59 dead after shooting on Las Vegas Strip; suspect ID'd

[DocM]

Hmmmmm....

 

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/10/vegas-shooters-father-was-on-fbi-most-wanted-list.html

 

 

[trag3dy]

46 minutes ago, PsYcHoKiLLa said:

Well, with a shooter that far away, she's right. Presuming they weren't spraying away with a full automatic.

 

I find it incredible, the opinion that her and people like her are just out to spoil people's "fun" pastime when what they're actually trying to do is stop tragedies like this.

Did you watch the videos? Did you hear the gun fire?

 

A silencer would literally melt in seconds under that kind of use.

 

Nothing she says or suggested would have prevented this.

 

Here's some one shooting an assault rifle with a silencer on it... it's not what you would describe as quiet. Also notice the smoke coming off the silencer? It's so hot it's almost glowing. And that's just after a few seconds of fully automatic fire. The shooter in Vegas went on for a solid 30+ seconds.

 

 

Edited October 2, 2017 by trag3dy

[DocM]

As usual, lts of talk about firearms by those who know nothing about them.

[Dick Montage]

Just now, DocM said:

As usual, lts of talk about firearms by those who know nothing about them.

And defensive comments from those who do.  It's a cycle that's not going to end.  And let's be honest, our gun laws here in the UK haven't stopped killings from happening here...

[DocM]

3 minutes ago, Nefarious Trigger said:

And defensive comments from those who do.  It's a cycle that's not going to end.  And let's be honest, our gun laws here in the UK haven't stopped killings from happening here...

And theres an argument to be made stare at the absence of firearms in some cases encourages many armed attacks. Especially in the case of criminals and "close up" terrorists, nothing encourages them like a bunch of sitting ducks and  unarmed police.

[Nerd Rage]

3 minutes ago, DocM said:

As usual, lts of talk about firearms by those who know nothing about them.

Yeah, very disappointing.  Especially the whole statement in essence saying - we need to stand together and not make this political, now lets stand against the NRA.............because that statement made sense.

[techbeck]

And now there is someone saying they she does not even care what happened to the victims because people who like country music are normally gun totting republicans.   Seems like the idiots really come out of the woodwork when things like this happen.

 

To those who show support around the world no matter who/what country things like this happen in, thank you.  Those who are on the opposite end or show zero support, then karma is a real bitch.

[The Evil Overlord]

6 minutes ago, DocM said:

And theres an argument to be made stare at the absence of firearms in some cases encourages many armed attacks. Especially in the case of criminals and "close up" terrorists, nothing encourages them like a bunch of sitting ducks and  unarmed police.

It's a change that is reverting... Armed police presence is starting to be more commonplace in high impact areas and cities, they're not exclusive to airports anymore, smaller districts are armed with various sprays and tasers.

For better or worse is not for me to decide, but it is most definitely a sign of the times where England is concerned, as armed response has been a very specialsed unit for a long time.

[techbeck]

Sorry I mentioned Hillary's comment since now this is turning in to a gun discussion. 

[PGHammer]

11 hours ago, trag3dy said:

I'm reading on twitter that there might be as many as 3 shooters with 1 "down". If so it's extremely coordinated and premeditated.

 

It at some sort of music concert/festival.

Country music festival.  The shooter (now identified) had no criminal history at all.

[dead.cell]

Just now, techbeck said:

Sorry I mentioned Hillary's comment since now this is turning in to a gun discussion. 

It was going to go there anyway. That's what happens when politicians like Hillary get involved and talk from their ass.

 

Not much left to talk about right now, until more details unravel. I'm still rather unnerved that there is such little to go on right now. Father being a bank robber? Theft and murder can go hand in hand sometimes in those situations, but not mass murder by the son so many years later (and at age 64 no less).

1 minute ago, PGHammer said:

Country music festival.  The shooter (now identified) had no criminal history at all.

I believe he was known to police for something else, but yeah, no real record.

[PGHammer]

37 minutes ago, DocM said:

Hmmmmm....

 

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/10/vegas-shooters-father-was-on-fbi-most-wanted-list.html

 

 

DocM - that leads to the Nature vs. Nurture argument - which has more holes than Grade AA Swiss - from Switzerland, let alone Wisconsin.

[Dick Montage]

1 hour ago, techbeck said:

Sorry I mentioned Hillary's comment since now this is turning in to a gun discussion. 

It was going to anyway, seeing as how so many people were shot!

