Colorado for The Dark Knight Rises premiere a few years ago killed the same amount of people.


It's because of that shooting I stopped going to opening weekend premieres. They did a documentary on that shooting on the ID channel. He killed in the 20s or something like that

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## EJ (Oct 2, 2017)

Mider T said:


> I think the guy who shot up the movie theater in Aurora, Colorado for The Dark Knight Rises premiere a few years ago killed the same amount of people.



No, he didn't. He killed 12, injured 70.


----------



## Utopia Realm (Oct 2, 2017)

RIP. I woke up like 15 mins ago and I see on Tv.


----------



## Nighty the Mighty (Oct 2, 2017)

I suspect you might actually see them budge a bit on this one actually 

_legit _fully automatic weaponry for civilians is incredibly hard to justify and already more than half illegal:





> (o)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), *it shall be unlawful for any person to transfer or possess a machinegun*.
> 
> (2) *This subsection does not apply with respect to*—
> 
> ...



Basically what this means is that it's only legal to own automatic weaponry that was in circulation prior to 1986. With respect to how difficult it is to pass gun control type stuff in the states, it does seem like there's an opening here where there could be bipartisan support for a total automatic weapons ban. 

but then again the issue has become increasingly partisan, so perhaps that's optimistic

Reactions: Informative 1 | Optimistic 1


----------



## Nighty the Mighty (Oct 2, 2017)

the other question is also whether his automatic weapon was legal ofc

if it's self modified or he imported it from north korea or something then that's another hurdle


----------



## Alwaysmind (Oct 2, 2017)

wibisana said:


> 50? It is new record? or close one IIRC



Sadly yes.



mr_shadow said:


> Confirmed deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history.
> 
> RIP victims.
> 
> But in b4 Trump and the GOP do nothing to restrict gun ownership, as usual.



Well there's a couple of ways that can play out. Trump will obviously call this a tragedy  but he might remind us of NRA lines that there's always someone who should have had a gun, from the maids and hotel employees to concert technicians.


----------



## Alwaysmind (Oct 2, 2017)

Hopefully no one here has had the tragedy of knowing someone who attended or were part of the victims.

Reactions: Optimistic 2


----------



## Mider T (Oct 2, 2017)

Jin22 said:


> It's because of that shooting I stopped going to opening weekend premieres. They did a documentary on that shooting on the ID channel. He killed in the 20s or something like that


You stopped going because of something that happened once in history?


Utopia Realm said:


> RIP. I woke up like 15 mins ago and I see on Tv.



Good morning.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## IchLiebe (Oct 2, 2017)

Racist redneck attacks a Jason Aldean concert? No.


----------



## Jin22 (Oct 2, 2017)

Mider T said:


> You stopped going because of something that happened once in history?


Yeah. I wait a week or two...people are mentally disenfranchised

Reactions: Sad! 1


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Oct 2, 2017)

God, do we know the reason behind this madness?


----------



## Alwaysmind (Oct 2, 2017)

The daily mail reporting on the important details:


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Oct 2, 2017)

Nighty the Mighty said:


> I suspect you might actually see them budge a bit on this one actually
> 
> _legit _fully automatic weaponry for civilians is incredibly hard to justify and already more than half illegal:
> 
> ...


It's likely that the gun was modified to be fully automatic from semi-automatic.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Mider T (Oct 2, 2017)

Flow said:


> No, he didn't. He killed 12, injured 70.


My mistake, the previous record was Pulse nightclub.  That was 49 people.


----------



## Mider T (Oct 2, 2017)

Jin22 said:


> Yeah. I wait a week or two...people are mentally disenfranchised


Have you also stopped taking planes, trains, subways, going to nightclubs, schools, bridges, plazas, and government buildings?


----------



## ~Gesy~ (Oct 2, 2017)

A white man? You sure he isn't Mexican or south  asian? Or in this country illegally?  Because those are the people our president told us to watch out for.


----------



## Alwaysmind (Oct 2, 2017)

Inb4 Trump will call him a loser and coward in his response.


----------



## Hitt (Oct 2, 2017)

Before we start the pointless gun control debate that will go nowhere, we should probably find out first what kind of gun he had and how this guy obtained it.

Reactions: Agree 2


----------



## ~Gesy~ (Oct 2, 2017)

It was the love of guns that helped get Trump into office. Those who are screaming or hoping for gun control are wasting their breath.


----------



## WorkingMoogle (Oct 2, 2017)

Let me guess, "tragic isolated incident," "lone wolf," "thoughts and prayers?"

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Huey Freeman (Oct 2, 2017)

Alwaysmind said:


> Sadly yes.
> 
> 
> 
> Well there's a couple of ways that can play out. Trump will obviously call this a tragedy  but he might remind us of NRA lines that there's always someone who should have had a gun, from the maids and hotel employees to concert technicians.


ah yes having a hand gun or shot gun and trying to play punisher is ideal


----------



## Huey Freeman (Oct 2, 2017)

WorkingMoogle said:


> Let me guess, "tragic isolated incident," "lone wolf," "thoughts and prayers?"


_He must have been a nice guy with mental issues. Yeah he definitely was not a Te....whoops almost used the T word there for a second, caught myself slipping _


----------



## Parallax (Oct 2, 2017)

IchLiebe said:


> Racist redneck attacks a Jason Aldean concert? No.


If this was brown you'd say a lot of untasteful things, hold your horses till we find out more.


----------



## Parallax (Oct 2, 2017)

Also since he's white nothing will happen the nra will be like OVER OUR DEAD BODY and the president won't say shit till tomorrow

Reactions: Like 2 | Friendly 1


----------



## Xiammes (Oct 2, 2017)

From what I have seen and heard the guy shot up a country concert and has a Asian wife, so I doubt he was some redneck. Don't see a clear motive right now, my mind is veering towards wanting a flashy suicide.


----------



## Deleted member 235437 (Oct 2, 2017)

50 dead and 400 injured 


What a disgusting world we live in

Reactions: Agree 2 | Disagree 1


----------



## Sennin of Hardwork (Oct 2, 2017)

My condolences to the families' victims.


----------



## Darkmatter (Oct 2, 2017)

This is terrible. RIP.

But I know what's going to happen: nothing. If there's minimum to nothing done related to Sandy Hook shooting, then nothing's going to happen from this tragedy.
At this point, I have no idea how to deal with such epidemic.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Vermilion Kn (Oct 2, 2017)

My god, woke up to this. 

What is the world coming to ?

Reactions: Optimistic 1


----------



## mali (Oct 2, 2017)

rip to the dead. my condolences to the family and friends of the victims and may their grieving be as painless as possible. the world always manages to remind you how dim of a place it is.


----------



## Vermilion Kn (Oct 2, 2017)

Sigh, already conpiratards are flooding the web claiming this was all a false flag.


----------



## Huey Freeman (Oct 2, 2017)

Vermilion Kn said:


> Sigh, already conpiratards are flooding the web claiming this was all a false flag.


Because it doesn't help with the Ban case you see


----------



## LesExit (Oct 2, 2017)

WorkingMoogle said:


> Let me guess, "tragic isolated incident," "lone wolf," "thoughts and prayers?"


Pretty sure I already read an article that called him a lone wolf...

What a disgusting man. An _actual_ fucking terrorist. I was just waiting for another shooting to happen...which is so sad


----------



## Mider T (Oct 2, 2017)

Apparently the dude was packing like 10 guns.  The video is crazy with how he is just mowing people down.   Surprised it was only 50.


----------



## Mider T (Oct 2, 2017)

Xiammes said:


> From what I have seen and heard the guy shot up a country concert and has a Asian wife,


It wasn't his wife.  Also racists can still be attracted to other races.


----------



## Huey Freeman (Oct 2, 2017)

Mider T said:


> It wasn't his wife.  Also racists can still be attracted to other races.


Like slave masters didn't have jungle fever from time to time.


----------



## Mider T (Oct 2, 2017)

Huey Freeman said:


> Like slave masters didn't have jungle fever from time to time.


>From time to time

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Kathutet (Oct 2, 2017)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Fifty dead is a lot. They named the shooter. Stephen Paddock


My sources tell me his name was Piece of Shit Cuntface.

But I guess they were probably wrong.

Reactions: Like 5 | Funny 2


----------



## ~Gesy~ (Oct 2, 2017)

Huey Freeman said:


> Because it doesn't help with the Ban case you see


It would've been checkmate had a Muslim or illegal done this.

Reactions: Friendly 1


----------



## Huey Freeman (Oct 2, 2017)

Mider T said:


> >From time to time

Reactions: Funny 2 | Winner 1


----------



## Huey Freeman (Oct 2, 2017)

~Gesy~ said:


> It would've been checkmate had a Muslim or illegal done this.


You know they were salivating with a rock hard boner at first and when the news came they were all like " Are you sure? Check again!" "But Sir." " I said check again!"

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## WorkingMoogle (Oct 2, 2017)

Really worst case wouldn't have been "Muslim."  The hate-boner is already full-on there.

Worst case would be "Antifa/Leftist Extremist" to justify cracking down on anyone visiting the "wrong" groups.

Fox News reporting links to "Moveon.org" and the ACLU in the same tone they do Al Queda would really make some groups drool.


----------



## LesExit (Oct 2, 2017)

Well while everyone talks about race... 
Why women don't be doing this crazy ass shit? Male violence crazy....

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 4 | Funny 1 | Disagree 1


----------



## Neo Arcadia (Oct 2, 2017)

Darkmatter said:


> At this point, I have no idea how to deal with such epidemic.


Well we as a society could try to understand why people are snapping and going on killing sprees, then attempt to resolve the underlying issues.
Nah, too much work. Let's just have a song and dance about gun control and "what if" racial/ideological politics and call it a day.
*Edit:* Annnnd maybe it's not "what if" anymore. I'm hearing rumors that ISIS has claimed responsibility and that Paddock was a recent convert.
That's another can of worms opened if true.


----------



## Huey Freeman (Oct 2, 2017)

LesExit said:


> Well while everyone talks about race...
> Why women don't be doing this crazy ass shit? Male violence crazy....


Because women always be crazy, you guys don't try to cage it


----------



## Huey Freeman (Oct 2, 2017)

Neo Arcadia said:


> Well we as a society could try to understand why people are snapping and going on killing sprees, then attempt to resolve the underlying issues.
> Nah, too much work. Let's just have a song and dance about gun control and "what if" racial/ideological politics and call it a day.
> *Edit:* Annnnd maybe it's not "what if" anymore. I'm hearing rumors that ISIS has claimed responsibility and that Paddock was a recent convert.
> That's another can of worms opened if true.


Dude's white come on dude. They'll claim for everything


----------



## ~Gesy~ (Oct 2, 2017)

Neo Arcadia said:


> Well we as a society could try to understand why people are snapping and going on killing sprees, then attempt to resolve the underlying issues.
> Nah, too much work. Let's just have a song and dance about gun control and "what if" racial/ideological politics and call it a day.
> *Edit:* Annnnd maybe it's not "what if" anymore. I'm hearing rumors that ISIS has claimed responsibility and that Paddock was a recent convert.
> That's another can of worms opened if true.


People are always going to snap. The why won't change that from occuring.


----------



## U mad bro (Oct 2, 2017)

Hate to say something blunt. But he probably walked around with the weapon strapped to his back and no one batted an eye.


----------



## EJ (Oct 2, 2017)

*Nevada state law defines Las Vegas mass shooting as an act of terrorism*

*But police say they are 'not at this point' treating incident as terror


*

Police investigating the mass shooting of concert-goers at a music festival in Las Vegas have said they are not treating the incident as an act of terrorism.

But Nevada law suggests the Sunday night massacre of at least 50 people can be defined as such.

The  says an “act of terrorism means any act that involves the use or attempted use of sabotage, coercion or violence which is intended to cause great bodily harm or death to the general population”.

However, police, who are early on in their investigation of the shooting that also left at least 200 injured, said it was too early to label the incident as terrorism.

Responding to questions about whether the killing was being treated as terror-related, Clark County Sheriff Joseph Lombardo said: “No not at this point, we believe it is a local individual, he resides here locally.

“We don’t know what his belief system was at this time.”

Nevada state law separately defines a terrorist as "a person who intentionally commits, causes, aids, furthers or conceals an act of terrorism or attempts to commit, cause, aid, further or conceal an act of terrorism".

The incident unfolded late on Sunday when a gunman, named as 64-year-old Stephen Paddock, fired hundreds of rounds from the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay Casino.

The bullets rained down on an outdoor country music festival, with concert-goers reporting hearing what they described as automatic gun fire.

Thousands fled as bursts of gunfire could be heard for more than five minutes[/quote]


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-law-act-police-stephen-paddock-a7978456.html


----------



## Neo Arcadia (Oct 2, 2017)

Huey Freeman said:


> Dude's white come on dude. They'll claim for everything


Have there been any definite cases where the claims were false?
There was also that ISIS propaganda video featuring Las Vegas a few months ago... It's not unreasonable to suspect they had been planning this for a while.


----------



## Kira Yagami (Oct 2, 2017)

What the fuck
50+ dead and 500 injured and moreover it was done by a white person,i was wondering why some people werent calling this 'terrorism' 
I bet they were the same people who were quick to cuss out muslims and islam claiming it was them before the suspect was even identified as white smh
And of course as usual ISIS have claimed responsibility for this cunts work


Rip all the victims and hope this "poor mentally ill deranged misunderstood lone wolf" rots in hell

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 2


----------



## IchLiebe (Oct 2, 2017)

Mider T said:


> It wasn't his wife.  Also racists can still be attracted to other races.


What does racism have to do with this?


Stormfront didn't come out and accept responsibility as ISIS have done.

Mass murder + white =\= Racism

Reactions: Dislike 1


----------



## Queen Vag (Oct 2, 2017)

Neo Arcadia said:


> Have there been any definite cases where the claims were false?
> There was also that ISIS propaganda video featuring Las Vegas a few months ago... It's not unreasonable to suspect they had been planning this for a while.


The FBI already said there's no correlation between the shooter and ISIS lmao


----------



## Mickey Mouse (Oct 2, 2017)

Disgusting. Just disgusting.


----------



## IchLiebe (Oct 2, 2017)

Parallax said:


> If this was brown you'd say a lot of untasteful things, hold your horses till we find out more.


Hold your words.

You not see how ridiculous that narrative is? Ridiculously retarded. Even if he was a white supremist, this attack had nothinto do with race.

A white old man who has white supremist opinions or ideologies attacks a country(white people) music concert?

Why not attack a rap concert that is formatted in the same way in the same city multiple times a month? 

Obviously racism had no effect on the attack.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Skaddix (Oct 2, 2017)

What will be done about the white christian menace?

Reactions: Optimistic 1


----------



## IchLiebe (Oct 2, 2017)

Val said:


> The FBI already said there's no correlation between the shooter and ISIS lmao


So far,

They still haven't analyzed his electronic devices. You heard the presser surely. So why be disingenuous?


----------



## Neo Arcadia (Oct 2, 2017)

Val said:


> The FBI already said there's no correlation between the shooter and ISIS lmao


Appeal to authority is a fallacy you know.
Oh who am I kidding, it's not like that ever matters.


----------



## EJ (Oct 2, 2017)

People are/were crossing their fingers over this shit hoping it was a Muslim, Antifa, racist crazed white guy, etc when the fact is gun-control is a problem that needs to be addressed within this country.

All three of those sides have their issues on a separate note.

Reactions: Agree 2


----------



## Huey Freeman (Oct 2, 2017)

Neo Arcadia said:


> Appeal to authority is a fallacy you know.
> Oh who am I kidding, it's not like that ever matters.


They claim every attack no matter how small or large. It doesn't fit their MO either. You're reaching


----------



## dr_shadow (Oct 2, 2017)

Neo Arcadia said:


> Appeal to authority is a fallacy you know.
> Oh who am I kidding, it's not like that ever matters.



Citing an authority is not the same as Appeal to Authority.

Otherwise we'd never be able to talk about things we haven't personally experienced.

Reactions: Winner 2


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Oct 2, 2017)

I saw a news saying IS claimed the attack. Confirmed?


----------



## EJ (Oct 2, 2017)

Where did you hear that from?


----------



## Hachibi (Oct 2, 2017)

How the fuck did we get to the point where one person is able to kill 58 people and injure 515?

This is infuriating. I hope that they're at least in a better place


----------



## WorkingMoogle (Oct 2, 2017)

Neo Arcadia said:


> Appeal to authority is a fallacy you know.
> Oh who am I kidding, it's not like that ever matters.





mr_shadow said:


> Citing an authority is not the same as Appeal to Authority.
> 
> Otherwise we'd never be able to talk about things we haven't personally experienced.



Citing the FBI in reference to an investigation the FBI is conducting is not an "appeal to authority fallacy."

An appeal to authority fallacy is when you are citing someone in a position of authority is correct solely due to the position they are in, not because of any knowledge or other expertise they are lent due to their position.

The argument "Trump says he acted alone, and if it's good enough for the President it's good enough for me and should be for you" is an appeal to authority because it is claiming the correct position solely because of the position the person holds.

The argument "President Trump's seen the results of the FBI investigation and he has cleared any indication of collaboration with ISIS or other terrorist organizations" would not be an appeal to authority because in this case it is speaking from a position where there is actual applied information.

Of course it is important to point out that neither argument actually _proves_ anything is correct, it's just that one is fallacious and one is not.


----------



## dr_shadow (Oct 2, 2017)

*Appeal to authority:* "The Bible says the Earth was created in six days, and therefore it is true"

*Not appeal to authority:* "The Bible says the Earth was created in six days, and therefore Christians believe it to be true; because being a Christian requires you to believe that everything the Bible says is true"

Reactions: Sad! 1


----------



## Keollyn (Oct 2, 2017)

Death is really hard at work this season. I wish he'd give it a rest and go play Kancolle or something.


----------



## Agent9149 (Oct 2, 2017)

Tragic. Disgusting. I'm tired of these lone gunman.

People can't even get shitfaced and jam out to a concert without the fear of being mowed down by an idiot with a gun.


----------



## Ignition (Oct 2, 2017)

My condolences to the families... too many of these attacks lately, where is the world heading to?


----------



## Milliardo (Oct 2, 2017)

Day doesn't go by anymore without a mass shooting....


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 2, 2017)

*Batman Begins*


----------



## Kishu (Oct 2, 2017)

I've been watching the news since eight this morning.  Such a horrible tradgy.  You can't even go to a concert without worrying about some nut with a gun.  My condolences to those directly impacted by this.


----------



## makeoutparadise (Oct 2, 2017)

Machine guns, fired into a country music festival???
The one place where people with guns would most likely go
How helpful were those guns then?

Reactions: Optimistic 1 | Dislike 2


----------



## Kishu (Oct 2, 2017)

So apparently the shooter's father was on America's Most Wanted List in the '60s and described as a psychopath or sociopath.  That explains an earlier statement by the police about the shooter.  You know if you believe psychopathy is inherited.

Problem is that psychopathy isn't easy to treat.


----------



## DonutKid (Oct 2, 2017)

Unfortunately lone wolf attacks are very difficult to detect and prevent. It really depends on the whim of a single person and there all sorts of people around the world, crazy or not.

Guns will just give them the opportunity for greater damage and magnify the problem of lone wolf attacks. You just need a single crazy guy with a gun to destroy hundreds of families. Death, coma, paralysis, disabled, trauma of family members. More than 500 people are shot and probably thousands of people are greatly affected in this single incident. That's tragic.


----------



## Gunners (Oct 2, 2017)

Draw and quarter him.

It's one of those situations where my heart wants an angry mob to get to him before law enforcement. The mind knows better .

Hope the family can process and move on from this tragedy.


----------



## makeoutparadise (Oct 2, 2017)

Background checks and regulations could have prevented this, but nooo i can hear the people now "its a time for prayer, too early to talk about gun control."

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 1


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Oct 2, 2017)

We need to deal with the mental health crisis in this country.

Reactions: Like 1 | Winner 1


----------



## Xhominid (Oct 2, 2017)

Gunners said:


> Draw and quarter him.
> 
> It's one of those situations where my heart wants an angry mob to get to him before law enforcement. The mind knows better .
> 
> Hope the family can process and move on from this tragedy.



The suspected gunman is dead and it seems like there really was just one gunman but he did have an accomplice but it doesn't seem like she was shooting at all.


----------



## dr_shadow (Oct 2, 2017)

Normality said:


> We need to deal with the mental health crisis in this country.



But muh government overreach! 

Mental health should be left to the people who have always been best at it - the churches.

Reactions: Funny 3


----------



## ~Gesy~ (Oct 2, 2017)

Why are people pretending that guns can only be obtained legally? You think if a store rejects him, he's just going to say "oh well" and go about his business?

Reactions: Like 3 | Agree 2 | Sad! 1


----------



## DonutKid (Oct 2, 2017)

Normality said:


> We need to deal with the mental health crisis in this country.



That's not the root of the problem.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Chelydra (Oct 2, 2017)

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-us-canada-41471242

BBC is saying that the guy was a recent convert to Islam so that can of worms is now officially open...

The FBI is currently stating that there is no connection to international terrorism yet.

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## Gunners (Oct 2, 2017)

Hachibi said:


> How the fuck did we get to the point where one person is able to kill 58 people and injure 515?
> 
> This is infuriating. I hope that they're at least in a better place


It's naive to think this wouldn't happen.

When the tools of mass carnage are readily available, mass killings don't happen because people by and large don't want to cause devastation. 

If someone wants to however, what's stopping them.

America has a population that is greater than 300 million. You're going to a handful of degenerates that slip through the cracks.


----------



## dr_shadow (Oct 2, 2017)

~Gesy~ said:


> Why are people pretending that guns can only be obtained legally? You think if a store rejects him, he's just going to say "oh well" and go about his business?



While for the _really motivated_ there's always a way to carry out a massacre, you will notice that countries with stricter gun laws have... FEWER GUN DEATHS!



> *Americans are 10 times more likely to be killed by guns than people in other developed countries, a new study finds.*
> 
> Compared to 22 other high-income nations, the United States' gun-related murder rate is 25 times higher. And, even though the United States' suicide rate is similar to other countries, the nation's gun-related suicide rate is eight times higher than other high-income countries, researchers said.
> 
> ...


----------



## Tarot (Oct 2, 2017)

~Gesy~ said:


> Why are people pretending that guns can only be obtained legally? You think if a store rejects him, he's just going to say "oh well" and go about his business?


Got a nice nirvana fallacy going on there.


----------



## Dragon D. Luffy (Oct 2, 2017)

Normality said:


> We need to deal with the mental health crisis in this country.



Pretty much this. You want to reduce lone wolf crimes? Find out what is going on about your society that breeds lone wolves.

Gun control also helps. But its not the only cause.

Reactions: Agree 2


----------



## GRIMMM (Oct 2, 2017)

Gun stocks have sky rocketed. These companies must love it every time a piece of shit decides to shoot up. Fucking disgraceful.


----------



## dr_shadow (Oct 2, 2017)

I updated the title to reflect that the shooter is no longer "active".


----------



## hcheng02 (Oct 2, 2017)

Chelydra said:


> https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-us-canada-41471242
> 
> BBC is saying that the guy was a recent convert to Islam so that can of worms is now officially open...
> 
> The FBI is currently stating that there is no connection to international terrorism yet.



That's if you take ISIS's word on it on face value.


----------



## wibisana (Oct 2, 2017)

so the gunner bring at least 500-600 bullets? what or the injury part because trampeling


----------



## hcheng02 (Oct 2, 2017)

GRIMMM said:


> Gun stocks have sky rocketed. These companies must love it every time a piece of shit decides to shoot up. Fucking disgraceful.



I'm not sure what a person with a gun would have done to stop this. The shooter was shooting from a window 20 stories up across the street into a crowd of thousands. How the hell is any civilian with a gun supposed to stop that? Shoot at random windows of the hotel?


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 2, 2017)

hcheng02 said:


> That's if you take ISIS's word on it on face value.



ISIS is desperate enough at this point to try to take anything they can spin to their advantage.  And the more they can make people hate them and Muslims in general, the more they get what they want.

But the end result of this shooting also shows a major problem with the US and gun control.  How on Earth does a man get a hold of _ten automatic weapons?_


----------



## Kishu (Oct 2, 2017)

Chelydra said:


> https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-us-canada-41471242
> 
> BBC is saying that the guy was a recent convert to Islam so that can of worms is now officially open...
> 
> The FBI is currently stating that there is no connection to international terrorism yet.


According to the shooter's brother, he wasn't.  I thought it was just something ISIS was claiming because they like any publicity they can get.


----------



## WorkingMoogle (Oct 2, 2017)

hcheng02 said:


> I'm not sure what a person with a gun would have done to stop this. The shooter was shooting from a window 20 stories up across the street into a crowd of thousands. How the hell is any civilian with a gun supposed to stop that? Shoot at random windows of the hotel?


_Obviously_ the average CCW holder is going to draw their Glock 26 and accurately target based off the muzzle flashes 1000 feet away.  Just like they do in the movies!


----------



## makeoutparadise (Oct 2, 2017)

Normality said:


> We need to deal with the mental health crisis in this country.


To more phycistrist we have the safe we'll be


----------



## Chelydra (Oct 2, 2017)

Catalyst75 said:


> ISIS is desperate enough at this point to try to take anything they can spin to their advantage.  And the more they can make people hate them and Muslims in general, the more they get what they want.
> 
> But the end result of this shooting also shows a major problem with the US and gun control.  How on Earth does a man get a hold of _ten automatic weapons?_



You modify them, you can't get a fully automatic weapon through normal channels, especially since said guns were purchased in California, which has stricter gun laws than most states.


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Oct 2, 2017)

Le Male Absolu said:


> I saw a news saying IS claimed the attack. Confirmed?


Yes.


----------



## Huey Freeman (Oct 2, 2017)

If he was an agent, the first report of his identity would have been just that. They didn't find him in no Muslim garbs or anything plus they have very specific MO and template they go by.

These are just then claiming anything to get attention


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Oct 2, 2017)

*The Islamic State (IS) issued a formal communique claiming credit for the Las Vegas shooting, identifying the perpetrator as "Abu Abdul Barr al-Amriki" and declaring that he heeded the response of IS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to attack coalition countries.*


----------



## WT (Oct 2, 2017)

erictheking said:


> Yes.



It makes their propoganda stronger. They feed on fear.

Not quoting star wars but its exactly what they want...

They want to create fear because fear turns into hate and if they can get that hate at the constitutional level, which they are acheiving with with Trump, it will sow seeds of divison between Muslim and non Muslims. That will make it easier for them to recruit...


----------



## Hitt (Oct 2, 2017)

Still need confirmation from the FBI before I take any of that seriously.

Reactions: Agree 3


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Oct 2, 2017)

They're doubling and trebling down on claiming this, as weird as it sounds.


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Oct 2, 2017)

erictheking said:


> *The Islamic State (IS) issued a formal communique claiming credit for the Las Vegas shooting, identifying the perpetrator as "Abu Abdul Barr al-Amriki" and declaring that he heeded the response of IS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to attack coalition countries.*


Isis plz shut the fuck up


----------



## Hitt (Oct 2, 2017)

erictheking said:


> They're doubling and trebling down on claiming this, as weird as it sounds.



I mean why not, it's not like they have a credibility or a PR problem.


----------



## wibisana (Oct 2, 2017)

yeah basically desperate attempt

they were about to be wiped out. they need as much fuel as they can


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Oct 2, 2017)

Hitt said:


> I mean why not, it's not like they have a credibility or a PR problem.


Maybe I'm forgetting or I missed it, but have they ever claimed an attack in the West that was later proven to be a false claim?


----------



## Amol (Oct 2, 2017)

What the fuck man?
This death count is way too high for a single gunman . This really never should have happened. I can't even imagine what nightmare it must have been. Someone just opening machine gun on is fucked up.
Do we know WHY that shithead did this?
RiP victims in any case.


----------



## Itachі (Oct 2, 2017)

What a scumbag. Hope the injured recover.


----------



## hcheng02 (Oct 2, 2017)

WorkingMoogle said:


> _Obviously_ the average CCW holder is going to draw their Glock 26 and accurately target based off the muzzle flashes 1000 feet away.  Just like they do in the movies!



Yeah, no doubt. At night, while under fire, and avoiding being trampled by a screaming mob no less.

Honestly, the only thing that cut short the slaughter was the Las Vegas Police SWAT Team finding and taking out the shooter so quickly. The LVPD coordinates with all the casino and hotel security and do drills with blueprints for these sorts of things.


----------



## Parallax (Oct 2, 2017)

Amol said:


> What the fuck man?
> This death count is way too high for a single gunman . This really never should have happened. I can't even imagine what nightmare it must have been. Someone just opening machine gun on is fucked up.
> Do we know WHY that shithead did this?
> RiP victims in any case.


Not when you use automatic weaponry from a high vantage point towards a mass group of unsuspecting people

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Oct 2, 2017)

*Has ISIS ever claimed responsibility for attacks that turned out to be totally unrelated to it?*

"We have not been able to find a real lie from ISIS," said Katz, who follows the group's social media obsessively with a critical eye. "Despite the fact that they are a terrorist organization, they want to provide their followers and supporters with authentic information."

Joscelyn said he can't think of an example of an outright false claim by ISIS in the U.S. and western Europe. There are plenty of exaggerations — on death tolls, for instance — and the statements shouldn't be assumed to be true. (For instance, the ISIS claim for the attack on a concert in Manchester didn't describe a suicide bomber, and had slightly inflated numbers of the dead and wounded.)

But in the West, "when ISIS claims something ... usually there's something there," Joscelyn said.

That's not true in Turkey and other parts of the world, where claims can be murkier, he said.​


----------



## Xhominid (Oct 2, 2017)

Dragon D. Luffy said:


> Pretty much this. You want to reduce lone wolf crimes? Find out what is going on about your society that breeds lone wolves.
> 
> Gun control also helps. But its not the only cause.



This. I feel like people who think stricter gun controls would help in lowering deaths really don't understand how easy it is to kill loads of people.
We finally only figured out how easy it is to order ingredients for bombs and using cars to kill people are.
I wouldn't be surprised if people start going chemical warfare just to get the same number as the number of deaths here.

The real issue I've seen so many damn times is how easily people ignore that those who do these shootings was never right in the head to begin with. Yes, there are some who do it on a sick thrill, but others are mainly so fucked up, that it could have been easily solved by having them go to a psychiatrist and get the help they need.

But hey, find anything to blame but mental illness, am I right? Even when they blatantly bring it up, they pretend it's a non-issue.


----------



## Ultra Instinct Vegito (Oct 2, 2017)

A CBS worker  who said she was not sympathetic because the people there were republicans has been fired.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Mider T (Oct 2, 2017)

You would think people who work with the media would know better than to say stupid shit like that.


