Vegas shooting

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

The fact that you can pay a fee to not take off your shoes really just shows that nobody really needs to. It's all a show to make people feel safe.

You pay the fee for the background check.

That "background check" is a total joke (much like gun checks, apparently).

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

Details are starting to trickle out about this guy, and how meticulously he prepared and pulled this off. It doesn't point to any mental illness, other than perhaps extreme narcissism. But there's still no word on motive. No manifesto. No social media postings. Not even a note. Bizarre. What if the guy just woke up one day, looked at his booze soaked, gambling addicted, depressing life and thought "eff it, I bet I could do this"?

[kso_FAN]

Details are starting to trickle out about this guy, and how meticulously he prepared and pulled this off. It doesn't point to any mental illness, other than perhaps extreme narcissism. But there's still no word on motive. No manifesto. No social media postings. Not even a note. Bizarre. What if the guy just woke up one day, looked at his booze soaked, gambling addicted, depressing life and thought "eff it, I bet I could do this"?

Well, that combined with just happening to have an arsenal of weapons modified to fire automatically is a pretty bad combo then.

[Gooch]

I need an AR 15 to defend my house from people who may want to steal my iPad and stuff

Like 30 people.

The .223/5.56 ammo is terrible for home defense. At close range the round is too small and traveling at such velocity it just zips right through people not inflicting much damage. It was actually designed for war in eastern Europe where shooting would be done at range. 100m plus when the bullet impacts its target it tumbles causing much more damage. Soldiers in Vietnam hated the round because it would go right through guys and they would keep running. They much preferred their old M1 that used a .30 caliber round.

[Rage Against the McKee]

The fact that you can pay a fee to not take off your shoes really just shows that nobody really needs to. It's all a show to make people feel safe.

You pay the fee for the background check.

If a guy who didn't have a criminal record wanted to blow up a plane with a shoe bomb, he'd be paying to not have to take his shoes off.

[Dugout DickStone]

The fact that you can pay a fee to not take off your shoes really just shows that nobody really needs to. It's all a show to make people feel safe.

You pay the fee for the background check.

If a guy who didn't have a criminal record wanted to blow up a plane with a shoe bomb, he'd be paying to not have to take his shoes off.

tons of those

[nicname]

Paddock's brother interviewed a second time. Bizarre interview.

https://www.cbsnews.com/videos/the-brother-of-las-vegas-gunman-stephen-paddock-speaks-for-a-second-time/

[LickNeckey]

Would you say that the AR-15 is designed "purely to kill people"? Any moreso than other guns?

Just take the L. I'm pretty sure when they were designing the AR15 to market and sell to soldiers in Vietnam they weren't looking into Coyote shooting applications.

Lol ok bub. You still haven't answered why the AR-15 is designed "purely to kill people" and more than any other gun. You keep pointing to... marketing or something?

I would suggest that since Eugene Stoner developed it specifically as an adaptation of the AR-10 in a .223 caliber at the request of the US military specifically to meet minimum depth of penetration requirements put forth by the Army would be the explanation you are looking for here.

So the that makes the AR-15 purely designed for killing people? And that's different than many other guns? I hate to keep beating a dead horse here, but this is such a simple point and you guys are so stubbornly refusing to acknowledge that was a dumb thing to say.

Early Shotguns were often called "fowling pieces" and designed specifically for aristocracy to shoot birds with

which to me would indicate a purpose other than the death of humans.

that would be a difference

[420seriouscat69]

Paddock's brother interviewed a second time. Bizarre interview.

https://www.cbsnews.com/videos/the-brother-of-las-vegas-gunman-stephen-paddock-speaks-for-a-second-time/

He knew. I wanna play poker with that guy.

[XocolateThundarr]

Paddock's brother interviewed a second time. Bizarre interview.

https://www.cbsnews.com/videos/the-brother-of-las-vegas-gunman-stephen-paddock-speaks-for-a-second-time/

Pretty sure that whole family is batshit crazy.

[Trim]

Paddock's brother interviewed a second time. Bizarre interview.

https://www.cbsnews.com/videos/the-brother-of-las-vegas-gunman-stephen-paddock-speaks-for-a-second-time/

Pretty sure that whole family is batshit crazy.

Take Eric Paddock's guns away immediately.

[Yard Dog]

What is a militia weapon?

I may be getting this wrong but I made sure to read ahead to make sure it wasn't addressed already.

The idea here (in my understanding) is that the citizenry has the ability to gather as a militia to a) defend themselves against a foreign enemy if your national military is compromised or b) against our national military if the federal government is compromised.

There is a fear among conservative minded people of a future federally controlled state where guns are made illegal thus allowing a totalitarian take over without resistance. I know several people who view gun rights as our nations ability to keep the federal government from considering blatant overreach.

I don't personally believe that some of the measures we have discussed here would lead to making gun ownership illegal, but as with many single issue people they see a "slippery slope" where letting up an inch will eventually mean giving up guns all together. 

[star seed 7]

People that believe that shouldn't be allowed to have guns

[kso_FAN]

What is a militia weapon?

I may be getting this wrong but I made sure to read ahead to make sure it wasn't addressed already.