[DocM]

21 minutes ago, Nefarious Trigger said:

It was going to anyway, seeing as how so many people were shot!

Just putting the modern rate of non-suicide homicides into perspective,  

 

In 1992 Los Angeles County alone logged 2,589 homicides, 49.8 per week.  Believe me, many parts of Detroit were war zones and we haven't started on Chicago, Cleveland, Baltimore, East St Louis, Oakland etc. 

 

Today there are about 8,500 a year in the entire nation, and about 280-300 in Detroit and LA . Still too many, but....

Edited October 2, 2017 by DocM

[Slugsie]

3 hours ago, Nerd Rage said:

While it may be true, it's a poor time to make that comment.  It didn't really make sense to play the speculation game.  Anyone could easily say that the death toll would be higher if the assailants have grenades, helicopters and hellfire missiles, but it would be extremely poor taste as a political figure to bring that up when people are dead and dying.

The problem is that by that argument there is no good time. 275 days into 2017, and there have been over 270 mass shootings. http://www.abc15.com/news/data/mass-shootings-in-the-u-s-over-270-mass-shootings-have-occurred-in-2017

 

So, given you're averaging nearly one a day, when exactly is the right time to discuss how to fix this horrendous problem you have in America? You need someone to step up and say enough is enough and do something NOW! It shouldn't be a political thing, because it really should be that EVERYONE can agree that it needs to be dealt with, and without delay. Your citizens are literally being gunned down as they carry on their normal lives, yet there doesn't seem to be the will to stop it happening. If you want to claim to be the leader of the free world, the country that everyone else can look up to, you simply cannot let this continue another day.

[shockz]

3 hours ago, trag3dy said:

Did you watch the videos? Did you hear the gun fire?

 

A silencer would literally melt in seconds under that kind of use.

 

Nothing she says or suggested would have prevented this.

 

Here's some one shooting an assault rifle with a silencer on it... it's not what you would describe as quiet. Also notice the smoke coming off the silencer? It's so hot it's almost glowing. And that's just after a few seconds of fully automatic fire. The shooter in Vegas went on for a solid 30+ seconds.

 

 

Why exactly does one need such a weapon outside of the military? I'm all for banning these for the general population. I have no problem owning a rifle or a hand gun, in fact I do, however I still can't fathom why one needs such weapons as an M16? You can't use them for hunting, you'd obliterate whatever you're trying to catch. I'm not being condescending, I'm trying to understand why one would need one unless you're part of a group tasked with taking out multiple targets in a military operation. There's having a gun for defense and then the machines that are displayed above which are overkill (pun intended) for really anyone.

[shockz]

1 hour ago, DocM said:

Just putting the modern rate of non-suicide homicides into perspective,  

 

In 1992 Los Angeles County alone logged 2,589 homicides, 49.8 per week.  Believe me, many parts of Detroit were war zones and we haven't started on Chicago, Cleveland, Baltimore, East St Louis, Oakland etc. 

 

Today there are about 8,500 a year in the entire nation, and about 280-300 in Detroit and LA . Still too many, but....

And as a gun advocate, how would you propose we get guns out of the hands of criminals? 

[trag3dy]

1 minute ago, shockz said:

Why exactly does one need such a weapon outside of the military? I'm all for banning these for the general population. I have no problem owning a rifle or a hand gun, in fact I do, however I still can't fathom why one needs such weapons as an M16? You can't use them for hunting, you'd obliterate whatever you're trying to catch. I'm not being condescending, I'm trying to understand why one would need one unless you're part of a group tasked with taking out multiple targets in a military operation.

For the fun of shooting it? That guy in the video clearly spends a lot of time at that particular spot so I assume it's his hobby. And as far as hunting goes it technically comes down to what you're hunting. Hunting big game like deer or elk for example requires certain calibers of bullets to make sure you can actually kill what you're hunting but for small game like coyotes or rabbits there are no such restrictions.

 

Just like some people work on cars or collect basketball cards or weave baskets. It's just a hobby.

 

The problem as with most things is when it's taken to extremes coupled mental illness*. There are more guys like the one in the video who collect and shoot guns as a hobby than there are who would ever have the potential to go into a hotel in Vegas and open fire on a crowd of people.