----------



## Parallax (Oct 2, 2017)

bmos89 said:


> A CBS worker  who said she was not sympathetic because the people there were republicans has been fired.


Good wtf is that nonsense


----------



## Ghost_of_Gashir (Oct 2, 2017)

bmos89 said:


> A CBS worker  who said she was not sympathetic because the people there were republicans has been fired.



What an idiot. Now's not the time, bitch.


----------



## Xhominid (Oct 2, 2017)

bmos89 said:


> A CBS worker  who said she was not sympathetic because the people there were republicans has been fired.



Go fuck yourself.

And honestly, looking at what someone said, how packed was it before people panicked and fled before the shootings? Because we know full well that he didn't hit everyone and there is easily can be injuries due to getting trampled, so what if a good chunk of those deaths are also because of getting trampled?

Of course not trying to take anything from the gunman, may he rot in Hell, but we have to take that into consideration.


----------



## Dragon D. Luffy (Oct 2, 2017)

Xhominid said:


> This. I feel like people who think stricter gun controls would help in lowering deaths really don't understand how easy it is to kill loads of people.
> We finally only figured out how easy it is to order ingredients for bombs and using cars to kill people are.
> I wouldn't be surprised if people start going chemical warfare just to get the same number as the number of deaths here.
> 
> ...



Gun control can help a lot tho. It's a matter of probability. If the guy needs to go through a lot of bureaucracy, or avoid the law, to get his automatic guns, the chances something will stop him along the way is higher.

Reactions: Agree 3


----------



## Kishu (Oct 2, 2017)

bmos89 said:


> A CBS worker  who said she was not sympathetic because the people there were republicans has been fired.


As she should be.  Jeez.  She just joined the ranks of those religious nuts who claim natural disasters are God's judgement or divine retribution.


----------



## IchLiebe (Oct 2, 2017)

Skaddix said:


> What
> 
> 
> WorkingMoogle said:
> ...


----------



## WorkingMoogle (Oct 2, 2017)

^ He was already planning to die, so, uh, no.

Plus the fact that he's firing from a window, he's already in cover.  Randomly shooting a handgun in his general direction would have just added more gunfire and chaos to the situation and potentially killed innocent people from stray shots.


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 2, 2017)

Kishu said:


> As she should be.  Jeez.  She just joined the ranks of those religious nuts who claim natural disasters are God's judgement.



The United States really has a problem with the whole "us vs. them" mentality that has been cultivated when it comes to politics.


----------



## ~Gesy~ (Oct 2, 2017)

mr_shadow said:


> While for the _really motivated_ there's always a way to carry out a massacre, you will notice that countries with stricter gun laws have... FEWER GUN DEATHS!


But the US will never legislate gun laws strict enough to cause significant change.  Prohibition has never worked in this country.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 2, 2017)

~Gesy~ said:


> But the US will never legislate gun laws strict enough to cause significant change.  Prohibition has never worked in this country.



You don't need prohibition, but rather more efficient regulation.


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 2, 2017)

~Gesy~ said:


> But the US will never legislate gun laws strict enough to cause significant change.  Prohibition has never worked in this country.



Not to mention that the NRA would probably lobby with individuals to ensure such gun laws never get passed, all the while going on about the Second Amendment.


----------



## baconbits (Oct 2, 2017)

makeoutparadise said:


> Machine guns, fired into a country music festival???
> The one place where people with guns would most likely go
> How helpful were those guns then?



Incredibly distasteful.  For you to say this to crowds that were being fired on from a position they couldn't even see...  you're better than this, man.


----------



## Huey Freeman (Oct 2, 2017)

This issue has to do with a mixture of mental health, propaganda, ideology, depression, gun regulations, and proper enforcement.

Reactions: Agree 2


----------



## hcheng02 (Oct 2, 2017)

baconbits said:


> Incredibly distasteful.  For you to say this to crowds that were being fired on from a position they couldn't even see...  you're better than this, man.



Uhhh, he was being sarcastic. There's simply nothing any civilian with a gun on the ground could have done since there's no way to know where the gunfire was coming from nor could they really shoot back.


----------



## Black Superman (Oct 2, 2017)

My nikka Dan with Luck from the devil himself. I'm convinced his superpower is based in luck.


----------



## Kitsune (Oct 2, 2017)

Waiting to see how anyone is still against gun control.



baconbits said:


> Incredibly distasteful.  For you to say this to crowds that were being fired on from a position they couldn't even see...  you're better than this, man.



He's right in a sense. In reality, more guns won't reduce gun violence.

Reactions: Agree 2


----------



## Junta1987 (Oct 2, 2017)

sources say its not islamic terror. USA should look at countries like Canada and Switzerland who have far less mass shootings and than try to adopt their strategies to prevent those things in the future (even if that means restrictions in some areas)


----------



## Darkmatter (Oct 2, 2017)

Neo Arcadia said:


> Well we as a society could try to understand why people are snapping and going on killing sprees, then attempt to resolve the underlying issues.
> Nah, too much work. Let's just have a song and dance about gun control and "what if" racial/ideological politics and call it a day.
> *Edit:* Annnnd maybe it's not "what if" anymore. I'm hearing rumors that ISIS has claimed responsibility and that Paddock was a recent convert.
> That's another can of worms opened if true.



It's not possible with the current state of healthcare. I can agree that we do need to get to the bottom of people's motivations to commit atrocious acts.

As for the suspect being a convert and IS/Daesh claiming the attack, I can't say I'm surprised they would say such given that's pretty much their goal: install fear into people. Not that I'm saying they're liars, but I'm taking it with a grain of salt for now.


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 2, 2017)

Junta1987 said:


> USA should look at countries like Canada and Switzerland who have far less mass shootings and than try to adopt their strategies to prevent those things in the future (even if that means restrictions in some areas)



America's first step would be abolishing the NRA (or severely limit its influence and power), along with far stricter gun laws (limiting how many fire arms one can possess, extended periods of training for handling, evaluating whether a person should have a gun, etc).  Furthermore, the mental state of individuals is something else to consider, as some people only need an excuse or 'ideological justification' to go on murder sprees.


----------



## makeoutparadise (Oct 2, 2017)

baconbits said:


> Incredibly distasteful.  For you to say this to crowds that were being fired on from a position they couldn't even see...  you're better than this, man.


Wasnt meant to be distatesful I apologize
Im just tried seeing this keep happenig and no one doing anything about it.
Partly because of gun loving conservative culture

The remarks were not directed towards the victims 
But rather people who think the status quo
Is fine or that more guns are needed to make thig safer

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Huey Freeman (Oct 2, 2017)

Catalyst75 said:


> America's first step would be abolishing the NRA (or severely limit its influence and power), along with far stricter gun laws (limiting how many fire arms one can possess, extended periods of training for handling, evaluating whether a person should have a gun, etc).  Furthermore, the mental state of individuals is something else to consider, as some people only need an excuse or 'ideological justification' to go on murder sprees.


First off they need to demilitarize their police and train them better to handle crime


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Oct 2, 2017)

why is it that every time someone mentions gun control some fucking retard always has to come in here to say "NOT ALL GUNZSXZSZXZS THO". Open your filthy waxed up ear and listen for once. No one is talking about BANNING ALL GUNS. What we are talking about is GUN REGULATION. Get it right.

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 2


----------



## Kitsune (Oct 2, 2017)

makeoutparadise said:


> Wasnt meant to be distatesful I apologize
> Im just tried seeing this keep happenig and no one doing anything about it.
> Partly because of gun loving conservative culture



At a time like this conservatives will try to tell you that your concern about gun violence is distasteful or that it's not the right time to talk about gun control. Trump is waiting for all the facts, because he's always _so_ cautious before speaking.

In my opinion, this is absolutely the right time to discuss concerns about gun control. It's more disrespectful to the dead to ignore the problem that killed them.

Reactions: Agree 4


----------



## WT (Oct 2, 2017)

Normality said:


> why is it that every time someone mentions gun control some fucking retard always has to come in here to say "NOT ALL GUNZSXZSZXZS THO". Open your filthy waxed up ear and listen for once. No one is talking about BANNING ALL GUNS. What we are talking about is GUN REGULATION. Get it right.



Totally agreed.

Legislation should be amended in the USA such that any persons classified as "Americans" should automatically be banned from owning any weapons. That sort of regulation will solve alot of problems

Reactions: Disagree 1


----------



## Deleted member 235437 (Oct 2, 2017)

I mean this may be wrong of me but I’ve developed a strange towards these things. Because really what’s going to change? Everyone will make some dumb post on social media sending their “thoughts and prayers” out to the victims and their families and then what?

It gets forgotten about until another tragedy happens and people do the same useless things all over again.

Nothing is going to change, absolutely nothing and it angers me to see people be so apathetic about this. Thoughts and prayers aren’t going to do anything. But Americans don’t want to have the gun control conversation. Someone’s child, parent, loved one is about to be buried because of this but people would still rather cling to their guns.

“Even with gun control, people could still find access to guns!! Nothing would change!!” Can we at least try it first? Can we at least try to put in some regulations to control who gets guns first before you can confidently say that it won’t work? Or is that too much for these people? I’m sorry, I forgot you value your guns over the lives of children or innocent concert goers.

You want to know what’s disrespectful? Being part of this apathetic cycle, insisting that gun control doesn’t need to be talked about. Anyone who thinks this is part of the problem and the blood of these victims, past, present and future are on your hands too until you stop being part of this apathetic cycle and start to value human lives over your guns.

Reactions: Like 3 | Agree 4 | Winner 5 | Useful 1


----------



## Mider T (Oct 2, 2017)

WT said:


> Totally agreed.
> 
> Legislation should be amended in the USA such that any persons classified as "Americans" should automatically be banned from owning any weapons. That sort of regulation will solve alot of problems


That's not going to happen.  You can suggest smart regulation without going completely totalitarian.


----------



## ~VK~ (Oct 2, 2017)

man this is messed up. america really needs to get their shit together in regards to guns.


----------



## Mider T (Oct 2, 2017)

Khaleesi said:


> Everyone will make some dumb post on social media sending their “thoughts and prayers”


----------



## Utopia Realm (Oct 2, 2017)

Agree with Khaleesi here. "Thoughts and Prayers" only go for so long. Guns in this country have become more of a addiction, along w/ tobacco and alcohol. We need real answers, solutions, and not feels. More guns didn't solve any real issues after Sandy Hook and the same can be said after this Mass Shooting....


----------



## HolyHands (Oct 2, 2017)

@Khaleesi 

Sad but true. We've reached the point where the GOP refuses to budge even a nanometer when it comes to gun control. So what can we do? Mass shootings are just gonna be a part of life now. Sandy Hook did nothing, and neither will this.


----------



## Mider T (Oct 2, 2017)

Utopia Realm said:


> Agree with Khaleesi here. "Thoughts and Prayers" only go for so long. Guns in this country have become more of a addiction, along w/ tobacco and alcohol. We need real answers, solutions, and not feels. More guns didn't solve any real issues after Sandy Hook and the same can be said after this Mass Shooting....


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Oct 2, 2017)

Hachibi said:


> How the fuck did we get to the point where one person is able to kill 58 people and injure 515?
> 
> This is infuriating. I hope that they're at least in a better place


Automatic weapons and a huge he crowd. But oh know second amendment. It’s their fault for not all having guns to shoot back


----------



## Deleted member 235437 (Oct 2, 2017)

HolyHands said:


> @Khaleesi
> 
> Sad but true. We've reached the point where the GOP refuses to budge even a nanometer when it comes to gun control. So what can we do? Mass shootings are just gonna be a part of life now. Sandy Hook did nothing, and neither will this.


Each and every one of those politicians - conservative or not who refuse to budge on gun control is the reason why someone’s loved one is in a grave right now. They might not have went out and did the shooting themsleves but they put a gun into the shooters hands.

I know they realize this, and that’s the scary part


----------



## Deleted member 198194 (Oct 2, 2017)

Be right back, building a portable nuclear rocket launcher and open carrying it with a cowboy hat on while telling people it's my 2nd amendment right.

Reactions: Funny 4 | Creative 1


----------



## Parallax (Oct 2, 2017)

Seeing all these pray for Vegas posts online make me upset, it feels so fake

Reactions: Agree 8 | Neutral 1


----------



## ~Gesy~ (Oct 2, 2017)

Normality said:


> why is it that every time someone mentions gun control some fucking retard always has to come in here to say "NOT ALL GUNZSXZSZXZS THO". Open your filthy waxed up ear and listen for once. No one is talking about BANNING ALL GUNS. What we are talking about is GUN REGULATION. Get it right.


I'm saying it won't fucking work. There's already trillions of guns out on the street . And thinking like a criminal-- if I am unable to get gun through legal means I'll obviously go to the guy who sells them in the trunk of his car.

If I  really want to do something like a mass murder. There isn't any form of regulation that would stop me from at least obtaining the weaponry to do so.

Reactions: Disagree 2 | Optimistic 1


----------



## SwordSlayer99 (Oct 2, 2017)

RIP to all victims.

Mass shootings/killings like this are the reason I don't believe in god. If god exists, then he watched yesterday as 58 people were mowed down by gun fire while 500+ goddamn people got hurt. God is evil as fuck and deserves to die if he exists.
Besides that I am absolutely disgusted by America once again. It doesn't matter how many people die, how many schools are shot up, because the end the only thing they will say is 'thoughts and prayers' like that changes anything. And I know damn well that no further gun regulation will come from this..... America is truly sicking imo.


----------



## Deleted member 198194 (Oct 2, 2017)

Parallax said:


> Seeing all these pray for Vegas posts online make me upset, it feels so fake


99.9999999% of people that refer to praying for someone don't actually pray for that person, and on the infinitesimal chance that they do, prayers are pointless emotional masturbation anyway.

Reactions: Agree 2 | Winner 1


----------



## Mider T (Oct 2, 2017)

afgpride said:


> Be right back, building a portable nuclear rocket launcher and open carrying it with a cowboy hat on while telling people it's my 2nd amendment right.


K, don't be too long. *tips 10 gallon hat*


----------



## Dragon D. Luffy (Oct 2, 2017)

Xhominid said:


> This. I feel like people who think stricter gun controls would help in lowering deaths really don't understand how easy it is to kill loads of people.
> We finally only figured out how easy it is to order ingredients for bombs and using cars to kill people are.
> I wouldn't be surprised if people start going chemical warfare just to get the same number as the number of deaths here.
> 
> ...



Not _just_ having the guy go to a psychiatrist.

I think the modern society, as a whole, is built in a way that makes people more prone to having mental disorders. Heck, it isn't even my opinion, 

Let's ask ourselves. Did this guy have a girlfriend/wife? If no, why?

Did he have friends? If no, why? And if yes, did those friends notice he had a mental disorder? if no, why? Why weren't close enough to him to notice it?

Did he live alone? If yes, why?

Did he talk to his family often? I saw a news where they interviewed his brother and he said he talked to him last month and he seemed normal. Well I'm sorry dude, but you are a shitty brother. Because you weren't close enough to your bro to notice he had something bad going on with him. And why did you only talk to him once a month? Why not more often? Why didn't his parents talk to him often, either?

I saw another news commenting on his father being a psychopath and a bank robber, and speculating on whether psychopathy can be genetic. Well, I have different questions. Did this father abuse him when he was a child? Did he get bullied as a kid for having a criminal father?

We need to start asking those questions. Because, right now, we are a society of lonely people. We have less friends, less dates, we talk less with our families. Of course we have more mental disorders. Going to a psychiatrist is a remedy, but doesn't tackle the source.

If everyone is lonely, some of us will turn crazy. And then you add lack of access to mental healthcare, easy access to guns, and exposure to radical ideologies/religions (though not in this case), and some of those crazy people will take extreme measures. Most of the time they only kill themselves, but sometimes they decide to take a crowd with them.

Gun control is useful. Healthcare is useful. But we need to fix our way of life too.

Reactions: Winner 2


----------



## Parallax (Oct 2, 2017)

~Gesy~ said:


> I'm saying it won't fucking work. There's already trillions of guns out on the street . And thinking like a criminal-- if I am unable to get gun through legal means I'll obviously go to the guy who sells them in the trunk of his car.
> 
> If I  really want to do something like a mass murder. There isn't any form of regulation that would stop me from at least obtaining the weaponry to do so.


This is fucking lazy and stupid I'm not even elaborate further than this it's such a tired argument

Reactions: Agree 5


----------



## ~Gesy~ (Oct 2, 2017)

Parallax said:


> Seeing all these pray for Vegas posts online make me upset, it feels so fake


It's like people who say "I'm sorry for your lost" . 8/10 They don't really give a darn..its just feels like something you're supposed to say to fake compassion .


----------



## hcheng02 (Oct 2, 2017)

Catalyst75 said:


> America's first step would be abolishing the NRA (or severely limit its influence and power), along with far stricter gun laws (limiting how many fire arms one can possess, extended periods of training for handling, evaluating whether a person should have a gun, etc).  Furthermore, the mental state of individuals is something else to consider, as some people only need an excuse or 'ideological justification' to go on murder sprees.



Don't see how that will be possible without running aground of the Fist Amendment's "freedom of speech and assembly." Especially after the Supreme Court ruled that stuff like Super PACS are protected free speech. The only way to beat the NRA would be to have a larger, better funded and organized anti-gun group to pressure politicians across the USA and good luck with that.


----------



## WT (Oct 2, 2017)

Kim Jong Un should go to America, become a citizen and then claim the second ...and all will be fine


----------



## ~Gesy~ (Oct 2, 2017)

Parallax said:


> This is fucking lazy and stupid I'm not even elaborate further than this it's such a tired argument


So knowing the significance guns has on American culture you think there are laws that can be passed that can stop criminals from obtaining them?


----------



## Deleted member 235437 (Oct 2, 2017)

~Gesy~ said:


> I'm saying it won't fucking work. There's already trillions of guns out on the street . And thinking like a criminal-- if I am unable to get gun through legal means I'll obviously go to the guy who sells them in the trunk of his car.
> 
> If I  really want to do something like a mass murder. There isn't any form of regulation that would stop me from at least obtaining the weaponry to do so.


Lmao you people aren’t even willing to give tighter gun regulations a chance. You’re literally just saying “welp this is life and we should all just accept mass shootings because there isn’t anything we can do to stop it” which is bullshit


----------



## Mider T (Oct 2, 2017)

~Gesy~ said:


> It's like people who say "I'm sorry for your lost" . 8/10 They don't really give a darn..its just feels like something you're supposed to say to fake compassion .


Filler phrases 

"Sorry for your loss"
"Thoughts and prayers"
"How are you?" (Following good morning/afternoon/evening)
"Ready?"
"Have a good day."
"See you later."
"Condolences"
"I'm so happy for you!"
"Life goes on"

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Parallax (Oct 2, 2017)

~Gesy~ said:


> So knowing the significance guns has on American culture you think there are laws that can be passed that can stop criminals from obtaining them?


By that logic it made no sense to abolish slavery or enact civil rights laws because AMERICAN culture. Understanding gives you an opportunity to change society.  Just going welp people finna die and shrug is defeatist and complicit in the status quo.


----------



## ~Gesy~ (Oct 2, 2017)

Khaleesi said:


> Lmao you people aren’t even willing to give tighter gun regulations a chance. You’re literally just saying “welp this is life and we should all just accept mass shootings because there isn’t anything we can do to stop it” which is bullshit


Not what I'm saying at all. I'm just pessimistic in the effectiveness of it.


----------



## HolyHands (Oct 2, 2017)



Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Deleted member 235437 (Oct 2, 2017)

~Gesy~ said:


> Not what I'm saying at all. I'm just pessimistic in the effectiveness of it.


There’s pessimism and then there’s conplacency. We are saying to just try and give gun control a chance but even that seems to be too much. Anything is better than going through these tragedies on repeat.


----------



## Darkmatter (Oct 2, 2017)

Mider T said:


> Filler phrases
> 
> "Sorry for your loss"
> "Thoughts and prayers"
> ...



And our lord and savior Jeb Bush once said:
"Shit happens"


----------



## makeoutparadise (Oct 2, 2017)

Saaaaame


----------



## Huey Freeman (Oct 2, 2017)

Huey Freeman said:


> This issue has to do with a mixture of mental health, propaganda, ideology, depression, gun regulations, and proper enforcement.


Incase some of you guys missed it, I see this thread is already taking a turn


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 2, 2017)

baconbits said:


> Incredibly distasteful.  For you to say this to crowds that were being fired on from a position they couldn't even see...  you're better than this, man.



shut up.


~Gesy~ said:


> So knowing the significance guns has on American culture you think there are laws that can be passed that can stop criminals from obtaining them?



If enforced properly, absolutely.


----------



## Deleted member 198194 (Oct 2, 2017)

~Gesy~ said:


> I'm saying it won't fucking work. There's already trillions of guns out on the street . And thinking like a criminal-- if I am unable to get gun through legal means I'll obviously go to the guy who sells them in the trunk of his car.
> 
> If I  really want to do something like a mass murder. There isn't any form of regulation that would stop me from at least obtaining the weaponry to do so.





~Gesy~ said:


> So knowing the significance guns has on American culture you think there are laws that can be passed that can stop criminals from obtaining them?



Outlawing murder doesn't stop murder.  Making rape illegal doesn't stop rape.  Therefore there's no point in making murder or rape illegal since people will do it anyway. Do you see the flaw in logic here? 

It's not about magically stopping all forms of gun crime.  It's about reducing it where possible and taking a legal stance on a matter of public safety. There are two strong arguments on this issue you should reflect on before playing devil's advocate.

1. Enacting a due diligence measure to make mass shooting weapons illegal and lower capacity firearms harder to access will reduce gun related crimes statistically by virtue of harder access and more restricted mobility.

2. The 2nd amendment was enacted many years ago in a state of primitive gun technology with much less killing potential.  Its wording doesn't imply any projectile firing device should be a right for a civilian, it only implies the right to arm yourself.  Civilians have no business walking around with fully automatic killing machines designed for warfare.


----------



## ~Gesy~ (Oct 2, 2017)

Parallax said:


> By that logic it made no sense to abolish slavery or enact civil rights laws because AMERICAN culture. Understanding gives you an opportunity to change society.  Just going welp people finna die and shrug is defeatist and complicit in the status quo.


Slavery and civil rights wasn't abolished because of moral obligation though. It was paid for through blood and sacrifice.

And It wasn't that long ago where during the last election the mere mention of gun control caused you to lose a significant amount of credibility with the people.

Look, if there was ever a time for change in gun laws..it would be now. We'll see how Donald and the Republican party (who tend to lean more towards the "guns don't kill people" side) react to this.


----------



## Mider T (Oct 2, 2017)

Annnnnnnddddd here it is.




> “There is a time and a place for political debate but now is the time for the country to come together,” Sanders said at the daily briefing. “This is an unspeakable tragedy. Today is a day for consoling survivors and mourning those who were lost.”
> 
> Sanders noted that the investigation into Sunday's attack is still ongoing, and a motive is yet to be determined.
> 
> “It is premature to discuss policy when we don’t know all the facts,” Sanders said.

Reactions: Funny 1 | Lewd 1


----------



## Hitt (Oct 2, 2017)

“It is premature to discuss policy when we don’t know all the facts,” Sanders said.

Does it matter Sanders, really?  No matter what, the debate will be killed before anything is done.  

We had Sandy Hook, with dozens of kids getting murdered.  Little fucking _kids_.  Why would this shooting change anything?


----------



## ~Gesy~ (Oct 2, 2017)

Mider T said:


> Annnnnnnddddd here it is.


Dems have little to no power.


----------



## reiatsuflow (Oct 2, 2017)

Hitt said:


> We had Sandy Hook, with dozens of kids getting murdered.  Little fucking _kids_.  Why would this shooting change anything?



And that's why I'm backing gesy on this one. There are other solutions, and tragedies like this could engage them instead of stalling out time and time again as americans continue refusing stricter gun laws. When school shootings happen, I look to schools that are exploring metal detectors, in school security and shooting drills. Those are getting traction. Gun regulation isn't.

So far. But jesus god wept almighty it's been a long 'so far'.


----------



## ~Gesy~ (Oct 2, 2017)

afgpride said:


> Outlawing murder doesn't stop murder.  Making rape illegal doesn't stop rape.  Therefore there's no point in making murder or rape illegal since people will do it anyway. Do you see the flaw in logic here?
> 
> It's not about magically stopping all forms of gun crime.  It's about reducing it where possible and taking a legal stance on a matter of public safety. There are two strong arguments on this issue you should reflect on before playing devil's advocate.
> 
> ...



But how will you pull off getting this bill signed  while holding on to the support of millions of gun enthusiasts ?


----------



## Huey Freeman (Oct 2, 2017)

Not connected to outside groups

Stop propagating propaganda


----------



## Kishu (Oct 2, 2017)

Dragon D. Luffy said:


> Not _just_ having the guy go to a psychiatrist.
> 
> I think the modern society, as a whole, is built in a way that makes people more prone to having mental disorders. Heck, it isn't even my opinion,
> 
> ...


----------



## Dragon D. Luffy (Oct 2, 2017)

It's not about blame. It's about pointing out the cause of this issue. The cause is that people in the 21th century are more lonely than in the centuries that preceded it.

We need to fix that somehow.

People grow apart? That is wrong. It's not unusual? That is horrible. We should not grow a part. Talk to your friends. Get close to them. Talk to your problems. Ask them to talk about theirs. Talk to your family.

We need to stop treating loneliness as if it's a normal thing. Just because we are grown ups, doesn't mean we are invincible. We need to socialize or we break apart.

And we need to stop hiding our problems. Right now I'm going through a moment in my life where I'm feeling very lonely. Do you know what I do? I tell everyone about it. And it's starting to work. A few weeks ago I got invited to a bar for the first time in over a year.

I could be this shooter. This is scaring the fuck out of me. I need to fix that. We all need to fix that or those mass shootings will not stop.

Reactions: Agree 2 | Disagree 1


----------



## Dragon D. Luffy (Oct 2, 2017)

hell, forget about the mass shootings. We need to do something about the huge rate of suicides we have right now. That is taking even more people out.


----------



## Mider T (Oct 2, 2017)

Dragon D. Luffy said:


> People grow apart? That is wrong. It's not unusual? That is horrible. We should not grow a part. Talk to your friends. Get close to them. Talk to your problems. Ask them to talk about theirs. Talk to your family.
> 
> We need to stop treating loneliness as if it's a normal thing. Just because we are grown ups, doesn't mean we are invincible. We need to socialize or we break apart.


Chill.  You act as if there are only 1,000 humans on the entire planet.  This guy had a girlfriend, he wasn't that lonely.


----------



## Dragon D. Luffy (Oct 2, 2017)

Mider T said:


> Chill.  You act as if there are only 1,000 humans on the entire planet.  This guy had a girlfriend, he wasn't that lonely.



Who apparently wasn't close enough to him either because she didn't know he was about to kill himself.


----------



## Kitsune (Oct 2, 2017)

It's true that human nature is flawed and that a lot of people are unhappy and angry. I think this has always been true. 

That's why we have to regulate gun ownership to provide some kind of safety net. Humans will always be flawed so limiting the ease with which a mass shooting can be accomplished is the first logical step.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Mider T (Oct 2, 2017)

Dragon D. Luffy said:


> Who apparently wasn't close enough to him either because she didn't know he was about to kill himself.


I'm pretty sure he wouldn't have killed himself had he not gone on a rampage that would have led to his death anyway.


----------



## Dragon D. Luffy (Oct 2, 2017)

I'll take it to another angle. ISIS. Who do they recuirt? It's always the lonely ones. People don't make friends with terrorists over the internet if they live a fulfilling social life.

You can blame radical islamism for being the trigger for the violence, but the root is social. It's always social. We live in a sick society.


----------



## Dragon D. Luffy (Oct 2, 2017)

Mider T said:


> I'm pretty sure he wouldn't have killed himself had he not gone on a rampage that would have led to his death anyway.



No you aren't.

Go back to fanfiction.net


----------



## makeoutparadise (Oct 2, 2017)

If More gun control laws wont stop gun violence 
Then a travel ban wont stop terrorists

And a wall wont stop illegal immigration.

If there will always be crazy People with guns then there will always be people who will get radicalized and people who will enter this country illegaly 
We should have no preventative mesures


----------



## Mider T (Oct 2, 2017)

Dragon D. Luffy said:


> No you aren't.
> 
> Go back to fanfiction.net


Okay then hero.  Keep thinking all of the world's ills are due to loneliness like a RL manga or something.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## reiatsuflow (Oct 2, 2017)

@Dragon D. Luffy you're not off the reservation on this one, but you're saying something existential and it's a tough application. Lone wolves are hard to pin down. It's not always the weirdo with no friends and no relationships.

I've brought it up before, but I had someone close to me I worried might become one of these shooters. By the time he got alarming I wasn't close with him anymore, but he was isolated and depressed and for a few years on the guy would casually mention that if it ever got too bad he'd shoot up some place. Due to his generally odd behavior, I thought nothing of it until I realized he had been repeating the same scenario; shooting up a particular type of place, with considerations of how to do it. Then I called everybody mutual friends and family. Argued with them about it. Wondered if we'd be those surprised people on the news, if we were missing obvious red flags and putting innocents in danger of a mentally ill person we might have had the power to stop. Long story short, nobody actually did anything or intervened. People actually got mad at me for overreacting, or became defensive of the guy and said he was just going through a phase or had a temper problem. And wouldn't you know it, few years later the guy grew out of it, found a good job and has a girlfriend now. So.

That elliot rogers guy didn't have distant parents. They knew something was wrong with him. He was in therapy. He had attentive people around him. His mom even called police to his address for a wellness visit shortly before the shooting. And still the shooting. This existential stuff is a tough problem to address.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Dragon D. Luffy (Oct 2, 2017)

Yes I know I'm generalizing, but I'm trying to point out to the macro issue instead of the individual one. Whatever it is we are doing to fight mental diseases, we are sucking at it on multiple levels.


----------



## Kishu (Oct 2, 2017)

Dragon D. Luffy said:


> It's not about blame.


Then why are you blaming the guy's brother and mother for this?  They don't even live in the same state as him.

Personally I'm more interested in what his girlfriend has to say since she's been around him more recently and more often.  She's more likely to have noticed a issue than his brother and mother.



> People grow apart? That is wrong. It's not unusual? That is horrible.


I didn't say it was right.  I just said it's not uncommon.


Overall I agree with you.  I just don't think it's right to blame the brother and the rest of his family in this case.


----------



## Dragon D. Luffy (Oct 2, 2017)

I'm not saying we should roast his mother for not noticing it.

I am saying that along the way to modern society we decided it was okay for people not to have anyone close enough to notice their mental issues, and when we did that we fucked up.

My mother is constantly worrying that I might be alone (she's right). Maybe this guy's mother diddn't. But someone could have.

