Archive

Vegas shooting thead

  • like_that
    Also COA, maybe the GOP sees guns as a right, because it’s in our constitution and healthcare isn’t [emoji848]. Not to mention don’t be so naive. Dems see guns as a right too. This is why the vast majority of them have never proposed any measures to fully ban guns and when a couple liberals states did like California, it was voted down with a heavy majority. There have been dem politicians who have won elections because of their support for guns and also some of them even received help from the evil NRA. Harry Reid is the most prominent example of this.
  • gut
    MOST of the gun homicides (excluding mass murders) ARE driven by gangs and the drug trade.

    Not to seem insensitive, but the most alarming trend in these mass shootings is the apparent one-upsmanship to go for records. I've also not seen anything that leads me to believe any of the gun control laws would have prevented any of these shootings. They could, theoretically, prevent something in the future. However, gun control continues mostly to be a wedge issue for which no one has any real solutions.
  • FatHobbit
    Commander of Awesome;1874796 wrote:the GOP see gun ownership as a right and health care as a privileged.
    [/LEFT]
    What crap. Nobody is giving anyone a gun. You can buy one if you choose. You can also buy healthcare if you choose. (Or when the dems are in charge you can be forced to buy healthcare, if you want to make this a repub vs dem issue)
  • gut
    like_that;1874820 wrote: I would also like to add 80% of gun crime is committed by hand guns (this includes the majority of “mass shootings”). Most proposed legislation I see is against “assault” (that term is also used loosely) weapons. What’s the next step when that 20% of the crime shifts to hand guns?
    But it's also inarguable that more firepower leads to more casualties. Why can't certain guns/types be limited only to gun clubs where they can be tightly controlled and regulated?
  • like_that
    isadore;1874815 wrote: Suicide accounts for more than two-thirds of the 32,000 firearms deaths the United States averages every year. Or, to come at the issue a different way: Suicide is the second-leading cause of death for Americans aged 15 to 34, and more than 50 percent of cases involve guns. A big reason for the prevalence of firearms in suicides is the deadliness of guns themselves: When a firearm is used in a suicide attempt, there’s an 85 percent chance of it being successful.
    Firearm violence is firearm violence, whether it’s committed against oneself or committed against others.
    https://www.thetrace.org/2015/11/gun-suicides-mental-illness-statistics/
    More Americans are killing themselves with guns, with the absolute number of gun suicides rising by 4,735 from 1999 to 2014.
    https://www.thetrace.org/2016/04/cdc-study-gun-suicides-getting-worse/
    This is 10000x more of a mental health issue than a gun issue. If you are using suicide as your main argument against guns, then you already lose. What’s going to stop them from killing themselves another way?
  • iclfan2
    like_that;1874812 wrote:Just wanted to add this in addition to the chart above. Gun crime has taken a dive the last twenty years and sales have gone up. As I said earlier, obama was the best salesman and nra recruiter the last 8 years and him crime deceased.
    COA just needed to regurgitate what he heard on the news, straight liberal talking points, especially about buying a gun easier than voting
  • like_that
    gut;1874830 wrote:But it's also inarguable that more firepower leads to more casualties. Why can't certain guns/types be limited only to gun clubs where they can be tightly controlled and regulated?
    Which guns are we speaking of? I can see some arguments, but I don’t think any will do much to decrease gun crime as oppose to looking at root causes.

    The AR-15 already went thru a period of being banned and gun crime was higher during that period than it was after. Autos are already banned.

    Edit: I re read your post. I now assume you’re speaking of more casualties per one assault?
  • gut
    like_that;1874837 wrote: Edit: I re read your post. I now assume you’re speaking of more casualties per one assault?
    Yeah, and I realize semi-auto handguns can do plenty of damage, but it's like half the ammo vs an extended mag for a rifle, correct?

    The gun crimes overall are a separate issue. I'm just saying I think we can restrict some of the firepower available to these mass shooters.
  • justincredible
    gut;1874852 wrote:Yeah, and I realize semi-auto handguns can do plenty of damage, but it's like half the ammo vs an extended mag for a rifle, correct?

    The gun crimes overall are a separate issue. I'm just saying I think we can restrict some of the firepower available to these mass shooters.
    You can get a full-frame handgun with 17-18 round capacity. I'm not aware of any standard mags that are larger, but there very well could be.