The idea here (in my understanding) is that the citizenry has the ability to gather as a militia to a) defend themselves against a foreign enemy if your national military is compromised or b) against our national military if the federal government is compromised.

There is a fear among conservative minded people of a future federally controlled state where guns are made illegal thus allowing a totalitarian take over without resistance. I know several people who view gun rights as our nations ability to keep the federal government from considering blatant overreach.

I don't personally believe that some of the measures we have discussed here would lead to making gun ownership illegal, but as with many single issue people they see a "slippery slope" where letting up an inch will eventually mean giving up guns all together. 

Well said. The last sentence is really the main basis for where the NRA takes their stance.

[Dugout DickStone]

So militia weapons, like AR are kept to kill people.  Ty

[LickNeckey]

What is a militia weapon?

I may be getting this wrong but I made sure to read ahead to make sure it wasn't addressed already.

The idea here (in my understanding) is that the citizenry has the ability to gather as a militia to a) defend themselves against a foreign enemy if your national military is compromised or b) against our national military if the federal government is compromised.

There is a fear among conservative minded people of a future federally controlled state where guns are made illegal thus allowing a totalitarian take over without resistance. I know several people who view gun rights as our nations ability to keep the federal government from considering blatant overreach.

I don't personally believe that some of the measures we have discussed here would lead to making gun ownership illegal, but as with many single issue people they see a "slippery slope" where letting up an inch will eventually mean giving up guns all together.

what is logically confounding is that the same people that argue the 2nd amendment is necessary to protect against a tyrannical gov't also support arming a 2 billion dollar a day military that they could never protect themselves from

[nicname]

What is a militia weapon?

I may be getting this wrong but I made sure to read ahead to make sure it wasn't addressed already.

The idea here (in my understanding) is that the citizenry has the ability to gather as a militia to a) defend themselves against a foreign enemy if your national military is compromised or b) against our national military if the federal government is compromised.

There is a fear among conservative minded people of a future federally controlled state where guns are made illegal thus allowing a totalitarian take over without resistance. I know several people who view gun rights as our nations ability to keep the federal government from considering blatant overreach.

I don't personally believe that some of the measures we have discussed here would lead to making gun ownership illegal, but as with many single issue people they see a "slippery slope" where letting up an inch will eventually mean giving up guns all together.

what is logically confounding is that the same people that argue the 2nd amendment is necessary to protect against a tyrannical gov't also support arming a 2 billion dollar a day military that they could never protect themselves from

yep

[Dugout DickStone]

We have bought invisible jets for Christ sakes

[kso_FAN]

I'm assuming none of you fellas have seen the original Red Dawn...

[Yard Dog]

What is a militia weapon?

I may be getting this wrong but I made sure to read ahead to make sure it wasn't addressed already.

The idea here (in my understanding) is that the citizenry has the ability to gather as a militia to a) defend themselves against a foreign enemy if your national military is compromised or b) against our national military if the federal government is compromised.

There is a fear among conservative minded people of a future federally controlled state where guns are made illegal thus allowing a totalitarian take over without resistance. I know several people who view gun rights as our nations ability to keep the federal government from considering blatant overreach.

I don't personally believe that some of the measures we have discussed here would lead to making gun ownership illegal, but as with many single issue people they see a "slippery slope" where letting up an inch will eventually mean giving up guns all together.

what is logically confounding is that the same people that argue the 2nd amendment is necessary to protect against a tyrannical gov't also support arming a 2 billion dollar a day military that they could never protect themselves from

The more likely thing is that the people who truly want to defend against tyranny at home are not the same people who want to protect us from harm abroad with a massive military. A constitutionalist libertarian is generally against foreign war/foreign interference all together (see Ron and Rand Paul).

I believe that more than one large group of individuals use this as an argument because it does have basis in constitutional law, but don't actually believe it. They truly want to have guns for the kicks (it looks cool and feels cool to own/shoot badass weaponry) and often to defend against other groups that are different from them (by race, religious views, and/or political views).

[Dugout DickStone]

I'm assuming none of you fellas have seen the original Red Dawn...

Like a million times

And all of the Wolverines were killed

[kso_FAN]

I'm assuming none of you fellas have seen the original Red Dawn...

Like a million times

And all of the Wolverines were killed

I remember so sad when C Thomas Howell's character died. He was my favorite.

And the son of the mayor that was a traitor made me really mad.

[XocolateThundarr]

Paddock's brother interviewed a second time. Bizarre interview.

https://www.cbsnews.com/videos/the-brother-of-las-vegas-gunman-stephen-paddock-speaks-for-a-second-time/

Pretty sure that whole family is batshit crazy.

Take Eric Paddock's guns away immediately.

He definitely doesn't appear to be the most stable at this time.....

[Katpappy]

Just a thought, but why don't we outlaw cars, trucks, or anything that can run over people.  I mean, crap people run over people all the time; where's the outrage. 

[Katpappy]

Paddock's brother interviewed a second time. Bizarre interview.

https://www.cbsnews.com/videos/the-brother-of-las-vegas-gunman-stephen-paddock-speaks-for-a-second-time/

Pretty sure that whole family is batshit crazy.

Take Eric Paddock's guns away immediately.

He definitely doesn't appear to be the most stable at this time.....

Would you?