If we didn't live in this shitty, cold, extremely individualistc and isolated society, where everyone is supposed to be completely self-sufficient, and we are okay with having less friends.


----------



## Xhominid (Oct 2, 2017)

Kitsune said:


> It's true that human nature is flawed and that a lot of people are unhappy and angry. I think this has always been true.
> 
> That's why we have to regulate gun ownership to provide some kind of safety net. Humans will always be flawed so limiting the ease with which a mass shooting can be accomplished is the first logical step.



I do agree with this but I'm also with Dragon in that we need to pay more attention to peoples' mental states as this is what ultimately causes these tragedies to happen more and more often.


----------



## Mider T (Oct 2, 2017)

Dragon D. Luffy said:


> My mother is constantly worrying that I might be alone (she's right). Maybe this guy's mother diddn't. But someone could have


 
A 64 year old man doesn't need his 90 year old mother checking up on him everyday.  Hell a 24 year old man doesn't need that either.  Grown people are Grown, A call every now and again will suffice.


----------



## Dragon D. Luffy (Oct 2, 2017)

At some point we all embraced individualism.

This was awesome for multiple reasons. We embraced freedom of choice, freedom of taste, sexual freedom, racial freedom, religious freedom, etc. I can be a nerd and not listen to the music that is popular, and not what she TV shows everyone likes.

But I think this is one of the main causes for all mental issues. We are turning lonely. We spend more time talking to friends over the internet than in real life, because we can't relate to anyone in real life. We should start talking about this too.

My mom keeps saying I would be less alone if I went to a church. I don't do it, because i'm an atheist. But you know what, she is right. Should I stop being an atheust? I don't know if I even can. But I know this is yet another cause for mental issues in modern society. Our ancestors were less free, but they lived in bigger groups so they were less lonely.

Reactions: Disagree 1


----------



## Dragon D. Luffy (Oct 2, 2017)

This is interesting:



It's not really agreeing with my point. Rather, it's asking a bunch of questions and trying to figure out what is wrong.


----------



## Gunners (Oct 2, 2017)

I mean this guy was a piece of shit. I can't exactly fault people for not befriending the type of lowlife shit bag who would shoot dozens of people indiscriminately. 

If they sensed that something was off with him, they were right.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Cthulhu-versailles (Oct 2, 2017)

Dragon D. Luffy said:


> At some point we all embraced individualism.
> 
> This was awesome for multiple reasons. We embraced freedom of choice, freedom of taste, sexual freedom, racial freedom, religious freedom, etc. I can be a nerd and not listen to the music that is popular, and not what she TV shows everyone likes.
> 
> ...



I heard in Cuba that citizens generally don't have access to Internet and rarely use cellphones. Generally speaking, I also heard the average person is less socially isolated than North America. I don't if they have mass shootings or wtv, but you could look into it. It might be interesting. Of course, I know Americans would never get behind the idea of moving to Cuba, marry a Cuban, and supplementing the monthly allowance she gets from the gouverment with their own money.  And in case ya didn't guess it I am planning to take a trip to Cuba soon.


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Oct 2, 2017)

Dragon D. Luffy said:


> At some point we all embraced individualism.
> 
> This was awesome for multiple reasons. We embraced freedom of choice, freedom of taste, sexual freedom, racial freedom, religious freedom, etc. I can be a nerd and not listen to the music that is popular, and not what she TV shows everyone likes.
> 
> ...




dont even think about it. just try to talk to as many people as possible wherever you go.


----------



## reiatsuflow (Oct 2, 2017)

Gunners said:


> I mean this guy was a piece of shit. I can't exactly fault people for not befriending the type of lowlife shit bag who would shoot dozens of people indiscriminately.
> 
> If they sensed that something was off with him, they were right.



That's another thing. People don't want to be around weirdos. A lot of times loners have strange thoughts or neuroses, and they're off-putting. Sometimes loners are otherwise likable people who are lonely and isolated because they're socially anxious, depressed, or they have situational reasons for their isolation. But sometimes people become isolated because they're behaving strangely. The guy I referenced in my above post became isolated because his behavior was getting more alarming and nobody wanted to be around him. We as a society shouldn't ask functional people to be weighed down by garbage people for the good of the whole.

Imo we gotta psycho pass this shit.

Reactions: Disagree 1


----------



## Kishu (Oct 2, 2017)

Dragon D. Luffy said:


> I'm not saying we should roast his mother for not noticing it.



My apologies then.  It just seems weird expecting a 90-year-old woman who last spoke to him in September to notice an issue.

I think you're asking the wrong person.  You need to ask the people who have been around him recently.  Like his girlfriend, his friends in Nevada, his neighbours.  Maybe his brother, but he said there was no history of mental illness as far as he knew.




> I am saying that along the way to modern society we decided it was okay for people not to have anyone close enough to notice their mental issues, and when we did that we fucked up.


Ummm.  Being concerned about people's mental well-being and mental health is a more recent thing.   A hundred years ago we just shipped mentally ill people off to insane asylums.


----------



## Mider T (Oct 2, 2017)

So I'm watching interviews with his neighbors and friends, and this guy wasn't some weirdo shut in.  He was apparently a well to do retiree who enjoyed gambling.


----------



## Kishu (Oct 2, 2017)

Mider T said:


> So I'm watching interviews with his neighbors and friends, and this guy wasn't some weirdo shut in.  He was apparently a well to do retiree who enjoyed gambling.


That's what I've been hearing all day on the news.  He was a little reclusive but not a shut in.  That's what makes this so horrible.  He sounds like a fairly normal guy, had no history of mental illness, was not an religious extremist, and not into politics.


----------



## Darkmatter (Oct 2, 2017)

bmos89 said:


> wat



I don't think @Xhominid is saying "Go Fuck Yourself" to you, but to the person that got fired.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Blu-ray (Oct 2, 2017)

So the average American can just waltz into a gun store and buy a machine gun and thousands of rounds of ammo just like that?


----------



## Chelydra (Oct 2, 2017)

Blu-ray said:


> So the average American can just waltz into a gun store and buy a machine gun and thousands of rounds of ammo just like that?



Not a fully automatic weapon, and ammo is expensive, so no he didn't, he stockpiled this stuff, and likely illegally modified his weapons.


----------



## Mickey Mouse (Oct 2, 2017)

That Hotel is going to be in a lot of trouble. People are going to want to put the blame on someone living.


----------



## Kishu (Oct 2, 2017)

Blu-ray said:


> So the average American can just waltz into a gun store and buy a machine gun and thousands of rounds of ammo just like that?


Not really.  It depends on the state.  Semiautomatic guns are legal in Nevada though... With background checks and registration.

This guy passed the background checks though and bought the ammo over time.  Also he turned semiautomatic guns into automatics (machine guns).


----------



## wibisana (Oct 2, 2017)

again, I am asking is any confirmation whole 550 (victims death and injuries) got gun shoot wounds. because I heard gun shop usually notify the cops/fbi if someone start to buy massive amount of bullets. also I cant imagine how bulky and heavy it is to brings +500 bullets


----------



## Kishu (Oct 2, 2017)

wibisana said:


> again, I am asking is any confirmation whole 550 (victims death and injuries) got gun shoot wounds. because I heard gun shop usually notify the cops/fbi if someone start to buy massive amount of bullets. also I cant imagine how bulky and heavy it is to brings +500 bullets


I don't think they're separating the injuries caused by gunshots from those caused from people trying to escape.  Because the latter wouldn't have happened if the shooting hadn't happened.  I'm pretty sure most, if not all, of the deaths were due to gunshots though.


This guy bought the bullets gradually over time from different stores and stockpiled them.  He did not buy them all at once because he knew that would have raised suspicions.  He checked into his hotel rooms on Thursday, so he had plenty of time to get his weapons in place over the course of a few days.

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## Neo Arcadia (Oct 2, 2017)

Dragon D. Luffy said:


> hell, forget about the mass shootings. We need to do something about the huge rate of suicides we have right now. That is taking even more people out.


I wonder how many nameless suiciders considered going out with a bang instead of quietly offing themselves. 
Scary thought.


----------



## Kishu (Oct 2, 2017)

Neo Arcadia said:


> I wonder how many nameless suiciders considered going out with a bang instead of quietly offing themselves.
> Scary thought.


Not that many, to be honest.  Undiagnosed or untreated mental illness such as depression is the reason behind most suicides, and people with mental illnesses are simply more likely to harm themselves than other people. 

Those who take other people with them are the exceptions, not the rule.


----------



## GaaraoftheDesert1 (Oct 2, 2017)

This redneck gun bullshit culture kind of keeps america behind europe in a lot of aspects.
Sure europe faces much more terrorism and we have lots of eurotrash idiots....but this is just on another level.
The US certainly has accomplished amazing things as a nation, but it also has the most insane stupid people on the planet...
Warfare keeps happening inside and outside of american borders (because of the US) and none gives a fuck.


----------



## Lord Stark (Oct 2, 2017)

Kitsune said:


> Waiting to see how anyone is still against gun control.



The religion of the state.  Plain and simple.  People worship the constitution with a devotion that rivals that of ISIS members.  And as for this idea that "don't you think he would just acquire a gun illegally if it wasn't legal?"  Actually, no.  Guns on the black market in Australia went from 2-4k to over 15k after the regulations were made stricter.  Someone having 2-4k on hand and walking down the street is far more likely than someone having 15k _and _not to mention have access to the black markets in the first place.  

All that being said, the only thing that will happen here is it may _slow_ GOP measures in congress to lessen (you heard that right) gun control legislation.  America has essentially consented to mass shootings ad infinitum after we didn't do shit after the Sandy Hook massacre.  If we didn't give anything but thoughts and prayers to dead children, a few country singers won't do anything.  Only way we're going to get better gun laws is if we have a second Black Panther party or if we get a militant arab or hispanic militant group of a similar breath.

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 3


----------



## HolyHands (Oct 2, 2017)

In fairness, there are some major logistical issues when it comes to gun control in America. Any gun control measure has to take into account that there is a constitutional amendment that guarantees a citizen's right to own firearms, a country with over 300 million guns in circulation, 50 states with their own specific gun laws in which people can easily just drive to another state to buy a gun there, sharing borders with other nations that can engage in black market deals to keep guns in circulation, and perhaps most of all, a culture in which love of guns and gun ownership is deeply ingrained in the American psyche, and whom will quite literally engage in violence to keep their guns.

Any serious gun control would only be successful if done nation-wide, which is extremely unlikely unless anti-gun politicians were super-majorities in all branches of government, and even passing any severe gun control on the level of Australia would quite literally have to earned through bloodshed. We're much better off advocating for increased safety and background checks as opposed to confiscation or buyback policies, as the former has much more support and a much better chance of actually happening.

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 1


----------



## Mider T (Oct 2, 2017)

Superman said:


> That Hotel is going to be in a lot of trouble. People are going to want to put the blame on someone living.


Nah it's Vegas, they'll be good.  Especially come the topless pool parties in the summer.


----------



## reiatsuflow (Oct 2, 2017)

HolyHands said:


> We're much better off advocating for increased safety and background checks as opposed to confiscation or buyback policies, as the former has much more support and a much better chance of actually happening.



And other security precautions that aren't really argumentative. Security folks paid a lot of attention to what happened in orlando. Security consultants are already talking about being mindful of booking outdoor concerts away from highrise buildings where people could position themselves. NPR's already got an article up about it.

Paddock's room had 16 weapons. 18 weapons were in his mesquite home along with thousands of rounds of ammunition and explosives. Pounds of ammonium nitrate. Assuming he got at least some of them legally, people are going to start paying more attention to who's buying what and why. Increasing citizen awareness and helping law enforcement form more trusting relationships with businesses that deal in these things should help. Even the example example of budget hotels that scan drivers licenses and show copies to local law enforcement in case any residents raise red flags. Reinforcing police relationships with businesses and citizens so they can help each other out in keeping an eye on society's undesirables. It's not going to prevent these things from happening, but it's a positive either way.


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Oct 2, 2017)

So if I missed nothing, we still don't know the motivations of the shooter. We only know IS claimed it but the FBI did not not confirmed it.


----------



## Nighty the Mighty (Oct 2, 2017)

Plague said:


> Didn't the guy have a fully automatic weapon? And those have been illegal since the 80s haven't they?
> And Europe is falling to pieces right now thanks to their open borders policies. Not a very good example.



1. Stop that.

2. No, fully automatics are not illegal. I covered this sometime in the first few pages.


----------



## scerpers (Oct 2, 2017)

WOOOO VEGAS!

Reactions: Dislike 2


----------



## Lord Stark (Oct 2, 2017)

HolyHands said:


> In fairness, there are some major logistical issues when it comes to gun control in America. Any gun control measure has to take into account that there is a constitutional amendment that guarantees a citizen's right to own firearms, a country with over 300 million guns in circulation, 50 states with their own specific gun laws in which people can easily just drive to another state to buy a gun there, sharing borders with other nations that can engage in black market deals to keep guns in circulation, and perhaps most of all, a culture in which love of guns and gun ownership is deeply ingrained in the American psyche, and whom will quite literally engage in violence to keep their guns.



We spent $2 trillion and limited just about every right guaranteed in the constitution due to a singular terrorist attack that killed ~3,000 people and cost us $178 billion.  Gun violence in this country kills 40,000 people _per year_ and costs $269 billion _per year_.  The US has the resources and the will to change it if people really thought about it in the right way/ if we used our multi billion dollar PR industry to push beneficial policy instead of selling vats of sugary beverages. 



> Any serious gun control would only be successful if done nation-wide, which is extremely unlikely unless anti-gun politicians were super-majorities in all branches of government, and even passing any severe gun control on the level of Australia would quite literally have to earned through bloodshed. We're much better off advocating for increased safety and background checks as opposed to confiscation or buyback policies, as the former has much more support and a much better chance of actually happening.



Step 1: Arm Black Lives Matters protesters with guns
Step 2: Have them follow the police and threaten vigilante justice (The Third Black Panther Party)
Step 3: PR campaign pushing no more guns

You'd have a _Republican_ sponsored gun control bill on the floor in a year.  I'd guarantee it, Trump himself would be begging Gorsuch to interpret the Second Amendment as military only.  Its why California has some of the strictest gun control laws, the Black Panthers.  

But in all seriousness if you had a serious push towards it by corporate interests it'd change.  There's just so much money in it.  Hell, even today Gun stocks spiked ~4%.

Reactions: Like 1 | Creative 1 | Optimistic 1


----------



## Parallax (Oct 2, 2017)

> Didn't the guy have a fully automatic weapon? And those have been illegal since the 80s haven't they?
> And Europe is falling to pieces right now thanks to their open borders policies. Not a very good example.



@Plague 

No this isn't an echo chamber this was a dumbass point and if you make any more like this imma keep posting them up


----------



## Bender (Oct 2, 2017)

Death toll 59 now.

(Drunk and kinda stupid/angry/sad) 

The shooter is reportedly a multi-millionaire real-estate.  It possible that he connected to the Trump org and did mass-shooting to prevent impeachment procedure voting ( was scheduled today).


----------



## Mider T (Oct 2, 2017)

Bender said:


> The shooter is reportedly a multi-millionaire real-estate.


He Is a piece of property?


----------



## Huey Freeman (Oct 2, 2017)

You know what gets me the most about this, is that this was white on white crime, by a white lunatic mostly repubs and yet they mostly remain hum on the situation. 



Bender said:


> Death toll 59 now.
> 
> (Drunk and kinda stupid/angry/sad)
> 
> The shooter is reportedly a multi-millionaire real-estate.  It possible that he connected to the Trump org and did mass-shooting to prevent impeachment procedure voting ( was scheduled today).


Source


----------



## Bender (Oct 2, 2017)

Mider T said:


> He Is a piece of property?



Too drunkg to figure out what you call real state person


----------



## Huey Freeman (Oct 2, 2017)

Mider T said:


> He Is a piece of property?


Are you a fruit ?


----------



## Mider T (Oct 2, 2017)

Bender said:


> Too drunkg to figure out what you call real state person


What did we tell you about posting drunk? @Gunners @Seto Kaiba


----------



## Bender (Oct 2, 2017)

Source[/QUOTE]


Huey Freeman said:


> You know what gets me the most about this, is that this was white on white crime, by a white lunatic mostly repubs and yet they mostly remain hum on the situation.





> Source


*Brother: Las Vegas gunman was wealthy real-estate investor*
scribbles


----------



## Bender (Oct 2, 2017)

Mider T said:


> What did we tell you about posting drunk? @Gunners @Seto Kaiba



I'm sad, I don't know what to do when I'm sad about things. I'm not strong like you are Mider.


----------



## reiatsuflow (Oct 2, 2017)

Lord Stark said:


> Step 1: Arm Black Lives Matters protesters with guns
> Step 2: Have them follow the police and threaten vigilante justice (The Third Black Panther Party)
> Step 3: PR campaign pushing no more guns



You might be playing, but this is good. It's happened before; gun regulation incited by radical black groups taking advantage of gun laws. Isn't that the mulford act?

Except we've had some lone black wolves gunning up cops, and that hasn't budged the issue either.

We're running out of options, fellow patriots!

Reactions: Optimistic 1


----------



## Junta1987 (Oct 2, 2017)

Huey Freeman said:


> First off they need to demilitarize their police and train them better to handle crime



lol i hope you are joking


----------



## Parallax (Oct 2, 2017)

Rich white guy goes on a rampage.   Bruh I can't wait for the fucking spin tomorrow

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 1 | Funny 1


----------



## ~Greed~ (Oct 2, 2017)

Nighty the Mighty said:


> 2. No, fully automatics are not illegal. I covered this sometime in the first few pages.



Any full auto gun manufactured after 1986 is illegal.

Any full auto gun manufactured during or prior to 1986 is legal but is about $20k.... minimum.

This debate about new more strict gun regulation  is pointless though. Outside of the fact that gun ownership is a right granted by the second amendmentof the Constitution....which is nearly impossible to have changed....most rednecks will tell you that you'll have to pry their gun out of their cold dead hands. That's not an exaggeration. They will literally fight to the death over it.


----------



## Bender (Oct 2, 2017)

What do you guys think the shooters motives were?

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Parallax (Oct 2, 2017)

Junta1987 said:


> lol i hope you are joking


Real talk, be honest, how mad are you a rich white man did this?

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Parallax (Oct 2, 2017)

~Greed~ said:


> Any full auto gun manufactured after 1986 is illegal.
> 
> Any full auto gun manufactured during or prior to 1986 is legal but is about $20k.... minimum.
> 
> This debate about new more strict gun regulation  is pointless though. Outside of the fact that gun ownership is a right granted by the second amendmentof the Constitution....which is nearly impossible to have changed....most rednecks will tell you that you'll have to pry their gun out of their cold dead hands. That's not an exaggeration. They will literally fight to the death over it.



First line is straight up false, fully automatic weapons were barely illegal in California about, I wanna say around 1989?  And this is California


----------



## Parallax (Oct 2, 2017)

Hmmm correction it was assault weapons bit that's a loaded term


----------



## Sherlōck (Oct 2, 2017)

RIP.

So was it declared as terrorism yet or just mentally ill white person with a sad past?

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## ~Greed~ (Oct 2, 2017)

Parallax said:


> First line is straight up false, fully automatic weapons were barely illegal in California about, I wanna say around 1989?  And this is California



No, they weren't. Pre-1986 are legal but extremely expensive, and heavily regulated.


"In 1986, this Act amended the NFA definition of “silencer” by adding combinations of parts for silencers and any part intended for use in the assembly or fabrication of a silencer. The Act also amended the GCA to prohibit the transfer or possession of machineguns. Exceptions were made for transfers of machineguns to, or possession of machineguns by, government agencies, and those lawfully possessed before the effective date of the prohibition, May 19, 1986."


----------



## HolyHands (Oct 2, 2017)

Sherlōck said:


> RIP.
> 
> So was it declared as terrorism yet or just mentally ill white person with a sad past?



FBI has stated that they haven't found any ties to ISIS or a terrorist group. Motives are still unknown.

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## Darkmatter (Oct 2, 2017)

Bender said:


> What do you guys think the shooters motives were?



I'm thinking either the dude just had it with life, or he lost his mind.

Definitely isn't a person who would go Postal given that he's quite financially healthy (on top of that, he would target his workplace if that were the case), and he certainly doesn't have any religious motivations despite Islamic State/Daesh claiming the atrocities.
I can't say for sure though...


----------



## Chelydra (Oct 2, 2017)

This dude was well off, unless he got hit with massive gambling debts...


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 2, 2017)

~Greed~ said:


> This debate about new more strict gun regulation is pointless though. Outside of the fact that gun ownership is a right granted by the second amendmentof the Constitution....which is nearly impossible to have changed....most rednecks will tell you that you'll have to pry their gun out of their cold dead hands. That's not an exaggeration. They will literally fight to the death over it.



Every fucking time with you people. There is a way to enact legislation that addresses our issue and recognizes gun rights.

THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO EXCUSE, but nah we should just throw our hands up and do nothing...it's pointless! Never had that work before except every other developed nation that has gun ownership rights...

_*FUCKING ISRAEL*_ has a lower gun crime per capita than we do, and has gun rights enshrined in its laws.


----------



## ~Greed~ (Oct 3, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Every fucking time with you people. There is a way to enact legislation that addresses our issue and recognizes gun rights.
> 
> THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO EXCUSE, but nah we should just throw our hands up and do nothing...it's pointless! Never had that work before except every other developed nation that has gun ownership rights...
> 
> _*FUCKING ISRAEL*_ has a lower gun crime per capita than we do, and has gun rights enshrined in its laws.



But every other nation doesn't share our constitution or the same restrictions that make it difficult to amend it .


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 3, 2017)

~Greed~ said:


> But every other nation doesn't share our constitution or the same restrictions that make it difficult to amend it .



I'm not sure if the point is escaping you or something, but Israel deals with a far more immediate threat of hostility and terror than we do and manages to have lower gun crime. 

This is also a stupid response because my point isn't about repealing the 2nd Amendment.


----------



## Kishu (Oct 3, 2017)

Bender said:


> Death toll 59 now.
> 
> (Drunk and kinda stupid/angry/sad)
> 
> The shooter is reportedly a multi-millionaire real-estate.  It possible that he connected to the Trump org and did mass-shooting to prevent impeachment procedure voting ( was scheduled today).


There's no evidence of this.  In fact his brother said he wasn't into politics.

Anyways he's a multi-millionaire professional gambler (and retired accountant) who has owned and sold a few apartment buildings.


Seto Kaiba said:


> I'm not sure if the point is escaping you or something, but Israel deals with a far more immediate threat of hostility and terror than we do and manages to have lower gun crime.
> 
> This is also a stupid response because my point isn't about repealing the 2nd Amendment.



But what you want will still require an amendment, which is a difficult process that requires ratification from 2/3's of the states' governments.  =/



I don't think there's enough support for it to pass.  Or there's too much influence from the NRA for it to pass.  I would love to be proven wrong though.


----------



## Bender (Oct 3, 2017)

White ppl get qway with everything!


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 3, 2017)

Kishu said:


> There's no evidence of this.  In fact his brother said he wasn't into politics.
> 
> Anyways he's a multi-millionaire professional gambler who has owned and sold a few apartment buildings.
> 
> ...



No, you don't need a constitutional amendment

What the hell is up with some of you newer folks and your reading comprehension?


----------



## Bender (Oct 3, 2017)

Kishu said:


> There's no evidence of this.  In fact his brother said he wasn't into politics.
> 
> Anyways he's a multi-millionaire professional gambler who has owned and sold a few apartment buildings.
> 
> ...



We only heard shooter bro. Not his gf. Find hard believe he aint have political leanigns or had odd reason he did thjs.


----------



## Junta1987 (Oct 3, 2017)

Parallax said:


> Real talk, be honest, how mad are you a rich white man did this?



read my post. I wrote that this is not an islamic terror attack because there where rumors that this could have been one but i can't remember one where the attacker jihadi killed himself after it


----------



## Kishu (Oct 3, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> No, you don't need a constitutional amendment
> 
> What the hell is up with some of you newer folks and your reading comprehension?


Why does me being new here matter? It's no reason to insult me.  I could easily say your reading comprehension needs work as well.

And all I said was that getting an amendment added to the Constitution is difficult.  One of the problems with getting gun regulation, apart from the NRA and its muscle, is that people will say it infringes on their Constitutional rights.  Which is technically true.  But adding an Amendment can address this.  They couldn't use the Constitution as an excuse anymore.

What are some other ways to get national gun regulation that can't be challenged in court by some guy with basic knowledge of the Constitution?


----------



## Kishu (Oct 3, 2017)

Bender said:


> We only heard shooter bro. Not his gf. Find hard believe he aint have political leanigns or had odd reason he did thjs.


Not just his bro.  The cops haven't turned up any evidence of this either.  But anything's possible, I guess.


----------



## Parallax (Oct 3, 2017)

~Greed~ said:


> But every other nation doesn't share our constitution or the same restrictions that make it difficult to amend it .


I mean so?  This is a fairly poor argument....just because we don't share constitutions doesn't mean that we should be stuck in our ways and disregard alternative ways to improve our society.


----------



## Tarot (Oct 3, 2017)

Lord Stark said:


> We spent $2 trillion and limited just about every right guaranteed in the constitution due to a singular terrorist attack that killed ~3,000 people and cost us $178 billion.  Gun violence in this country kills 40,000 people _per year_ and costs $269 billion _per year_.  The US has the resources and the will to change it if people really thought about it in the right way/ if we used our multi billion dollar PR industry to push beneficial policy instead of selling vats of sugary beverages.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Finally...  ARM THE POOR!


----------



## dr_shadow (Oct 3, 2017)

Death Arcana said:


> Finally...  ARM THE POOR!



...which book is this from? 

I don't think the Communist Manifesto.


----------



## Queen Vag (Oct 3, 2017)

Kinds ot but isn't it funny the group opposing gun control in principle because they don't want the government legislating their personal rights to firearms is _the_ _same _group that wants to control the reproductive rights for women   and all because the NRA sends so much money their way. the right is a big ol fucking glass house of corporate greed.

Reactions: Like 4 | Disagree 1


----------



## Tarot (Oct 3, 2017)

mr_shadow said:


> ...which book is this from?
> 
> I don't think the Communist Manifesto.

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## Megaharrison (Oct 3, 2017)

How come we need "common sense gun laws" even though places that have them like Chicago are basically warzones...And yet we can't have "common sense immigration laws"


----------



## WT (Oct 3, 2017)

Megaharrison said:


> How come we need "common sense gun laws" even though places that have them like Chicago are basically warzones...And yet we can't have "common sense immigration laws"



Turning gun control into an immigration debate

Nice try


----------



## Junta1987 (Oct 3, 2017)

WT said:


> Turning gun control into an immigration debate
> 
> Nice try



in one point he is right: criminals dont care about gun laws
Depending on where the immigrants come from we get more or less criminals


I still think USA should look deep into the problem of mass shooting and consider all possibilities


----------



## Roman (Oct 3, 2017)

Junta1987 said:


> in one point he is right: criminals dont care about gun laws
> Depending on where the immigrants come from we get more or less criminals
> 
> 
> I still think USA should reconsider their value of the Second Amendment



The shooter was an old white man tho


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 3, 2017)

Junta1987 said:


> in one point he is right: criminals dont care about gun laws
> Depending on where the immigrants come from we get more or less criminals
> 
> I still think USA should look deep into it and make chances



It's a lousy argument though.

Might as well have no laws in that place then since you know criminals by definition just break them anyway!

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Junta1987 (Oct 3, 2017)

Roman said:


> The shooter was an old white man tho





Seto Kaiba said:


> It's a lousy argument though.
> 
> Might as well have no laws in that place then since you know criminals by definition just break them anyway!



i changed my comment a bit too late before you posted your one:



Junta1987 said:


> I still think USA should look deep into the problem of mass shooting and consider all possibilities


----------



## Roman (Oct 3, 2017)

Weak. You're implying something completely different now.


----------



## GRIMMM (Oct 3, 2017)




----------



## Junta1987 (Oct 3, 2017)

Roman said:


> Weak. You're implying something completely different now.



nonsense. America has a problem with gang violence and it has a problem with lunatics who start mass shooting without a reason

If you allow mass immigration from Third World countries you will get more gang violence that's why you should not let them in to not make things worse

If you want to solve the problem of mass shootings you will probably have to change things on the Second Amendment


they are quite optimistic...


----------



## Azula (Oct 3, 2017)

Apparently one guy did not pull out his gun in response because he (correctly) feared that he would then get mistaken as _the_ shooter by the police and just handed it over.

Good thinking.


----------



## Darkmatter (Oct 3, 2017)

Megaharrison said:


> How come we need "common sense gun laws" even though places that have them like Chicago are basically warzones...And yet we can't have "common sense immigration laws"



I thought we already have "Common Sense Immigration Laws", but far more strict?


----------



## WorkingMoogle (Oct 3, 2017)

Darkmatter said:


> I thought we already have "Common Sense Immigration Laws", but far more strict?


Clearly immigration laws don't work, we still have illegal immigration after all.

All they do is cost us a lot of money and inconvenience the people who are coming to the country for good reasons.  We should shut down INS and the border check points and just open things up.  The way it was when the founding fathers wrote the Constitution.


----------



## makeoutparadise (Oct 3, 2017)

Megaharrison said:


> How come we need "common sense gun laws" even though places that have them like Chicago are basically warzones...And yet we can't have "common sense immigration laws"


Illegal immigrants wont follow the law
Just like mass shooters wont follow gun laws 
So we should do nothing

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## IchLiebe (Oct 3, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> I'm not sure if the point is escaping you or something, but Israel deals with a far more immediate threat of hostility and terror than we do and manages to have lower gun crime.
> 
> This is also a stupid response because my point isn't about repealing the 2nd Amendment.


You are mixing gun crimes and terror attacks. We have less terror attacks than Israel. We have more gun crimes than Israel.

Go to Palestine and buy gun from whatever dealer. Now go to Chicago and buy an ak  for 2grand from a 12 year old kid on the side of the street.

UK has very little gun crime, so should they relax the gun laws?



Gun control is unconstitutional.


----------



## IchLiebe (Oct 3, 2017)

makeoutparadise said:


> Illegal immigrants dont follow the law
> Just like mass shooters sometimes follow gun laws
> So we should do nothing


Fixed.


This guy had a legal semi automatic with a legal accessory to increase fire rate.


----------



## makeoutparadise (Oct 3, 2017)

IchLiebe said:


> Fixed.
> 
> 
> This guy had a legal semi automatic with a legal accessory to increase fire rate.


