Las Vegas shooting - a point not yet made

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

YOU, not someone else, was talking to an FBI agent? Were you a suspect? If what you say is true, that FBI agent is just as guilty as Comey was for talking about an active investigation. I think you are making this shit up!

Why would a bump stock be tiring? I fire AK-47s on full auto and never get tired. Your story is pure fantasy created to shore up your weak argument.

The answer from Westwall is enough to convince anyone that Paddock was tired, but if you insist that it was not, it's your choice.

So in other words, you are just gullible and accept everything to be the Gospel truth with no evidence?

You know I talked to the Sheriff who told me that Paddock liked to exercise horses. Do you believe that?

You do know that a paddock is a small enclosure where you exercise horses, right?

I believe Westwal when he says he's talk to an agent, are you calling him a liar?

Unless he can document it, yes, I would call him a liar because that claim makes zero sense. You on the other hand, are simply gullible.

The head of the DHS Fusion Center is a good friend of mine, I talked to the FBI agent when he was there presenting what they had.

My friend invited me to listen in.

So your FBI agent committed a crime. Thanks for admitting that he spoke to you with no authorization about an investigation, the same thing the FBI IG nailed Comey with.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

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

I am almost 59 years old and do simulated combat against special operations troops from 3 services. One of my cohorts is over 60 and recently had a heart attack. I carry an AK-47 loaded with blanks around our urban combat range.

You obviously have no clue how easy to operate an AR-15 is. My grandsons who are 10 and 13 have no problem with it. My 62 year-old wife has a hip replacement and still has no problem with it.

What you are doing is making a huge assumption based on facts not in evidence.

From my old thread :westwall : Bump stocks are physically very tiring. I was talking to one of the fbi agents involved in the investigation and they agree that he had to stop and take a break because he was so fatigued.
And do you think there was a lot of mass shooting from a 60 year old man?

YOU, not someone else, was talking to an FBI agent? Were you a suspect? If what you say is true, that FBI agent is just as guilty as Comey was for talking about an active investigation. I think you are making this shit up!

Why would a bump stock be tiring? I fire AK-47s on full auto and never get tired. Your story is pure fantasy created to shore up your weak argument.

Bump stocks are different. I own machineguns and can shoot them for days, but a bump stock beats the shit out of you.

It's how they are designed.

Sorry, not buying it! I think you are full of shit!

 

[HappyJoy]

For starters you haven't proven otherwise and I already told you, this guy wasn't a marksman. He was able to use a few ARs, bump stock and extended clips to his advantage and just spray everyone, I don't think he would know how to do anything else. It was very successful, more so than any other mass shooting.


How so? You don't seem to be able to provide any argument except if he used something other than an AR...but you don't go further than that.

If he hadn't used the bump stock, more people would be dead.

Based on your opinion? Not good enough. He used a bump stock, several ARs and extended clips to become the most successful mass shooter in our country's history without having any extensive training.

And location selection had the biggest effect on the death rate......at Virginia Tech the shooter used 2 pistols and killed 32.... the Vegas shooter firing into a crowd of over 22,000 only killed 58........and Luby's cafe the shooter killed 24 with 2 pistols......

Yes and he couldn't have accomplished his task without randomly spraying a crowd, sure the venue made a difference, combined with equipment he used.

Target location and other factors create more deaths....not weapon type....

The Russian Polytechnic shooter used a 5 shot, tube fed, pump action shotgun and killed 20 injuring 40.....

It's odd because that weapon type more often than not is used in many if not most of our deadliest mass shootings.

Wrong...hand guns are the most popular gun for mass shooters, not rifles.

Deadliest mass shootings.

Was in Paris, where more anti gun laws than even you dreamed of are already in effect.

Mass shootings are relatively rare in France. The AR has been used in 4 out of 5 most deadliest mass shootings in the U.S. where gun laws are lax compared to other countries. But this isn't even something I'm arguing.

If you want more gun laws then by all means please start more topics like in this thread.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Add 2.5 minutes elevation.

He could not see that far. You seem unfamiliar with how he sprayed and prayed to hit people. He could no more see his targets than Dolly Parton can see her shoes!

Um...
You think you can't see man-sized targets at 400yds, and hit them with iron sights?
Yes, he sprayed and prayed, but that doesn't mean he couldn't see what he was shooting at.

You are shooting those man-sized targets in the dark while they are moving?

The area was lit by the surrounding ambient light, and he was elevated.
There's no reason to think he could not see what he was shooting at.

The stench of bullshit in your posts is overpowering!