 

*I'm not excusing the vegas shooter as being mentally ill, I don't think anyone knows what his specific circumstance is just yet

[trag3dy]

43 minutes ago, Slugsie said:

The problem is that by that argument there is no good time. 275 days into 2017, and there have been over 270 mass shootings. http://www.abc15.com/news/data/mass-shootings-in-the-u-s-over-270-mass-shootings-have-occurred-in-2017

 

So, given you're averaging nearly one a day, when exactly is the right time to discuss how to fix this horrendous problem you have in America? You need someone to step up and say enough is enough and do something NOW! It shouldn't be a political thing, because it really should be that EVERYONE can agree that it needs to be dealt with, and without delay. Your citizens are literally being gunned down as they carry on their normal lives, yet there doesn't seem to be the will to stop it happening. If you want to claim to be the leader of the free world, the country that everyone else can look up to, you simply cannot let this continue another day.

With only 3 months left in the year we're 200 less mass shootings (which technically doesn't have a definition) behind 2016. If you're trying to use that to prove your point a seems like it would be doing the opposite.

 

While this event is bad there are so many other things we choose to use in our daily lives that result in far more deaths than guns in any given year. You're far more likely to die of a heart attack or get hit and killed by a car as you're walking down the street than getting killed in a mass shooting.

 

I don't know what the solution is because the guns the guy in Vegas was shooting are already heavily restricted and extremely expensive to buy if he even had them legally. No amount of restrictions would have changed this.

From link:

Quote

Eric Paddock, the shooter's brother, told CBS News that Stephen was "not an avid gun guy at all."

That to me says the guy probably didn't obtain the guns legally.

Edited October 2, 2017 by trag3dy

[+Kyle Subscriber¹]

32 minutes ago, Slugsie said:

You need someone to step up and say enough is enough and do something NOW!

What is your suggestion, @Slugsie? What does America do now? 

[shockz]

40 minutes ago, trag3dy said:

For the fun of shooting it? That guy in the video clearly spends a lot of time at that particular spot so I assume it's his hobby. And as far as hunting goes it technically comes down to what you're hunting. Hunting big game like deer or elk for example requires certain calibers of bullets to make sure you can actually kill what you're hunting but for small game like coyotes or rabbits there are no such restrictions.

 

Just like some people work on cars or collect basketball cards or weave baskets. It's just a hobby.

 

The problem as with most things is when it's taken to extremes coupled mental illness*. There are more guys like the one in the video who collect and shoot guns as a hobby than there are who would ever have the potential to go into a hotel in Vegas and open fire on a crowd of people.

 

*I'm not excusing the vegas shooter as being mentally ill, I don't think anyone knows what his specific circumstance is just yet

There's all sorts of fun things that have been either been deemed illegal or heavily regulated, it's just that these types of weapons are able to hide behind the guise of an amendment that was crafted in a totally different time and place. While some semi/automatic weapons (and I use that term loosely) existed during the time the second amendment was wrote, I can't imagine our founding fathers could of ever imagined the type of weapons people have access to today, nor did they probably ever think we'd be referencing a 225 year old amendment in 2017. But I can already see we're never going to agree on this point, so I won't waste my energy typing much more. But a hobby being fun honestly isn't a good enough reason to excuse the type of mass casualties these types of weapons create, not to mention during mass shooting events, automatic/semi automatic weapons are being sought after and used more and more, and just like with this guy, had no history of criminal activity. 

 

If a person shooting up a school full of kids isn't enough to get the ball rolling on actual, helpful legislation, hate to say nothing will. We'll keep having these mass shootings, and same discussions, and it won't make a difference. All while the rest of 1st world countries (and some others) have only a handful of incidents every decade or so.

Edited October 2, 2017 by shockz

[Slugsie]

17 minutes ago, trag3dy said:

With only 3 months left in the year we're 200 less mass shootings (which technically doesn't have a definition) behind 2016. If you're trying to use that to prove it point a seems like it would be doing the opposite.

 

While this event is bad there are so many other things we choose to use in our daily lives that result in far more deaths than guns in any given year. You're far more likely to die of a heart attack or get hit and killed by a car as you're walking down the street than getting killed in a mass shooting.

 

I don't know what the solution is because the guns the guy in Vegas was shooting are already heavily restricted and extremely expensive to buy if he even had them legally. No amount of restrictions would have changed this.

From link:

That to me says the guy probably didn't obtain the guns legally.

