Las Vegas shooting - a point not yet made

[HappyJoy]

Why do I need to describe with specificity? Seems irrelevant. He did it. I don't think he'd have the same success with a bolt action rifle. Or a handgun. I'm sure you think you could beat his record though nobody else has.

In the time he had a bolt action rifle would have worked to kill more people....he could have used a bigger bullet and actually hit more people with fewer bullets used.........he wouldn't have been firing over the crowd because he wouldn't have been using a bump stock.....

Doubt the guy had the skills.

What skill do you have to have to shoot into a tightly packed crowd of 22,000 people in a surprise attack, from a concealed position with the concert hiding the sound of your shooting?

I don't. Neither do either of you as you've never done it. I go off the end result. 1 guy, multiple ARs, bump stocks and extended clips killed more people in a mass shooting than anyone else in this country. If his desire was to kill people he was more successful than anyone else.

And you say it was the weapon....I say it was the location of the attack.......

It was both, do you really have a point? The combination seemed to have been effective.

He had 22,000 people...tightly packed...and he only killed 58....

He wasn't a good shot he was far away and it was dark, still managed to kill more than anyone else. I'm sure you're totally fine with ARs in the vicinity of 22k people gathered together and most likely feel it's an infringement on your freedom if you are forced to leave your gun behind in the same circumstance.

At Virginia Tech the shooter had to run around and still managed to kill 32 with 2 pistols........

You don't understand the issue.

What don't I understand? The Las Vegas shooter picked a target rich environment, brought the weapons and equipment to top everyone else and he did.

 

[M14 Shooter]

What don't I understand? The Las Vegas shooter picked a target rich environment, brought the weapons and equipment to top everyone else and he did.

And the number of casualties he cause were limited by his choice of weapon.
Go ahead - lie to us some more.

 

[HappyJoy]

He used multiple windows, was this old man supposed to haul around a 30 + lb weapon back and forth while also defending his hotel room door with a weapon he would have been unfamiliar with?
How do you know this? You're not an expert on what weapons can do in the hands of people with various skill levels in a mass shooting.

The only fact we have is that he used ARs, bump stocks and extended clips to become the deadliest mass shooter in U.S. history.

Yes.....he had to fire into a tightly packed crowd of over 22,000 people, at night, firing from surprise and concealment.....vs Virginia tech 32 killed with 2 pistols.

Yeah, I guess we can assume that an AR shooting into a crowd of people is more deadly than some little shit creeping around a college campus with two pistols. That's a great argument to use against an AWB, idiot.

Hey, shit stain, you don't know what you are talking about...the 5 shot, pump action shotgun, killed 20, the guy with the rifle at Gilroy only 3, and parkland, with a rifle 18....you shit pile...... you don't know what you are talking about....32 killed with 2 pistols in Virginia Tech....24 at Luby's Cafe with 2 pistols.....

From what distance was that shotgun used? Do you think it would have been that effective from the 32nd floor? No? Thanks.

You can argue guns used. The AR is responsible for 4 out of the 5 with the highest casulty count.

No, dip shit...... the weapon isn't the issue.....the location is....the shotgun shooter picked the location for his attack......

The entire event is the issue to include the weapons, equipment and location. Why wouldn't it be?

Had the shooter in Vegas used a bolt action rifle, he could have killed more....since none of his shots would have gone over the crowd into the empty field....and the slower shooting would not have drawn the attention of the crowd the way the bump stock fire did, causing them to scatter....

How do you know this? Would he have been effective with a bolt action? Or just spray the crowd? You don't know if he would have been better or not as you're not an expert on the subject of mass shootings.

He used weapons that put him on top, that is a fact.

 

[HappyJoy]

What don't I understand? The Las Vegas shooter picked a target rich environment, brought the weapons and equipment to top everyone else and he did.

And the number of casualties he cause were limited by his choice of weapon.
Go ahead - lie to us some more.

Or gained depending on what you compare that to. If he were firing hand guns from his hotel window I don't think he would have done any better. Shot gun, nope.

