At least 50 dead, 200 wounded at shooting on Las Vegas Strip

[Brent in Az]

I will give up my 2nd amendment rights, if the Media gives up it's 1st amendment rights.

Sure ...and monkeys will fly out of my backside.

 

[tarbe]

Now for the feather ruffling....

-Yes the right to bear arms is your second amendment right, but if Uncle Sam did decide to turn on you would your aresenal really hold a candle to smart bombs, tanks, and the rest of his stockpile?

-Being from Canada, I had no idea what a bump stock, or the trigger cylinder thing-a-magiggy was and had to look them up. This leads me to a conclusion, they have no purpose for hunting or target shooting, so they are a gimmick to be brought out once a year as a laugh. Let’s say without those, that the casualties would have been cut in half. Is that worth less than your right to own such devices?

-@Ragman pointed out our laws on pistols. I can honestly say that I wouldn’t trade the fact that I live in the country where I have never once, at any time, felt the need to have any sort of a wepon on my person for self defence, for the most lax carry laws out there!

No one is coming to confiscate your guns, they are just trying to make it a little harder for someone to kill 58 people in ten min.

I am a hunter, and I am a gun owner.

Well, the King never thought a few farmers could defeat the best military in the world.

The simple answer to your question is - there is no way the U.S. military could vanquish the American people.

First off, the American Military is (thankfully) not a bunch of paid foreign killers (think Rome). Most will not turn on their own people in a significant way.

Second, there are perhaps 50 million of us. Hell, we even have Cody!

 

[Brent in Az]

This shooting has a very bad smell to it. There is so much, rhetoric, and innuendo, by dozens of sources. Conspiracy run amuck. We may never find out the real truth, if it gets covered up. Everything points to a coordinated plot. I'm no expert, but the audio sounds like full auto, from two different rifles. Various sources have the same opinion.

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

-@Ragman pointed out our laws on pistols. I can honestly say that I wouldn’t trade the fact that I live in the country where I have never once, at any time, felt the need to have any sort of a wepon on my person for self defence, for the most lax carry laws out there!

No one is coming to confiscate your guns, they are just trying to make it a little harder for someone to kill 58 people in ten min.

1. I'm happy you've never felt that need in Canada. In a previous suburban sleepy little strong middle class neighborhood I lived in just a few minutes from here, I came home one day to helicopters hovering over a home down the street. Turns out the guy living there had connections with the Mexican drug cartels. He apparently got sideways with them and they came to settle the problem.

2. In a neighborhood not from there, one night a couple of guys decided on a home they thought would be good for a home invasion. They busted open the front door and were armed. The homeowner was also armed with a 12ga shotgun as well as pistols, he won, they lost.

Shall I go on?

Regarding gun confiscation, just what the hell do you think they did in Australia? While there are many who are in favor of increased gun control without confiscation, you're dreaming or just ignorant that that is exactly what so many of our politicians want.

Regarding gun control, here's a pretty good read from the liberal Washington Post:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...8c702d2d975_story.html?utm_term=.bf9ed56eea9c

 

[charleslabounty]

Now for the feather ruffling....

-If the accused’s skin was anything remotly darker than rosey pink everyone’s would be screaming for travel/immigration bans

-Yes the right to bear arms is your second amendment right, but if Uncle Sam did decide to turn on you would your aresenal really hold a candle to smart bombs, tanks, and the rest of his stockpile?

-Being from Canada, I had no idea what a bump stock, or the trigger cylinder thing-a-magiggy was and had to look them up. This leads me to a conclusion, they have no purpose for hunting or target shooting, so they are a gimmick to be brought out once a year as a laugh. Let’s say without those, that the casualties would have been cut in half. Is that worth less than your right to own such devices?

-@Ragman pointed out our laws on pistols. I can honestly say that I wouldn’t trade the fact that I live in the country where I have never once, at any time, felt the need to have any sort of a wepon on my person for self defence, for the most lax carry laws out there!

No one is coming to confiscate your guns, they are just trying to make it a little harder for someone to kill 58 people in ten min.

