Active shooter on Las Vegas strip.

[Wiyld]

Making them fully auto is not legal.

You sure bump stocks aren't legal?

[TZucchini]

You sure bump stocks aren't legal?

They're perfectly legal, and are cheap as shit.

[Wiyld]

They're perfectly legal, and are cheap as shit.

yeah i was just lookin at some for 200 or less

[Ghostpanther]

Everyone brings metal into hotels. You'd have to check each person and find out what that metal is. You can't be TSA level security because people sneak shit by them ALL the time. They can be set up to scare people from even attempting it I suppose..

Sure, some. He was bringing more than just small pieces of coins or such however and those would have set off a metal detector rather easily. I do not think it would have to be TSA level. Just one security guard and a metal detector. Inconvenient? Costly? Of course and a damn hassle. But worth it.

[Wiyld]

yeah i was just lookin at some for 200 or less

And they are exactly what he was using

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...-to-speed-fire

- - - Updated - - -



SO far as I've seen thats been the defense in the thread thus far...'the guns might have been legal but he modified them illegally'

Well....there goes that...

Legal guns, legal mods.

[Deleted]

Personally, I don't think civilians should have guns. Hunters could have their hunting rifles and shotguns, but only when it's subsistence, or to cull a population when needed. People who want to practice their aim can use a duck hunt light gun. I definitely don't think people need assault rifles of any type for any purpose whatsoever, semi-auto or not, and suppressors are just completely pointless in every single case.

On the topic of suppressors though, or the so-called mythical "silencer", I'm not sure if this was posted here already. I don't want to start a thread for it, and this is relating to this shooting anyway;

https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/s...53465926639618

Hillary Clinton‏
@HillaryClinton

The crowd fled at the sound of gunshots.

Imagine the deaths if the shooter had a silencer, which the NRA wants to make easier to get.

Ahh, the magical "silencer". It doesn't exist. Suppressors do exist. They don't silence a gun, though, and in the case of an M-16 (or a full-auto AR-15), which is most likely what the shooter used, people would have still heard it just fine.

Here's a video with an M-16 shooting full auto, first without a suppressor in the very beginning, then with a suppressor at 9:50:



So yeah... For sure, lifting regulations and restrictions on the sales of suppressors will absolutely cause problems and nobody needs to have one, but they're not "silencers", and they won't make guns "silent".

[Ghostpanther]

You sure bump stocks aren't legal?

I was not aware of those. But they should be made illegal except for the police to use. This is one step which needs to be done to help prevent this from happening again. Thanks for pointing this out.

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah, you underestimate how much security it would take to screen people going up to hotel rooms in Vegas.

And I think you are overestimating it.

[Wiyld]

Personally, I don't think civilians should have guns. Hunters could have their hunting rifles and shotguns, but only when it's subsistence, or to cull a population when needed. People who want to practice their aim can use a duck hunt light gun. I definitely don't think people need assault rifles of any type for any purpose whatsoever, semi-auto or not, and suppressors are just completely pointless in every single case.

On the topic of suppressors though, or the so-called mythical "silencer", I'm not sure if this was posted here already. I don't want to start a thread for it, and this is relating to this shooting anyway;

https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/s...53465926639618

Ahh, the magical "silencer". It doesn't exist. Suppressors do exist. They don't silence a gun, though, and in the case of an M-16 (or a full-auto AR-15), which is most likely what the shooter used, people would have still heard it just fine.

Here's a video with an M-16 shooting full auto, first without a suppressor in the very beginning, then with a suppressor at 9:50:



So yeah... For sure, lifting regulations and restrictions on the sales of suppressors will absolutely cause problems and nobody needs to have one, but they're not "silencers", and they won't make guns "silent".

I mean they DO exist...they just aren't widely available for every gun. Sure the name silencer is a misnomer, but arguing that is just arguing what words we use. What Clinton said was true...at the loud concert, a suppressed weapon would have been harder to hear at first, the fact that they exist at all is evidence of that. Suppressors suck...they totally fuck with the guns performance, there is a good reason people put up with that....because reducing the noise the gun makes is valuable. The more suppression, the more it messes with your performance, generally slowing your round down.



For those wondering what the shooter used to 'mod' his guns, here is a video of what bump stocks do. the first example is pretty haunting in its similarity to what the shooter must have been using.

[TZucchini]

people would have still heard it just fine.

I'd be interested to hear other opinions as to whether it would have made a difference. I understand suppressors don't eliminate the sound. But the shooter was 1200 feet away (365 meters), 32 stories high. And then there's the fact that the concert atmosphere is incredibly loud to begin with. So I guess I'm not convinced that they would have heard the firing given all that information.

[Blade Wolf]

Personally, I don't think civilians should have guns. Hunters could have their hunting rifles and shotguns, but only when it's subsistence, or to cull a population when needed. People who want to practice their aim can use a duck hunt light gun. I definitely don't think people need assault rifles of any type for any purpose whatsoever, semi-auto or not, and suppressors are just completely pointless in every single case.

On the topic of suppressors though, or the so-called mythical "silencer", I'm not sure if this was posted here already. I don't want to start a thread for it, and this is relating to this shooting anyway;

https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/s...53465926639618

Ahh, the magical "silencer". It doesn't exist. Suppressors do exist. They don't silence a gun, though, and in the case of an M-16 (or a full-auto AR-15), which is most likely what the shooter used, people would have still heard it just fine.

Here's a video with an M-16 shooting full auto, first without a suppressor in the very beginning, then with a suppressor at 9:50:



So yeah... For sure, lifting regulations and restrictions on the sales of suppressors will absolutely cause problems and nobody needs to have one, but they're not "silencers", and they won't make guns "silent".