I'm sorry you aren't familiar with firearms at the basic level.

Concerts are dark for a reason dumbass!

When you watch the videos taken from the point of view of the people at the concert, you'll see there is plenty of light.
Dumbass.

 

[M14 Shooter]

But limited his casualty count by his choice of weapon.

Bullshit. Is that what you were going for? That makes no sense.

Sure it does.
He could have easily chose weaponry that would have greatly increased the number of casualties.
Thus, the damage he caused was limited by the weapons he chose.

How would ge get access to that type of weaponry? Care to explain?

M1917A1 for sale. 2, actually.
M1919s and M60s, too.
Belt Guns | DealerNFA

That's why your argument is bullshit. You made a claim and failed to provide any support for your asinine logic.

Do I -really- need to explain the capacity of such a weapon to increase the number of casualties in this incident?

Do I really need to tell you that you must have a license to own a machine gun such as that ancient POS?

I'm sorry -- you sidestepped the question. I'll ask again:
Do I -really- need to explain the capacity of such a weapon to increase the number of casualties in this incident?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Editing my posts again?

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.
Why do you refuse to understand how this would significantly increase his casualty count?
Fact:
The number of casualties he created was limited by his choice of weapon.
Why do you refuse to understand this?

No he could NOT have easily bought a water-cooled M1917.

Because?
He had the money,and he was legally able to own a machine gun. Buying one would take a little extra time - which he had - and nothing else.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You haven't presented an argument.

Another lie.
All you have are lies and talking points.

If you don;t stop copy and posting the same damn thing, I am reporting you for spamming.

Bring it, cupcake.

 

[M14 Shooter]

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?

I don't know how HE would have fared with them. And it's irrelevant.

Look at you - unable to honestly address the question, and then dishonestly declare that question irrelevant.

His ARs were effective, I don't know how he would have done with anything else given he had no training, the options he used were effective.

And thus, you cannot demonstrate how anything I said is irrelevant to my point.
Let's try again:
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?
I look forward to your continued avoidance.

My God, a fucking parrot got access to a computer and is posting the same drivel over and over again!
Stop it!

That's cute, cupcake - posting like this is a real-time conversation.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Mass shootings are relatively rare in France. The AR has been used in 4 out of 5 most deadliest mass shootings in the U.S. where gun laws are lax compared to other countries.

Let's try again:
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?
I look forward to your continued avoidance.

 

[2aguy]

For starters you haven't proven otherwise and I already told you, this guy wasn't a marksman. He was able to use a few ARs, bump stock and extended clips to his advantage and just spray everyone, I don't think he would know how to do anything else. It was very successful, more so than any other mass shooting.


How so? You don't seem to be able to provide any argument except if he used something other than an AR...but you don't go further than that.

If he hadn't used the bump stock, more people would be dead.

Based on your opinion? Not good enough. He used a bump stock, several ARs and extended clips to become the most successful mass shooter in our country's history without having any extensive training.

And location selection had the biggest effect on the death rate......at Virginia Tech the shooter used 2 pistols and killed 32.... the Vegas shooter firing into a crowd of over 22,000 only killed 58........and Luby's cafe the shooter killed 24 with 2 pistols......

Yes and he couldn't have accomplished his task without randomly spraying a crowd, sure the venue made a difference, combined with equipment he used.

Target location and other factors create more deaths....not weapon type....

The Russian Polytechnic shooter used a 5 shot, tube fed, pump action shotgun and killed 20 injuring 40.....

It's odd because that weapon type more often than not is used in many if not most of our deadliest mass shootings.

Wrong...hand guns are the most popular gun for mass shooters, not rifles.

Deadliest mass shootings.

Was in Paris, where more anti gun laws than even you dreamed of are already in effect.

Second worst was in Norway, 77 people killed. The paris attack, 135.....

Then you have South Korea, 56 people killed

 

[HappyJoy]

Mass shootings are relatively rare in France. The AR has been used in 4 out of 5 most deadliest mass shootings in the U.S. where gun laws are lax compared to other countries.

Let's try again:
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?
I look forward to your continued avoidance.

He didn't appear to have a lot if any training, he chose the weapons and equipment that fit his skill level most likely and the result was devastating.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Bullshit. Is that what you were going for? That makes no sense.

Sure it does.
He could have easily chose weaponry that would have greatly increased the number of casualties.
Thus, the damage he caused was limited by the weapons he chose.

How would ge get access to that type of weaponry? Care to explain?

M1917A1 for sale. 2, actually.
M1919s and M60s, too.
Belt Guns | DealerNFA

That's why your argument is bullshit. You made a claim and failed to provide any support for your asinine logic.