I am a hunter, and I am a gun owner.

Diane Feinstein 199x “If I would have the 51 votes, then Mr &Mrs America turn them all in.”
She said this in an interview in 20xx while talking about the assault gun ban bill in the 1990’s.

 

[Bullthrower338]

Anders Breivik killed 69 people with small arms fire in Norway after killing 8 and wounding 209 with explosives. Gun control there is very strict, yet it happened.
How about the crossbow attack in Ontario, Canada? Brett Ryan killed 3 and wounded 2 with a damn crossbow! A good guy with a handgun could have ended the situation most likely before the next bolt was loaded! Those of us that have spent a significant amount of time on our southern border are no strangers to Mexican drug violence, murder and kidnaping are almost daily in the borderland.
Aaron, we don't walk around seeing the boogie man around every corner. We walk around knowing that he can appear at anytime, anywhere and God forbid when he does at least I have a chance to stop the mayhem. I would not hesitate to place myself between someone I love and evil but I want my 1911 to at least even the field. It is a personal choice to carry, with it comes great responsibility that most do not take lightly. There will always be sheep, with sheep come wolves, if you're a sheep, you prey that the sheepdog is not to far away when the wolf shows up!

 

[PARA45]

We have thousands of gun laws in the books, and none of them prevented this. This nut case went through a bunch of background checks, and he purchased the guns legally. Chicago has the strictest gun control laws in the country, and how are these laws preventing their out of control murders? Our politicians need to stop blaming the tool for the actions of an evil individual. But then again, that will never happen.

 

[Brent in Az]

The Democrats who are always screaming for gun control, are the same people who want to allow a flood of refugees into the country, and allow sanctuary cities for lawbreakers, rapists, murderers, and welfare leeches.

And the Democrats want our guns.

Let that sink in for awhile.

 

[CLICKBANGBANG]

[snip]

And the Democrats want our guns.

Let that sink in for awhile.

I'll first respond to this quote from Brent, and then give a closing thought in this terrible tragedy.

I live in a state that is almost the current leftist utopia, and have all of my life. Please don't be mistaken, the left do own guns. They can see the writing on the wall as well (violence on an uncontrollable level). Yet they still vote for politicians that are anti hunting and gun control extremist. They don't realize that they are supplementing the rise in violence by letting an uncontrolled government have their way with the second amendment (and often our rights to hunt). All this to say, yes. You are correct. The democrats want the republicans guns. But they want to keep theirs.

My wife called the police this time last year. We've lived in a very small dusty farm town here in northern CA since we were born. Met and married in the same church. It's a really great community and little in the way of danger ever happens here. It looked like no one was home one day, and someone decided to kick on our back door attempting to break in. She yelled at the door if they came through, she'd shoot. She called 911, and barricaded herself inside the house with a 9mm and a New York reload. Then texted me while I was at my office. I made it home in 7 min (gear limited speed on a Cummins Ram is 115 mph). The first officer arrived 25 min later. Just a few minutes is long time for a small scared woman to sit waiting for help. You can't depend on the police to protect you. You have to arm yourself accordingly. I am very thankful we only had footprints on the back door, instead of unimaginably worse. And I pray for our continued safety.

The Las Vegas shooting is incredibley saddening. I am in that city once or twice a year on business, but rarely spend much time on much for recreation. Just to take my wife to a show, and we'll have the driver take the strip once so we can look at the lights. No doubt there is a problem with our mental health system. I have no good ideas to fix this issue. Infringing on freedom will not make this country any more safe. Again, I have no good fix to this either to try and prevent cowardly murder of innocent people. Other than that, it's hard to find how to respond to a situation like this. Every group of people will dig in the trenches and respond in a emotional outrage. Be it left, right, conspiracy theorists, or other. The only thing I do know, is that politicians step in to do something often making blundering mistakes along the way. And someone gets paid. Somewhere a politician figures out a way to line their pockets amidst the tragedy be it, fires, hurricanes, or shootings. All that's left is a country in more divide, and the morning family and friends.

