Active shooter at Mandalay Bay in Las Vegas...

[Kutnupe14]

Can we at least attempt to stay on topic on ONE thread on INGO? I'd prefer it be this one.

Hedonism?

 

[dusty88]

You could also just fly over a crowd and drop a whole pile of rocks (depending how much your plane would carry). Terminal velocity is significant on objects like that. I have no idea what the fatality rate would be, but yes there are innumerable ways to inflict injury on a crowd including with airplanes.

Flying a small plane around buildings, where various air velocity changes occur isn't easy but if you are going to commit suicide I don't suppose that's a prime consideration.

 

[Kutnupe14]

The hypocrisy of the left is always "on topic", but I get your point.

....and with minor exceptions, almost never that of the right

 

[ArcadiaGP]

The hypocrisy of the left is always "on topic", but I get your point.

To be fair, I'm also hoping this one stays related to the event and gun-related reactions to it.

I think there may even be a GenPol thread for this event... Think I saw it move around in the new posts.

 

[Ruffnek]

I just had a thought ..... I am watching WISH TV news, and they talk about a bill to RESTRICT abortions .....

The LEFT, says it is UN Constitutional ..... I have NEVER read the word abortion, in the Constitution .....

But they, want to RESTRICT guns, and they are IN the Constitution .....

What are YOUR thoughts ?????

I think many of the left think that "constitutional" means "what we like."

 

[HubertGummer]

I just had a thought ..... I am watching WISH TV news, and they talk about a bill to RESTRICT abortions .....

The LEFT, says it is UN Constitutional ..... I have NEVER read the word abortion, in the Constitution .....

But they, want to RESTRICT guns, and they are IN the Constitution .....

What are YOUR thoughts ?????

Do you expect anything else from the left?

This sounds exactly like their "logic".

 

[Alpo]

And.......

They're OFF!!!!!

 

[HoughMade]

I think many of the left think that "constitutional" means "what we like."

It's simple. If it expands federal government control over the states, we can find "rights" in penumbras formed by emanations.

If it restricts federal government control in any way, we can't find the rights that are spelled out explicitly.

Gun control in the way they are talking about it is forbidden, explicitly....they can't find it.

Oh, and bumpfire stocks? We can only hope that's where this ends. I can make a good argument for the self-defense usefulness of AR, AKs, etc.....bumpfire, all I got is FREEDOM!!!... and, unfortunately, that will not likely carry the day and I don't know of a constitutional interpretation that covers "accessories".

 

[Kutnupe14]

And.......

They're OFF!!!!!

 

[dusty88]

I just had a thought ..... I am watching WISH TV news, and they talk about a bill to RESTRICT abortions .....

The LEFT, says it is UN Constitutional ..... I have NEVER read the word abortion, in the Constitution .....

But they, want to RESTRICT guns, and they are IN the Constitution .....

What are YOUR thoughts ?????

I'd be careful about going there. While protection of the fetus's life is a valid concern, the right of a woman to control her own body also arguably has constitutional protections.

And the likely rebuttal to your argument is that there ARE a lot of restrictions on abortion and very few people support things like late-term abortions. I think you might find yourself in a trap if you make the comparison.

 

[Floivanus]

New term from the antis now.


bumpfire magazine.

wonder how badly they would freak if they knew I can bump a 40 round bake from my shoulder without the bumpfire stock?

 

[jayhawk]

I just had a thought ..... I am watching WISH TV news, and they talk about a bill to RESTRICT abortions .....

The LEFT, says it is UN Constitutional ..... I have NEVER read the word abortion, in the Constitution .....

But they, want to RESTRICT guns, and they are IN the Constitution .....

What are YOUR thoughts ?????

An individual, an individual's body. The debate is whether an individual is/is not obligated to use one's body to support another individual's body.

 

[HoughMade]

OK, even I​ think this topic is straying too far, too fast.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Seems the news sources are reporting this right. They aren't calling the weapons used automatic, but referring to bump stocks as being devices that speed up semi-auto rate of fire to a level similar to a full automatic.

Noticing that as well. Honing in on the target of laws/rules/whatever to ban.

For their rate of accurate reporting, it's almost surprising they didn't run with "automatic" longer.

Though most probably have no idea about NFA, the finite number of automatic weapons, the average cost, difficulty to purchase, etc...

 

[HoughMade]

Finally, some info that may be useful.

Portrait emerging of Las Vegas shooter as man 'descending into madness' - ABC News

Many, many things could be involves, but I keep coming back to something organic. Tumor? Disease?

Don't know, speculation.

 

[indiucky]

I'm a pilot, and owned an airplane with a useful load of 1600 pounds for 20 years. Been a consulting chemist for a long time so I have some idea how this works.

That's kind of what I thought...I figured you were already doing the math in your head...

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Finally, some info that may be useful.

Portrait emerging of Las Vegas shooter as man 'descending into madness' - ABC News

Many, many things could be involves, but I keep coming back to something organic. Tumor? Disease?

Don't know, speculation.

More details are emerging, investigators say, that suggest Paddock’s mental state was deteriorating before the shooting: significant weight loss, an increasingly slovenly physical appearance and obsession with his girlfriend’s ex-husband.

If the ex is a country music fan, we can close the book on this case.

 

[HoughMade]

If the ex is a country music fan, we can close the book on this case.

Which one, Bustos or Danley?

 

[d.kaufman]

Finally, some info that may be useful.

Portrait emerging of Las Vegas shooter as man 'descending into madness' - ABC News

Many, many things could be involves, but I keep coming back to something organic. Tumor? Disease?

Don't know, speculation.

I mentioned a little earlier in the thread he had a prescription written in June for basically volume which can cause anger and psychotic thoughts. Possible explanation in my opinion. Lots of mass murderers on anti depressants and such

 

[ArcadiaGP]

So let's take a step back and look at the reaction to this on all sides. Let me remove a few groups:

Angry ideologues that see this as an opportunity.
Angry ideologues that don't care, just like name-calling and insulting on the internets.
Angry gun owners that don't care, just like repeating "FREEDOM".

Let's just look at the people that don't understand. Your fellow Americans that don't necessarily subscribe to either team's newsletter... your neighbors and peers.

They see ~60 people killed in a single act, and they're sad... frustrated... disappointed... and sometimes angry. They want to know how and why. They don't understand why people should be allowed to buy so many guns, or so much ammo, or modifications that make them faster, etc... They don't get it, but they might start thinking something should be done about it.

Without getting defensive, is there a way to communicate to them why restricting firearms isn't the right course of action? Without playing politics, without name-calling, without broad answers ("FREEDOM!")... how do you explain to these Americans that otherwise don't care about guns... why the guns aren't the problem?

Curious if any of you have had to tone down, or phrase differently, your defense of firearms when it comes to the people you're talking to.

This being the internet, we mostly just see the angry ideologues screaming irrational things at gun owners, laying all the blame on them, the NRA, etc... But if we look past those people, there are others that just don't get it.