Do I -really- need to explain the capacity of such a weapon to increase the number of casualties in this incident?

Do I really need to tell you that you must have a license to own a machine gun such as that ancient POS?

I'm sorry -- you sidestepped the question. I'll ask again:
Do I -really- need to explain the capacity of such a weapon to increase the number of casualties in this incident?

I sidestepped the question because it is

Editing my posts again?

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.
Why do you refuse to understand how this would significantly increase his casualty count?
Fact:
The number of casualties he created was limited by his choice of weapon.
Why do you refuse to understand this?

No he could NOT have easily bought a water-cooled M1917.

Because?
He had the money,and he was legally able to own a machine gun. Buying one would take a little extra time - which he had - and nothing else.

He did not have time. He had a set date and you are making assumptions not in evidence, just like everyone else.

You ignore all kind of information that you would need. Where would he get the ammo? How would he hide a much larger weapon?

You just a talking shit!

 

[westwall]

If he hadn't used the bump stock, more people would be dead.

Based on your opinion? Not good enough. He used a bump stock, several ARs and extended clips to become the most successful mass shooter in our country's history without having any extensive training.

And location selection had the biggest effect on the death rate......at Virginia Tech the shooter used 2 pistols and killed 32.... the Vegas shooter firing into a crowd of over 22,000 only killed 58........and Luby's cafe the shooter killed 24 with 2 pistols......

Yes and he couldn't have accomplished his task without randomly spraying a crowd, sure the venue made a difference, combined with equipment he used.

Target location and other factors create more deaths....not weapon type....

The Russian Polytechnic shooter used a 5 shot, tube fed, pump action shotgun and killed 20 injuring 40.....

It's odd because that weapon type more often than not is used in many if not most of our deadliest mass shootings.

Wrong...hand guns are the most popular gun for mass shooters, not rifles.

Deadliest mass shootings.

Was in Paris, where more anti gun laws than even you dreamed of are already in effect.

Mass shootings are relatively rare in France. The AR has been used in 4 out of 5 most deadliest mass shootings in the U.S. where gun laws are lax compared to other countries. But this isn't even something I'm arguing.

If you want more gun laws then by all means please start more topics like in this thread.

Yes, because the violent people who do them are rare. Unlike this country where we have been importing them for 50 years. Europe has imported a couple of million of them and lo and behold their violent crime rate, gun crimes included, is exploding. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out.

So why do you have so much trouble recognizing the obvious?

 

[westwall]

Sure it does.
He could have easily chose weaponry that would have greatly increased the number of casualties.
Thus, the damage he caused was limited by the weapons he chose.

How would ge get access to that type of weaponry? Care to explain?

M1917A1 for sale. 2, actually.
M1919s and M60s, too.
Belt Guns | DealerNFA

That's why your argument is bullshit. You made a claim and failed to provide any support for your asinine logic.

Do I -really- need to explain the capacity of such a weapon to increase the number of casualties in this incident?

Do I really need to tell you that you must have a license to own a machine gun such as that ancient POS?

I'm sorry -- you sidestepped the question. I'll ask again:
Do I -really- need to explain the capacity of such a weapon to increase the number of casualties in this incident?

I sidestepped the question because it is

Editing my posts again?

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.
Why do you refuse to understand how this would significantly increase his casualty count?
Fact:
The number of casualties he created was limited by his choice of weapon.
Why do you refuse to understand this?

No he could NOT have easily bought a water-cooled M1917.

Because?
He had the money,and he was legally able to own a machine gun. Buying one would take a little extra time - which he had - and nothing else.

He did not have time. He had a set date and you are making assumptions not in evidence, just like everyone else.

You ignore all kind of information that you would need. Where would he get the ammo? How would he hide a much larger weapon?

You just a talking shit!

No, he didn't have a set date. He was looking at venues all over the country. he was planning the crime for months. But it doesn't matter. Had his goal been purely to kill people he would have driven a semi tractor trailer rig through the venue. He would have killed hundreds at the very least. His goal was to make a political statement.

The question is who was he working for.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Mass shootings are relatively rare in France. The AR has been used in 4 out of 5 most deadliest mass shootings in the U.S. where gun laws are lax compared to other countries.

Let's try again:
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?
I look forward to your continued avoidance.

He didn't appear to have a lot if any training, he chose the weapons and equipment that fit his skill level most likely and the result was devastating.

As predicted, you avoided my question.
Let's try again:
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?
I look forward to your continued avoidance.