 

[Royal27]

Yes the right to bear arms is your second amendment right, but if Uncle Sam did decide to turn on you would your aresenal really hold a candle to smart bombs, tanks, and the rest of his stockpile?

Don't be so sure. It's more than just who would win the fight, its the political fight it would cause as well, and perhaps even a fight at a more localized level. The Second Amendment is for exactly this scenario, to protect against government.

No one is coming to confiscate your guns, they are just trying to make it a little harder for someone to kill 58 people in ten min.

If you believe that the U.S government (or the Canadian government for that matter) is the first government in the history of the world that won't eventually turn on its people then more power to you. I don't bet on one in a million long shots like that. The Second Amendment is my protection from future oppression.

What I'd like to hear from you or anyone else is what gun control measures are being proposed that would have stopped this instance or any of the other true mass attacks over the last decade. I haven't seen it yet. What I have seen is that despite the proliferation of guns in America the actual murder rate has dropped by 50% since the early 90s. Only these mass shooting have gone up. Furthermore, the mass shootings by the crazies really began to pick up after we watered down our mental health system beginning in 1980. Politicians and liberals want to cure the symptom, not the disease..

This leads me to a conclusion, they have no purpose for hunting or target shooting, so they are a gimmick to be brought out once a year as a laugh. Let’s say without those, that the casualties would have been cut in half. Is that worth less than your right to own such devices?

I honestly don't care if I can own a bump stock or not. I actually thought about buying one at one point for fun and decided against it. I'm too cheap to waste ammunition like that. To your question though. First, I don't accept your premise that casualties would have been 50%. Better aimed fire produces better results (don't we talk about shot placement here constantly?) and bumpfire is wildly inaccurate. Secondly, this guy planned, carefully. Illegally creating this rate of fire would not have been difficult without bumpfire, so even if you're right and I'm wrong it wouldn't have made a difference. Finally, I always roll my eyes at the "give up rights to save lives" argument. People don't really mean it, or want it. It just sounds good to argue is all. No speeding on our highways would save more lives every year than making a bumpfire stock illegal ever would. Everyone who's supportive of a governer on your car to prevent speeding please raise your hand! I mean I just don't understand why someone needs or wants to own a car that will go over the speed limit after all.

My country is based on the fundamental right to own and bear arms. I won't give that up, or even risk giving that up. Ironically, I'm not opposed to some gun law change as many are. That said, I want to be shown that it will make an actual impact and do what "they" say it will do. I haven't seen those ideas yet.

Good discussion and I appreciate your post!

 

[Royal27]

Not my information below, but great information and stresses the point I made above that it's really not saving lives, but rather about controlling the populace.

I suspect most avid gun owners already know this but it is a good set of FACTS to use if you ever find yourself in a discussion with gun grabbers.