He brought the weapons and equipment (bump stocks, thousands of rounds of ammo and extended clips) to top the list. He used weapons that are relatively affordable and he did it. 4 out of the top 5 mass shootings were committed with ARs. Did they all pick the wrong weapon?

 

[M14 Shooter]

He brought the weapons and equipment (bump stocks, thousands of rounds of ammo and extended clips) to top the list. He used weapons that are relatively affordable and he did it. 4 out of the top 5 mass shootings were committed with ARs

And the number of casualties he cause were limited by his choice of weapon.
Go ahead - lie to us some more.

 

[M14 Shooter]

He used weapons that put him on top, that is a fact.

And the number of casualties he cause were limited by his choice of weapon.
Go ahead - lie to us some more.

 

[HappyJoy]

He brought the weapons and equipment (bump stocks, thousands of rounds of ammo and extended clips) to top the list. He used weapons that are relatively affordable and he did it. 4 out of the top 5 mass shootings were committed with ARs

And the number of casualties he cause were limited by his choice of weapon.
Go ahead - lie to us some more.

You don't know this. He appears to use what he was comfortable with and it was enough. I'm not arguing there aren't more effective weapons. I'm saying your OP is not a valid argument against an AWB.

Like I said, because grenades exist doesn't mean cherry bombs should be legal.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You don't know this.

Fact:
He could have easily bought a water-cooled M1917 machine gun w/ a tripod and fired 4-5 thousand rounds of .30-06 into that crowd in that same 10 minutes.
Thus:
The number of casualties he created was limited by his choice of weapon.

I'm saying your OP is not a valid argument against an AWB.

Cite the post where I discuss any AWB in any way shape of form
Go ahead. I dare you.


C'mon. Lie to us some more.

 

[HappyJoy]

You don't know this.

Fact:
He could have easily bought a water-cooled M1917 machine gun w/ a tripod and fired 4-5 thousand rounds of .30-06 into that crowd in that same 10 minutes.
Thus:
The number of casualties he created was limited by his choice of weapon.

I'm not arguing against your 'fact'. I'm saying the AR was more than he needed and did not limit him. Or I suppose it limited him like going 0-60 in a Mustang GT would be slower than in a Lambo. The Mustang is still fast and more familiar.

I'm saying your OP is not a valid argument against an AWB.

Cite the post where I discuss any AWB in any way shape of form
Go ahead. I dare you.


C'mon. Lie to us some more.

There is no other point to your post.

 

[Paulie]

OK, but I'm not sure of your point.

I do not think he could have shoot from one window to another because of his age and also his state of health.

I don't really think that would have been that large of a factor.

I believe so, There is the distance of the two windows and the number of shots for someone of this age and also not in perfect health.

You’ve asked questions that indicate you don’t even understand the AR15 and then you go on to pontificate and opine on how he would’ve been able to handle that weapon. Why don’t you just go research firearms and learn about them yourself? It’s ridiculous that you’re giving opinions on something you’ve clearly indicated you don’t even understand.

I did not know that I had to ask your permission to ask a question? and you are wrong, I said that Paddock had health problems and that he would have had trouble getting from one window to another (if he did drink and took medication). as I said in one of my posts that you could read, he drank and was on medication and no Admiral Rockwell Tory, I was not there to see if he had really taken his medicine

You’re saying you think a man who carried an arsenal of weapons undetected up to a hotel room had “trouble moving from one window to another”? Is that seriously what you’re trying to say? You don’t think that sounds fucking ridiculous?

 

[HappyJoy]

I do not think he could have shoot from one window to another because of his age and also his state of health.

I don't really think that would have been that large of a factor.

I believe so, There is the distance of the two windows and the number of shots for someone of this age and also not in perfect health.

You’ve asked questions that indicate you don’t even understand the AR15 and then you go on to pontificate and opine on how he would’ve been able to handle that weapon. Why don’t you just go research firearms and learn about them yourself? It’s ridiculous that you’re giving opinions on something you’ve clearly indicated you don’t even understand.