If the fact that be bought the guns legally along with his modifications qualifys as "sometimes" following the law by not getting caught and working peacfully in the community. 
Then by this logic illegal immigrants also "sometimes" or "mostly" follow the law.
Its when the mass shooter kills is when he breaks the law


----------



## IchLiebe (Oct 3, 2017)

makeoutparadise said:


> If the fact that be bought the guns legally along with his modifications qualifys as "sometimes" following the law by not getting caught and working peacfully in the community.
> Then by this logic illegal immigrants also "sometimes" or "mostly" follow the law.
> Its when the mass shooter kills is when he breaks the law


Yes but up to the point of the mass shooting they are sometimes law abiding citizens. This guy had no prior record, he was a law abiding citizen. We can't say he bought the guns legally for illegal purposes. Or he obtained them despite gun laws. He was within accordance to gun laws.

Yes some do follow the law, but all of them broke the law within their first steps into the country. They were never within accordance to the law.

Mass shooters sometimes follow the gun laws and obtain guns legally, sometimes they don't. And yes when then start killing they are no longer law abiding.

All illegal immigrants break the law of immigration, every fuckin time.


He followed the law in the purchase of weapons and related accessories. He even passed multiple background checks.


He purchased the weapons and accessories legally and passed multiple background checks.


----------



## Morglay (Oct 3, 2017)

Was this lunatic caught alive?


----------



## wibisana (Oct 3, 2017)

Morglay said:


> Was this lunatic caught alive?


he killed himself bfore police arrived

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## IchLiebe (Oct 3, 2017)

Morglay said:


> Was this lunatic caught alive?


No he had cameras in the hallway to see when the police where there, he shot himself and swat team breached in and point man shot him 2-3 more times...I believe in the head. Him and the officers knew he wasn't going to live.

@wibisana, no he did as they arrived.

Reactions: Sad! 1


----------



## WorkingMoogle (Oct 3, 2017)

IchLiebe said:


> Or he obtained them despite gun laws.


Hence why some of us thing the gun laws need changed.


----------



## IchLiebe (Oct 3, 2017)

WorkingMoogle said:


> Hence why some of us thing the gun laws need changed.


And I am of the opinion that gun laws are unconstitutional.


What I meant by that statement (what you quoted) was that if he wanted a gun he can get one. If it requires him to buy a 3d printer he can acquire what is needed. Right now I can go to the apartment complex and buy a throwaway for less than $100.


----------



## WorkingMoogle (Oct 3, 2017)

IchLiebe said:


> And I am of the opinion that gun laws are unconstitutional.


Well, you're certainly entitled to your opinion on the matter.


----------



## wibisana (Oct 3, 2017)

IchLiebe said:


> No he had cameras in the hallway to see when the police where there, he shot himself and swat team breached in and point man shot him 2-3 more times...I believe in the head. Him and the officers knew he wasn't going to live.
> 
> @wibisana, no he did as they arrived.


so? he/she asked if they caught him alive? I answer he killed himself, the fact that police shoot 2-3 more time in his dying body dont change the fact that he wasnt caught alive. i dont understand your dislike tbh


----------



## IchLiebe (Oct 3, 2017)

wibisana said:


> so? he/she asked if they caught him alive? I answer he killed himself, the fact that police shoot 2-3 more time in his dying body dont change the fact that he wasnt caught alive. i dont understand your dislike tbh


I didnt mean too.

In was correct in you that he was doinit as police arrived, not before.

There, you happy now?


----------



## Huey Freeman (Oct 3, 2017)

I'm surprise there isn't a forum wide ignore for ichliebe

Reactions: Agree 2 | Funny 1


----------



## Parallax (Oct 3, 2017)

Dude


IchLiebe said:


> Yes but up to the point of the mass shooting they are sometimes law abiding citizens. This guy had no prior record, he was a law abiding citizen. We can't say he bought the guns legally for illegal purposes. Or he obtained them despite gun laws. He was within accordance to gun laws.
> 
> Yes some do follow the law, but all of them broke the law within their first steps into the country. They were never within accordance to the law.
> 
> ...



What the fuck you bringing up immigration for in this thread.  Stop derailing.


----------



## wibisana (Oct 3, 2017)

Huey Freeman said:


> I'm surprise there isn't a forum wide ignore for ichliebe


Im ignoring him, but i dont put people on ignore list. sometimes stupidity triggers me


----------



## EJ (Oct 3, 2017)

wibisana said:


> Im ignoring him, but i dont put people on ignore list. sometimes stupidity triggers me



So much for being tolerant! Un-ignore him and read his stupidity!


----------



## wibisana (Oct 3, 2017)

Flow said:


> So much for being tolerant! Un-ignore him and read his stupidity!


I dont have him on ignore list lol. i just decide to ignore/dont reply him too much. it waste of time tbh


----------



## EJ (Oct 3, 2017)

He doesn't concede to when he's proven wrong and shifts the argument around everywhere to make it seem as though he had an initial point he was attempting to make. I get why you would ignore him.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Mider T (Oct 3, 2017)

Morglay said:


> Was this lunatic caught alive?


Seriously asking this 2 days after the event?


----------



## IchLiebe (Oct 3, 2017)

Parallax said:


> Dude
> 
> 
> What the fuck you bringing up immigration for in this thread.  Stop derailing.


I fucking didn't. You advisor @Megaharrison  did in reference to gun control laws.




Flow said:


> So much for being tolerant! Un-ignore him and read his stupidity!


Your reading comprehension is pure shit. He said he doesn't put people on the ignore list.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 3, 2017)

Parallax said:


> Dude
> 
> 
> What the fuck you bringing up immigration for in this thread.  Stop derailing.



He's a demented hick supremacist, not shocking.


----------



## Tarot (Oct 3, 2017)

Junta1987 said:


> nonsense. America has a problem with gang violence and it has a problem with lunatics who start mass shooting without a reason
> 
> If you allow mass immigration from Third World countries you will get more gang violence that's why you should not let them in to not make things


 The vast majority of gangs are made up of native born Americans. You're making a poor attempt to shoehorn anti-immigration bullshit.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 3, 2017)

Cartels create problems in border towns, but that is more a matter of the drug war, which we honestly need to put to an end or deal a huge blow in by legalizing marijuana.


----------



## Utopia Realm (Oct 3, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Cartels create problems in border towns, but that is more a matter of the drug war, which we honestly need to put to an end or deal a huge blow in by legalizing marijuana.



Agree with legalizing marijuana. If we have learned anything in this country, Prohibition failed then and fails now w/ marijuana...


----------



## Parallax (Oct 3, 2017)

The cartel has lost hundreds of millions with marijuana being legalized in the states, it's proven to be effective.


----------



## GrimaH (Oct 3, 2017)

https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/l...lets-congress-looks-rollback-gun-laws-n806881

*Silencers, Armor-Piercing Bullets: Congress Looks to Roll Back Gun Laws*
by Alex Seitz-Wald

WASHINGTON — *The day House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, R-La., was shot in June during a congressional baseball practice, his colleagues were supposed to hold a hearing on a bill to make it easier for Americans to buy gun silencers. 


 That hearing was postponed because of the shooting, and now Congress may push that legislation back yet again after another shooting. This time, it's the attack in Las Vegas, the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history, which critics say would have been even worse if the gunman had been equipped with a silencer. 


 Meanwhile, Congress may soon take up another bill that has long topped the wish-list of pro-gun groups, including the National Rifle Association (NRA), which would force states to recognize other states' permits allowing residents to carry concealed weapons. *

The Republican-controlled House has yet to schedule a vote on the Sportsmen Heritage and Recreational Enhancement (SHARE) Act, a wide-ranging bill that includes the silencer provision, but opponents had feared it could come up for a vote as soon as this week.

*The House Natural Resources Committee approved the bill this month and took several steps to fast-track the legislation, including requesting a rushed analysis from the Congressional Budget Office and asking other committees to waive their jurisdiction, Democrats on the committee say. *

No vote was scheduled, however, and it's now up to House GOP leaders to determine whether and when the chamber will take up the bill.

*The NRA and other supporters say rolling back 80-year-old restrictions on silencers would be an "important safety-oriented aspect of the bill that will help protect the hearing of America's hunters." 


 But critics charge that silencers, which mask the sound and flash of a gunshot, would cost lives by making it harder for law enforcement and shooting victims to tell where shots are coming from in active shooting situations. *

*"Imagine how much worse last night's shooting could have been if the gunman had a silencer," said Mark Kelly, the former astronaut who runs the pro-gun control group Americans for Responsible Solutions with his wife, former U.S. Rep. Gabby Giffords. *

Republicans have tried to pass the SHARE Act several times before, but the NRA calls the current version "the most ambitious and consequential yet."

*The bill would, among other things, loosen regulations on the sale of armor-piercing bullets, expand gun rights on public lands and shield people transporting guns across state lines from local laws. It would force courts to reimburse plaintiffs' legal fees if they are improperly detained. 


 "The SHARE Act would open up our law enforcement officers to personal legal liability for doing their jobs when they inquire about interstate firearm transportation during routine stops. This is absolutely ridiculous," said Rep. Mike Thompson, D-Calif., a former co-chairman of the Congressional Sportsman's Caucus who opposes the bill. 


 A separate bill on concealed carry reciprocity has yet to be taken up by the House Judiciary Committee, but it already has 212 co-sponsors, putting it easily within reach of the 218 votes necessary for a majority. *

Laws that govern carrying concealed weapons vary widely by state, with some requiring applicants to prove that they need a weapon and have taken a training course, while others have virtually no restrictions at all.

*Proponents say the current patchwork is too confusing and want concealed carry permits to work like drivers licenses, with every state recognizing every other's. 


 "This confusion often leads to law-abiding gun owners running afoul of the law when they exercise their right to self-protection while traveling or temporarily living away from home," said Chris Cox, executive director of the NRA's legislative arm. 


 But critics say forced reciprocity would undermine states and cities that have chosen to enact stricter laws by creating a giant loophole that would allow residents to obtain permits in neighboring states with weak laws and use them in their home states with strict laws. *

The U.S. Conference of Mayors, the official nonpartisan organization of cities, recently passed a resolution calling forced reciprocity "dangerous" and "completely antithetical to all of the efforts to reduce and prevent gun violence."


----------



## Huey Freeman (Oct 3, 2017)

Ah yes now you don't have to worry about those mass shootings at concerts no more because you literally won't be hearing it, genius


----------



## wibisana (Oct 3, 2017)

Huey Freeman said:


> Ah yes now you don't have to worry about those mass shootings at concerts no more because you literally won't be hearing it, genius


Silencer is not like in the movie tho. it still quite loud, but it dont hurt ear anymore.


----------



## Huey Freeman (Oct 3, 2017)

wibisana said:


> Silencer is not like in the movie tho. it still quite loud, but it dont hurt ear anymore.


Yep but doesn't help my joke and you ruined it thanks

Reactions: Funny 2


----------



## wibisana (Oct 3, 2017)

Huey Freeman said:


> Yep but doesn't help my joke and you ruined it thanks


I actually kinda wondering why silencer need to be baned/regulated btw? I mean the one kill is bullet and Gun, not the silencer. silencer help the owner so they dont have to wear earplug (it dont hurt when shooting without earplug and still quite loud) so it should be mandatory to have silencer because it is good for health?


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 3, 2017)

Parallax said:


> The cartel has lost hundreds of millions with marijuana being legalized in the states, it's proven to be effective.



It's against objective morality.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Hitt (Oct 3, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> It's against objective morality.


Pretty sure it says in the Bible "thou shall not smoketh the Mary Jane" somewhere.


----------



## EJ (Oct 3, 2017)

lol Seto and bacon been going at it for like half a year bruh! LMAO


----------



## baconbits (Oct 3, 2017)

makeoutparadise said:


> Wasnt meant to be distatesful I apologize
> Im just tried seeing this keep happenig and no one doing anything about it.
> Partly because of gun loving conservative culture
> 
> ...



What law change would have prevented this tragedy?


----------



## baconbits (Oct 3, 2017)

Catalyst75 said:


> America's first step would be abolishing the NRA (or severely limit its influence and power), along with far stricter gun laws (limiting how many fire arms one can possess, extended periods of training for handling, evaluating whether a person should have a gun, etc).  Furthermore, the mental state of individuals is something else to consider, as some people only need an excuse or 'ideological justification' to go on murder sprees.



So you're advocating the regulation of thought?  You're more totalitarian than any strawman a right winger could come up with.


----------



## HolyHands (Oct 3, 2017)

Mass shootings are part and parcel of living in America.

Sadly.


----------



## GrimaH (Oct 3, 2017)

wibisana said:


> I actually kinda wondering why silencer need to be baned/regulated btw? I mean the one kill is bullet and Gun, not the silencer. silencer help the owner so they dont have to wear earplug (it dont hurt when shooting without earplug and still quite loud) so it should be mandatory to have silencer because it is good for health?


Firearms are not meant to be "good for health"; they are meant for deterrence, self-defence, and incapacitating/killing people. Having silencers will only help in the last category, and only if the shooter wants to do it while remaining hidden.
That, quite obviously, is not something that should be legalized in society.


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 3, 2017)

baconbits said:


> So you're advocating the regulation of thought?  You're more totalitarian than any strawman a right winger could come up with.



You really come to the most backwards of conclusions.  I'm supposedly "totalitarian" because I want stricter gun control and _don't _want guns to fall into the hands of people who could abuse them?

I guess I better ring up God and ask for his opinion.  _Condemning all non-believers to Hell_ probably gives him a more "objectively moral" view of totalitarianism and "regulation of thought" than any mere mortal.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Bontakun (Oct 3, 2017)

My thoughts:

First, the status. America has opted to keep its civilians armed to the teeth for better or worse. Along with that choice comes mass shootings. It's not something that happens in other developed countries, but it doesn't mean it's wrong. It's a choice of liberty over control and order. I think the price to pay isn't too high. There are much bigger causes of death than gun violence, and if it gives people a peace of mind that they can form militias in case the federal government becomes too totalitarian, I think that makes sense. So my sympathies for Americans who have to endure snarky remarks from people in more controlling countries (and some liberals within) every time a shooting happens.

Second, it's still a tragedy every time it happens. I think each state should charge more taxes on guns, and using the revenue to do more  licensing procedures. Guns are dangerous pieces of equipment that need to be used responsibly or society suffers. What other thing has the same property? Cars. *Guns should have licenses just like cars, and owners need to go through tests just like drivers do. The licenses need to be reviewed with periodic tests.* Just like your eyesight can fail and you lose the privilege of owning a car, your mental state can fail and you should lose the privilege of owning a gun. If the Las Vegas shooter had to renew licenses every few years, the authorities will see that this guy owns an unusual number of guns for his occupation and trigger some red flags. He will have to pass some interviews and mental health checkups. Even if he does pass them, at least each state will be building up a database of gun owner profiles from all these tests, and when a mass shooting happens they can analyze past tests to see if there's any detectable patterns to help prevent future shootings.

And this isn't the same flimsy background checks conducted at gun shops. You don't get your driver's license from Toyota. You get it from the Department of Transportation. A gun license needs to be obtained from an equally *strict exam* from an equally *official establishment*.



baconbits said:


> So you're advocating the regulation of thought?  You're more totalitarian than any strawman a right winger could come up with.



Just gonna jump in without reading prior comments and hope I'm talking about the same thing. Since the danger of guns is from mentally unstable people, mental tests are appropriate for gun ownership.



HolyHands said:


> Mass shootings are part and parcel of living in America.
> 
> Sadly.


It's true but instead of keeping guns cheap and having all the cost go to the innocent people while profits accrue in gun makers, more tax on guns and using the revenue to help keep people safe would make sense.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## WorkingMoogle (Oct 3, 2017)

Don't you guys believe in Science?  Deer have evolved armor-plated hides as a counter to hunters.  Hunters _need_ those armor piercing bullets to keep up otherwise deer populations will get out of control!

Reactions: Agree 2 | Funny 2


----------



## baconbits (Oct 3, 2017)

Catalyst75 said:


> You really come to the most backwards of conclusions.  I'm supposedly "totalitarian" because I want stricter gun control and _don't _want guns to fall into the hands of people who could abuse them?
> 
> I guess I better ring up God and ask for his opinion.  _Condemning all non-believers to Hell_ probably gives him a more "objectively moral" view of totalitarianism and "regulation of thought" than any mere mortal.



Nice attempt at changing the subject.  The reason you're totalitarian is because you're advocating banning a group that hasn't done anything illegal; they only have different views than you do.  Hence the "regulating thought" comment.

And you cannot do that in the US.  You can't just abolish groups because you don't like what they stand for.  We live in a free society and want to continue in it.


----------



## WorkingMoogle (Oct 3, 2017)

baconbits said:


> Nice attempt at changing the subject. The reason you're totalitarian is because you're advocating banning a group that hasn't done anything illegal; they only have different views than you do. Hence the "regulating thought" comment.


What's your position on Abortion again?

Do you advocate that it should become illegal?  Do you consider that to be totalitarian because "you're advocating banning a group that hasn't done anything illegal; they only have different views than you do?"


----------



## Utopia Realm (Oct 3, 2017)

WorkingMoogle said:


> Don't you guys believe in Science?  Deer have evolved armor-plated hides as a counter to hunters.  Hunters _need_ those armor piercing bullets to keep up otherwise deer populations will get out of control!



Then where the fuck is my enhanced body armor w/ extra slots and def stats at?

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## baconbits (Oct 3, 2017)

WorkingMoogle said:


> What's your position on Abortion again?
> 
> Do you advocate that it should become illegal?  Do you consider that to be totalitarian because "you're advocating banning a group that hasn't done anything illegal; they only have different views than you do?"



False equivalency.  If you want to make a fair comparison you'd have to find me advocating getting rid of Planned Parenthood and saying they don't have a right to exist.  I disagree with their stance but they have a right to advocate for positions I find abhorrent.  That's part of living in a free society.


----------



## WorkingMoogle (Oct 3, 2017)

baconbits said:


> False equivalency.  If you want to make a fair comparison you'd have to find me advocating getting rid of Planned Parenthood and saying they don't have a right to exist.  I disagree with their stance but they have a right to advocate for positions I find abhorrent.  That's part of living in a free society.


Bullshit.

You want to remove a right (Abortion | Gun Ownership) from a group (Women Wanting Abortions | People Wanting Guns) that is currently legal because your personal moral beliefs surrounding the right differ from theirs.

The details are obviously different, and you're free to believe whatever moral positions you want.  But the comparison is valid.  If it is "totalitarian" because of your previous definition own up to the title.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## baconbits (Oct 3, 2017)

WorkingMoogle said:


> Bullshit.
> 
> You want to remove a right (Abortion | Gun Ownership) from a group (Women Wanting Abortions | People Wanting Guns) that is currently legal because your personal moral beliefs surrounding the right differ from theirs.
> 
> The details are obviously different, and you're free to believe whatever moral positions you want.  But the comparison is valid.  If it is "totalitarian" because of your previous definition own up to the title.



Nonsense.  By that logic everyone is totalitarian since we all have groups and rights we disagree with.  Totalitarianism isn't advocacy of a position, but the attempt to make advocacy of the opposing position illegal.


----------



## reiatsuflow (Oct 3, 2017)

baconbits said:


> If you want to make a fair comparison you'd have to find me advocating getting rid of Planned Parenthood and saying they don't have a right to exist.  I disagree with their stance but they have a right to advocate for positions I find abhorrent.  That's part of living in a free society.



I'm suspicious. Wouldn't you support some sort of movement against planned parenthood if they were too influential in controlling the abortion debate, preventing research into fetal development and blocking down attempts by the government to study the surrounding areas? If planned parenthood had a small country's worth of a lobbying presence, and hilary clinton spoke at their bohemian grove cabal promising the country will refuse anti abortion legislation under her watch? Wouldn't you be for checking their influence?

I know catalyst said do away with, but he probably meant the parentheses more seriously (shore up their massive influence somehow).


----------



## baconbits (Oct 3, 2017)

reiatsuflow said:


> I'm suspicious. Wouldn't you support some sort of movement against planned parenthood if they were too influential in controlling the abortion debate, preventing research into fetal development and blocking down attempts by the government to study the surrounding areas? If planned parenthood had a small country's worth of a lobbying presence, and hilary clinton spoke at their bohemian grove cabal promising the country will refuse anti abortion legislation under her watch? Wouldn't you be for checking their influence?
> 
> I know catalyst said do away with, but he probably meant the parentheses more seriously (shore up their massive influence somehow).



If that's what he meant he should clarify his position.  I think unions have a disproportionate influence on government spending, especially in local elections, but I don't think unions should be illegal.  I've long thought that teachers' unions were unfair in that you have a group that benefits from more spending advocating for public policy that they directly benefit from.  But I don't call for them to be eliminated.  I cheer when they weaken and I cheer when their political power goes down, but they should always have a right to exist and try to obtain influence.  They should have the same rights I should.

It's incredibly dangerous to advocate for eliminating a group for the sole reason that you disagree with them.  That's the stuff of extremism.  There's no other way to paint it.


----------



## baconbits (Oct 3, 2017)

Psychic said:


> Something is not right here. This somehow reminds me of the Virginia Tech shooting, where the killer was already dead when police found him. I like know in my heart the real killer is still alive, like why wear a mask to do the shootings only to reveal your face in a video to a news station? Same thing here, whoever did these killings is doing it for attention. He/She is very clever and confident, and probably already got away with smaller mass shootings in the past. You have to ask, what does the killer stand to gain? Going down as the largest mass shooting in the U.S. for one and a massive audience. This person probably knows the security details very well in the Mandalay or at least been to enough hotels to know they dont check baggages. Someone who planned this out, wouldn't just kill himself like that. The killer knew the smoke alarm was gonna be set off by the gunfire, he wanted the body to be found.



Its too early to be engaging in this in depth of a conspiracy story.


----------



## Psychic (Oct 3, 2017)

baconbits said:


> Its too early to be engaging in this in depth of a conspiracy story.


Oh nvm I'm retarded. I didn't read the whole story carry on.


----------



## HolyHands (Oct 3, 2017)

Too late. The internet is already awash with conspiracy theories that the shooter was an antifa paid by George Soros to assassinate conservatives (because only the right likes country music!) in service to the Jewish globalist agenda to disarm the populace and dismantle western civilization through extermination of the white race. 

So you know... business as usual.


----------



## WorkingMoogle (Oct 3, 2017)

baconbits said:


> Nonsense.  By that logic everyone is totalitarian since we all have groups and rights we disagree with.  Totalitarianism isn't advocacy of a position, but the attempt to make advocacy of the opposing position illegal.



I think it's a large step from "disband the NRA" to "make advocacy of [gun rights] illegal."

Honest question, if I combed through your post history what do you suppose the chances are I'd find a quote from you suggesting that Planned Parenthood be closed down?

And I can _guarantee_ I could find Republicans calling for that right now, are those Republicans totalitarian?


----------



## makeoutparadise (Oct 3, 2017)

baconbits said:


> What law change would have prevented this tragedy?


Some countries require a phycological assesment before handing a person a gun.
We need to shut down the free flowing gun markets where you can just walk in show no id and buy what you like on the sales floor and leave


----------



## Parallax (Oct 3, 2017)

baconbits said:


> What law change would have prevented this tragedy?


So we should just let things be and pretend to be sad when people die

Edit: damn phone typo


----------



## makeoutparadise (Oct 3, 2017)

Also we should let te CDC actually find out about the real stats on gun laws and repeal the laws the NRA as lobbied for that stifle the departments of firearms from doing its job


----------



## makeoutparadise (Oct 3, 2017)

Perhaps even a limit on how many of each gun you can buy?

Do you need three houses full of assualt rifles?

What are you planning to do with that many?
There no zombies coming
Our millitary a nd police both already have tanks  
At some point you're just fetishizing guns
Those kinda people kill


----------



## makeoutparadise (Oct 3, 2017)

Perhaps a record of how many guns you have should be kept in a database

You want to by that modifcation that turns your semi auto into a full auto 

You're gonna need to alert the athorites tha you're doing that.

Maybe such modifactions should be left to the shooting ranges 

People who run the shooting range can for a small fee trun you semiauton gun into and fully auto gun for a shooting session 
Then when you leave they switch it back


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 3, 2017)

baconbits said:


> Nice attempt at changing the subject. The reason you're totalitarian is because you're advocating banning a group that hasn't done anything illegal; they only have different views than you do. Hence the "regulating thought" comment.
> 
> And you cannot do that in the US. You can't just abolish groups because you don't like what they stand for. We live in a free society and want to continue in it.



"Advocating banning a group that hasn't done anything illegal".

Remind, hasn't the Church done that every time they have forced their religion onto other cultures, causing them to abandon the religion and beliefs the people of a region held beforehand?  Or does "objective morality" mean that is not "totalitarianism", because you believe you are spreading "the truth of God"?

I am calling out hypocrisy where I see it.

You are treating the NRA as if they are an embodiment of the Second Amendment, but they are not. 

They are a *organization* that gets off on people buying up things that can easily kill people if mishandled, or get into the wrong hands, continue to support legislation to make both easier, and have always gone dark whenever a gun massacre does occur (as they are doing now).  Hell, before this tragedy, they were advocating for a bill _*to ease regulations on silencers.*_ 



baconbits said:


> What law change would have prevented this tragedy?



How about "limiting the number of firearms amount of munitions a person may possess at any one time", "limiting what type of fire-arms one may possess", and "performing checks for and restricting the possession of fire-arms in public buildings"? 

The shooter responsible for this tragedy had upward to _thirty-six_ fire-arms, including those at his home (with thousands of rounds of ammunition found there as well).  There were twenty-three of them in his _hotel suite_, , and enough rounds in the suite to allow him to injure over 500 people, and kill 59 people.  From a building 400 metres away from where the concert was going to be held on.

If restrictions to the amount of firearms and munitions one can possess were a thing in the US, as well as the need to show the staff of a public building what firearms you may possess were a thing, the shooter would have never been able to accumulate as much firepower as he did _*in one room.*_
*


*


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 3, 2017)

WorkingMoogle said:


> I think it's a large step from "disband the NRA" to "make advocacy of [gun rights] illegal."
> 
> Honest question, if I combed through your post history what do you suppose the chances are I'd find a quote from you suggesting that Planned Parenthood be closed down?
> 
> And I can _guarantee_ I could find Republicans calling for that right now, are those Republicans totalitarian?



Don't forget that the hack would rescind LGBT rights if he could.


----------



## Parallax (Oct 3, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Don't forget that the hack would rescind LGBT rights if he could.


Is this true @baconbits


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Oct 3, 2017)

baconbits said:


> If that's what he meant he should clarify his position. * I think unions have a disproportionate influence on government spending, especially in local elections,* but I don't think unions should be illegal.  I've long thought that teachers' unions were unfair in that you have a group that benefits from more spending advocating for public policy that they directly benefit from.  But I don't call for them to be eliminated.  I cheer when they weaken and I cheer when their political power goes down, but they should always have a right to exist and try to obtain influence.  They should have the same rights I should.
> 
> It's incredibly dangerous to advocate for eliminating a group for the sole reason that you disagree with them.  That's the stuff of extremism.  There's no other way to paint it.



lmao this guy lives in an alternative reality.


----------



## baconbits (Oct 3, 2017)

WorkingMoogle said:


> I think it's a large step from "disband the NRA" to "make advocacy of [gun rights] illegal."
> 
> Honest question, if I combed through your post history what do you suppose the chances are I'd find a quote from you suggesting that Planned Parenthood be closed down?
> 
> And I can _guarantee_ I could find Republicans calling for that right now, are those Republicans totalitarian?



If someone wants to close down an organization simply because they disagree with that organization they are authoritarian and if I've done so in the past I betrayed my ideals.



makeoutparadise said:


> Some countries require a phycological assesment before handing a person a gun.
> We need to shut down the free flowing gun markets where you can just walk in show no id and buy what you like on the sales floor and leave



That's not what this guy did.  He had no criminal history.  He was given a background check.  So much for gun control saving lives in this instance.



Catalyst75 said:


> "Advocating banning a group that hasn't done anything illegal".



Lol.  You try and tie everything to an atheist Christian debate mainly because your arguments are terrible and you rely on others to pick up the slack for you.  This has nothing to do with religion.  You want to ban a group that hasn't done anything illegal, who have no relation to this incident because of your political biases.  That tramples over freedom.


----------



## Deleted member 235437 (Oct 3, 2017)

Val said:


> Kinds ot but isn't it funny the group opposing gun control in principle because they don't want the government legislating their personal rights to firearms is _the_ _same _group that wants to control the reproductive rights for women   and all because the NRA sends so much money their way. the right is a big ol fucking glass house of corporate greed.


Also funny how these people are pro-life for a bundle of cells but are perfectly ok with standing by and letting children die because they cling to their guns. 

This entire group is filled with terrible human beings, I’m convinced

Reactions: Agree 2


----------



## makeoutparadise (Oct 3, 2017)

baconbits said:


> That's not what this guy did.  He had no criminal history.  He was given a background check.  So much for gun control saving lives in this instance.
> .


I wasnt talking about a background check I was talking about people need to physicaly go see a mental health doctor and have themselves tested to see if they arent psychological fit to have a gun
Background checks are clearly not strick enough and are a joke.
You can thank the NRA for that


----------



## HolyHands (Oct 3, 2017)

I'd argue that we may need restrictions when it comes to firearms and any high rise buildings. 

Part of that reason why this attack was so deadly was because it was done from a sniper position into a packed crowd at the dead of night. Not only is it a perfect spot to shoot from, it also basically prevents any and all form of defense. The whole damn reason why we have guns in the first place is for self-defense, but as this shooting demonstrated, the "good guys with guns" were completely helpless. At least with Sandy Hook there was the excuse that an armed teacher could have made the difference. No such excuse here. Literally every person in the city could have been armed and it would have done nothing.

If gun supporters don't want limitation on how many guns a person can own, then fine, but there has to be a way to prevent armed individuals from getting into places that make it easy to shoot innocents from high up. Because if bad guys can create situations where good guys can't shoot back, then it completely ruins the whole reason why we let citizens have guns in the first place.


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 3, 2017)

baconbits said:


> Lol. You try and tie everything to an atheist Christian debate mainly because your arguments are terrible and you rely on others to pick up the slack for you. This has nothing to do with religion. You want to ban a group that hasn't done anything illegal, who have no relation to this incident because of your political biases. That tramples over freedom.



I do that because one's beliefs, regardless of whether they are social or religiously tied, all have some bearing in how one shapes their arguments.  In your case, "objective morality" and strong conservative loyalty to the Republican party go hand in hand. 

You said it yourself: you don't care who is in power _so long as your ideologies are pushed, _and you refuse to acknowledge any flaws or mistakes in your ideology.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOTE: "Abolish" and "ban" have two distinctly different meanings.

Abolish - formally put an end to (a system, practice, or institution).

Ban - to prohibit

The NRA has become a problematic organization due to its influence with conservative politicians on matters pertains to the Second Amendment, especially when many of the policies its supports are about allowing people access to more dangerous firearms, including opposing acts that would prohibit the possession of certain types of firearms.