There are 30,000 gun related deaths per year by firearms, and this number is not disputed. The U.S. population is 324,059,091 as of June 22, 2016. Do the math: 0.000000925% of the population dies from gun related actions each year. Statistically speaking, this is insignificant! What is never told, however, is a breakdown of those 30,000 deaths, to put them in perspective as compared to other causes of death:
• 65% of those deaths are by suicide, which would never be prevented by gun laws.
• 15% are by law enforcement in the line of duty and justified.
• 17% are through criminal activity, gang and drug related or mentally ill persons – better known as gun violence.
• 3% are accidental discharge deaths.
So technically, "gun violence" is not 30,000 annually, but drops to 5,100. Still too many? Now lets look at how those deaths spanned across the nation.
• 480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago
• 344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore
• 333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit
• 119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington D.C. (a 54% increase over prior years)
So basically, 25% of all gun crime happens in just 4 cities. All 4 of those cities have strict gun laws, so it is not the lack of law that is the root cause.
This basically leaves 3,825 for the entire rest of the nation, or about 75 deaths per state. That is an average because some States have much higher rates than others. For example, California had 1,169 and Alabama had 378
Now, who has the strictest gun laws by far? California, of course, but understand, it is not guns causing this. It is a crime rate spawned by the number of criminal persons residing in those cities and states. So if all cities and states are not created equal, then there must be something other than the tool causing the gun deaths.
Are 5,100 deaths per year horrific? How about in comparison to other deaths? All death is sad and especially so when it is in the commission of a crime but that is the nature of crime. Robbery, death, rape, assault are all done by criminals. It is ludicrous to think that criminals will obey laws. That is why they are called criminals.
But what about other deaths each year?
• 40,000+ die from a drug overdose–THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THAT!
• 36,000 people die per year from the flu, far exceeding the criminal gun deaths.
• 34,000 people die per year in traffic fatalities(exceeding gun deaths even if you include suicide).
Now it gets good:
• 200,000+ people die each year (and growing) from preventable medical errors. You are safer walking in the worst areas of Chicago than you are when you are in a hospital!
• 710,000 people die per year from heart disease. It’s time to stop the double cheeseburgers! So what is the point? If the liberal loons and the anti-gun movement focused their attention on heart disease, even a 10% decrease in cardiac deaths would save twice the number of lives annually of all gun-related deaths (including suicide, law enforcement, etc.). A 10% reduction in medical errors would be 66% of the total number of gun deaths or 4 times the number of criminal homicides ................ Simple, easily preventable 10% reductions! So you have to ask yourself, in the grand scheme of things, why the focus on guns? It's pretty simple:
Taking away guns gives control to governments. The founders of this nation knew that regardless of the form of government, those in power may become corrupt and seek to rule as the British did by trying to disarm the populace of the colonies. It is not difficult to understand that a disarmed populace is a controlled populace.
Thus, the second amendment was proudly and boldly included in the U.S. Constitution. It must be preserved at all costs. So the next time someone tries to tell you that gun control is about saving lives, look at these facts and remember these words from Noah Webster: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed."

 

[LivingTheDream]

To everyone's point, they (Democrats and liberals) do want to take our guns away. They can't confiscate, because we have guns. Most military men wouldn't turn on their countrymen to confiscate and it would cause a civil.

As far never felt a need to have a pistol for self defense....when you are in a situation where you do feel that need and you don't have it, I imagine it will already be too late.

 

[firehuntfish]

No one is coming to confiscate your guns, they are just trying to make it a little harder for someone to kill 58 people in ten min.

Regarding gun confiscation, just what the hell do you think they did in Australia? While there are many who are in favor of increased gun control without confiscation, you're dreaming or just ignorant that that is exactly what so many of our politicians want.

@Aaron Nietfeld, I was going to address your comment quoted above, but @PHOENIX PHIL was quicker to echo the same reply I would have posted... The distrust between the right and left on gun legislation always has and always will be the main roadblock to any meaningful progress on this debate. Too many times in history, the left has made ridiculous demands with complete and total ignorance to the facts and statistics. It's very difficult to trust the opposition to work together on reasonable legislation when they have no clue as to what they are talking about. They have the agenda of chipping away a piece at a time, and they have no problems trading away our freedoms for that agenda.

I would love to believe that removing the rights of law abiding folks to keep and bear arms would prevent a horrific tragedy like what occurred in Las Vegas. It is a romantic notion to aspire to, but not one based in reality. I'm am happy for you that your everyday reality does not include holstering a concealed weapon along with pocketing your car keys, wallet, and cell phone each and every time you head out the front door... Where I live, that is not the case.... Carrying a concealed pistol is a routine part of life for me in South Florida. I would never consider leaving the house without one. I have a brother, and many friends who are police officers, and they will be the first to admit that the police cannot adequately protect the citizens in this day and age.

It is the responsibility of any civil government to provide basic protection to its citizens, but it is unrealistic to think that they can guarantee our safety at all times under all circumstances, especially in today's world. We have to assume some responsibility for our own safety, and the true purpose of the Second Amendment in our Constitution was put there specifically to guarantee that... At least for now....

 

[Royal27]

As far never felt a need to have a pistol for self defense....when you are in a situation where you do feel that need and you don't have it, I imagine it will already be too late.

Exactly!