I did not know that I had to ask your permission to ask a question? and you are wrong, I said that Paddock had health problems and that he would have had trouble getting from one window to another (if he did drink and took medication). as I said in one of my posts that you could read, he drank and was on medication and no Admiral Rockwell Tory, I was not there to see if he had really taken his medicine

You’re saying you think a man who carried an arsenal of weapons undetected up to a hotel room had “trouble moving from one window to another”? Is that seriously what you’re trying to say? You don’t think that sounds fucking ridiculous?

Many of them need idiotic conspiracies to remain true to their religion.... I mean ideology.

 

[Paulie]

He used multiple ARs, bump stocks and extended clips, what else do you want to know? Are you into this idiotic conspiracy crap too?

And yet, you STILLcannot, with specificity, demonstrate how the fact an AR was used to create the most casualties in any mass shooting address, let along negate, the fact the number of casualties he created was limited by his choice of weapon.

Why do I need to describe with specificity? Seems irrelevant. He did it. I don't think he'd have the same success with a bolt action rifle. Or a handgun. I'm sure you think you could beat his record though nobody else has.

In the time he had a bolt action rifle would have worked to kill more people....he could have used a bigger bullet and actually hit more people with fewer bullets used.........he wouldn't have been firing over the crowd because he wouldn't have been using a bump stock.....

Doubt the guy had the skills.

What skill do you have to have to shoot into a tightly packed crowd of 22,000 people in a surprise attack, from a concealed position with the concert hiding the sound of your shooting?

Not just that, but an elevated position to boot. He could’ve just tossed 1 grenade into the crowd and killed more people than he did with over 1000 rounds fired.

 

[Paulie]

I don't really think that would have been that large of a factor.

I believe so, There is the distance of the two windows and the number of shots for someone of this age and also not in perfect health.

You’ve asked questions that indicate you don’t even understand the AR15 and then you go on to pontificate and opine on how he would’ve been able to handle that weapon. Why don’t you just go research firearms and learn about them yourself? It’s ridiculous that you’re giving opinions on something you’ve clearly indicated you don’t even understand.

I did not know that I had to ask your permission to ask a question? and you are wrong, I said that Paddock had health problems and that he would have had trouble getting from one window to another (if he did drink and took medication). as I said in one of my posts that you could read, he drank and was on medication and no Admiral Rockwell Tory, I was not there to see if he had really taken his medicine

You’re saying you think a man who carried an arsenal of weapons undetected up to a hotel room had “trouble moving from one window to another”? Is that seriously what you’re trying to say? You don’t think that sounds fucking ridiculous?

Many of them need idiotic conspiracies to remain true to their religion.... I mean ideology.

Guns and economics, 2 subjects that the left seems to know almost nothing about beyond what they’ve heard about on the news and yet they still have the answers to all of it.

 

[HappyJoy]

I believe so, There is the distance of the two windows and the number of shots for someone of this age and also not in perfect health.

You’ve asked questions that indicate you don’t even understand the AR15 and then you go on to pontificate and opine on how he would’ve been able to handle that weapon. Why don’t you just go research firearms and learn about them yourself? It’s ridiculous that you’re giving opinions on something you’ve clearly indicated you don’t even understand.

I did not know that I had to ask your permission to ask a question? and you are wrong, I said that Paddock had health problems and that he would have had trouble getting from one window to another (if he did drink and took medication). as I said in one of my posts that you could read, he drank and was on medication and no Admiral Rockwell Tory, I was not there to see if he had really taken his medicine

You’re saying you think a man who carried an arsenal of weapons undetected up to a hotel room had “trouble moving from one window to another”? Is that seriously what you’re trying to say? You don’t think that sounds fucking ridiculous?

Many of them need idiotic conspiracies to remain true to their religion.... I mean ideology.

Guns and economics, 2 subjects that the left seems to know almost nothing about beyond what they’ve heard about on the news and yet they still have the answers to all of it.

I'm on the left. What have I said in this thread that you disagree with?

 

[M14 Shooter]

I'm not arguing against your 'fact'

So you AGREE:
The number of casualties he created was limited by his choice of weapon
Good.

There is no other point to your post.

What's that? You CAN'T cite the post where I discuss any AWB in any way shape of form?
Do you always argue straw-men, or is today somehow special?