For example, they pushed those politicians they support against the Assault Weapons Ban that was proposed in 2013.  _Assault weapons were among those in the shooter's hotel suite.  _

In other words, either abolishing or severely restricting the NRA's political influence would _finally _allows for stricter laws in regards to firearms to be passed, greatly lowering the risk of mass shootings like this being possible.  

Instead, the NRA prevents, if not outright _prohibits_ any ideas of restrictions on people having how many guns they want, or what type of guns they want, while trying to pin all the blame on "mental illness", as if that is the _only explanation_ for people to be mass shooters.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Darkmatter (Oct 3, 2017)

Just when we recently had the deadliest mass shooting in American History, we're going to roll back on some laws over weapon accessories.
Bravo, what a brilliant fucking move!


----------



## Mider T (Oct 3, 2017)




----------



## Kitsune (Oct 3, 2017)

Khaleesi said:


> Also funny how these people are pro-life for a bundle of cells but are perfectly ok with standing by and letting children die because they cling to their guns.



They don't care about human life in any meaningful way. It's all about control. Once that cluster of cells is an autonomous life form outside of the womb it needs to pull up its bootstraps and fend for itself. Born to poor parents who don't want you? Too bad, welfare only makes you weak so deal with it.

The same people who blow a gasket when some football players kneel to raise awareness about their constitutional rights are _all_ about the liberty and freedom to own weapons. The right to kill people on principle is more important than peaceful civil rights protest.

They don't support healthcare reforms that help people with mental health problems but still want to allow dangerous weapons to circulate. They think it's intrusive to screen for mental illness prior to owning a gun, but they have no interest in helping those people.

The general hypocrisy is shocking and there's no logic to it.

Reactions: Like 2 | Agree 1 | Winner 3


----------



## reiatsuflow (Oct 3, 2017)

Every time baconbits enters one of these threads he's instantly surrounded by an ideological circle jerk that can only contain its excitement for a page or two before it's just a full on bukkake of accusations spraying everywhere. It gets on the walls, the floor, the ceiling. Eventually bacon stumbles away covered in the political ejaculate of at least five different men. But you know what? Goddamn it if he doesn't check himself, duck into a phone booth and then seconds later walk out looking dapper and together. The man smooths down his suit, adjusts his sunglasses and then flies off to help jesus with something.

Reactions: Funny 2 | Friendly 1 | Lewd 3 | Sad! 1 | Dislike 2


----------



## Kitsune (Oct 3, 2017)

reiatsuflow said:


> Every time baconbits enters one of these threads he's instantly surrounded by an ideological circle jerk that can only contain its excitement for a page or two before it's just a full on bukkake of accusations spraying everywhere. It gets on the walls, the floor, the ceiling. Eventually bacon stumbles away covered in the political ejaculate of at least five different men. But you know what? Goddamn it if he doesn't check himself, duck into a phone booth and then seconds later walk out looking dapper and together. The man smooths down his suit, adjusts his sunglasses and then flies off to help jesus with something.



 Credit where credit is due. The man is resilient.


----------



## Mider T (Oct 3, 2017)

A hero

Reactions: Like 2 | Agree 1 | Winner 1


----------



## Kitsune (Oct 3, 2017)

Catalyst75 said:


> The NRA has become a problematic organization due to its influence with conservative politicians



You can see the corruption there when you look at the NRA's stated motivations vs. the reality of what they actually do.

The whole point of the second amendment is to prevent a tyrannical government from taking and holding power. I can totally get behind this idea, but the NRA doesn't approach this in a genuine way.

First of all, the constitutional right to bear arms and form a militia isn't the right to bear any weapons you want. You can't walk down the street with a rocket launcher for the same reason you probably shouldn't have a semi-automatic weapon. Public safety is a legitimate concern.

If the NRA really cares about the intent of the Second Amendment they should be fighting against the militarization of the police force.

It's gotten to the point where even if we DID walk down the street with rocket launchers we wouldn't be able to stage an insurrection due to the sophisticated weapons used by law enforcement. It's over. The government could never be overcome by a militia force at this point.

The NRA has no problem with this because they don't really care about standing up to tyranny.

At this point I feel like you're either selling guns or you've been duped by the people who want to sell them to you.


----------



## Queen Vag (Oct 3, 2017)

HolyHands said:


> Mass shootings are part and parcel of living in America.
> 
> Sadly.


Thats a...horrifyingly complacent statement


----------



## Queen Vag (Oct 3, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Cartels create problems in border towns, but that is more a matter of the drug war, which we honestly need to put to an end or deal a huge blow in by legalizing marijuana.


Idk if it would end it, they still get a huge amount of their income from supplying cocaine


----------



## Mider T (Oct 3, 2017)

Val said:


> Thats a...horrifyingly complacent statement


I read his post with your avatar lol.


----------



## Queen Vag (Oct 3, 2017)

Oh bother, mister banana.


----------



## Ashi (Oct 3, 2017)

Val said:


> Oh bother, mister banana.



And you're Anna Banana


----------



## reiatsuflow (Oct 3, 2017)

I like that we have a gun lobby. They're just too powerful.


----------



## TheCupOfBrew (Oct 3, 2017)

The thing that bothers me is that even with tighter gun control (I'm pro gun) they also will have to be very stringent when it comes to after market modifications. Even a semi automatic gun can be modified not to difficulty to fire automatically, or  almost automatically with bump stocks.

Oh actually looking at the reports he used a bump stock on his gun to make it function that way.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 3, 2017)

Kitsune said:


> Credit where credit is due. The man is resilient.



Resilience implies he actually faces the criticism toward him. He's convinced himself it's just some bandwagon and somehow I'm some ringleader of it all. There's also his idea that he pretty much can never be wrong on value judgments of any kind, and probably anything else, you don't have a resilient person. You just have a delusional one.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 3, 2017)

Ai said:


> The thing that bothers me is that even with tighter gun control (I'm pro gun) they also will have to be very stringent when it comes to after market modifications. Even a semi automatic gun can be modified not to difficulty to fire automatically, or  almost automatically with bump stocks.
> 
> Oh actually looking at the reports he used a bump stock on his gun to make it function that way.



Which comes the question why those are even legal.


----------



## Kitsune (Oct 3, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Resilience implies he actually faces the criticism toward him. He's convinced himself it's just some bandwagon and somehow I'm some ringleader of it all. There's also his idea that he pretty much can never be wrong on value judgments of any kind, and probably anything else, you don't have a resilient person. You just have a delusional one.



He might be wrong about just about everything but I appreciate that he doesn't lash out at people or freak out. You, on the other hand, have decent opinions but you're like a wild animal. If only I could combine you two into a gentlemanly liberal homunculus.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 3, 2017)

I want you to keep in mind, that unlike this shooter, most mass shooters are at ground level with their victims, oftentimes a short distance from them:


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 3, 2017)

Kitsune said:


> He might be wrong about just about everything but I appreciate that doesn't lash out at people or freak out. You, on the other hand, have decent opinions but you're like a wild animal. If only I could combine you two into a gentlemanly liberal homonculous.



You fall for performance and don't see the snide passive-aggressive person underneath. At least with me you get the genuine article.

Not someone who is polite to you and also thinks to themselves you're a morally inferior person who's gonna burn in hell when you die.


----------



## Mider T (Oct 3, 2017)

Kitsune said:


> homncoulus


Homunculus*

Reactions: Useful 1


----------



## Kitsune (Oct 3, 2017)

Im going to abuse my powers to correct that spelling.


----------



## TheCupOfBrew (Oct 3, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Which comes the question why those are even legal.


There's no real reason that they are legal. It's mostly a loophole as far as I understand. Since the technology didn't exist when the gun laws were being written, or weren't popular when things get amended they weren't ever ruled out. 

But now with this incident I would have a hard time believing that thy won't be put under the microscope, and ultimately banned or the more likely outcome of being heavily regulated. I can't really think of a valid reason for owning automatic firearms as a individual. They may be 'more fun' to shoot, but they don't really offer anything practical that you would need. 

For sporting, or hunting their accuracy is pretty dismal without proper training, and do little more than offer a avenue to just spit out ammunition at very quick pace to cover a much wider area of effect. Which is obviously why it was used in this situation. 

More regulation in general is apparently needed when it comes to firearms as a whole.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 3, 2017)

I don't exactly hate the south or the midwest, and I am a southerner. Yet these two regions, the south especially, have done a lot to harm progress in general in this country. The gun culture wouldn't be so bad if we didn't have such rabid fucks down here in high concentrations. It's just an extension of this stubbornness that has regrettably become a characteristic among southeastern Americans in particular to be absolutely resistant to social change that may afford the rights to classes that were deprived of them, or legislative and economic change that may benefit themselves.

Las Vegas is going to skew it heavily now, but the bulk of gun deaths happen in two areas, inner cities, and the south...the latter having the highest concentration of gun ownership. Handguns, hunting rifles, I have no problem with. I just see no practical need to have something most find indistinguishable from a machine gun though. When you ask their rationale, and break it down, a lot of these are frequent buyers that have been driven to absolute paranoia over the issue by groups like the NRA.


----------



## Mider T (Oct 3, 2017)

*On average, support for gun regulation has dropped over the past 25 years.*

Probably because we don't have things like Waco and Ruby Ridge happening anymore.



Kitsune said:


> I'm going to abuse my powers to correct that spelling.


Oh yeah?


----------



## TheCupOfBrew (Oct 3, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> I don't exactly hate the south or the midwest, and I am a southerner. Yet these two regions, the south especially, have done a lot to harm progress in general in this country. The gun culture wouldn't be so bad if we didn't have such rabid fucks down here in high concentrations. It's just an extension of this stubbornness that has regrettably become a characteristic among southeastern Americans in particular to be absolutely resistant to social change that may afford the rights to classes that were deprived of them, or legislative and economic change that may benefit themselves.
> 
> Las Vegas is going to skew it heavily now, but the bulk of gun deaths happen in two areas, inner cities, and the south...the latter having the highest concentration of gun ownership.


As  Midwesterner myself I can definitely attest to at least a lot of people in Nebraska that I have met being that way. Though of course the more rural parts of Nebraska being much more so than the more metropolitan areas like Omaha, or Lincoln. 

The amount of hostility you'd face if you brought up gun regulations to some of the people in this state is astounding. It almost makes you want to distance yourself from self identifying as a pro-gun person, since if you do most people seem to have that stereotype in their head. 

Though it's not necessarily unfounded I suppose.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 3, 2017)

Mider T said:


> *On average, support for gun regulation has dropped over the past 25 years.*
> 
> Probably because we don't have things like Waco and Ruby Ridge happening anymore.
> 
> ...



People support measures to protect themselves against something when it dawns on them that it can happen to them. I for one, am shocked.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 3, 2017)

Ai said:


> As  Midwesterner myself I can definitely attest to at least a lot of people in Nebraska that I have met being that way. Though of course the more rural parts of Nebraska being much more so than the more metropolitan areas like Omaha, or Lincoln.
> 
> The amount of hostility you'd face if you brought up gun regulations to some of the people in this state is astounding. It almost makes you want to distance yourself from self identifying as a pro-gun person, since if you do most people seem to have that stereotype in their head.
> 
> Though it's not necessarily unfounded I suppose.



Look at the comments in that article @Mider T posted, people have been absolutely brainwashed by right-wing outlets and respond with hostility to any reality of this matter that runs contrast to what they were fed. This is how this shit keeps happening in part.


----------



## Skaddix (Oct 3, 2017)

Kitsune said:


> He might be wrong about just about everything but I appreciate that he doesn't lash out at people or freak out. You, on the other hand, have decent opinions but you're like a wild animal. If only I could combine you two into a gentlemanly liberal homunculus.



Meh and we appreciate if he wasn't a mod because not only is he a dumbass devoid of intelligent thought but unlike the rest of his kind, he is mod. Granted that doesn't get him much power it does make him an easy target though beyond what normal stupidity allows.

Still this shooting will sadly change nothing if Sandy Hook didn't move the dial, no way this does.

As for the NRA, they are in the gun selling business not protecting the 2nd Amendment Business and they use white resentment to build a base that lets them pressure politicians. It hasn't been about protection against government tyranny and hunting animals in ages.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 3, 2017)

Skaddix said:


> As for the NRA, they are in the gun selling business not protecting the 2nd Amendment Business and they use white resentment to build a base that lets them pressure politicians. It hasn't been about protection against government tyranny and hunting animals in ages.



"The War of Northern Aggression".


----------



## Skaddix (Oct 3, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> "The War of Northern Aggression".



Indeed hence the "White Resentment Part"

Just remember Colin Kapernick is disgracing the troops when he kneels but waving confederate flags around makes you a real American Patriot.


----------



## TheCupOfBrew (Oct 3, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Look at the comments in that article @Mider T posted, people have been absolutely brainwashed by right-wing outlets and respond with hostility to any reality of this matter that runs contrast to what they were fed. This is how this shit keeps happening in part.


It's interesting how they always seem to equate regulation to banning firearms. As long as they're following the laws they should have nothing to worry about. 

It's so alien thinking that people can actually fall for things like this. The lack of critical thought is pretty alarming. It almost feels the same way with those who are for instance devout religious people. They immediately take anything they're being told by their news source of choice, and take it as a fact immediately. 

This is why I don't get involved in politics.


----------



## Kitsune (Oct 3, 2017)

Skaddix said:


> Meh and we appreciate if he wasn't a mod because not only is he a dumbass devoid of intelligent thought but unlike the rest of his kind, he is mod. Granted that doesn't get him much power it does make him an easy target though beyond what normal stupidity allows.



Half of America thinks like he does. I might feel that's foolish but to be honest I'm glad to have his voice in here. It invites debate and forces us to verbalize our opposition to his stance.

As far as his being a mod, he cares about this section and its well being. The reason we can argue so passionately in here and not have every other post deleted is because he (and shadow) value open debate and the preferences of regulars.


----------



## TheCupOfBrew (Oct 3, 2017)

Vote Ai for non-partisan Cafe Mod


----------



## Skaddix (Oct 3, 2017)

Kitsune said:


> Half of America thinks like he does. I might feel that's foolish but to be honest I'm glad to have his voice in here. It invites debate and forces us to verbalize our opposition to his stance.
> 
> As far as his being a mod, he cares about this section and its well being. The reason we can argue so passionately in here and not have every other post deleted is because he (and shadow) value open debate and the preferences of regulars.



Meh we had open debate before he became a mod so I am not so inclined to hand him credit for that. But as long as he not banning opposition I suppose it doesn't matter.


----------



## makeoutparadise (Oct 3, 2017)

1941: "Pearl harbor has just been bombed but now is not the time to talk about going to war with Japan"

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Deleted member 235437 (Oct 3, 2017)

makeoutparadise said:


> 1941: "Pearl harbor has just been bombed but now is not the time to talk about going to war with Japan"


When it’s an Islamic radical behind the attack, travel bans, NSA surveillance and everything under the sun is done to prevent it from happening again. But when a mass shooting happens - “now is not the time to talk about gun control”


----------



## reiatsuflow (Oct 3, 2017)

Ai said:


> It's interesting how they always seem to equate regulation to banning firearms. As long as they're following the laws they should have nothing to worry about.



It's still more to do with the NRA. You're always going to find some community of disagreeable people regurgitating bad talking points into each other's mouths like a terrible new species of bird, but  shows more americans in favor of stricter gun laws. Pretty consistently so. And that point has been brought up in the thread before. It's pretty unanimous even outside of gallup. 

So I'm assuming it's the NRA.

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## Skaddix (Oct 3, 2017)

Khaleesi said:


> When it’s an Islamic radical behind the attack, travel bans, NSA surveillance and everything under the sun is done to prevent it from happening again. But when a mass shooting happens - “now is not the time to talk about gun control”



Well of course a white guy did it, lone wolf, lip service about mental healthcare system...no serious changes to policy, "Thoughts and Prayers" cleanse and repeat next time.


----------



## TheCupOfBrew (Oct 3, 2017)

Skaddix said:


> Well of course a white guy did it, lone wolf, lip service about mental healthcare system...no serious changes to policy, "Thoughts and Prayers" cleanse and repeat next time.


Damned white people!


----------



## Mider T (Oct 3, 2017)

Skaddix said:


> Well of course a white guy did it, lone wolf, lip service about mental healthcare system...no serious changes to policy, "Thoughts and Prayers" cleanse and repeat next time.


----------



## TheCupOfBrew (Oct 3, 2017)

Wait, there was a bill signed that allows people who have mental illnesses to buy firearms?


----------



## Skaddix (Oct 3, 2017)

Of course nothing should infringe on your 2nd Amendment Rights to own military grade firearms. 

America Fuck Yeah.


----------



## TheCupOfBrew (Oct 3, 2017)

Skaddix said:


> Of course nothing should infringe on your 2nd Amendment Rights to own military grade firearms.
> 
> America Fuck Yeah.


The thing is that what is considered 'military grade' are automatic firearms. Which while not technically illegal are very hard to obtain, and own. You have to be permitted by the government to own them from what I understand. 

The weapons used in this scenario were not automatic weapons originally. They were semi-automatic ones modified with after market stocks to fire in a automatic- or a near automatic way.


----------



## Kitsune (Oct 3, 2017)

Wow, that was a really good clip. It's hard to feel anything anymore because there's bad news every day but this got to me.


----------



## Mider T (Oct 3, 2017)

Ai said:


> Wait, there was a bill signed that allows people who have mental illnesses to buy firearms?

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## TheCupOfBrew (Oct 3, 2017)

Sometimes reality really is stranger than fiction...


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 3, 2017)

Also a point I forgot to bring up. A lot of Mexico's struggles with guns is due to our guns pouring into their borders.

Reactions: Agree 1 | Informative 2


----------



## Mider T (Oct 3, 2017)

Ai said:


> Sometimes reality really is stranger than fiction...


The first four mins


Gun Silencer vote this week


----------



## Mr. Black Leg (Oct 3, 2017)

Khaleesi said:


> I mean this may be wrong of me but I’ve developed a strange towards these things. Because really what’s going to change? Everyone will make some dumb post on social media sending their “thoughts and prayers” out to the victims and their families and then what?
> 
> It gets forgotten about until another tragedy happens and people do the same useless things all over again.
> 
> ...



I think I don't need to dive more into this, this guy has said it all it needed to be said. I avoided posting in this kind of thread(Mass shooting threads) for more than 6 months now because of that. It won't change fuck all.


----------



## Mider T (Oct 3, 2017)

Mr. Black Leg said:


> this guy


Uh...she's a Khaleesi not a Khal.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Aduro (Oct 3, 2017)

If everyone in America gets enough guns they can just all shoot each other. Then the crime rate will drop to 0.


----------



## scerpers (Oct 3, 2017)

thank god. now mass murderers will never be able to kill our heavy armor wearing citizens


----------



## Mr. Black Leg (Oct 3, 2017)

Mider T said:


> Uh...she's a Khaleesi not a Khal.



Uuuuh sorry, I don't really know names in other languages suffix and shit, in portuguese generally if it ends with an "e" or an "a" it's generally a girl. I'll start trying to use more gender free pronouns and shit, I never know the gender the person I'm talking to in forums, and in portuguese you are obligated to speak to a woman or a man so I end up always going to the masculine(Maybe because deep down I'm fundamentally sexist ? Dunno, really). Well, sorry for the mistake, just letting you(Khaleesi) know that your post was in a few lines what I've been feeling for quite some time now, it embodies every aspect of my feelings towards the subject.


----------



## Mider T (Oct 3, 2017)

Mr. Black Leg said:


> Uuuuh sorry, I don't really know names in other languages suffix and shit, in portuguese generally if it ends with an "e" or an "a" it's generally a girl. I'll start trying to use more gender free pronouns and shit, I never know the gender the person I'm talking to in forums, and in portuguese you are obligated to speak to a woman or a man so I end up always going to the masculine(Maybe because deep down I'm fundamentally sexist ? Dunno, really). Well, sorry for the mistake, just letting you(Khaleesi) know that your post was in a few lines what I've been feeling for quite some time now, it embodies every aspect of my feelings towards the subject.


Don't worry it isn't English, it's Dothraki.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Megaharrison (Oct 3, 2017)

So turns out he already illegally modified his firearm to fire full auto. Already violated gun laws.


----------



## Skaddix (Oct 3, 2017)

Megaharrison said:


> So turns out he already illegally modified his firearm to fire full auto. Already violated gun laws.



Yeah well when your planning Mass Murder and Committing Suicide....I don't think you care much about those minor concerns.

Its hard to care about these shootings because we know nothing will change. 
If Sandy Hook and a bunch of Children getting blown away didn't change anything then no shooting is liable to move the dial.


----------



## reiatsuflow (Oct 3, 2017)

Mider T said:


> Gun Silencer vote this week



As bad as that timing is, I don't think silencers are a big deal one way or the other and people unfamiliar with firearms are more concerned about this. I file this talking point along with mainstream news outlets mispronouncing gun names, misunderstanding rounds, capacities and modifications, and making gun owners a little bit nervous at how unfamiliar all these commentators are with what they're commentating on. Wibisana mentioned this earlier too. The silencers are a public safety / hearing measure for recreational shooters.

Here are two examples of what silencers sound like.


----------



## Raiden (Oct 3, 2017)

Man this is really sick. My dad fought for a boxing World Title at the bay and I remember that we were pretty high up.

I'm not too surprised that he managed to kill so many people. The area is really really open, and it's usually crowded. He might have gotten a lot of people even if there wasn't a festival.


----------



## Mider T (Oct 3, 2017)

WorkingMoogle said:


> Don't you guys believe in Science?  Deer have evolved armor-plated hides as a counter to hunters.  Hunters _need_ those armor piercing bullets to keep up otherwise deer populations will get out of control!


@Deer Lord need you to verify


----------



## Tarot (Oct 4, 2017)

Las Vegas gunman killed over 50 people and injured hundreds in the worst mass shooting in modern American history.

The hundreds wounded are being tended to in Clark County’s network of hospitals in Nevada. But because this is a country that has never had guaranteed universal health care, they will soon be besieged by a second tragedy: enormous medical bills.

This morning, Clark County Commission Chair Steve Sisolak, , a private crowdfunding platform, to request charity for those injured in the massacre.

Sisolak, who is running for governor as a Democrat, pitched in $10,000 and explained that he is currently at the county’s level-one trauma center with victims:

I’m Steve Sisolak, Clark County Commission Chair from Las Vegas. We are raising funds to assist the victim’s of the tragic Las Vegas shooting. I am at Clark County’s only level-one trauma center with the victims and their families as we speak.

Funds will be used to provide relief and financial support to the victims and families of the horrific Las Vegas mass shooting?.

Nevada’s Republican Gov. Brian Sandoval  over the summer that would have allowed Nevadans to buy into the state’s Medicaid program.
Asking strangers for charitable donations to tackle medical bills is ubiquitous in the United States. A  by NerdWallet released in 2015 found that $930 million of the $2 billion raised by GoFundMe since its 2010 launch have been related to medical bills. Yet NerdWallet’s comprehensive survey of crowdfunding sites found that barely 1 in 10 medical campaigns raised the full amount they asked for.

Contrast this American experience with that of some of our allies. In June,  and eight people were killed when London terrorists ran a van through a crowd and then proceeded to stab multiple people. It was the second major terror attack of the year, the first one being in March in .

In the United Kingdom, most health care is free. The National Health Service, erected in the ashes of World War II, provides comprehensive health care to all British residents.

At the London attack, NHS staff were on the scene within aiding the injured. Last month, the NHS  to the first responders, nurses, and doctors who aided the victims of the London terror attack. “They highlighted the resilience and the compassion of the NHS staff who time after time responded to victims, who had suffered unimaginable injuries – putting the needs of those people first. This is the NHS at its best,” Jane Cummings, chief nursing officer of the NHS, said.

In the Manchester attack, American Kurt Cochran was killed. His wife, Melissa Cochran, returned to the U.S. with the need for continuous care. With no American NHS, she had to set up a  to finance her treatment. Thankfully, this one both met and exceeded its goal, having raised $83,512.

It’s the price of a free-market approach to health care.

Reactions: Like 1 | Dislike 1


----------



## Megaharrison (Oct 4, 2017)

lmao there's event insurance, there's emergency care projects set up by the government, there's the funding for medical care for victims of acts of terrorism (which this has already been declared as), there's the fact that hospitals have to treat you even if you don't have insurance, etc.. This is just bullshit agenda-pushing.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Huey Freeman (Oct 4, 2017)

The spin is real


----------



## Deleted member 235437 (Oct 4, 2017)

Huey Freeman said:


> The spin is real


I died at 2:50 LMAO


----------



## EJ (Oct 4, 2017)

Khaleesi said:


> I died at 2:50 LMAO



4:44

The way the dude smiled and turned his head to the side and shook his head had me laughing.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Deleted member 235437 (Oct 4, 2017)

Flow said:


> 4:44
> 
> The way the dude smiled and turned his head to the side and shook his head had me laughing.


lmaaaaao she looked so dumb


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 4, 2017)

Khaleesi said:


> I died at 2:50 LMAO



What's going on?  I can't see it from Canada.

Edit: Oh, I see Fox is already trying to push the "mentally unstable" routine.


----------



## WT (Oct 4, 2017)

@erictheking is silent here cos its not a muzzie (but is gagging to pin this on ISIS) so life goes on...

Reactions: Optimistic 1


----------



## Mr. Black Leg (Oct 4, 2017)

Megaharrison said:


> So turns out he already illegally modified his firearm to fire full auto. Already violated gun laws.



That is your excuse ? It's like, if there was no restriction to who could drive, and there were mass run overs and one guy had a illegally modified car and you car cock suckers would all be like " AHA BUT HE HAD AN ILLEGALLY MODIFIED CAR, SO HE DIDN'T PLAY BY THE RULES OF CAR SAFETY, SO WE DON'T NEED CAR RESTRICTION LAWS". It's not the illegally modified firearm/car that is the problem, it obviously is the system that lets anyone, in this my analogy, to use a car/firearm, be it one illegally modified or not.

Also, don't pretend that 99% of rednecks and gun owners in the US don't modify illegally their weapons VERY EASILY and VERY OFTEN.


----------



## The Faceless Man (Oct 4, 2017)

reported

Please guys read this and learn what to do when something like this happens.

Please for the love of god dont do what your instinct tells you. I know its hard to breathe and you just want to dig a whole in the ground and hide.


But RUN, run like death itself is coming for you.


----------



## Megaharrison (Oct 4, 2017)

Mr. Black Leg said:


> That is your excuse ? It's like, if there was no restriction to who could drive, and there were mass run overs and one guy had a illegally modified car and you car cock suckers would all be like " AHA BUT HE HAD AN ILLEGALLY MODIFIED CAR, SO HE DIDN'T PLAY BY THE RULES OF CAR SAFETY, SO WE DON'T NEED CAR RESTRICTION LAWS". It's not the illegally modified firearm/car that is the problem, it obviously is the system that lets anyone, in this my analogy, to use a car/firearm, be it one illegally modified or not.
> 
> Also, don't pretend that 99% of rednecks and gun owners in the US don't modify illegally their weapons VERY EASILY and VERY OFTEN.



If he already broke the law what would hav stopped him  from buying a gun Illegally? You know, like the Muslims do in France every week in their attacks


----------



## The Faceless Man (Oct 4, 2017)

Also learn the sound of a gun cuz most people dont know it. In the video from Las Vegas shooting you will hear the pinch noise... its a very unique noise.


----------



## TheCupOfBrew (Oct 4, 2017)

I'm confused was it an illegal mod, or a bump stock?


----------



## Dragon D. Luffy (Oct 4, 2017)

Fucking communist. A true American would have let the ones who can't pay their doctors die. Jesus made this shooting happen so the sinners can be separated from the real, hard working Americans.

A true bible following, Ayn Rand reading American would never save someone else's life. Unless they paid for it, of course.


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Oct 4, 2017)

WT said:


> @erictheking is silent here cos its not a muzzie (but is gagging to pin this on ISIS) so life goes on...


"Pin this" on them? They vehemently claimed it for themselves and their supporters were celebrating it all over social media. The motive is thus far inconclusive. The FBI have said they haven't found any evidence of links and ISIS haven't provided any.

If it's not one of theirs, what do you want? Let ISIS have a free one next time? Why are you so defensive of them? 

If you're saying I'm silent on any incident here that doesn't involve Muslims, what about the Charlottesville one? You're a transparent bullshitting twat with a contemptible victim complex.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## stream (Oct 4, 2017)

From what I could read, it was a bump stock, and it was legal. But maybe there were multiple modifications?

I don't think it really matters. The tired argument that anyway criminals won't respect gun regulations is bullshit. Australia has proved rather conclusively that gun regulations makes it harder to get guns, and that's already good enough. Just the fact that you could at least arrest people for having an illegal weapon is sufficient to justify gun regulations.


----------



## Roman (Oct 4, 2017)

Fuck it, maybe I really will go to Canada


----------



## Heart Over Blade (Oct 4, 2017)

From last year


> *ISIS Video Threatens Las Vegas, San Francisco, Shows Golden Gate and Skyscraper*
> Source:



*Spoiler*: __ 





> BY  JUNE 26, 2016
> 
> 
> ISIS praises Orlando shooter Omar Mateen in a June 26, 2016, video. (ISIS video screenshot)
> ...






Someone asked this before and I didn't see an answer. Has ISIS ever claimed an attack that they weren't partially responsible for?


----------



## wibisana (Oct 4, 2017)

Roman said:


> Fuck it, maybe I really will go to Canada


I thought you live in London


----------



## Roman (Oct 4, 2017)

wibisana said:


> I thought you live in London



The fact that I said "I _will_ go to Canada" should imply I don't live in Canada


----------



## wibisana (Oct 4, 2017)

Roman said:


> The fact that I said "I _will_ go to Canada" should imply I don't live in Canada


but you said as if you are American


----------



## Roman (Oct 4, 2017)

Unless you're thinking that I meant London Ontario, in which case........I wish


----------



## Roman (Oct 4, 2017)

wibisana said:


> but you said as if you are American



Bruh, do I have to explain it again?

I'm born in Italy with an American father, did elementary school in both countries, moved to Saudi for middle school education which was under a British International curriculum, did high school in France and university in London (UK) and have stayed here (in London) since then.


----------



## Roman (Oct 4, 2017)

Really not sure what you're having trouble getting.


----------



## wibisana (Oct 4, 2017)

Roman said:


> Bruh, do I have to explain it again?
> 
> I'm born in Italy with an American father, did elementary school in both countries, moved to Saudi for middle school education which was under a British International curriculum, did high school in France and university in London (UK) and have stayed here (in London) since then.


I remember that but you said to move to Canada, it gives me impresion you are american that sick of US condition

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Roman (Oct 4, 2017)

wibisana said:


> I remember that but you said to move to Canada, it gives me impresion you are american that sick of US condition



First, I said it semi-ironically. Secondly, if shit like this keeps up, I expect to run into a lot of difficulties since I plan on being self employed by the time I move out.


