Active shooter on Las Vegas strip.

[Darkeon]

So the guy was white, does that mean, not terrorist and just mentally unstable?

I bet the moment you take a look at the victims you'll claim he indeed wasn't a terrorist and just mentally unstable~

[TZucchini]

Those are things (nouns), so I feel justified in including them. In fact, in the the line you quoted, I said "things."

OK sure, whatever. Dangerous things/items should be regulated within reason. Government should promote the general welfare of society.

My position is consistent, and much better than yours, since it doesn't involve the complete destruction of our planet.

- - - Updated - - -

So if he killed 50 and wounded 400 that means he probably fired at least 500 shots right (That's assuming he only missed 1 in 10 shots)? How long was he doing this?

These high velocity rounds tend to go straight through one person, and into another. Lots of ricochets too. But yeah, not sure how many rounds were fired.

[Deleted]

What about children, are they supposed to outrun the home invader, when they may be asleep in their bed?

It's good to see you live in a place where nobody is hurt in home invasions, I want to see such a country.

I do not have any children, but obviously, i would take them too. And if there is someone here then chances that they carry are so slim that i would have a great chance with a bat.
It is not that no one ever gets hurt, but being robbed in your home with a gun is unheard of.

[Machismo]

No way he pick off that many people that quickly.

A great deal of the casualties would could have been a result of trampling in the panic.

[petej0]

Im saying that i'd run in any home invasion, but a home invasion with a gun where i live is pretty much unheard off unless its a criminals trying to off each other. But robbing a home with a gun? I would say that number is very close if not zero.

Where are you going to run to in a multi-story home? What are you going to do with your kids, toss them out a window? Wife is too scared to jump, you leave her behind?

Even if the criminals arent armed, do you feel confident enough in your hand to hand combat that you would fight off an intruder? Is your spouse? Is your 50 year old neighbor? Not everyone is Chuck Norris material. So I would understand why someone would want to or even need to own a firearm for defense.

[Lahis]

No way he pick off that many people that quickly.

10 guns (so no overheating issue), high vantage point, tightly packet target area.

Just spray an' pray towards the masses of people. Easier to hit something than miss there.

[Exeris]

No way he pick off that many people that quickly.

I don't know but they were tightly packed together and also some of the deaths and injuries might be caused by the people panicking.

[Machismo]

OK sure, whatever. Dangerous things/items should be regulated within reason. Government should promote the general welfare of society.

My position is consistent, and much better than yours, since it doesn't involve the complete destruction of our planet.

- - - Updated - - -



These high velocity rounds tend to go straight through one person, and into another. Lots of ricochets too. But yeah, not sure how many rounds were fired.

Then be consistent, and regulate everything that is potentially dangerous or harmful in the same manner. So far, it's not really that consistent.

[Etselion]

Brother says Las Vegas shooter had no political or religious affiliation.

Probably a "lets dialogue and reason with nazis" type of centrist. You guys need to disavow immediatley.

[petej0]

I'm thinking it's time we license guns. The Second Amendment and licensing are not mutually exclusive.

Sounds good, how does licensing stop this event?

[Iamanerd]

No way he pick off that many people that quickly.

Between all the people running and stampeding over others plus the height and angle he was firing from the bullets where ricocheting all over the place I imagine. That many rounds in that time frame is very doable.

[TZucchini]

Then be consistent, and regulate everything that is potentially dangerous or harmful in the same manner. So far, it's not really that consistent.

I just told you that I'm fine with regulating dangerous things/items, within reason. What isn't consistent about that?

[Ghostpanther]

The news said "They don't suspect terrorism".

The people in those videos looked terrified to me.

Las Vegas Gun Show open on Saturday and Sundays








I'm thinking it's time we license guns. The Second Amendment and licensing are not mutually exclusive.

You are correct. But how do you propose licensing the hundreds of millions firearms already in circulation? And how do you enforce it? Besides, licensing firearms would not prevent this sort of tragedy. Same as licensing large trucks and vans in Europe did not stop their tragedies.

[Machismo]

I do not have any children, but obviously, i would take them too. And if there is someone here then chances that they carry are so slim that i would have a great chance with a bat.
It is not that no one ever gets hurt, but being robbed in your home with a gun is unheard of.

So, how do you protect yourself when someone wants to hurt you, even if they don't have a gun. They may have a crow bar, or a bat. How does a woman or teenage protect themselves against a larger attacker who is armed with a weapon?

Running with a kid in your arms is slow. Homes have choke points, making them difficult to escape from depending on where the invaders are.

[Pratt]

I believe that the definition of terrorism includes a political/religious component, so if it was just a crazy guy killing people because he hates humans it wouldn't technically be terrorism.

[Deleted]

OK sure, whatever. Dangerous things/items should be regulated within reason. Government should promote the general welfare of society.

My position is consistent, and much better than yours, since it doesn't involve the complete destruction of our planet.

- - - Updated - - -



These high velocity rounds tend to go straight through one person, and into another. Lots of ricochets too. But yeah, not sure how many rounds were fired.

People panicking doesn't help either, in situations were there was just panicking there have been multiple deaths. I can imagine that people will act more scared and panicked when they are being shot at.

[stabetha]

Are you fucking serious you really comparing Mexico and their economic issues with that of social issues really. Yeah well Australia doesn't have any fucking guns and it works out swell. Of course the entirely depends on who you ask.

So are we really going to ask stupid questions or do you simply not know the History of Mexico because if not that seems to fit how well you understand this one specifically concerning militias.

The authors of the constitution weren't new. They also spoke very clearly and not double speak. The passage about well regulated militias was along with the rest of the thoughts in the same lines about informed citizenry.

You know that thing about the country intended to be a republic realized through a democracy. That the responsibility of this government would never be left up to Kings or Stuart's. But free men and women also obligated to defending it. Not only with just guns but words. You know freedom of speech before it the right to assemble and redress.

They didn't then go fuck it just arm everyone.

you said borders between countries where better at protecting against arms smuggling, well that's the border, it sure isn't protecting anything.

[Doctor Amadeus]

"The "Militia" as understood at the Founding was not a select group such as the National Guard of today. It consisted of all able-bodied male citizens"

No that isn't what you said and posting a link with your text isn't going to save you. It doesn't support your claim in the previous post or now and I'm not going to derail the thread to educate you on what you clearly misunderstood by your own post.

A well regulated militia has nothing directly to do with the 2A. It's part of it as is the whole damn document. And nowhere is it interpreted as well regulated militias meaning just arm everyone. Lol

You have the right to bare arms, that doesn't make you a militia.

[Deleted]

So would banning all guns, motorcycles, unhealthy food, full-contact sports, skydiving, and drive-though fast food...

also ppl that dont exercise should be fined like 1000 sek every week if they dont comply with police state.

[Machismo]

I just told you that I'm fine with regulating dangerous things/items, within reason. What isn't consistent about that?

Well, what's the "within reason" part? Should we mandate that people get a physical health assessment before eating unhealthy foods? Should they have to weigh in at the supermarket, to make sure they are fit to eat cookies? This is especially important if society is going to be tasked with paying for their health care.