Mass Shooting in Las Vegas, Nevada

[Bromley boy]

Have we had the statement "its not the gun that kills people its the person that pulls the trigger" yet. Seems to always be trotted out by the gun lobby after these events.

Or perhaps they will blame it on violent video games or Marilyn Manson's music.

I'm at a loose end tonight and have been watching Bowling for Columbine on Netflix.

Absolutely nothing has changed since 2002.

 

[Cowley]

Have we had the statement "its not the gun that kills people its the person that pulls the trigger" yet. Seems to be always be trotted out by the gun lobby after these events.

Very true. Although as Eddie Izzard said, guns do play some part. You wouldn't get very far just shouting Bang, Bang, Rat-tat-tat, Bang! At someone.

 

[Bromley boy]

Very true. Although as Eddie Izzard said, guns do play some part. You wouldn't get very far just shouting Bang, Bang, Rat-tat-tat, Bang! At someone.

True, but imagine I'm mentally unstable/violently angry and decide on the spur of the moment to commit a mass killing. I live in one of two possible countries:

Country A which allows almost unfettered access to military grade assault weapons (I might already own one if I like guns);

Country B which has stringent gun controls with very few firearms per capita where I almost certainly won't own a gun, or know anyone with access to one.

Which country would likely end up with the highest body count?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Or perhaps they will blame it on violent video games or Marilyn Manson's music.

I'm at a loose end tonight and have been watching Bowling for Columbine on Netflix.

Absolutely nothing has changed since 2002.

Funnily enough, I'd forgotten that Marilyn Manson existed until I read yesterday that he had needed hospital treatment after being injured on stage. It's a long time since he's been blamed for anything!

 

[RichmondCommu]

American seems completely unwilling to help itself by allowing its population to own such powerful weapons. Americans will simply never learn and in a few months time the whole sorry episode will be forgotten.

Give it another year or two and the same awful scenes will be played out on our television screens once more.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

American seems completely unwilling to help itself by allowing its population to own such powerful weapons. Americans will simply never learn and in a few months time the whole sorry episode will be forgotten.

Give it another year or two and the same awful scenes will be played out on our television screens once more.

Quite. The second amendment was written in the days of muskets and single-fire rifles... and those who say it can't be changed, Jim Jefferies pointed out a while ago that it obviously can be- the clue is in the name "amendment". That unfortunately means that all the other amendments could be revoked too.

 

[jon0844]

The latest story on the Onion sums things up, just as the same story has many times before.

http://www.theonion.com/search?q=no+way+to+prevent+this+regularly+happens

Very well done. I expect over time this search will yield even more results. Sadly.

 

[Busaholic]

Not that it makes any difference to the end result, but it's now being reported that the gunman took his own life - I guess that might have saved the addition of a few to the death tally.
Somebody asked earlier on the thread whether anyone was now calling for even greater arming of (sections of) the American populace, and, indeed, I heard the dog whistle resounding on the 'World at One' (our time, considerably in excess of middle of the night Vegas) when a 'spokesman' for the terminally brainless was advocating the armament of every U.S. citizen: don't leave home to attend a Country and Western concert without your automatic machine gun was the message.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Not that it makes any difference to the end result, but it's now being reported that the gunman took his own life - I guess that might have saved the addition of a few to the death tally.
Somebody asked earlier on the thread whether anyone was now calling for even greater arming of (sections of) the American populace, and, indeed, I heard the dog whistle resounding on the 'World at One' (our time, considerably in excess of middle of the night Vegas) when a 'spokesman' for the terminally brainless was advocating the armament of every U.S. citizen: don't leave home to attend a Country and Western concert without your automatic machine gun was the message.

I've just seen an interview with the shooter's brother who was doorstepped outside his home by a mass of reporters. The poor guy looked absolutely astounded by what's happened and apparently had no idea that his brother might have been in crisis and about to act out in such a violent way. The interview was difficult to watch as this man was trying to process the news in front of all these cameras. Makes me glad I don't live over there, for sure.

 

[radamfi]

Unlike other mass American shootings, the weapon used here appears to be something that is heavily restricted and cannot be obtained easily in the same way as a normal gun, so gun laws aren't relevant in this particular case.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Listening to Radio 5 Live on the train home tonight they were interviewing a man who had been watching the gig when the gunman opened fire. Despite what that poor soul had witnessed even he thought that the gun laws should stay as they are which made me gasp in amazement. His justification was that people will always find a way to kill each other but someone armed with a knife or indeed a less powerful gun could not kill almost 60 people without being overpowered.

 

[Cowley]

Unlike other mass American shootings, the weapon used here appears to be something that is heavily restricted and cannot be obtained easily in the same way as a normal gun, so gun laws aren't relevant in this particular case.

Pretty sure that's not so Radamfi, Nevada has some of the most relaxed gun laws in the USA and I believe that you are quite within your rights to own a weapon like this and as much ammunition as you want.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Unlike other mass American shootings, the weapon used here appears to be something that is heavily restricted and cannot be obtained easily in the same way as a normal gun, so gun laws aren't relevant in this particular case.

Heavily restricted perhaps but he still managed to get hold of one, not to mention large amounts of ammunition.

 

[jon0844]

Listening to Radio 5 Live on the train home tonight they were interviewing a man who had been watching the gig when the gunman opened fire. Despite what that poor soul had witnessed even he thought that the gun laws should stay as they are which made me gasp in amazement. His justification was that people will always find a way to kill each other but someone armed with a knife or indeed a less powerful gun could not kill almost 60 people without being overpowered.