----------



## IchLiebe (Oct 4, 2017)

Roman said:


> Fuck it, maybe I really will go to Canada


No you won't.

So do you identify as American or Italian? 




This ain't nothing but agenda pushing by liberal socialist.

Universal healthcare would've meant they would've had to wait a significant times before each surgery which would've cost more lives. So funny that Universal healthcare has proven to be shit and yet continues to be pushed.


----------



## Roman (Oct 4, 2017)

IchLiebe said:


> No you won't.



Probably not  While I said I'd expect a lot of problems moving to the US as self-employed, I expect even more in Canada 



IchLiebe said:


> So do you identify as American or Italian?



I don't really know tbh. I guess I don't quite feel Italian when in Italy altho I get by very well regardless, and when I contact clients there from work, I definitely don't feel like part of their mold. I feel way more at home speaking to Americans and Canadians if anything but that doesn't really tell how I identify


----------



## IchLiebe (Oct 4, 2017)

Heart Over Blade said:


> From last year
> 
> 
> 
> Someone asked this before and I didn't see an answer. Has ISIS ever claimed an attack that they weren't partially responsible for?


Usually they don't double down on such claims once we call bullshit on the first claim. This is the first time I've known them to double down and they provided his Arab name which is also peculiar to say the least.

Yes they have claimed at least one attack that had nothing to do with ISIS but was still Islamic terror, that I know of. Surely there are more.


I think its odd though and am leaning towards him possibly being a convert. But it depends on who he sent the money to in the Philippines.. That will tell you for a fact. If not to his girlfriend or her family it most likely went to fund Islamic terrorist.


----------



## dr_shadow (Oct 4, 2017)

As OP is mildly opinion-y and directly related to the shooting, I'm gonna merge this into the shooting megathread.


----------



## baconbits (Oct 4, 2017)

makeoutparadise said:


> I wasnt talking about a background check I was talking about people need to physicaly go see a mental health doctor and have themselves tested to see if they arent psychological fit to have a gun
> Background checks are clearly not strick enough and are a joke.
> You can thank the NRA for that



The NRA has nothing to do with the seriousness of a background check.  A background check looks at your criminal and legal history.  No amount of advocacy would change that.

There's no evidence that this guy had any mental history, so again, the change you want would have done nothing to prevent this tragedy.  Why should we trade our rights for your emotionalism?



Catalyst75 said:


> "Abolish" and "ban" have two distinctly different meanings.
> 
> Abolish - formally put an end to (a system, practice, or institution).
> 
> Ban - to prohibit



This is pedantic.  If you abolish something that action is meaningless unless you also ban it from coming back into existence.  Imagine that you abolish the NRA and they form the next day.  What did you accomplish?

Now if you are advocating abolishing the NRA on Monday and then allowing it to come back Tuesday I suppose I would disagree with you, but I'd be more curious as to how that would accomplish anything.  But if you want to actually make any sense you're advocating both abolishing AND banning the NRA, which tramples all over their rights.  You cannot arbitrarily "restrict their influence".  How would you accomplish this?  I posit you can't and still live in a free society.  Thus my accusation that you are an authoritarian and advocate totalitarian government still stands.


----------



## Toby (Oct 4, 2017)

Dragon D. Luffy said:


> Fucking communist. A true American would have let the ones who can't pay their doctors die. Jesus made this shooting happen so the sinners can be separated from the real, hard working Americans.
> 
> A true bible following, Ayn Rand reading American would never save someone else's life. Unless they paid for it, of course.



Isn't it remarkable that the current voices of leadership within the Republican party proclaim Randian economic worldviews and unironically claim Jesus as their advocate?

The power of Calvinism 

It probably also helps that Eisenhower has been dead for half a century.


----------



## WorkingMoogle (Oct 4, 2017)

Aduro said:


> If everyone in America gets enough guns they can just all shoot each other. Then the crime rate will drop to 0.


There's more guns in America than there are people.  So it's really a distribution problem.


----------



## dr_shadow (Oct 4, 2017)

@GrimaH 

Can I just merge this into the shooting/gun control megathread?


----------



## WorkingMoogle (Oct 4, 2017)

Khaleesi said:


> When it’s an Islamic radical behind the attack, travel bans, NSA surveillance and everything under the sun is done to prevent it from happening again. But when a mass shooting happens - “now is not the time to talk about gun control”


One of the trollish Senators should introduce a bill to ban the sale of firearms to Muslim Immigrants.  See if we can't get some divide-by-zero errors from the spin on the Right.



Megaharrison said:


> lmao there's event insurance, there's emergency care projects set up by the government, there's the funding for medical care for victims of acts of terrorism (which this has already been declared as), there's the fact that hospitals have to treat you even if you don't have insurance, etc.. This is just bullshit agenda-pushing.



Treat, yes.  To the point where it is no longer life threatening.

Treat for free?  No.  They can and will bill you for it.  And can and will engage legal actions against you if you can't pay the bill.

Fun fact, I was in a car wreck a few months ago, knocked into the concrete barrier on the highway by some old dude that couldn't keep control of his car.  65mph vs. wall.

Ambulance ride to hospital, x-ray, Cat Scan, and various other procedures later I have about $12,000 in bills for my injuries.  Fortunately everyone involved was well insured so I shouldn't end up having to pay a cent for it but if I wasn't collectors would already be calling me about it.

Of course if I didn't have insurance I probably would have been sent home before they had any of those procedures because I didn't have any obvious injuries that seemed life threatening so I "only" would have had a few thousand dollars worth of expenses because someone else hit me.

(The normal go-to in this situation is to deny having identification and give a fake name so they can't track you down, but since this happened at the scene of an accident the police already had my identification)

Reactions: Friendly 1


----------



## Mider T (Oct 4, 2017)

IchLiebe said:


> Universal healthcare would've meant they would've had to wait a significant times before each surgery which would've cost more lives.


No they wouldn't.


----------



## GrimaH (Oct 4, 2017)

Its pretty big news by itself especially considering what just happened. Merging it into a megathread just means it's going to be lost in a sea of shitposts by the trolls.
It's your call though


----------



## dr_shadow (Oct 4, 2017)

GrimaH said:


> Its pretty big news by itself especially considering what just happened. Merging it into a megathread just means it's going to be lost in a sea of shitposts by the trolls.
> It's your call though



I prefer to merge when things are this closely related.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 4, 2017)

baconbits said:


> The NRA has nothing to do with the seriousness of a background check. A background check looks at your criminal and legal history. No amount of advocacy would change that.



Oh yes they do. They've actively put forth efforts to impede legislation and enforcement relating to such for decades.


----------



## Amol (Oct 4, 2017)

No shadow, it is a very different thread. One is about a legislation while other is about a tragedy.
OT : America's obsession with guns and in generally weapons never ceases to amaze me.
Yes how poor of you that you don't have armour piercing bullets.
Mah constitutional  right!!
Seriously all pro guns needs to be checked for mental illness. There has to be something wrong in their brains that makes them so obsessed with guns .


----------



## baconbits (Oct 4, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Oh yes they do. They've actively put forth efforts to impede legislation and enforcement relating to such for decades.



He tied the NRA to the impotency of a background check, which is nonsensical.  The NRA has worked to prevent other road blocks to gun ownership, tho.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 4, 2017)

baconbits said:


> He tied the NRA to the impotency of a background check, which is nonsensical.  The NRA has worked to prevent other road blocks to gun ownership, tho.



The NRA has a direct relationship to such. He was on the money. God fucking dammit This is why I have such utter contempt for you.

"The NRA has worked to prevent other road blocks"...fuck you.

Stop trying to spin it. The NRA has actively impeded efforts for more effective background checks, they've done so for decades. They even pitched a fit when George H.W. Bush tried to put forth initiatives on gun regulation that weren't even all that extreme, comparing him to a Nazi. The NRA has actively impeded efforts to curb the massive circulation of firearms in this country, as well as regulations on those firearms that are of considerable firepower. They are not a guns' rights group, they are a gun lobby. They are about sales of firearms and ammunition, and regularly drum up the paranoia, racism, and stewing hate of the very entity that affords them 2nd Amendment rights. They are about impeding responsible efforts because it could threaten the bottom line.


----------



## Hitt (Oct 4, 2017)

Even right now, the NRA is biding their time and waiting for this little slaughter here to blow over so they can continue their extreme gun lobbying and removing any and all regulations to owning any kind of firearm. 

Why in the FUCK is it legal, anywhere, to buy a mod for a semiautomatic that effectively turns it into an automatic?  I mean we should at least start there.

Then we need to look at why these weapons, which are so easily modified for mass killing, allowed to be sold at all to any schmuck on the street who passes a background check?


----------



## baconbits (Oct 4, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> The NRA has a direct relationship to such. He was on the money.



No, he wasn't.  The extensive checks you guys want goes beyond mere background checks.  Every job does background checks.  You guys want much more than that but simply refuse to be honest about what you want, why you want that and how that would have had no impact on this tragedy.

Also I hope you're not buying into his autocratic proposals.



Seto Kaiba said:


> Stop trying to spin it. The NRA has actively impeded efforts for more effective background checks, they've done so for decades. They even pitched a fit when George H.W. Bush tried to put forth initiatives on gun regulation that weren't even all that extreme, comparing him to a Nazi. The NRA has actively impeded efforts to curb the massive circulation of firearms in this country, as well as regulations on those firearms that are of considerable firepower. They are not a guns' rights group, they are a gun lobby. They are about sales of firearms and ammunition, and regularly drum up the paranoia, racism, and stewing hate of the very entity that affords them 2nd Amendment rights. They are about impeding responsible efforts because it could threaten the bottom line.



The NRA has supported the right to own guns.  I don't disagree with that.  Just don't pretend abolishing them wouldn't be trampling over their constitutional rights.  I agree with most of what you said the NRA did, but then I also agree with the NRA's stance on most of those issues as well.


----------



## EJ (Oct 4, 2017)

I'm for absolute gun-control and I'm not going to refrain from stating it.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Hitt (Oct 4, 2017)

Flow said:


> I'm for absolute gun-control and I'm not going to refrain from stating it.


I'm for _any _gun control!  Something!  Shouldn't a weapon that can take the life of someone with the pull of a trigger be heavy regulated at least?  I mean I'm not asking for the world here.  _Just anything!_

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## WT (Oct 4, 2017)

erictheking said:


> "Pin this" on them? They vehemently claimed it for themselves and their supporters were celebrating it all over social media. The motive is thus far inconclusive. The FBI have said they haven't found any evidence of links and ISIS haven't provided any.
> 
> If it's not one of theirs, what do you want? Let ISIS have a free one next time? Why are you so defensive of them?
> 
> If you're saying I'm silent on any incident here that doesn't involve Muslims, what about the Charlottesville one? You're a transparent bullshitting twat with a contemptible victim complex.



You are relatively silent on this finding every possible way to blame Muslims, even though the FBI have made no links, so you can justify what a bigoted prick you are 

You've blatantly mentioned before that you'd support the monitoring of every Muslim...


----------



## dr_shadow (Oct 4, 2017)

*Guns per 100 residents*

1. United States (112)

2. Serbia (58)
3. Yemen (54)

4. Cyprus (36)
5. Saudi Arabia (35)
6. Finland (34)
7. Iraq (34)
8. Uruguay (31)
9. Sweden (31)
10. Norway (31)



America is the only country in the world to have an -average- of over 100% gun ownership. Meaning that not only do the gun owners have enough guns to make up for those who don't own any guns, but also enough to put the average at 1.1 guns per person. Meaning 1/10 of gun owners have one extra gun beyond what they statistically "need".


----------



## Mider T (Oct 4, 2017)

Serbia and Scandanavia is quite unexpected.


----------



## baconbits (Oct 4, 2017)

*CBS fires executive who said she was 'not even sympathetic' to Las Vegas victims because they were most likely Republican gun owners*

CBS on Monday fired an executive on its legal team after she wrote on Facebook about how she did not care about the victims of a mass shooting at a Las Vegas country music festival because they were most likely Republican and owned guns.

Hayley Geftman-Gold, a vice president in the strategic transactions department at CBS, appeared to reference the deadly shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012 in a Facebook comment earlier Monday. She said she had little faith that Congress would act on gun-control legislation because Republicans didn't support a background-check bill following that shooting, in which 20 children were killed.

She also wrote that she was not sympathetic to the victims of the shooting in Las Vegas on Sunday — in which at least 59 people were killed and 527 were injured — because, she said, country music fans are often Republicans and own guns.

"If they wouldn't do anything when children were murdered I have no hope that the Repugs will ever do the right thing," she wrote. "I'm actually not even sympathetic bc country music fans often are republican gun toters."

CBS announced in a statement that it had fired Geftman-Gold, who had made her Twitter account private by midday.

"This individual, who was with us for approximately one year, violated the standards of our company, and is no longer an employee of CBS," a representative said. "Her views as expressed on social media are deeply unacceptable to all of us at CBS. Our hearts go out to the victims in Las Vegas and their families."

Geftman-Gold's comments sparked widespread condemnation. They also quickly became a talking point on the right, as many commentators and pundits used her words as an example of media bias against Republicans and gun owners.

In a rant against politicizing shootings, the Fox News host Sean Hannity mentioned the executive's departure to his radio audience. The story got top billing on Fox News' website and the far-right news site Breitbart.

Geftman-Gold did not respond to Business Insider's request for comment.

https://www.businessinsider.com/las-vegas-shooting-cbs-hayley-geftman-gold-2017-10


----------



## EJ (Oct 4, 2017)

What a heartless, stupid ass idiot.


----------



## Darkmatter (Oct 4, 2017)

I think someone already posted that in the Las Vegas shooting thread, but it's whatever.

Good on CBS' part to fire that person.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## dr_shadow (Oct 4, 2017)

Mider T said:


> Serbia and Scandanavia is quite unexpected.



Scandinavia is because we have a very low population density. Something like 80% of Sweden's surface is forest. Which means a lot of people in rural areas engage in recreational hunting. My grandpa is one of them; he has one sniper-type rifle (don't know the correct hunting term) and one shotgun.

People who live in -very- rural areas might even feel they need a rifle for self-defense against bears and the occasional wolf. But IIRC this is very uncommon because we have basically exterminated all predatory species that are aggressive to humans. The ones that survive have learned to keep their distance. There's only like 200 wolves left in Sweden, meaning 1 wolf to every 50,000 humans. The chance of accidentally encountering one is slim.

But to make a long story short the guns legally sold in Scandinavia are mainly rifles designed for human vs animal action. It's much harder to get a handgun designed for human vs human action.


----------



## Roman (Oct 4, 2017)

Because being a Republican gun owner means you're a nazi or a nazi sympathizer


----------



## HolyHands (Oct 4, 2017)

Anyone who thinks it's okay to say something like that in any public context lacks the mental ability to hold a job. Good riddance.

Reactions: Agree 2


----------



## baconbits (Oct 4, 2017)

mr_shadow said:


> *Guns per 100 residents*
> 
> 1. United States (112)
> 
> ...



The "100% gun ownership" doesn't make any sense because, as you stated, gun owners typically own more than one gun, so realistically gun ownership as a percentage of the population is probably lower than 40%.  Second, a free society should not try to forcefully determine "need" to own a product that is legal.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 4, 2017)

baconbits said:


> No, he wasn't.  The extensive checks you guys want goes beyond mere background checks.  Every job does background checks.  You guys want much more than that but simply refuse to be honest about what you want, why you want that and how that would have had no impact on this tragedy.
> 
> Also I hope you're not buying into his autocratic proposals.
> 
> ...



Dude. Really. shut the fuck up. You have no idea what I want because you can't be arsed to read shit. 

The extensive background checks people desire are incredibly elementary, and the NRA has resisted them at every turn for decades. For the last time, quit playing stupid. 

The NRA only cares about it because it fuels their bottom line. Quit with this moronic strawmanning that I support a ban on firearms.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 4, 2017)

baconbits said:


> The "100% gun ownership" doesn't make any sense because, as you stated, gun owners typically own more than one gun, so realistically gun ownership as a percentage of the population is probably lower than 40%.  Second, a free society should not try to forcefully determine "need" to own a product that is legal.



Not gun ownership, guns per 100 residents. 

Read.


----------



## baconbits (Oct 4, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Not gun ownership, guns per 100 residents.
> 
> Read.



You're missing my point, which is that this statistic is meaningless no matter how you look at it.


----------



## baconbits (Oct 4, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Quit with this moronic strawmanning that I support a ban on firearms.



Its tedious to reply to you but... where did I say you supported a ban?


----------



## Benedict Cumberzatch (Oct 4, 2017)

Mider T said:


> Serbia and Scandanavia is quite unexpected.



You've obviously never read Scandinavian noir where someone uses grandpa's old gun from WW2 or hunting rifle to commit the crime lol.

Reactions: Winner 1


----------



## Parallax (Oct 4, 2017)

baconbits said:


> You're missing my point, which is that this statistic is meaningless no matter how you look at it.


How is it meaningless?  I'm very confused this seems like an empty statement to sidestep an argument.


----------



## Benedict Cumberzatch (Oct 4, 2017)

HolyHands said:


> Anyone who thinks it's okay to say something like that in any public context lacks the mental ability to hold a job. Good riddance.



Ah, looks like the story was clarified. When I first read it, the article made it sound like she was posting under a username at a message board, and some doxxed her.


----------



## dr_shadow (Oct 4, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Not gun ownership, guns per 100 residents.
> 
> Read.





baconbits said:


> You're missing my point, which is that this statistic is meaningless no matter how you look at it.



More than 100 guns per 100 inhabitants = average more than 1 gun per person. Which I phrased as "average more than 100% gun ownership" admittedly for  shock value, to highlight the absurd amounts of guns that must be possessed by the ones who own them.

If every American has 1 gun, you only need that to get to 100%. If only half of Americans have guns, then the owning half needs to each have 2 guns to reach 100%. If only a quarter owns guns they each need 4 guns to reach 100% etc.

But that aside, please explain to me why Americans need twice as many guns per capita as the runner-up? Trice as many as fucking IRAQ, a country in civil war?

The Iraqis at least have the excuse that they need to defend their wives and children from ISIS, because there's no functioning army or police to do it for them. But what's America's excuse?

(TBH I don't know if these figures include guns owned by military & police or not, so America's equally disproportionately military spending might inflate the number somewhat)

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## baconbits (Oct 4, 2017)

Parallax said:


> As a West coaster
> 
> How is it meaningless?  I'm very confused this seems like an empty statement to sidestep an argument.



How is it meaningful?  People own weapons.  That doesn't tell you how many people own them, or how violent the society is.  As a statistic it doesn't correlate with anything else, so why should we pay attention to it other than for trivia?


----------



## baconbits (Oct 4, 2017)

mr_shadow said:


> More than 100 guns per 100 inhabitants = average more than 1 gun per person. Which I phrased as "average more than 100% gun ownership" admittedly for  shock value, to highlight the absurd amounts of guns that must be possessed by the ones who own them.
> 
> If every American has 1 gun, you only need that to get to 100%. If only half of Americans have guns, then the owning half needs to each have 2 guns to reach 100%. If only a quarter owns guns they each need 4 guns to reach 100% etc.
> 
> But that aside, please explain to me why Americans need twice as many guns per capita as the runner-up? Trice as many as fucking IRAQ, a country in civil war?



They don't "need" them.  That's the point of living in a free country: you're not restricted by someone else's definition of "need" on how you can spend your wealth.


----------



## Parallax (Oct 4, 2017)

baconbits said:


> How is it meaningful?  People own weapons.  That doesn't tell you how many people own them, or how violent the society is.  As a statistic it doesn't correlate with anything else, so why should we pay attention to it other than for trivia?



You don't think ease of availability has an impact of these things?  And you're too smart to be acting this stupid it's not every American owns 1 gun it's that there are so many guns that literally every citizen would be able to own at least one.

Reactions: Agree 2


----------



## Parallax (Oct 4, 2017)

Also answering a question with another is rather lazy and thanks for once again side stepping

Reactions: Sad! 1


----------



## Benedict Cumberzatch (Oct 4, 2017)

baconbits said:


> The "100% gun ownership" doesn't make any sense because, as you stated, gun owners typically own more than one gun, so realistically gun ownership as a percentage of the population is probably lower than 40%.  Second, a free society should not try to forcefully determine "need" to own a product that is legal.



But do you find it frightening that America has no agency that collects this data? There's no actual, confirmed statistic of gun ownership, and I find it difficult to believe everyone you ring up will answer candidly. Harvard and Northeastern put out a study saying Americans owned around 265 million guns. To think 22% of America is in ownership of 265 million guns makes you feel secure?







baconbits said:


> They don't "need" them.  That's the point of living in a free country: you're not restricted by someone else's definition of "need" on how you can spend your wealth.



Oh please. Surely you're against sex trafficking, slavery -- I know you're against hard drugs -- organ theft? You're such a Calvinist that you think money/success = moral objectivity? That people should be allowed to purchase whatever they want?

Reactions: Winner 1


----------



## dr_shadow (Oct 4, 2017)

Can we keep all shooting- and gun-related news in the megathread until things have calmed down a bit?

Reactions: Agree 2


----------



## baconbits (Oct 4, 2017)

Parallax said:


> *You don't think ease of availability has an impact of these things? * And you're too smart to be acting this stupid it's not every American owns 1 gun it's that there are so many guns that literally every citizen would be able to own at least one.





Parallax said:


> _*Also answering a question with another is rather lazy and thanks for once again side stepping*_







Parallax said:


> You don't think ease of availability has an impact of these things?



No, I don't think so.  There are lots of people that own many guns and they don't tend to initiate these massacres.  Secondly, he already owned them for himself.  It's not like he needed "ease of access" to engage in this massacre.



Zatch said:


> But do you find it frightening that America has no agency that collects this data?



No, I'd be more worried if there was an agency that did collect that data.  It's not the government's business if I chose to own a firearm or not.



Zatch said:


> There's no actual, confirmed statistic of gun ownership, and I find it difficult to believe everyone you ring up will answer candidly. Harvard and Northeastern put out a study saying Americans owned around 265 million guns. To think 22% of America is in ownership of 265 million guns makes you feel secure?



It doesn't make me feel one way or another.  Legal gun ownership is usually a net positive.  Illegal gun ownership is what I worry about.


----------



## WorkingMoogle (Oct 4, 2017)

baconbits said:


> There are lots of people that own many guns and they don't tend to initiate these massacres.


Somebody want to pull the data on "mass shootings perpetrated by gun-owners" vs. "mass shootings perpetrated by non-gun-owners?"

(Yeah, trollface, whatever  )

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## baconbits (Oct 4, 2017)

I missed your edit:



Zatch said:


> Oh please. Surely you're against sex trafficking, slavery -- I know you're against hard drugs -- organ theft?



Those are already illegal and you don't have a constitutional right to those things.



Zatch said:


> You're such a Calvinist that you think money/success = moral objectivity?



The comparison doesn't make any sense, but I get that you want to join the anti-objective morality fanclub, even if you have no idea what it means.



Zatch said:


> That people should be allowed to purchase whatever they want?



Where did I state this?


----------



## baconbits (Oct 4, 2017)

WorkingMoogle said:


> Somebody want to pull the data on "mass shootings perpetrated by gun-owners" vs. "mass shootings perpetrated by non-gun-owners?"
> 
> (Yeah, trollface, whatever  )



You can also pull the data on how many gun crimes someone who initiates a massacre commits and how effective those laws are at stopping the massacre.


----------



## Parallax (Oct 4, 2017)

baconbits said:


> You can also pull the data on how many gun crimes someone who initiates a massacre commits and how effective those laws are at stopping the massacre.



Are you implying that laws aren't a deterrent?


----------



## WorkingMoogle (Oct 4, 2017)

Parallax said:


> Are you implying that laws aren't a deterrent?


It's extra funny because I can't think of a mass shooting off-hand where the firearms were purchased illegally.

According to this. 80% of the time they're purchased legally.  Study is since 1982.

 says a "vast majority" of the last 16 shootings (article June 2016) were legally obtained.  Can't be arsed to look at the details at lunch.


----------



## Mider T (Oct 4, 2017)

Zatch said:


> You've obviously never read Scandinavian noir where someone uses grandpa's old gun from WW2 or hunting rifle to commit the crime lol.


I have, but the novels don't give background as to why.


----------



## Mider T (Oct 4, 2017)

This was already posted.


----------



## dr_shadow (Oct 4, 2017)

Mider T said:


> This was already posted.



Looock, I guess...?

But can I lock a thread by my co-mod? 

"Physician, heal thyself"


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 4, 2017)

baconbits said:


> You can also pull the data on how many gun crimes someone who initiates a massacre commits and how effective those laws are at stopping the massacre.



_*WHY DO YOU INSIST ON BEING THIS DUMB?!
*_
*You're way too smug for someone so fucking ignorant.

Australia, Britain had mass shootings, PASSED LAWS IN RESPONSE TO THOSE SHOOTINGS.

GUESS WHAT HAPPENED? GUESS!*

Reactions: Sad! 1


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 4, 2017)

baconbits said:


> Its tedious to reply to you but... where did I say you supported a ban?





baconbits said:


> No, he wasn't.  The extensive checks you guys want goes beyond mere background checks.  Every job does background checks.  You guys want much more than that but simply refuse to be honest about what you want, why you want that and how that would have had no impact on this tragedy.
> 
> Also I hope you're not buying into his autocratic proposals.
> 
> ...



Quit playing dumb.

Reactions: Creative 1


----------



## Benedict Cumberzatch (Oct 4, 2017)

baconbits said:


> Are you implying they worked in this case?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Sorry, I'm doing something else right now, or else I'd reply to your comments to mine above (which I don't know if it's worth it since you and I just have differing opinions); however, do you think the Founding Fathers had in mind someone being able to fire 400 bullets in a minute? Also, I don't quite understand what your sweeping statement on policing is. Is it a referendum on American procedure, or are you making a blanket claim about the entire world? Because according to the math, you're wrong...


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 4, 2017)

baconbits said:


> This is pedantic. If you abolish something that action is meaningless unless you also ban it from coming back into existence. Imagine that you abolish the NRA and they form the next day. What did you accomplish?
> 
> Now if you are advocating abolishing the NRA on Monday and then allowing it to come back Tuesday I suppose I would disagree with you, but I'd be more curious as to how that would accomplish anything. But if you want to actually make any sense you're advocating both abolishing AND banning the NRA, which tramples all over their rights. You cannot arbitrarily "restrict their influence". How would you accomplish this? I posit you can't and still live in a free society. Thus my accusation that you are an authoritarian and advocate totalitarian government still stands.



So in other words, you are jumping right into the assumption that, in wanting to abolish the NRA, I'm also advocating for "banning" their existence.  Meaning your entire argument is based on a fantasy that I never mentioned, all because of some naive notion that anything 'abolished' one day can just reform _its entire infrastructure the next.
_
As for 'restricting their influence', they are for all intents and purposes a 'corporate group' that are able to unduly influence politicians to put forward legislation that benefits only their agenda, with no concern for anything else.  All the while claiming themselves recently to be "America's safest place", and at the same time advocating for "the clenched fist of truth" against the "violence of lies".  The "lies" in question being any protest against the current administration, in particular anyone who advocates for reforms to gun laws.

In other words, *a far-reaching and aggressive totalitarian view.*

For any meaningful progress to be made on reforming gun laws in the United States, their influence on the political level needs to be restricted.

NOTE: Though I suppose saying _*I*_ want a totalitarian government is a substitute for ranting and raving about how I'm going to Hell for disagreeing with you so much.


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Oct 4, 2017)

WT said:


> You are relatively silent on this finding every possible way to blame Muslims, even though the FBI have made no links, so you can justify what a bigoted prick you are
> 
> You've blatantly mentioned before that you'd support the monitoring of every Muslim...



You keep lying about that don't you? You pathetic jihadist-sympathising wannabe victim twat.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 4, 2017)

@baconbits is the perfect example of someone so incredibly ignorant but convinced of the brilliance of such. Someone is only this stupid because they are content with it, because they need to be. This is the same thing he did with the healthcare debate. It doesn't matter how many lives it costs, he has to retain his ideological integrity in his head to prevent from confronting the reality of his ignorance:


----------



## Huey Freeman (Oct 4, 2017)

The gun laws don't piss me off necessarily, they annoy me, but what really get to me is that majority of these guys who buy these high powered rifles do it to play military but too chicken shit to join the actual military.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Benedict Cumberzatch (Oct 4, 2017)

Also, I don't understand this cherry-picking adoration of the Founding Fathers, which I've noticed in most non-secular people I've spoken with. They had, in modern history's eyes, backward, degenerate views on women and blacks, yet we've been able to succumb those prejudices to ameliorate civil rights. Not everything they said was prescient or serves a utility function for 2017, and I don't see why their opinions on guns should be protected from scrutiny.


----------



## baconbits (Oct 4, 2017)

Zatch said:


> Sorry, I'm doing something else right now, or else I'd reply to your comments to mine above (which I don't know if it's worth it since you and I just have differing opinions); however, do you think the Founding Fathers had in mind someone being able to fire 400 bullets in a minute? Also, I don't quite understand what your sweeping statement on policing is. Is it a referendum on American procedure, or are you making a blanket claim about the entire world? Because according to the math, you're wrong...



I don't think we will convince each other but that doesn't mean conversation is pointless.  I may learn something about your perspective I didn't know even if my position doesn't change.

To the points you raised I don't think the founders envisioned that, or the internet, or many other technological changes we see now.  I don't think that has any bearings on the philosophical argument for why we should have a right to own weapons, tho, or the practical consideration that your defense is ultimately your responsibility.

As for my line about the police, its simply reality.  The police cannot guarantee your protection.  The best they can promise is to respond quickly when they've been alerted to a crime in progress.


----------



## baconbits (Oct 4, 2017)

Zatch said:


> Also, I don't understand this cherry-picking adoration of the Founding Fathers, which I've noticed in most non-secular people I've spoken with. They had, in modern history's eyes, backward, degenerate views on women and blacks, yet we've been able to succumb those prejudices to ameliorate civil rights. Not everything they said was prescient or serves a utility function for 2017, and I don't see why their opinions on guns should be protected from scrutiny.



It's very simple  Their views on blacks and women were wrong and their views on human rights were correct.

Reactions: Optimistic 1


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 4, 2017)

baconbits said:


> I don't think we will convince each other but that doesn't mean conversation is pointless.  I may learn something about your perspective I didn't know even if my position doesn't change.