Yes, 2017 is indeed *thankfully* going to have fewer mass shootings that 2016 (mass shootings are typically defined as having 4 or more victims, but it's not a hard and fast definition). Does that mean there isn't a problem? I hope you're not trying to suggest that nothing needs to be done? Surely you agree that something needs to change?

7 minutes ago, Kyle said:

What is your suggestion, @Slugsie? What does America do now? 

Honestly? I haven't got a clue. I'm a software engineer living in the UK, this is so far outside my area of knowledge it's silly. I know it's not practical or sensible to ban guns in the USA (self protection from wildlife when out in the middle of nowhere for instance is one time when a gun is a sensible tool to carry). But many of the typical anti gun control arguments just sound like excuses so gun enthusiasts can keep their toys.

 

I'm not advocating for any particular solution. I'm advocating for all sides of the political divide to work together to find one. Having the President (be it Obama, Trump, or whoever) have to stand up again and again and condemn such violence yet not do anything to stop it... well, after a while it just looks like nobody cares, and words are just being used as platitudes.

 

The first step to a solution surely is for all sides to agree there is a problem that needs to be solved, and that all sides need to work together towards that solution.

[trag3dy]

7 minutes ago, shockz said:

There's all sorts of fun things that have been either been deemed illegal or heavily regulated, it's just that these types of weapons are able to hide behind the guise of an amendment that was crafted in a totally different time and place. While some automatic weapons (and I use that term loosely) existed during the time the second amendment was wrote, I can't imagine our founding fathers could of ever imagined the type of weapons people have access to today, nor did the probably ever think we'd be referencing a 225 year old amendment in 2017. But I can already see we're never going to agree on this point, so I won't waste my energy typing much more. But a hobby being fun honestly isn't a good enough reason to excuse the type of mass casualties these types of weapons create, not to mention during mass shooting events, automatic/semi automatic weapons are being sought after and used more and more, and just like with this guy, had no history of criminal activity. 

 

If a person shooting up a school full of kids isn't enough to get the ball rolling on actual, helpful legislation, hate to say nothing will. We'll keep having these mass shootings, and same discussions, and it won't make a difference. All while the rest of 1st world countries (and some others) have only a handful of incidents every decade or so.

Short of getting rid of the 2A entirely fully automatic assault rifles are already heavily restricted. It takes a year long back ground check process which is needed to buy a specific kind of license which costs thousands, and that's before you can actually buy the guns which are not cheap.. the are in the in the tens of thousands price range. A fully automatic M16 with select fire (like in the video I linked above) will cost anywhere from $15000 to $30000.

 

They are just not something ordinary people are going to be able to get their hands on.

[TPreston]

3 minutes ago, trag3dy said:

Well, I mean, short of getting rid of the 2A entirely fully automatic assault rifles are already heavily restricted. It takes a year long back ground check process which is needed to buy a specific kind of license which costs thousands, and that's before you can actually buy the guns which are not cheap.. the are in the in the tens of thousands price range. A fully automatic M16 with select fire (like in the video I linked above) will cost anywhere from $15000 to $30000.

 

They are just not something ordinary people are going to be able to get their hands on.

After which they can be sold to anyone in the same state without any of the above checks curtesy of the gun show loophole

[trag3dy]

6 minutes ago, Slugsie said:

Yes, 2017 is indeed *thankfully* going to have fewer mass shootings that 2016 (mass shootings are typically defined as having 4 or more victims, but it's not a hard and fast definition). Does that mean there isn't a problem? I hope you're not trying to suggest that nothing needs to be done? Surely you agree that something needs to change?

Honestly? I haven't got a clue. I'm a software engineer living in the UK, this is so far outside my area of knowledge it's silly. I know it's not practical or sensible to ban guns in the USA (self protection from wildlife when out in the middle of nowhere for instance is one time when a gun is a sensible tool to carry). But many of the typical anti gun control arguments just sound like excuses so gun enthusiasts can keep their toys.

 

I'm not advocating for any particular solution. I'm advocating for all sides of the political divide to work together to find one. Having the President (be it Obama, Trump, or whoever) have to stand up again and again and condemn such violence yet not do anything to stop it... well, after a while it just looks like nobody cares, and words are just being used as platitudes.

 

The first step to a solution surely is for all sides to agree there is a problem that needs to be solved, and that all sides need to work together towards that solution.

As I noted above these guns are not things ordinary people can just go and buy. It takes time and a lot of money to get them if you go the legal rout.

 

All evidence seems to indicate this guy didn't buy his guns legally.