A knife wouldn't have been as effective from a hotel window, and on the ground he'd have been overpowered quickly.

A normal gun wouldn't have been as quick, nor had some 500 odd injuries in addition to the deaths.

Control on the type of weapons would be a start.

 

[Busaholic]

According to BBC tv news, Paddock's father was an armed robber who'd been on the FBI's 'most wanted' list so the picture that's so far been painted of the man may be somewhat incomplete: he also took himself for days at a time to gamble in the Las Vegas casinos, so probably safe to assume he hadn't just won the jackpot.

 

[Busaholic]

Unlike other mass American shootings, the weapon used here appears to be something that is heavily restricted and cannot be obtained easily in the same way as a normal gun, so gun laws aren't relevant in this particular case.

1994 Federal ban on assault weapons was allowed to wither in 2004, meaning in a state such as Nevada Paddock could legally obtain and hold such a weapon so long as he had a permit.

 

[DarloRich]

Unlike other mass American shootings, the weapon used here appears to be something that is heavily restricted and cannot be obtained easily in the same way as a normal gun, so gun laws aren't relevant in this particular case.

it is not heavily restricted in the slightest. Nevada has some of the most lax gun controls in america

1994 Federal ban on assault weapons was allowed to wither in 2004, meaning in a state such as Nevada Paddock could legally obtain and hold such a weapon so long as he had a permit.

In Nevada you need not even register as a gun owner.

 

[RichmondCommu]

A knife wouldn't have been as effective from a hotel window, and on the ground he'd have been overpowered quickly.

A normal gun wouldn't have been as quick, nor had some 500 odd injuries in addition to the deaths.

Control on the type of weapons would be a start.

Absolutely but even someone caught up in all the madness was suggesting that it was pointless trying to change anything. The US is simply not capable of helping itself.

 

[Confused147]

A Muslim kills... he must be terrorist

A Black guy kills... he must be a thug

A White guy kills... he has mental illness and lack of mummy's attention


And if your waiting for Trump to call this man a terrorist.....don't hold your breath. He's got the wrong skin color to be called anything more than mentally disturbed.

 

[Temple Meads]

A Muslim kills... he must be terrorist

A Black guy kills... he must be a thug

A White guy kills... he has mental illness and lack of mummy's attention


And if your waiting for Trump to call this man a terrorist.....don't hold your breath. He's got the wrong skin color to be called anything more than mentally disturbed.

This is the definition of terrorism:

The unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.

So if Trump was to call this man a terrorist he would be wrong (in the absence of public evidence of any political motivations).

 

[AlterEgo]

A Muslim kills... he must be terrorist

A Black guy kills... he must be a thug

A White guy kills... he has mental illness and lack of mummy's attention


And if your waiting for Trump to call this man a terrorist.....don't hold your breath. He's got the wrong skin color to be called anything more than mentally disturbed.

Do you know something we don’t then?

 

[najaB]

This is the definition of terrorism.

That is one definition, however the FBI's definition is:

The unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives

So if he had any grudge with society then it meets the definition.

 

[jon0844]

Trump will likely be holding off saying anything until he's absolutely sure that he has no connection with the far right, or voted for Trump, or anything that could be used against him.

The 'mentally ill' line will work just fine if there's ANY link.

Now if he was found to be a Democrat voter, then I have no doubt he'll change tact.

 

[najaB]

Now if he was found to be a Democrat voter, then I have no doubt he'll change tact.

I'd be surprised if a Democrat had such a large personal arsenal - the two don't often go together.

 

[radamfi]

it is not heavily restricted in the slightest.

This interview says otherwise:

http://talkradio.co.uk/news/las-vegas-gunman-probably-prepared-his-attack-advance-17100219216

 

[najaB]

This interview says otherwise.

According to Wikipedia, no permit is required for NFA weapons - the category which includes machine guns.

 

[Darandio]

This interview says otherwise:

http://talkradio.co.uk/news/las-vegas-gunman-probably-prepared-his-attack-advance-17100219216

Do we mean the interview itself, or what is quoted in the text?

Because either way, the weapon used is not heavily restricted in the state of Nevada.

 

[EM2]

I've been doing some reading up this morning on the Second Amendment, and various Supreme Court rulings.
The one that jumps out at me is District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) which clearly states:

...the Second Amendment should not be understood as conferring a “right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.” The Court provided examples of laws it considered “presumptively lawful,” including those which:
•Prohibit firearm possession by felons and the mentally ill;
•Forbid firearm possession in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings; and
•Impose conditions on the commercial sale of firearms.

The Court noted that this list is not exhaustive, and concluded that the Second Amendment is also consistent with laws banning “dangerous and unusual weapons” not in common use at the time, such as M-16 rifles and other firearms that are most useful in military service. In addition, the Court declared that its analysis should not be read to suggest “the invalidity of laws regulating the storage of firearms to prevent accidents.”

So if the Supreme Court has ruled it to be so, what would Congress and the Senate need to do to make those conditions much more stringent?

 

[radamfi]

Do we mean the interview itself, or what is quoted in the text?

Because either way, the weapon used is not heavily restricted in the state of Nevada.

The legality of the weapon is discussed in the audio. It is not in the text.

 

[Tim R-T-C]

The big counter argument that American gun lovers use against restrictions is that it would leave law abiding citizens at the mercy of criminal gunmen with no ability to fire back and defend themselves. People need guns to defend themselves against criminals with guns.

Yet in a state with the lowest gun restrictions in the USA, no-one was able to stop this man.