You're missing some factors. First off the distance would most likely mask alot of the sound and speakers blasting music would probably mask it even more.

[Surfd]

Personally, I don't think civilians should have guns. Hunters could have their hunting rifles and shotguns, but only when it's subsistence, or to cull a population when needed. People who want to practice their aim can use a duck hunt light gun. I definitely don't think people need assault rifles of any type for any purpose whatsoever, semi-auto or not, and suppressors are just completely pointless in every single case.

On the topic of suppressors though, or the so-called mythical "silencer", I'm not sure if this was posted here already. I don't want to start a thread for it, and this is relating to this shooting anyway;

https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/s...53465926639618

Ahh, the magical "silencer". It doesn't exist. Suppressors do exist. They don't silence a gun, though, and in the case of an M-16 (or a full-auto AR-15), which is most likely what the shooter used, people would have still heard it just fine.

Here's a video with an M-16 shooting full auto, first without a suppressor in the very beginning, then with a suppressor at 9:50:



So yeah... For sure, lifting regulations and restrictions on the sales of suppressors will absolutely cause problems and nobody needs to have one, but they're not "silencers", and they won't make guns "silent".

Ok, sure. We know that movie magic "silencers" don't actually exist, and nobody is going to be wandering around with a fully silent assault weapon. But exactly how much noise does a suppressor actually suppress? Likely enough that I doubt many people at a concert would have heard a suppressed gun going off from 32 stories up. If people there described the shooting as "what sounded like firecrackers", I can only imagine what it would sound like with a suppressor knocking the sound down to "tolerable" levels. There just would have been people dropping dead all over the place for god only knows how long before someone clued in that someone was shooting the place up, and most of them wouldn't even have been aware it was happening.

[Deleted]

I'd be interested to hear other opinions as to whether it would have made a difference.

But exactly how much noise does a suppressor actually suppress?

An AR-15 would be something like 155-165dB without a suppressor. A suppressor would drop it down to something like 135dB. Yeah, it would've been heard just fine. Still, that's not really the point of what I was trying to say. I'm against allowing the sale of suppressors anyway.

[petej0]

Sure, some. He was bringing more than just small pieces of coins or such however and those would have set off a metal detector rather easily. I do not think it would have to be TSA level. Just one security guard and a metal detector. Inconvenient? Costly? Of course and a damn hassle. But worth it.

Its not worth it, especially when you have to go back up to your room because you forgot something and have to wait in the security line because there is only one guard. All because of something that was done once and probably never again.

[Ghostpanther]

I have worked in casinos. You clearly have no concept of them or the traffic they see, let alone how many entrances to room areas there are. A single guard would work at a motel, not a resort on the strip.

How many guards would it take? And how many entrances are there in say the motel he was in? And I did say it would be inconvenient and a hassle. And not cost free.

[Wiyld]

The company that makes the damn things literally calls them silencers

https://silencerco.com/



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jZSzTgIFws

HE made his AR-15 as quiet as a BB gun


I mean cmon guys.....if I can find this stuff in like 20 seconds on the internet why can't you?



edit: and yes I know it won't cycle this quiet...but the point is there is a LOT more play in how quiet you can make these things than 'oh its not that quiet you would certainly still hear it'

[Ghostpanther]

Its not worth it, especially when you have to go back up to your room because you forgot something and have to wait in the security line because there is only one guard. All because of something that was done once and probably never again.

I hope you are right. But I would not want to take the same risk again.

[Deleted]

The company that makes the damn things literally calls them silencers

https://silencerco.com/

Well, you use the vernacular your customers expect you to use.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jZSzTgIFws

HE made his AR-15 as quiet as a BB gun

I mean cmon guys.....if I can find this stuff in like 20 seconds on the internet why can't you?

edit: and yes I know it won't cycle this quiet...but the point is there is a LOT more play in how quiet you can make these things than 'oh its not that quiet you would certainly still hear it'

Yeah, so...you found a video of a gun that doesn't work. Good job.

[urasim]

Alcohol is self inflicted. Gun murder isn't.

This is a prime example of not knowing language. Drinking alcohol is self inflicted, but that's not what he was talking about. He's talking about the deaths of those caused by individuals who drink AND drive.

[Independent voter]

Shooter had 23 guns in his hotel room and 19 more at home, thousands of rounds of ammunition.

[urasim]

Personally, I don't think civilians should have guns. Hunters could have their hunting rifles and shotguns, but only when it's subsistence, or to cull a population when needed. People who want to practice their aim can use a duck hunt light gun. I definitely don't think people need assault rifles of any type for any purpose whatsoever, semi-auto or not, and suppressors are just completely pointless in every single case.

On the topic of suppressors though, or the so-called mythical "silencer", I'm not sure if this was posted here already. I don't want to start a thread for it, and this is relating to this shooting anyway;

https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/s...53465926639618

Ahh, the magical "silencer". It doesn't exist. Suppressors do exist. They don't silence a gun, though, and in the case of an M-16 (or a full-auto AR-15), which is most likely what the shooter used, people would have still heard it just fine.

Here's a video with an M-16 shooting full auto, first without a suppressor in the very beginning, then with a suppressor at 9:50:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NM8xvE5B4yk

So yeah... For sure, lifting regulations and restrictions on the sales of suppressors will absolutely cause problems and nobody needs to have one, but they're not "silencers", and they won't make guns "silent".

Do you really expect any different from that idiot? Hillary is an absolute joke. She watches too many movies or her kids play video games around her.

That said... I'm sure Trump would make the same mistake. But she's supposed to be the credible one. lol