No you won't.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## baconbits (Oct 4, 2017)

Catalyst75 said:


> So in other words, you are jumping right into the assumption that, in wanting to abolish the NRA, I'm also advocating for "banning" their existence.  Meaning your entire argument is based on a fantasy that I never mentioned, all because of some naive notion that anything 'abolished' one day can just reform _its entire infrastructure the next._


_
_
You never cease to amaze.  Let's buy your argument for a minute and allow you to abolish the NRA.  What would you do to the other organizations that also support guns rights, some of which go further than the NRA?  And what would you do if another organization took the NRA's place?



Catalyst75 said:


> As for 'restricting their influence', they are for all intents and purposes a 'corporate group' that are able to unduly influence politicians to put forward legislation that benefits only their agenda, with no concern for anything else.




And they have a constitutional right to do that.  How do you get around that?



Catalyst75 said:


> Though I suppose saying _*I*_ want a totalitarian government is a substitute for ranting and raving about how I'm going to Hell for disagreeing with you so much.



Lol.  You never stop trying to bring religion into this discussion.


----------



## baconbits (Oct 4, 2017)

erictheking said:


> You keep lying about that don't you? You pathetic jihadist-sympathising wannabe victim twat.



Calm down, man.  If you keep going I'll have to give you a warning.


----------



## WorkingMoogle (Oct 4, 2017)

@baconbits 

Should we be attempting to repeal/roll back laws prohibiting ownership of fully automatic weapons?

Serious non-troll question.  Should Joe Schmo be allowed to own a fully automatic rifle?  Is there any cut off for slug-throwers that you'd have (anti-vehicle caliber, Vulcan cannon,  man-portable rail-gun when we get that technology)?  Does it matter if it's man carried or vehicle mounted?

What about explosives?  Should they be legal for the general population?  It would stand to follow that if the 2nd Amendment exists to allow the people to fight off a tyrannical government than having explosives would be a needful tool.  So RPGs?  C4?

If we want to go to extremes, should a "briefcase nuke" be protected by the 2nd Amendment?

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Breadman (Oct 4, 2017)

The thing is, I can understand a want for having something simple like a hand pistol with a few shots in it to keep at your home, but how paranoid do you have to be to want to carry a machine designed to kill on your waist because you're afraid 24/7 that some psycho might come along and start shooting?


----------



## Hitt (Oct 4, 2017)

This Tyrannical government shit does not apply anymore, so gun nuts need to _stop using it_.  If the government today went totalitarian, there would be little your average citizen could do.  Your AR-15 aint doing shit against tanks and drones.


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 4, 2017)

mr_shadow said:


> Looock, I guess...?
> 
> But can I lock a thread by my co-mod?
> 
> "Physician, heal thyself"



Because he got a verbal beating in the other thread, and likely made this thread to say "b-but the evil leftists!"

But yes, I suggest you lock the thread after the counter-points I'm about to provide.

Counter-points:



The Nevada NRA official implies that a law preventing the shooter from having explosives would require a "total totalitarian state that monitors everything everyone does".  While the White House is demanding the info of thousands of Facebook users who visited one site for a protest rally against the administration.



A long summation of the NRA's political lobbying and their propaganda throughout, including highlighting their support for racist and xenophobic individuals, as well as claims that "Islam is evil" should not be protected under the First Amendment.  In the last of these cases, they championed an uncontrolled version of the Second while wanting to restrict what is protected under the First.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...ooting-concert-attack-who-is-he-a7979331.html







Meanwhile, on the right and far-right, conspiracy theories abound over what "really happened", from misidentifying the shooter as someone on the left, from claiming that it was "Islamic terrorists, Jews or Asian people", from blaming antifa, or even claiming it to be a "false flag" operation to prevent the passage of federal legislation easing restrictions on silencers.

Much of this from our dear, fellow right and far-right commenters on Reddit and 4chan.


----------



## Mickey Mouse (Oct 4, 2017)

I wish they could fire Trump as easily....


----------



## makeoutparadise (Oct 4, 2017)

mr_shadow said:


> Looock, I guess...?
> 
> But can I lock a thread by my co-mod?
> 
> "Physician, heal thyself"


I could lock it if you want


----------



## Neo Arcadia (Oct 4, 2017)

Hitt said:


> This Tyrannical government shit does not apply anymore, so gun nuts need to _stop using it_.  If the government today went totalitarian, there would be little your average citizen could do.  Your AR-15 aint doing shit against tanks and drones.


If the American government today went totalitarian and started blowing up its own citizens and infrastructure, I'd give it about 2 years at most before the country implodes.


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 4, 2017)

baconbits said:


> And they have a constitutional right to do that. How do you get around that?



Weren't you on board the "drain the swamp" rhetoric Trump was pouring out, one which claimed it would get rid of political corruption and corporate influences as part of its "make America great again" campaign?

Where did that go, or does anything that fits your ideological viewpoint not count as "the swamp"?

------------------------------------------------------------

As for how I get around that, it would be about proving that the policies that the NRA supports, as well as their viewpoints, have done more harm than good for the people of the United States.  As I believe I outlined earlier, the NRA pushed their agenda against the Assault Weapon Ban law in 2013, the same assault weapons that were used by the shooter, dozens of which he was able to carry into his hotel room with no issue.  

Another point of argument would be their "anti-government" stance, at least when the government is "violating their constitutional gun rights".  Back in 1995, with the original Federal Assault Weapon ban they helped waylay, here's one of their lines of rhetoric against it, courtesy of chief executive Wayne LaPierre, who said the then-new assault weapon ban "_gives jackbooted Government thugs more power to take away our constitutional rights, break in our doors, seize our guns, destroy our property and even injure and kill us_.”

There is also what can be seen : "_I was outraged when, even in the wake of the Oklahoma City tragedy, Mr. Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of N.R.A., defended his attack on federal agents as "*jack-booted thugs*." To attack Secret Service agents or A.T.F. people or any government law enforcement people as "*wearing Nazi bucket helmets and black storm trooper uniforms" wanting to "attack law abiding citizens*" is a vicious slander on good people_."

The Oklahoma City bombing killed over 160 people.

There is no contrast between then and today, only that the NRA has even more political power with which to push their agenda, and their propaganda against anyone who is for reform to gun control laws, or stricter gun control laws. The recent tragedy just shows how much the NRA's agenda has enabled such a tragedy to take place: around three dozen guns and thousands of rounds of ammunition were taken into a hotel room, _a public building,_ and no one realized until after blood had been spilled.

And they _still_ want to push another legislation that eases restrictions on silencers for gun owners.  Meaning the next time a gunman decides to shoot into a crowd of people from a distance, _no one will hear or see where the shots are being fired from. _

And they still will not care when the next massacre happens, just as they do not care about the loss of life now.

They will just spin their yarns about how "the corrupt government is trying to take away our constitutional rights", and then move on to the next hand-held weapon on their list to make available to the random civilian.


----------



## baconbits (Oct 4, 2017)

WorkingMoogle said:


> @baconbits
> 
> Should we be attempting to repeal/roll back laws prohibiting ownership of fully automatic weapons?



I don't think legally owned automatic weapons are a major contributor to gun violence, so whether we ban them or not will have little effect on our common safety.


----------



## baconbits (Oct 4, 2017)

Catalyst75 said:


> Weren't you on board the "drain the swamp" rhetoric Trump was pouring out, one which claimed it would get rid of political corruption and corporate influences as part of its "make America great again" campaign?



I wish you would take one post and actually respond to what is written and that alone.  You literally spent 99% of your post discussing things no one in this thread has ever said.



Catalyst75 said:


> As for how I get around that, it would be about proving that the policies that the NRA supports, as well as their viewpoints, have done more harm than good for the people of the United States.



That's not enough to justify violating their rights.  I don't like the KKK or the Black Panthers and I believe both do more harm than good but they still have a constitutional right to exist and say what they believe.


----------



## baconbits (Oct 4, 2017)

Yoshua said:


> The thing is, I can understand a want for having something simple like a hand pistol with a few shots in it to keep at your home, but how paranoid do you have to be to want to carry a machine designed to kill on your waist because you're afraid 24/7 that some psycho might come along and start shooting?



That usually isn't the justification, just like you don't really need a car that can go 200mph and accelerate from 0 to 100 in a few seconds.  Most people who have high powered guns simply like owning high powered guns, just like most people who like high powered engines on their cars simply like owning powerful cars, whether they "need" them or not.


----------



## WorkingMoogle (Oct 4, 2017)

baconbits said:


> I don't think legally owned automatic weapons are a major contributor to gun violence, so whether we ban them or not will have little effect on our common safety.


They're not, of course they've also been mostly-illegal since 1988 so it's tough to say which side of the "cause-effect" balance it is.

So, can I take your statement above to be "an average citizen should be able to buy a fully automatic rifle just as easily (cost aside) as they can buy a manual rifle, shotgun, or handgun?"

What about the other items on the list?  Where does the stream break down for you.  Explosives?  Vehicle-mounted weapons?


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 4, 2017)

baconbits said:


> I don't think legally owned automatic weapons are a major contributor to gun violence, so whether we ban them or not will have little effect on our common safety.


He says this when the story is about a guy who just caused the largest mass shooting in our history. Using modified parts to emulate a fully automatic weapon... 

This is the ignorance I was referring to before.


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Oct 4, 2017)

baconbits said:


> Calm down, man.  If you keep going I'll have to give you a warning.


He's allowed to call me a bigoted prick is he?


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 4, 2017)

baconbits said:


> I don't think legally owned automatic weapons are a major contributor to gun violence, so whether we ban them or not will have little effect on our common safety.



You say this in a thread where a gunman used modified assault weapons - semi-automatics and assault rifles - to kill 59 people and injure over five hundred others _from a hotel 400 meters away and over thirty stories up_. 

Allowing for automatic weapons only makes it _that much easier_ for gunmen to kill even more people.



baconbits said:


> I wish you would take one post and actually respond to what is written and that alone. You literally spent 99% of your post discussing things no one in this thread has ever said.



You asked me "how would I get around [the NRA's constitutional rights]", and I responded.  I pointed out their resistance to the Assault Weapons Ban, a ban which would have prevented the Las Vegas shooter from getting his hands on assault rifles which he used to commit the massacre.  I pointed out their inflammatory anti-government rhetoric whenever a law or legislation that calls for tighter gun control or reforms to it comes up, even in the wake of tragedies such as this one, and the consequences of their pushing for 'more freedom to have guns'.

Stack up their behavior over the past few decades, and you can make a case for limiting the political influence of or abolishing the NRA, based on the fact their agendas have caused far more harm than good, and how they have incited supporters to hostility towards government institutions that are for gun control reforms.

They are already putting out ads with inflammatory rhetoric towards those who are for gun control reforms and critics of the current administration.  If it ever reaches a point where some NRA supporter (or supporters) acts on that rhetoric and cause deaths, I would say that gives them the title of "domestic terrorists".


----------



## baconbits (Oct 4, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> He says this when the story is about a guy who just caused the largest mass shooting in our history. Using modified parts to emulate a fully automatic weapon...



If you think mass shootings are a significant portion of the gun violence we have I need to reintroduce you to basic mathematics.



WorkingMoogle said:


> They're not, of course they've also been mostly-illegal since 1988 so it's tough to say which side of the "cause-effect" balance it is.



The main point is that thee problem of gun violence won't be solved by these control initiatives many on the left push.  Even in this very thread you had posters pushing ideas that wouldn't have done anything to stop this tragedy.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 4, 2017)

baconbits said:


> If you think mass shootings are a significant portion of the gun violence we have I need to reintroduce you to basic mathematics.


We have the most gun crimes per capita, and the most mass shootings annually in the developed world. The latter of which exceeds total gun crime in many countries. Yet keep playing dumb.


----------



## Parallax (Oct 4, 2017)

baconbits said:


> I wish you would take one post and actually respond to what is written and that alone.  You literally spent 99% of your post discussing things no one in this thread has ever said.
> 
> 
> 
> That's not enough to justify violating their rights.  I don't like the KKK or the Black Panthers and I believe both do more harm than good but they still have a constitutional right to exist and say what they believe.


Wait what good has the kkk ever done


----------



## WorkingMoogle (Oct 4, 2017)

baconbits said:


> The main point is that thee problem of gun violence won't be solved by these control initiatives many on the left push. Even in this very thread you had posters pushing ideas that wouldn't have done anything to stop this tragedy.


Again, that's dodging the question.  Suggesting that for a measure to be effective it must be 100% effective is a standard not applied anywhere else.

Will illegal immigration be eliminated by building "the Wall?"  No one suggests it will.  Does that change your position on it?

Does requiring a Visa to visit the U.S. stop terrorists from sneaking in with forged documents?  No sadly it doesn't.  Does that mean we should wave Visa requirements on all visitors?

Would outlawing abortions stop all abortions?  No, that's historically proven.  Yet many continue to push to outlaw them.

But let's take a step back to my questions.  I'll ask again, in a general sense, are there _any_ weapons that you don't think individuals should have a right to own?  If so how did you come to this determination?


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 4, 2017)

Also for non-Americans, our worst mass shooting incident before this one was the last one reported on in Orlando. The shooter stockpiled firearms all the same, including the common culprit, the AR-15.

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## Cthulhu-versailles (Oct 4, 2017)

I think I know what the shooter's motivation was. It's not so much he was angry with the world or something. Rather, I think he got to a point where he just wanted to create chaos. He believe the world itself was chaotic and that his contribution ution to the chaos should reflect the apathy and savageness of the human race as a whole when laid to bear and stripped of all pretense of belonging, society, etc. In him, the shooter probably wanted to show some kind of example of failed governance in certain issues in America and the world as a whole. That's what I think. I believe this was Nolan Jokers motivation as well.

He's the worst and most dangerous kind of criminal because it's hard to predict beforehand when he'll crack. Still, it's kind of pathetic these things happen again and again and none even want to attempt a nation wide super serious gun restriction.


----------



## Cthulhu-versailles (Oct 4, 2017)

Roman said:


> Because being a Republican gun owner means you're a nazi or a nazi sympathizer



Do you think Nazi sympathizers deserve to die or something? 

And of course the chick was fired. Lol. Even if you do the give a toss about the shooting, it's dumb to announce that to the public. What she could if said is the usual our prayers our with you dribble, said she sympathizers with the family's etc. Then she could of try to subtly snub and work with v political angle she wanted.


----------



## Utopia Realm (Oct 4, 2017)

Bacon, what the hell kind of solution are you looking for, if you are even looking for one at all? We need regulated gun control in this country. Sitting here and dodging questions and sidestepping arguments ain't a solution. Praying by itself and saying "My Condolenses" isn't gonna make the problem go away either. Mass Shootings keep happening and all we do is repeat the same tired excuses and bullshit. I usually am reserved and out of sight on issues like this but I have to question if you even care about the victims at all. I have to question why show up to this thread when you aren't even serious about comng up with solutions to reduce the bloodshed and make our country safer as a result. We as a country have given up freedoms in exchange for security and protection since 9/11 and even before that. Giving up the most unnecessary and more dangerous firearms isn't hurt anybody.

Reactions: Like 2 | Agree 6


----------



## Mider T (Oct 4, 2017)

Utopia Realm said:


> Bacon, what the hell kind of solution are you looking for, if you are even looking for one at all? We need regulated gun control in this country. Sitting here and dodging questions and sidestepping arguments ain't a solution. Praying by itself and saying "My Condolenses" isn't gonna make the problem go away either. Mass Shootings keep happening and all we do is repeat the same tired excuses and bullshit. I usually am reserved and out of sight on issues like this but I have to question if you even care about the victims at all. I have to question why show up to this thread when you aren't even serious about comng up with solutions to reduce the bloodshed and make our country safer as a result. We as a country have given up freedoms in exchange for security and protection since 9/11 and even before that. Giving up the most unnecessary and more dangerous firearms isn't hurt anybody.


Jimmy Kimmel was right.  Anybody who doesn't even want to discuss Or dismisses with something like "This isn't the right time" or "Gun control wasn't the issue here" doesn't care if people die.  As long as the current gun laws stay the same we could have another Sandy Hook with even more kids gunned down and they won't bat an eye.  Tough to see that Congresspeople don't give a shit about voters or their families, except when it comes to the bedroom or their bodies.


----------



## Deleted member 23 (Oct 4, 2017)

mr_shadow said:


> Can we keep all shooting- and gun-related news in the megathread until things have calmed down a bit?


I believe the reason bacon posted this was so that more people would see it rather than it getting lost somewhere in the megathread.
I agree, if people are saying you deserve to be killed because of your political leaning, more members should know about it and see it rather than shuffling through the megathread.


----------



## Gunners (Oct 4, 2017)

It's funny. People like her are the people I'm most wary of. In every era people are going to have conflicting views but what stands out to me is when people let those views get in the way of human decency. 

I question whether those people would have the moral compass needed to speak up in an era where more unsavoury views were common place or whether they would be at the front of the lynch mob.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Deleted member 198194 (Oct 4, 2017)

Gunners said:


> It's funny. People like her are the people I'm most wary of. In every era people are going to have conflicting views but what stands out to me is when people let those views get in the way of human decency.
> 
> I question whether those people would have the moral compass needed to speak up in an era where more unsavoury views were common place or whether they would be at the front of the lynch mob.


It's a marker of sociopathy as far as I'm concerned.  The eagerness to dehumanize people on ideological grounds and the dangerous lack of empathy that follows... The brass neck that follows, is disgusting.

Reactions: Agree 3


----------



## Darkmatter (Oct 4, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Also for non-Americans, our worst mass shooting incident before this one was the last one reported on in Orlando. The shooter stockpiled firearms all the same, including the common culprit, the AR-15.



B...BUT HE WAS A MUZZIE! THIS WAS DIDFFERENT AND THAT MUZZIES SHOULDNT OWN A GUN!


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 4, 2017)

Mider T said:


> Jimmy Kimmel was right.  Anybody who doesn't even want to discuss Or dismisses with something like "This isn't the right time" or "Gun control wasn't the issue here" doesn't care if people die.  As long as the current gun laws stay the same we could have another Sandy Hook with even more kids gunned down and they won't bat an eye.  Tough to see that Congresspeople don't give a shit about voters or their families, except when it comes to the bedroom or their bodies.


DADT, gay marriage and adoption...these were issues and still are such conservatives like our own mod felt were such a moral crisis that such efforts had to be squashed, any laws in support had to be repealed, and laws passed to prevent these matters.

But gun control? Naaahhh...


----------



## Magic (Oct 4, 2017)

Utopia Realm said:


> Bacon, what the hell kind of solution are you looking for, if you are even looking for one at all? We need regulated gun control in this country. Sitting here and dodging questions and sidestepping arguments ain't a solution. Praying by itself and saying "My Condolenses" isn't gonna make the problem go away either. Mass Shootings keep happening and all we do is repeat the same tired excuses and bullshit. I usually am reserved and out of sight on issues like this but I have to question if you even care about the victims at all. I have to question why show up to this thread when you aren't even serious about comng up with solutions to reduce the bloodshed and make our country safer as a result. We as a country have given up freedoms in exchange for security and protection since 9/11 and even before that. Giving up the most unnecessary and more dangerous firearms isn't hurt anybody.



Now is not the time to think of solutions, now is the time to come together as a family and mourn the fallen. Until the next massacre happens.


----------



## wibisana (Oct 4, 2017)

"There are over 550 million firearms in worldwide circulation. That's one firearm for every twelve people on the planet. The only question is: How do we arm the other 11?"


----------



## WT (Oct 4, 2017)

erictheking said:


> Yes, I would have to admit that.
> 
> In one sense we have already sacrificed privacy for security with the surveillance capacity our security services have in comparison to most other countries.



Here's your quote.

You blatantly mentioned that your fine with singling out one community and setting upon them a harsher standard



erictheking said:


> You keep lying about that don't you? You pathetic jihadist-sympathising wannabe victim twat.



See above

And I want evidence where I've supposedly sympathised with terrorists


----------



## WT (Oct 4, 2017)

erictheking said:


> He's allowed to call me a bigoted prick is he?



Im sorry for calling you a prick. I take it back.

I get emotional when I face hypocrites


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 4, 2017)

wibisana said:


> "There are over 550 million firearms in worldwide circulation. That's one firearm for every twelve people on the planet. The only question is: How do we arm the other 11?"


So this means we have more than half of the worldwide circulation of firearms? Damn.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## wibisana (Oct 4, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> So this means we have more than half of the worldwide circulation of firearms? Damn.


that quote is from Lord of war movie, i think it is oudated/not accurate. By 2007 according to wiki that Mr Shadow post. there are about 700-750 M world wide.
US is at + 300 M. it is about 40% (still alot btw)


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 4, 2017)

BORN IN THE USA 
I WAS BORN IN THE USA
BORN IN THE USA
I'M A LONG GONE DADDY IN THE USA 
BORN IN THE USA 
BORN IN THE USA 
I'M A COOL ROCKING DADDY IN THE USA 

This is a song of lamentation, fyi...fucking ashamed of this country. MAGA indeed.


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Oct 4, 2017)

WT said:


> Here's your quote.
> 
> You blatantly mentioned that your fine with singling out one community and setting upon them a harsher standard
> 
> ...


I never said anywhere in that thread that I wanted blanket surveillance of all Muslims, you liar. I stated in the following posts that singling out Muslims with regards to counter-extremism strategies (not specifically surveillance) would be counter-productive, and that all religions would have to be affected. Not to mention it is also impossible to conduct meaningful surveillance of all Muslims. And extremely wasteful.

I also talked about the fact that UK citizens have already sacrificed liberty for security, so the legal case is simple. I am in favour of expanding surveillance of high-risk people.

As for your sympathies to jihadists, it's dripping from every one of your posts.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 4, 2017)

wibisana said:


> that quote is from Lord of war movie, i think it is oudated/not accurate. By 2007 according to wiki that Mr Shadow post. there are about 700-750 M world wide.
> US is at + 300 M. it is about 40% (still alot btw)


We have about one gun for every American now, so that is about 40%, yes. Pretty shameful.


----------



## Breadman (Oct 4, 2017)

baconbits said:


> That usually isn't the justification, just like you don't really need a car that can go 200mph and accelerate from 0 to 100 in a few seconds.  Most people who have high powered guns simply like owning high powered guns, just like most people who like high powered engines on their cars simply like owning powerful cars, whether they "need" them or not.



Difference here is the purpose. Cars have all sorts of things going for them, such as designer making, paint jobs, some being pure art cars, etc. Some people just like having cars for art, or for bragging rights because of how expensive they are.

A guns only purpose is to shoot and kill. That was the sole purpose of it, to be a tool of war. It's not pretty, it's not something you show off to the family or visitors, or something you proudly parade.

If it's historical guns, I could maybe see the appeal, but often times that's because of the history behind the gun, and those guns are poor to use to begin with. 

Just saying, if you're somebody who collects automatic rifles as your hobby, that's already throwing up red flags in my book. *shrugs*

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Oct 4, 2017)

WT said:


> Im sorry for calling you a prick. I take it back.
> 
> I get emotional when I face hypocrites


You should call yourself a prick when you look at yourself in the mirror. You're the one that's defended slavery while wearing a Malcolm X avatar.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 4, 2017)

Yoshua said:


> Difference here is the purpose. Cars have all sorts of things going for them, such as designer making, paint jobs, some being pure art cars, etc. Some people just like having cars for art, or for bragging rights because of how expensive they are.
> 
> A guns only purpose is to shoot and kill. That was the sole purpose of it, to be a tool of war. It's not pretty, it's not something you show off to the family or visitors, or something you proudly parade.
> 
> ...


Also, a gun's purpose explicitly is to kill. The automobile is the evolution of the horse and buggy, which is meant to cut traveling time in transport of people, goods, and services. Any responsible gun owner acknowledges the distinction. I certainly do.


----------



## Breadman (Oct 4, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Also, a gun's purpose explicitly is to kill. The automobile is the evolution of the horse and buggy, which is meant to cut traveling time in transport of people, goods, and services. Any responsible gun owner acknowledges the distinction. I certainly do.



I acknowledged that in the second paragraph, but yeah, basically.

It's why the argument of "Oh, well cars can kill you, knives can kill you, etc." Are so mind numbingly dumb. A car's primary purpose is to transport you. A knife is supposed to cut things down to size, like large pieces of food. A gun's main purpose is to kill somebody, and it's secondary function is... well, defending yourself from somebody using the guns first function.


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 4, 2017)

Yoshua said:


> Difference here is the purpose. Cars have all sorts of things going for them, such as designer making, paint jobs, some being pure art cars, etc. Some people just like having cars for art, or for bragging rights because of how expensive they are.



Let us not forget that you have to be sixteen years old to start driving a car, and a considerable amount of time driving with a licensed driver before you can drive on your own, and only the military is allowed access to cars with gun mounts.

Which is the problem with the NRA and their 'interpretation' of the Second Amendment: they want to allow people to carry weapons that are _military-grade_ i.e. made for the expressed purpose of fighting and warfare.


----------



## Darkmatter (Oct 4, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Also, a gun's purpose explicitly is to kill. The automobile is the evolution of the horse and buggy, which is meant to cut traveling time in transport of people, goods, and services. Any responsible gun owner acknowledges the distinction. I certainly do.



It's still mindblowing that there are people alive comparing a weapon that's made to kill to a vehicle that's made for traveling destinations or a kitchen utensil that's used for cooking.


----------



## wibisana (Oct 4, 2017)

mr_shadow said:


> Looock, I guess...?
> 
> But can I lock a thread by my co-mod?
> 
> "Physician, heal thyself"


who watch the watchmen?


----------



## Atem (Oct 4, 2017)

wibisana said:


> who watch the watchmen?



Who watches the watchmen who watch the watchmen?


----------



## Atem (Oct 4, 2017)

Who watches the watchmen who watch those watchmen.


----------



## wibisana (Oct 4, 2017)

Soma Cruz said:


> Who watches the watchmen who watch the watchmen?


Watcheptioner?


----------



## Atem (Oct 4, 2017)

And so on.


----------



## Atem (Oct 4, 2017)

I am saying it's aliens.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Orochibuto (Oct 4, 2017)

Unbelievable, I can't help but wonder if she was looking to get fired.

I mean, I guess I could be sympathetic to her, on some level at least, if she posted this in an anonymous forum, was doxxed and tracked, then exposed and fired over her views.

But saying this shit on your public Facebook? That's pretty much playing Russian roulette with your employment and social life, specially when you are an executive and your views and be taken to speak for your company.


----------



## Benedict Cumberzatch (Oct 4, 2017)

Orochibuto said:


> Unbelievable, I can't help but wonder if she was looking to get fired.
> 
> I mean, I guess I could be sympathetic to her, on some level at least, if she posted this in an anonymous forum, was doxxed and tracked, then exposed and fired over her views.
> 
> But saying this shit on your public Facebook? That's pretty much playing Russian roulette with your employment and social life, specially when you are an executive and your views and be taken to speak for your company.



Now she will write a book about the double standard of why she was fired, when Trump gets to say whatever he wants in public.


----------



## Superstars (Oct 4, 2017)

Flow said:


> What a heartless, stupid ass idiot.


Compassion? What is this invisible reality you are speaking of? Since we can't see it; doesn't exist. Morality is fake since we came from slime. So don't get indignant, cause there is no proof of that unseen justice you feel. She is right, since there is no right or wrong you can't judge her. Oops, did I just show some contradiction and hypocrisy? By stating she is right when there is no moral standard. Which could only be given to us by a _Moral Being_?

Reactions: Lewd 1


----------



## Mider T (Oct 4, 2017)

Catalyst75 said:


> Let us not forget that you have to be sixteen years old to start driving a car, and a considerable amount of time driving with a licensed driver before you can drive on your own, and only the military is allowed access to cars with gun mounts


Or cars that bacon is suggesting aren't even street legal.


----------



## Mider T (Oct 4, 2017)

Superstars said:


> Morality is fake since we came from slime.


Lewd.


----------



## Superstars (Oct 4, 2017)

Mider T said:


> Lewd.


Bro half of humans DNA are in common with Bananas...Banana's have no morality. Therefore the woman is right not to feel anything. You shouldn't rate anything as "lewd" either, Mr. Banana, this is SCIENCE.

Reactions: Sad! 1


----------



## Benedict Cumberzatch (Oct 4, 2017)

Speaking of those car attacks, Japan is very fortunate to have avoided a tragedy.


----------



## Mider T (Oct 4, 2017)

Zatch said:


> Speaking of those car attacks, Japan is very fortunate to have avoided a tragedy.


What are you talking about?  Han's death was a very big deal.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 4, 2017)

Darkmatter said:


> It's still mindblowing that there are people alive comparing a weapon that's made to kill to a vehicle that's made for traveling destinations or a kitchen utensil that's used for cooking.



Are you all convinced of his ignorance yet?


----------



## Darkmatter (Oct 4, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Are you all convinced of his ignorance yet?



Honestly, Bacon isn't really good at debating such topics in my opinion. Sometimes, I feel he's searching for whatever sources to back his claims, and sometimes it backfires.

Nonetheless, it still amazes me how people like him compare two objects that has different functions. Yeah, I get it: you can substitute a Gun to a Vehicle to commit mass murder, but the latter has severe limitations like minimum effect against few pedestrians.


----------



## GrimaH (Oct 4, 2017)

Baconbits' posts in this thread aren't ignorant. Ignorance is simply lack of relevant knowledge. He doesn't lack for that; everyone else has been hammering them over his head.

A more appropriate term would be either wilful stupidity or malice.

Reactions: Agree 2 | Winner 3 | Informative 1 | Creative 1


----------



## Rukia (Oct 4, 2017)

Easy decision.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 4, 2017)

This is an interactive that details how the modern mass shooters in u.s. history obtained their firearms

Disturbing that the great majority had legally-owned firearms.


----------



## Bender (Oct 4, 2017)

*posting and shockingly sober*

His girlfriend said that she didn't know what her bf was doing.


----------



## Fruits Basket Fan (Oct 5, 2017)

My gym had one of the television sets airing Faux News and boy the bias is off the charts!

Even with this gun tragedy and calls for stricter background checks from majority of Americans: Fox News claim they are all "liberals" making a political agenda out of this (more like years of unnecessary tens of thousands of deaths due to gun violence)....showing clips of other news programs calling for stricter background checks labeling: "liberal agenda" or "liberal lie".....

Fox News really likes to to make it "us" v "them" mentality....


And I fail to see why the news programs have to publically announced the suspects girlfriend's name....she was not part of the crime and was away and had no idea he was involved...


----------



## Bender (Oct 5, 2017)

Fruits Basket Fan said:


> My gym had one of the television sets airing Faux News and boy the bias is off the charts!
> 
> Even with this gun tragedy and calls for stricter background checks from majority of Americans: Fox News claim they are all "liberals" making a political agenda out of this (more like years of unnecessary tens of thousands of deaths due to gun violence)....showing clips of other news programs calling for stricter background checks labeling: "liberal agenda" or "liberal lie".....
> 
> ...



I remember when I was at the gym and one of the tubes was on fox news, I could barely contain my anger. Thankfully, I put on my headphones while I was working out.