 

[Dalia]

I do not think he could have shoot from one window to another because of his age and also his state of health.

I don't really think that would have been that large of a factor.

I believe so, There is the distance of the two windows and the number of shots for someone of this age and also not in perfect health.

You’ve asked questions that indicate you don’t even understand the AR15 and then you go on to pontificate and opine on how he would’ve been able to handle that weapon. Why don’t you just go research firearms and learn about them yourself? It’s ridiculous that you’re giving opinions on something you’ve clearly indicated you don’t even understand.

I did not know that I had to ask your permission to ask a question? and you are wrong, I said that Paddock had health problems and that he would have had trouble getting from one window to another (if he did drink and took medication). as I said in one of my posts that you could read, he drank and was on medication and no Admiral Rockwell Tory, I was not there to see if he had really taken his medicine

You’re saying you think a man who carried an arsenal of weapons undetected up to a hotel room had “trouble moving from one window to another”? Is that seriously what you’re trying to say? You don’t think that sounds fucking ridiculous?

That's what I say, and I'm not the only one to think that it was not be Paddock who would have been the shooter, I already have long discuss about the subject when it happens but my thread was closer for some Reason.
Las Vegas shooting: Reports of shooter at Mandalay Bay Casino

 

[HappyJoy]

I'm not arguing against your 'fact'

So you AGREE:
The number of casualties he created was limited by his choice of weapon
Good.

No, I neither agree or disagree, it's irrelevant and I have already stated.

There is no other point to your post.

What's that? You CAN'T cite the post where I discuss any AWB in any way shape of form?
Do you always argue straw-men, or is today somehow special?

There are weapons that shoot more bullets per second, they have advantages and disadvantages like anything else in life. Ok, so?

 

[Paulie]

You’ve asked questions that indicate you don’t even understand the AR15 and then you go on to pontificate and opine on how he would’ve been able to handle that weapon. Why don’t you just go research firearms and learn about them yourself? It’s ridiculous that you’re giving opinions on something you’ve clearly indicated you don’t even understand.

I did not know that I had to ask your permission to ask a question? and you are wrong, I said that Paddock had health problems and that he would have had trouble getting from one window to another (if he did drink and took medication). as I said in one of my posts that you could read, he drank and was on medication and no Admiral Rockwell Tory, I was not there to see if he had really taken his medicine

You’re saying you think a man who carried an arsenal of weapons undetected up to a hotel room had “trouble moving from one window to another”? Is that seriously what you’re trying to say? You don’t think that sounds fucking ridiculous?

Many of them need idiotic conspiracies to remain true to their religion.... I mean ideology.

Guns and economics, 2 subjects that the left seems to know almost nothing about beyond what they’ve heard about on the news and yet they still have the answers to all of it.

I'm on the left. What have I said in this thread that you disagree with?

Everything. I read your posts and I see nothing that indicates you understand firearms.

 

[HappyJoy]

I did not know that I had to ask your permission to ask a question? and you are wrong, I said that Paddock had health problems and that he would have had trouble getting from one window to another (if he did drink and took medication). as I said in one of my posts that you could read, he drank and was on medication and no Admiral Rockwell Tory, I was not there to see if he had really taken his medicine

You’re saying you think a man who carried an arsenal of weapons undetected up to a hotel room had “trouble moving from one window to another”? Is that seriously what you’re trying to say? You don’t think that sounds fucking ridiculous?

Many of them need idiotic conspiracies to remain true to their religion.... I mean ideology.

Guns and economics, 2 subjects that the left seems to know almost nothing about beyond what they’ve heard about on the news and yet they still have the answers to all of it.

I'm on the left. What have I said in this thread that you disagree with?

Everything. I read your posts and I see nothing that indicates you understand firearms.

What did I miss? Name one or two things.

 

[M14 Shooter]

So you AGREE:
The number of casualties he created was limited by his choice of weapon
Good.

No, I neither agree or disagree,

Are you or are you not aware of the fact he had within his means to choose weapons that could have significantly increased his casualty count?

It's irrelevant and I have already stated.

You cannot demonstrate how anything I have said is irrelevant to my point.