 

[M14 Shooter]

I'm sorry -- you sidestepped the question. I'll ask again:
Do I -really- need to explain the capacity of such a weapon to increase the number of casualties in this incident?

I sidestepped the question because ...

The answer is yes?
If you are so ignorant about subject that I need to explain to you the capacity of such a weapon to increase the number of casualties in this incident, why do you bother posting?

He had the money,and he was legally able to own a machine gun. Buying one would take a little extra time - which he had - and nothing else.

He did not have time. He had a set date and you are making assumptions not in evidence, just like everyone else.

He had been planning an attack like we saw in LV for at least 18 moths prior - how is that not enough time to legally obtain an M1917A1?

Where would he get the ammo?

The below website in an example, not an advertisement
Ammo Deals | gun.deals
As much as you want, delivered to your door.

How would he hide a much larger weapon?

He "hid" 26 rifles. a shotgun and a handgun - why do you think he would have any issue "hiding" a single MG, tripod an ammo?

How is it you do not know the answers to these questions?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I'm sorry -- you sidestepped the question. I'll ask again:
Do I -really- need to explain the capacity of such a weapon to increase the number of casualties in this incident?

I sidestepped the question because ...

The answer is yes?
If you are so ignorant about subject that I need to explain to you the capacity of such a weapon to increase the number of casualties in this incident, why do you bother posting?

He had the money,and he was legally able to own a machine gun. Buying one would take a little extra time - which he had - and nothing else.

He did not have time. He had a set date and you are making assumptions not in evidence, just like everyone else.

He had been planning an attack like we saw in LV for at least 18 moths prior - how is that not enough time to legally obtain an M1917A1?

Where would he get the ammo?

The below website in an example, not an advertisement
Ammo Deals | gun.deals
As much as you want, delivered to your door.

How would he hide a much larger weapon?

He "hid" 26 rifles. a shotgun and a handgun - why do you think he would have any issue "hiding" a single MG, tripod an ammo?

How is it you do not know the answers to these questions?

Have you seen the size of that weapon? Don't be a dumbass! Ever try to buy beltfed ammo?

 

[westwall]

I'm sorry -- you sidestepped the question. I'll ask again:
Do I -really- need to explain the capacity of such a weapon to increase the number of casualties in this incident?

I sidestepped the question because ...

The answer is yes?
If you are so ignorant about subject that I need to explain to you the capacity of such a weapon to increase the number of casualties in this incident, why do you bother posting?

He had the money,and he was legally able to own a machine gun. Buying one would take a little extra time - which he had - and nothing else.

He did not have time. He had a set date and you are making assumptions not in evidence, just like everyone else.

He had been planning an attack like we saw in LV for at least 18 moths prior - how is that not enough time to legally obtain an M1917A1?

Where would he get the ammo?

The below website in an example, not an advertisement
Ammo Deals | gun.deals
As much as you want, delivered to your door.

How would he hide a much larger weapon?

He "hid" 26 rifles. a shotgun and a handgun - why do you think he would have any issue "hiding" a single MG, tripod an ammo?

How is it you do not know the answers to these questions?

Have you seen the size of that weapon? Don't be a dumbass! Ever try to buy beltfed ammo?

Yeah, it's easy to buy belted ammo. I have around 20,000 rounds on link.

 

[M14 Shooter]

I'm sorry -- you sidestepped the question. I'll ask again:
Do I -really- need to explain the capacity of such a weapon to increase the number of casualties in this incident?

I sidestepped the question because ...

The answer is yes?
If you are so ignorant about subject that I need to explain to you the capacity of such a weapon to increase the number of casualties in this incident, why do you bother posting?

He had the money,and he was legally able to own a machine gun. Buying one would take a little extra time - which he had - and nothing else.

He did not have time. He had a set date and you are making assumptions not in evidence, just like everyone else.

He had been planning an attack like we saw in LV for at least 18 moths prior - how is that not enough time to legally obtain an M1917A1?

Where would he get the ammo?

The below website in an example, not an advertisement
Ammo Deals | gun.deals
As much as you want, delivered to your door.

How would he hide a much larger weapon?

He "hid" 26 rifles. a shotgun and a handgun - why do you think he would have any issue "hiding" a single MG, tripod an ammo?
How is it you do not know the answers to these questions?

Have you seen the size of that weapon? Don't be a dumbass! Ever try to buy beltfed ammo?

At this point, it is clear your ignorance is willful.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Yeah, it's easy to buy belted ammo. I have around 20,000 rounds on link.

It doesn't take much to figure out you but the ammo, and you buy the links/belts.