----------



## Heart Over Blade (Oct 5, 2017)

_
tumblr
_


> _
> Las Vegas gunman Stephen Paddock in an undated photo. On Sunday, Oct. 1, 2017, Paddock opened fire on the Route 91 Harvest festival, killing 58 and wounding hundreds. (Eric Paddock via AP)
> 
> Stephen Paddock (courtesy)
> ...



Explains why someone who seemed so harmless and has no criminal record is capable of this. Guy was clearly unstable.


----------



## convict (Oct 5, 2017)

As someone who has prescribed this drug on occasion I highly doubt Valium in any way influenced this shooting. It is a sedative. People take this shit before they go in to MRIs to just chill in there. In the once-in-a-blue-moon event it causes impulsive suicidal ideation his actions were far too well thought out and coordinated.


----------



## Heart Over Blade (Oct 5, 2017)

convict said:


> As someone who has prescribed this drug on occasion I highly doubt Valium in any way influenced this shooting. It is a sedative. People take this shit before they go in to MRIs to just chill in there. In the once-in-a-blue-moon event it causes impulsive suicidal ideation his actions were far too well thought out and coordinated.



First, we're talking about side effects of a drug. Not everyone experiences the same ones or even to the same degree. The keyword in the article is 'can'. Second, your lone anecdotal experience doesn't carry much weight here, no offense.

_



Diazepam is a sedative-hypnotic drug in the class of drugs known as benzodiazepines, which studies have shown can trigger aggressive behavior. 

Click to expand...





			“If somebody has an underlying aggression problem and you sedate them with that drug, they can become aggressive,” said Dr. Mel Pohl, chief medical officer of the Las Vegas Recovery Center. “It can disinhibit an underlying emotional state. … It is much like what happens when you give alcohol to some people … they become aggressive instead of going to sleep.”
		
Click to expand...

_
This being premeditated doesn't rule out that he was under the influence of a drug. If he's been taking it regularly for months god knows how long he's been under its effects. There's also potential withdrawal effects to consider if he ever suddenly stops them. Taken as a regular prescription, this isn't like a recreational drug people take where you get high for a few hours and you're back to normal. Even recreational drugs have been known to cause undesirable effects that linger after discontinuation.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 5, 2017)

We already have a thread discussing the shooting.  I suggest you move it there, unless you're trying to go for the "he was not in his right mind" angle, *which spits in the faces of all the people who died in the tragedy, and those who lost loved ones.*


----------



## convict (Oct 5, 2017)

The fact he was taking it for months prior further speaks against the drug being contributory. If he just started taking it the days preceding you might have a stronger point. Especially with benzos one quickly generates tolerance for the medication. So often it happens that we try to find a specific reason as to why it happened beyond what is the most simple and frankly speaking, most scary. Yes an outwardly normal person can internally be a complete mess. It doesn't have to be a drug that did it, the person himself can simply be so broken in the head. He may have been otherwise fine but just snapped acutely because of personal reasons. The fact that he was taking Valium on the side is something to think about but definitely not at the top of my differential. I think the mental state of his, which requires valium on the regular in the first place is more concerning.

I invariably find moms coming in to my clinic telling me that "studies have shown.." amusing. When I ask them which studies they point to a random doctor talking in a newspaper article or an ad. In medicine you always have to look up the primary trial if you want to have a credible stance. Make sure that trial is valid. But I will say, in support of your statement there is credible research showing how Valium can very rarely cause violent behaviors, but from what I remember it has never been directly linked to homicide.


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 5, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> This is an interactive that details how the modern mass shooters in u.s. history obtained their firearms
> 
> Disturbing that the great majority had legally-owned firearms.



Yeah, but then you'll have people who inevitably try to spin it 'another way' to redirect the blame.



@Heart Over Blade _apparently _felt the need to make a separate thread about, already trying to claim he was "under the influence of the drug" when he started shooting.


----------



## convict (Oct 5, 2017)

Fact of the matter is, with something this outrageous and beyond imagination for most humans, even if there were drugs involved, there is something fundamentally wrong with the person himself. The drugs may just exacerbate the situation.

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 1


----------



## Heart Over Blade (Oct 5, 2017)

Catalyst75 said:


> We already have a thread discussing the shooting.  I suggest you move it there, unless you're trying to go for the "he was not in his right mind" angle,



If it needs to be moved, then mods are free to move it. To me this tragedy is important enough to warrant multiple threads talking about its different aspects.



> _*which spits in the faces of all the people who died in the tragedy, and those who lost loved ones.*_



Does it now, even if it's true? Blame the article, not the poster.




			
				convict said:
			
		

> I invariably find moms coming in to my clinic telling me that "studies have shown.." amusing. When I ask them which studies they point to a random doctor talking in a newspaper article or an ad. In medicine you always have to look up the primary trial if you want to have a credible stance. Make sure that trial is valid. But I will say, in support of your statement there is credible research showing how Valium can very rarely cause violent behaviors, but from what I remember it has never been directly linked to homicide.



Referenced here





			
				convict said:
			
		

> The fact he was taking it for months prior further speaks against the drug being contributory. *If he just started taking it the days preceding you might have a stronger point*



Let me show you why that assumption is incorrect.



> However, previous reports have noted an association between benzodiazepine use and aggressive/violent behavior . Past reviews have documented increased risk of criminal behavior following *extended use*







> The fact that he was taking Valium on the side is something to think about but definitely not at the top of my differential. I think the mental state of his, which requires valium on the regular in the first place is more concerning.



I don't disagree with this.


----------



## Heart Over Blade (Oct 5, 2017)

Catalyst75 said:


> Yeah, but then you'll have people who inevitably try to spin it 'another way' to redirect the blame.
> 
> 
> 
> @Heart Over Blade _apparently _felt the need to make a separate thread about, already trying to claim he was "under the influence of the drug" when he started shooting.



You do realize both the lax gun laws and the drug that he was taking can share the blame? The concept of a result having multiple factors leading up to it must be foreign to you.


----------



## Magic (Oct 5, 2017)

This country is fucked, it will never change on this issue.


----------



## Dragon D. Luffy (Oct 5, 2017)

Fruits Basket Fan said:


> And I fail to see why the news programs have to publically announced the suspects girlfriend's name....she was not part of the crime and was away and had no idea he was involved...



Because people want somebody to blame, and if the guy ia dead, his girlfriend was the next best thing.


----------



## baconbits (Oct 5, 2017)

erictheking said:


> He's allowed to call me a bigoted prick is he?



No, he should be warned, too.  I missed that comment.  @WT you need to tone it down or you'll get an official warning.  Neither of you are being officially warned, but your comments are getting towards instigating a flame war and your comments are pretty much off topic.


----------



## baconbits (Oct 5, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> We have the most gun crimes per capita, and the most mass shootings annually in the developed world. The latter of which exceeds total gun crime in many countries. Yet keep playing dumb.



Of which mass shootings are a miniscule proportion.  Basic math.



Parallax said:


> Wait what good has the kkk ever done



That's the point.  They still have a constitutional right to exist.



WorkingMoogle said:


> Again, that's dodging the question.  Suggesting that for a measure to be effective it must be 100% effective is a standard not applied anywhere else.



Ridiculous.  To suggest in this thread and elsewhere that a solution to this problem is gun control and then suggest fixes that wouldn't have done anything to prevent this tragedy is a solution in search of a problem.



Yoshua said:


> A guns only purpose is to shoot and kill. That was the sole purpose of it, to be a tool of war. It's not pretty, it's not something you show off to the family or visitors, or something you proudly parade.



You must not know a lot of people who own guns, because this is exactly what they do.  They love guns and think they can be attractive and show them to their friends.  Some are also proudly paraded.



Yoshua said:


> Just saying, if you're somebody who collects automatic rifles as your hobby, that's already throwing up red flags in my book. *shrugs*



As does someone who likes hentai with figures that appear to be underaged in my book, but its still legal.  Also the vast majority of gun violence isn't caused by the collectors.


----------



## Mider T (Oct 5, 2017)

RemChu said:


> This country is fucked, it will never change on this issue.


Well they said the same thing about slavery, civil service corruption, and Railroad Barons, no problem is unconquerable.

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 1 | Neutral 1 | Optimistic 1


----------



## WorkingMoogle (Oct 5, 2017)

baconbits said:


> Ridiculous. To suggest in this thread and elsewhere that a solution to this problem is gun control and then suggest fixes that wouldn't have done anything to prevent this tragedy is a solution in search of a problem.


In 2015 there were 35,000 gun related deaths in the U.S.

Is that a "problem?"  I would argue absolutely.  But let's look at something else first.

In 2015 there were also about 35,000 automobile related deaths in the U.S.  We'll go with this since it matches up very nicely with the above.

We've known about the potential for automobile injuries and deaths for a long time.  It's something we spend a lot of effort studying (both at a government level and individual industries).  The government actually organized the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards in 1966, organized under the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. 

According to Wikipedia the FMVSS currently maintains 74 different areas of safety standards with things ranging from requiring headlights to specifications of how the frame must be constructed in order to ensure passenger safety.  The specific details change from time to time as new safety standards are introduced.

This isn't solely led by the government, of course.  Individual corporations also are interested and invested in making their automobiles as safe as possible.  Volkswagon alone says they spent $13.5B in 2013 in R&D to be "highly competitive and innovative car manufacturer which must fulfill a whole host of environmental and safety standards."  I'll grant they don't provide a specific breakdown of how much is spent purely for safety however.

In spite of these efforts we still have automobile deaths every year.  While I look forward to such things as Google's self driving cars or new ways to make accidents less-lethal when they do happen I hold no illusions that there will continue to be automotive deaths for the foreseeable future.

K, tangent done, let's go back to guns.

Hmm.  "Federal gun safety standards" doesn't seem to be bringing up any government agencies concerned with making gun's more safe.  Probably under the ATF, we'll try "ATF Safety Standards"... "explosives safety" "fireworks safety" hmm, no "gun safety."  Odd.  Must not be finding it, have a link handy?

But clearly it's not only a government problem, surely there's R&D going on to make guns more safe, I don't think Remington wants the PR of their guns being used in a mass shootings any more than Ford likes reading about car accidents.  Let's look "firearms safety R&D"...  Well, there's a page on tax credits, that sounds like a Republican solution, let's read more: 


> Enacted in 1981, the Federal Research and Development (R&D) Tax Credit allows a credit of up to 13% of eligible spending for new and improved products and processes. Qualified research must meet the following four criteria:
> 
> New or improved products, processes, or software
> Technological in nature
> ...




Hmm, "Safety" seems missing there.  Though later in the document they do say "almost 1,000 patents have been issued under the broad classification of 'firearms' since the beginning of 2008. In the continuing quest for higher shooting accuracy, faster loading, a higher degree of accuracy of ammunition, shooter safety, and ease of use all at the most economical cost, many opportunities for R&D continue to exist among gun companies and their suppliers."  So maybe it's just hidden.

How much are they spending on R&D anyway?  Well, Ruger, Smith and Wesson, and the Freedom Group Family of Companies combined spent about $24M in 2012 so, um, not a whole lot.  (Ruger alone had earnings of $125M in 2012 so their R&D budget is a touch less than 5% of their EBIDTA).  I can't tell for sure how much of this went into safety features, but a google for "Ruger new safety" comes up with a blog "Ruger Eliminates External Safety Features on New Ruger LC9s Pro Model" from 2014 (articles type "firearms" are blocked at work  ).

Apparently it's not "a solution in search of a problem" it's "a problem with no search of a solution."

So let's cut to brass tacks, are firearms deaths a problem?  If so what's the right solution to this problem in your opinion?  If not what level of deaths need to occur in order for it to be considered a problem?


----------



## Hitt (Oct 5, 2017)

WorkingMoogle said:


> If not what level of deaths need to occur in order for it to be considered a problem?


Pretty sure Bacon would find it acceptable even if we had a mass shooting every single day of the year, because "rights must be protected".

That's what it's come to, extreme partisanship, of which Bacon is a part of, has ensured that now no gun control, of any kind, of any sort, is acceptable.  It just won't work anyway according to him, so why bother, right?


----------



## WorkingMoogle (Oct 5, 2017)

Hitt said:


> Pretty sure Bacon would find it acceptable even if we had a mass shooting every single day of the year, because "rights must be protected".


Maybe but I'll give him the chance to speak for himself on it.  Though historically he simply dodges this sort of direct question.

50/50 he pivots to heart attacks or some other cause of death and ignores any touch on "is the fact that people are dying from being shot a problem."


----------



## Nighty the Mighty (Oct 5, 2017)

Hitt said:


> Pretty sure Bacon would find it acceptable even if we had a mass shooting every single day of the year, because "rights must be protected".



this sort of depends on how one defines mass shooting honestly


----------



## IchLiebe (Oct 5, 2017)

More people have died from mass shootinin France in one year than Obamas entire presidency...thought France had strong gun control, aka gun ban.

Nothing would've stopped this guy but a good guy with a gun and the security guard saved many many lives and stopped the gunman from enacting his escape plan, which he seems to have had down rather well And given his assets and planning, might've been quite hard to capture him.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 5, 2017)

baconbits said:


> Of which mass shootings are a miniscule proportion. Basic math.



Still playing stupid, I see. We have mass shootings annually that exceed the total number of gun crimes in many countries alone. 

Your sidestepping is pathetic.


----------



## dr_shadow (Oct 5, 2017)

Nighty the Mighty said:


> this sort of depends on how one defines mass shooting honestly



The conventional definition seems to be 4 or more victims.


----------



## Nighty the Mighty (Oct 5, 2017)

mr_shadow said:


> The conventional definition seems to be 4 or more victims.



victims meaning what?

somepeople say it needs to be 4 dead, some people say just 4 injured in some way

depending on variables one could argue america already has about one mass shooting per day but this probably isn't what people mean when they say "mass shooting" in this context.

if you up the numbers a bit they happen every few weeks iirc


----------



## dr_shadow (Oct 5, 2017)

Nighty the Mighty said:


> victims meaning what?
> 
> somepeople say it needs to be 4 dead, some people say just 4 injured in some way
> 
> ...



I was surprised too. I would have personally put the "mass" bar at 10 dead, with anything less being just an unprefixed "shooting".


----------



## Kansas City Kipchaks Point Guard (Oct 5, 2017)

Superstars said:


> Compassion? What is this invisible reality you are speaking of? Since we can't see it; doesn't exist. Morality is fake since we came from slime. So don't get indignant, cause there is no proof of that unseen justice you feel. She is right, since there is no right or wrong you can't judge her. Oops, did I just show some contradiction and hypocrisy? By stating she is right when there is no moral standard. Which could only be given to us by a _Moral Being_?


Silme makes rules so we can build civiolizations making slime lives better. Morality is useful.


----------



## very bored (Oct 5, 2017)

If we're talking about homicides, I think who does the killing and why deserves recognition. The DoJ collects crime data and publishes it every year.  According to their 2015 homicide data, if a person is killed with a gun, and the police find something that caused it, an argument is .

According to a different table, in somewhere between 1/3 and 1/2 of homicides, , but that they did not in about 1/10.

In 2015, guns were used in , and in , and


----------



## stream (Oct 5, 2017)




----------



## Huey Freeman (Oct 5, 2017)




----------



## Huey Freeman (Oct 5, 2017)

I've got an actual good idea, liability insurance. All americans understand is guns and money and if they had to pay liability insurance every month for every gun they owned maybe they wouldnt stockpile as many, make it prohibitivly expenive to own lots of guns


----------



## makeoutparadise (Oct 5, 2017)




----------



## Breadman (Oct 5, 2017)

baconbits said:


> You must not know a lot of people who own guns, because this is exactly what they do.  They love guns and think they can be attractive and show them to their friends.  Some are also proudly paraded.
> 
> 
> 
> As does someone who likes hentai with figures that appear to be underaged in my book, but its still legal.  Also the vast majority of gun violence isn't caused by the collectors.




1.) Really? I've never seen people who paint their guns or make them look classical, or bring them to old age, retro gun rallies where they show off the guns and have contests for them.... 


2.) I never said anything about legality, and I agree. Fucking lolicons man.


----------



## baconbits (Oct 5, 2017)

Yoshua said:


> 1.) Really? I've never seen people who paint their guns or make them look classical, or bring them to old age, retro gun rallies where they show off the guns and have contests for them....



Then you see my point, that some people don't see them as any different than the latest power tools.



Yoshua said:


> 2.) I never said anything about legality, and I agree. Fucking lolicons man.



I need to find the fist-bump smiley for this.  That lolicon stuff is sick to me.

Back on topic tho, I agree that owning too many weapons can be a sign of something but it can also just be the sign of a hobbyist or collector.  Lots of people collect or like things I have no interest in, and some of those things are dangerous.


----------



## Parallax (Oct 5, 2017)

baconbits said:


> Then you see my point, that some people don't see them as any different than the latest power tools.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


But a gun isn't a power tool.  A gun has no purpose other than to quickly and efficiently kill.  It's like owning a tiger just cause it's a feline, it's not the same analogy at all.


----------



## WorkingMoogle (Oct 5, 2017)

baconbits said:


> Then you see my point, that some people don't see them as any different than the latest power tools.


Um, if 35,000 people die this year due to (mis)use of circular saws I would certainly expect to see some changes.  Whether that means the circular saw manufactures adding safety features or the government restricting access to purchasing circular saws is perhaps open to debate.

I wouldn't expect people to say "yeah, Johnny decapitated himself in wood shop, these things happen, what you gonna do?"


----------



## Huey Freeman (Oct 5, 2017)



Reactions: Funny 3


----------



## WorkingMoogle (Oct 5, 2017)

"Our thoughts and prayers go out to Johnny's family in these trying times."
"Thoughts and prayers?  That's nice I guess but what are you going to do about the saw?"
"What do you mean?  The saw is just a tool, it doesn't have any harmful intents, why would we punish it?"
"Well, okay, he tripped over the cable right, shouldn't you move it so that the power cord isn't a hazard?"
"I don't know about you but I learned to walk at a young age, and in my family they taught me to watch my step.  If Johnny didn't learn that he has no one to blame but himself."
"But fire codes say that--"
"And those codes didn't stop Johnny from dying did they?  Fire codes are just suggestions, suggestions that some people are going to ignore and kids like Johnny will die anyway."
"WTF?  Okay, well, shouldn't there be some sort of guard or something over the blade on the saw?  So that even if someone falls they won't land on the bare blade?  I'm sure I've seen that before."
"Well, _some_ models might have features like that.  Ours don't.  Or they broke off, I'm not sure.  Either way it's not there now so why worry about it?  We have hundreds of students use the saws every day and only rarely are they injured."
"So really you think there's nothing that can be done here?  The school has no responsibility?"
"People die every day by tripping over loose cables and landing neck-first on the saw blade.  It's sad when it happens to someone close but, it's just a tragic accident.  The same sort of accident happening hundreds of times every day."

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## baconbits (Oct 5, 2017)

Parallax said:


> But a gun isn't a power tool.  A gun has no purpose other than to quickly and efficiently kill.  It's like owning a tiger just cause it's a feline, it's not the same analogy at all.



I'm analogizing how people treat them, not how they're used.


----------



## WorkingMoogle (Oct 5, 2017)

baconbits said:


> I'm analogizing how people treat them, not how they're used.


There are differences!

We have a branch of the government that provides guidance for circular saws:


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 5, 2017)

baconbits said:


> I'm analogizing how people treat them, not how they're used.


Your analogies suck for the very reason of their contrasting purposes.


----------



## baconbits (Oct 5, 2017)

WorkingMoogle said:


> There are differences!
> 
> We have a branch of the government that provides guidance for circular saws:


----------



## baconbits (Oct 5, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Your analogies suck for the very reason of their contrasting purposes.



I'll take your thoughts in consideration.  Not much consideration, but some nonetheless.


----------



## WorkingMoogle (Oct 5, 2017)

baconbits said:


>


Yeah, really!

Plus I've now got "OSHA firearms" in my google search history at work so there's that


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 5, 2017)

baconbits said:


> I'll take your thoughts in consideration.  Not much consideration, but some nonetheless.


No you won't. You'll continue to insist 1 + 1 = 3, despite a dozen people correcting you, as you always do.


----------



## baconbits (Oct 5, 2017)

WorkingMoogle said:


> Yeah, really!
> 
> Plus I've now got "OSHA firearms" in my google search history at work so there's that



That sad realization that I know the same feeling.


----------



## baconbits (Oct 5, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> No you won't.



It still takes some consideration to decide to not take you seriously.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 5, 2017)

baconbits said:


> It still takes some consideration to decide to not take you seriously.


It's only charity that anyone takes you seriously. You know as little on this topic as you do so many others. Yet it's only because you don't want to. Your ideology is more important than facts, even in cases where lives could be saved. People like you are the problem with our electorate and the voting population.


----------



## Huey Freeman (Oct 5, 2017)

I think we fucked up when we invented vaccines, medicines and other medical procedures. We should have let natural selection take it course. 
Thoughts?





No thanks, I'm good on the prayers

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Ashi (Oct 5, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> It's only charity that anyone takes you seriously. You know as little on this topic as you do so many others. Yet it's only because you don't want to. Your ideology is more important than facts, even in cases where lives could be saved. People like you are the problem with our electorate and the voting population.



I think he gets it


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 5, 2017)

Ashi said:


> I think he gets it


He thinks this is a biased bandwagon against him, so he really doesn't.

How many times did he attempt to repeat right-wing talking points on the NRA, the gun crime of other countries, the effects of gun law, only to be corrected and turn around to make the same exact arguments before? That is willful dishonesty and ignorance. Then his shit analogies. He just attempted one with cars yesterday, only to try again with power tools today. He learned nothing.


----------



## Parallax (Oct 5, 2017)

baconbits said:


> I'm analogizing how people treat them, not how they're used.


It doesn't matter how they're treated that was my point.  Your analogies are poor and don't hold up to scrutiny.  Again just because people treat guns like tools doesn't make them tools just like having a tiger isn't the same as owning a cat.


----------



## Breadman (Oct 5, 2017)

I honestly just don't get the obsession. It doesn't have to be one way or the other here, there are multiple options for how to work with gun laws.


----------



## WorkingMoogle (Oct 5, 2017)

Yoshua said:


> I honestly just don't get the obsession. It doesn't have to be one way or the other here, there are multiple options for how to work with gun laws.


The problem here (and many other areas of law) is compromise is dead.

One side picks "0" as their ideal position.  The other side picks "100."  It used to be they'd meet somewhere in the middle (probably not "50" but 30-70 depending on who has more power in the current political environment) and make the compromise "hey we both gave in and met halfway."

Now you have "0" that says "1 is infinity percent above my goal, how can you ask me to abandon my principles!"  And thus it frequently comes down to an up-down vote on the issue (and/or justifies any political trickery to achieve your goal if you're on the losing end of the up/down).

(This isn't exclusively aimed at Republicans, Democrats have been known to do this as well)

Fundamentally it's a breakdown in communication and negotiation.  The question is how can it be fixed?


----------



## Breadman (Oct 5, 2017)

WorkingMoogle said:


> The problem here (and many other areas of law) is compromise is dead.
> 
> One side picks "0" as their ideal position.  The other side picks "100."  It used to be they'd meet somewhere in the middle (probably not "50" but 30-70 depending on who has more power in the current political environment) and make the compromise "hey we both gave in and met halfway."
> 
> ...



I think there needs to be a reconditioning of ours own psyche for that to happen.

We've allowed our opinions and morals to be so highly revered by ourselves that if someone has a disagreement, we consider it an attack on them. We've gained this status of thinking that we are purely righteous and good, and anybody who disagrees must be a piece of shit, because heaven forbid that the problem actually lies with me!


----------



## baconbits (Oct 5, 2017)

Parallax said:


> It doesn't matter how they're treated that was my point.  Your analogies are poor and don't hold up to scrutiny.  Again just because people treat guns like tools doesn't make them tools just like having a tiger isn't the same as owning a cat.



I never said how they were treated changed their nature.


----------



## Neo Arcadia (Oct 5, 2017)

WorkingMoogle said:


> The question is how can it be fixed?


Civil war.
But I'll compromise and say we need to figure out the underlying cause of politics being taken to the extreme and infesting everything these days.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 5, 2017)

Neo Arcadia said:


> Civil war.
> But I'll compromise and say we need to figure out the underlying cause of politics being taken to the extreme and infesting everything these days.


Campaign financing


----------



## makeoutparadise (Oct 5, 2017)



Reactions: Like 2 | Funny 5 | Winner 3 | Creative 1


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 5, 2017)

> Semi-automatic weapons used by the Las Vegas shooter were reportedly equipped with bump stocks — devices that can rapidly increase the rate of fire, similar to that of fully automatic weapons, and have quickly become the focus of the gun control debate.
> 
> The devastating carnage that left 58 people dead and more than 500 injured has some pro-gun Republicans and even the powerful National Rifle Association talking about the need to review the legality of bump stocks and create new regulations.
> 
> ...



_In fact, he said Paddock *would likely have killed more people had he used a semi-automatic weapon that had not been modified with the bump stock.*

"*He could have actually been more deadly with a semi-auto rifle and accurately able to aim and take shots* than with a bump fire," McRae said.
_
In other words, the "reforms need to be made to possession of bump stocks" line by Republicans and gun groups doesn't actually address the real problem at hand - how dangerous semi-automatic weapons are, modded or un-modded.  

Hell, we have a Green Beret saying that Paddock could have killed _more people _without the bump stock, since the bump stock just trades accuracy for easy rapid-fire.  Would he have wounded less people, yes, _but he could have also increased the number of people killed.
_
So, given there was a Gun Silencer Bill before this tragedy being considered, consider how the circumstances would have changed if those semi-automatics were modded with _silencers_ rather than a bump stock.

_The Semi-Automatics are the problem_, not the bump stock.


----------



## Parallax (Oct 5, 2017)

Catalyst75 said:


> _In fact, he said Paddock *would likely have killed more people had he used a semi-automatic weapon that had not been modified with the bump stock.*
> 
> "*He could have actually been more deadly with a semi-auto rifle and accurately able to aim and take shots* than with a bump fire," McRae said.
> _
> ...



Who cares  this isn't relevant information that could have prevented this tragedy @baconbits

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## wibisana (Oct 6, 2017)

there are only 2 times you need something like AR-15 (semi auto rifle)

when hunting dragon
when hunting humans
sadly 1st target is not exist

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 6, 2017)

wibisana said:


> there are only 2 times you need something like AR-15 (semi auto rifle)
> 
> when hunting dragon
> when hunting humans
> sadly 1st target is not exist



blue-eyes white dragon is bulletproof and can fly through the atmosphere

Reactions: Winner 5


----------



## Roman (Oct 6, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Campaign financing



Pretty much. It's not just that we're more conditioned to hold our values above everyone else's (in fact, I don't think that's an issue at all except with alt-right supporters and SJWs), there's also the fact that politicians on both sides are being financed by sponsors to push their ideas forward. If they compromise with the other side, they lose their financing.

The real issue that needs to be addressed is corporations being allowed to play a part in politics, something that shouldn't happen to begin with since power is being given to a few elites rather than the population as a whole.


----------



## wibisana (Oct 6, 2017)

Roman said:


> Pretty much. It's not just that we're more conditioned to hold our values above everyone else's (in fact, I don't think that's an issue at all except with alt-right supporters and SJWs), there's also the fact that politicians on both sides are being financed by sponsors to push their ideas forward. If they compromise with the other side, they lose their financing.
> 
> The real issue that needs to be addressed is corporations being allowed to play a part in politics, something that shouldn't happen to begin with since power is being given to a few elites rather than the population as a whole.


welcome to Corporate Republic of America

Reactions: Agree 2


----------



## Roman (Oct 6, 2017)

wibisana said:


> welcome to Corporate Republic of America



Yup.


----------



## Kitsune (Oct 6, 2017)

mr_shadow said:


> Looock, I guess...?
> 
> But can I lock a thread by my co-mod?
> 
> "Physician, heal thyself"



I'll merge it into the megathread since it was already posted there. @baconbits I don't mean to step on your toes so feel free to reverse this if you want.

In response to the topic, it's obviously profoundly uncool to wish violence on anyone regardless of the amount of potential irony involved.


----------



## Atem (Oct 7, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> blue-eyes white dragon is bulletproof and can fly through the atmosphere



This is why I support the NDA or National Dragon Association. When the Blue-Eyes White Dragons invade there is only way you can stop them.



You need a bigger dragon.

Reactions: Winner 1


----------



## Darkmatter (Oct 7, 2017)

Soma Cruz said:


> This is why I support the NDR or National Dragon Association. When the Blue-Eyes White Dragons invade there is only way you can stop them.
> 
> 
> 
> You need a bigger dragon.

Reactions: Neutral 1


----------



## Atem (Oct 7, 2017)

...

God has forsaken us.


----------



## Ashi (Oct 7, 2017)

Soma Cruz said:


> ...
> 
> God has forsaken us.




Star eater is an old ass card at this point and doesn't come close to being as OP as some shit out today


----------



## Darkmatter (Oct 7, 2017)

Soma Cruz said:


> ...
> 
> God has forsaken us.



In terms of size of the Dragons, Star Eater is pretty much the largest being in YGO lore.
In terms of effects/OPness, then Zarc is the winner.


----------



## Atlas (Oct 7, 2017)

Trap card > You


----------



## Darkmatter (Oct 7, 2017)

Atlas said:


> Trap card > You



Everyone should have a right to carry a Mirror Force!

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Xiammes (Oct 7, 2017)

Darkmatter said:


> In terms of size of the Dragons, Star Eater is pretty much the largest being in YGO lore.
> In terms of effects/OPness, then Zarc is the winner.


----------



## Darkmatter (Oct 7, 2017)

Could've sworn that Star Eater was bigger than Dyson Sphere, given that we've seen that its size is the equivalent to the Sun (or a Star).


----------



## Xiammes (Oct 7, 2017)

Darkmatter said:


> Could've sworn that Star Eater was bigger than Dyson Sphere, given that we've seen that its size is the equivalent to the Sun (or a Star).



Thats a star in the center of it, Dyson Sphere is way more massive.

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## Darkmatter (Oct 7, 2017)

Xiammes said:


> Thats a star in the center of it, Dyson Sphere is way more massive.



Jesus Christ, I had no idea the center was actually a Star.


----------



## Ashi (Oct 7, 2017)

You know I think it's fitting this turned into a Yugioh discussion considering the title made me think of the LV archetype


----------



## Xiammes (Oct 7, 2017)

Darkmatter said:


> Jesus Christ, I had no idea the center was actually a Star.



Dyson sphere refers to a fictional mega structure that encapsulates a star to serve as a power source.

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## Tarot (Oct 7, 2017)

I love how PJW can't even play along with Alex at this point

Reactions: Funny 1


----------