A gun for self defense is insurance, period. Like all insurance I hope I never need it and that I've "wasted my money." It's funny how people who don't want you to have the "insurance" and call you a sheep for having it are exactly the ones who want to turn you into a sheep, ready for slaughter.

 

[375 Ruger Fan]

Randy Wakeman has a thought provoking article with a lot of similar comments as in @Royal27 post.

http://randywakeman.com/TheLasVegasTragedyisJustAnotherSeptemberinChicago.htm

 

[Royal27]

Do the math: 0.000000925% of the population dies from gun related actions each year.

It was pointed out to me that there is a typo in the math here, so to correct - .009%.

 

[lcq]

Now for the feather ruffling....

-If the accused’s skin was anything remotly darker than rosey pink everyone’s would be screaming for travel/immigration bans

-Yes the right to bear arms is your second amendment right, but if Uncle Sam did decide to turn on you would your aresenal really hold a candle to smart bombs, tanks, and the rest of his stockpile?

-Being from Canada, I had no idea what a bump stock, or the trigger cylinder thing-a-magiggy was and had to look them up. This leads me to a conclusion, they have no purpose for hunting or target shooting, so they are a gimmick to be brought out once a year as a laugh. Let’s say without those, that the casualties would have been cut in half. Is that worth less than your right to own such devices?

-@Ragman pointed out our laws on pistols. I can honestly say that I wouldn’t trade the fact that I live in the country where I have never once, at any time, felt the need to have any sort of a wepon on my person for self defence, for the most lax carry laws out there!

No one is coming to confiscate your guns, they are just trying to make it a little harder for someone to kill 58 people in ten min.

I am a hunter, and I am a gun owner.

I'm also Canadian but your comment reminds me of a Churchill quote. "An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last." The antigun people have been picking us off one group at a time and there are those gun owners among us who attempt to appease the anti's by turning their backs on those who have black rifles, handguns etc. The rational is always the same. I don't need it so you don't need it and they will never take my hunting rifle.

1. Need vs want. in a free society I don't have to justify why I want something as long as it is legal and I'm not hurting others.
2. Never think for a moment that you are safe from the Anti's they want all the guns destroyed.
"FIRST THEY CAME FOR THE SOCIALISTS..."

 

[JimP]

I always like the firearm owners that say that they are for restricting or banning AR type platform rifles and that they have no place in the hunting world and figure that the government will never come for their bolt action or pump action rifles. Little do they know.

It is the same with handguns, and shotguns. But let them get their foot in the door by restricting one type of firearm and then next year they will try it on the next one and all the antis have is time on their side.

It is a lot like marijuana here in Colorado. The proponents of it started to put it on the ballot years ago and it failed quite a few times. But finally it got pushed through to become law. They could do the same thing with firearms if it wasn't for the Second Amendment.

 

[lcq]

I always like the firearm owners that say that they are for restricting or banning AR type platform rifles and that they have no place in the hunting world and figure that the government will never come for their bolt action or pump action rifles. Little do they know.

It is the same with handguns, and shotguns. But let them get their foot in the door by restricting one type of firearm and then next year they will try it on the next one and all the antis have is time on their side.

It is a lot like marijuana here in Colorado. The proponents of it started to put it on the ballot years ago and it failed quite a few times. But finally it got pushed through to become law. They could do the same thing with firearms if it wasn't for the Second Amendment.

you count your lucky stars that you have a 2nd as a buffer. We Canadians have zero protection. I have many friends who lost legally owned firearms to confiscation without compensation.

Never allow registration as it makes it easy for the government to steal your property. Our former PM (the competent adult) had our registry data destroyed (bureaucrats illegally kept copies) so it will be difficult for the government to get your property.

No officer I sold that gun years ago

 

[charleslabounty]

you count your lucky stars that you have a 2nd as a buffer. We Canadians have zero protection. I have many friends who lost legally owned firearms to confiscation without compensation.

Never allow registration as it makes it easy for the government to steal your property. Our former PM (the competent adult) had our registry data destroyed (bureaucrats illegally kept copies) so it will be difficult for the government to get your property.

No officer I sold that gun years ago

Say it again for those that did not hear you!