    There's also this:

    https://gunmagwarehouse.com/kci-glock-9mm-50-round-drum-magazine.html

  • gut
    Is anyone going to be surprised if his gf actually comes back to the US? Being reported he sent tens of thousands overseas. If I'm not 100% confident I could prove my innocence, then you'd probably have to extradite me.
  • justincredible
    That said, magazine capacity doesn't make much of a difference in my opinion. It takes very little time to swap in a new magazine.
  • thavoice
    isadore;1874815 wrote:Suicide accounts for more than two-thirds of the 32,000 firearms deaths the United States averages every year. Or, to come at the issue a different way: Suicide is the second-leading cause of death for Americans aged 15 to 34, and more than 50 percent of cases involve guns. A big reason for the prevalence of firearms in suicides is the deadliness of guns themselves: When a firearm is used in a suicide attempt, there’s an 85 percent chance of it being successful.
    Firearm violence is firearm violence, whether it’s committed against oneself or committed against others.
    https://www.thetrace.org/2015/11/gun-suicides-mental-illness-statistics/
    More Americans are killing themselves with guns, with the absolute number of gun suicides rising by 4,735 from 1999 to 2014.
    https://www.thetrace.org/2016/04/cdc-study-gun-suicides-getting-worse/
    We best be getting on a full blown abortion ban as well as getting rid of guns or are you one of those who believe a woman should be able to kill her baby?
  • gut
    justincredible;1874857 wrote:That said, magazine capacity doesn't make much of a difference in my opinion. It takes very little time to swap in a new magazine.
    That's true. But every re-load still gives people a few seconds to escape or find cover.
  • justincredible
    gut;1874861 wrote:That's true. But every re-load still gives people a few seconds to escape or find cover.
    It's less than a few seconds. Someone well trained can do it in a second or less.
  • justincredible
    I'll try to find the video when I get a chance. I can't remember who made the video, but it was to bust the myth of "someone can charge the shooter when they change magazines." The conclusion was...you'd die. Quickly.

    That said, it might be a little easier to slip out of harms way than to charge. But I'm guessing there are a billion or more 30-round mags in circulation. Good luck putting that genie back in the bottle.
  • gut
    justincredible;1874865 wrote:I'll try to find the video when I get a chance. I can't remember who made the video, but it was to bust the myth of "someone can charge the shooter when they change magazines." The conclusion was...you'd die. Quickly.

    That said, it might be a little easier to slip out of harms way than to charge. But I'm guessing there are a billion or more 30-round mags in circulation. Good luck putting that genie back in the bottle.
    I'm not saying you charge the guy.

    But are you honestly going to say if you're running from someone shooting at you that you don't care if they have a 15-round mag or 30-round mag? You're going to give that even odds?
  • CenterBHSFan
    Rumors going around now that the shooter had antifa stuff in his hotel room. Gawd!
  • salto
    CenterBHSFan;1874868 wrote:Rumors going around now that the shooter had antifa stuff in his hotel room. Gawd!


    Right wing blogs at it again.
  • justincredible
    gut;1874867 wrote:I'm not saying you charge the guy.

    But are you honestly going to say if you're running from someone shooting at you that you don't care if they have a 15-round mag or 30-round mag? You're going to give that even odds?
    You probably quoted me right as I edited. Re-read my post for additional commentary.
  • gut
    justincredible;1874871 wrote:You probably quoted me right as I edited. Re-read my post for additional commentary.
    I get that. And there's always a black market, but when people go after that stuff on the black market it's maybe a bit easier to flag.

    Also, I'd bet the vast majority of owners of 30-round mags would abide by regulations to at least not sell or trade those.
  • gut
    CenterBHSFan;1874868 wrote:Rumors going around now that the shooter had antifa stuff in his hotel room. Gawd!
    Well, sure, you connect him to Antifa then you can push the narrative he targeted a gathering of "Trump supporters" at a country music concert....
  • queencitybuckeye
    justincredible;1874855 wrote:You can get a full-frame handgun with 17-18 round capacity. I'm not aware of any standard mags that are larger, but there very well could be.

    There's also this:

    https://gunmagwarehouse.com/kci-glock-9mm-50-round-drum-magazine.html


    That's pretty wild. Glock makes a 33-round mag for their 9mm line.
  • O-Trap
    Commander of Awesome;1874796 wrote:... the GOP see gun ownership as a right and health care as a privileged.
    I'm certainly not here to defend the GOP, but the ideas of many conservatives around these two topics are actually pretty ideologically consistent:

    Right to gun ownership: Nobody is required to provide a gun for you, but you are free to purchase one if you're able and have someone willing to sell it to you.

    Right to health care: Nobody is required to provide health care or insurance for you, but you are free to purchase either or both if you're able and have someone willing to sell them to you.

    The views do parallel pretty well.
  • gut
    O-Trap;1874877 wrote: Right to health care: Nobody is required to provide health care or insurance for you, but you are free to purchase either or both if you're able and have someone willing to sell them to you.
    They've also largely been hands-off whatever a solution a state wants to do in their state. And that's how it should be. I'd even argue viable solutions within states are likely different for dense urban areas vs. rural areas.
  • CenterBHSFan
    salto;1874870 wrote:Right wing blogs at it again.
    It's all over youtube. I don't know if they qualify as "right wing" or not.