Las Vegas shooting: Reports of shooter at Mandalay Bay Casino

Status
Not open for further replies.
As far as guns....let's consider FACTS SHALL WE?...

FACT: In the USA, Guns PREVENT BODILY HARM and SAVE MORE LIVES THAN TAKE THEM

In spite of the Left medias vast coverage of RARE shootings like this and even rarer coverage of guns saving lives
 
Then make it easier to institutionalize someone, or use a judicial proceeding to restrict their access to firearms.

The NRA's issue is that most of these "take the guns" laws skip the judicial step and leave it to some bureaucrat to make the decision.

Right, because clearly we should wait until a whole legal process has played out before taking a crazy person's guns.

What's the worst that can happen?

Oh, yeah. What happened today.

We hold people before conviction, people can be held before commitment, as long as there is a clear legal process that gets the person in front of a judge as quickly as possible.

The same can be done for people seen as a threat to others due to their mental state.
 
Of course this is retarded thinking.
No one could kill more than fifty and injure more than four hundred with any weapon other than a gun.
You ever hear of bombs? Are you that stupid?
No bombs in this attack, dope.
The cartoon shows physical attacks. Not bombs.

Bombs aren't physical attacks?

The cartoon I responded to did not feature bombs, dope.

Your comment was guns could only do that amount of damage!

So you were proven wrong and now you want to change it you only meant the cartoon.

In real life if someone want to kill they will us guns, bombs, knives, bats hammers, trucks, planes and so much more but the only thing those like you focus on is the gun and not the damn individual!
So you were proven wrong and now you want to change it you only meant the cartoon.

My post was a response to the cartoon, retard.
 
[Q

The fact that this monster had access to automatic weapons and all the ammo he needed is not worth doing anything about...is it?


He used the weapons in an illegal manner. If they were NFA full auto weapons then he would be the first person to ever use the weapons in an illegal manner. If they weren't NFA and modified then he committed a crime by having automatic weapons.

Why should a law abiding citizen, protected by the Second Amendment, have their rights taken away because somebody else does something illegal? Because once you start restricting firearms or restricting access to firearms then that is what you are doing and that is wrong.
 
Why does everybody think that every time there's a mass shooting there has to be some agenda? Can't anybody just be crazy anymore?

cg50ed78a4d282e.jpg

Of course this is retarded thinking.
No one could kill more than fifty and injure more than four hundred with any weapon other than a gun.

Those that used the planes in 9/11 prove you wrong. Tim McVeigh proves you wrong.

Hell bombings around the world prove you wrong.

Want to try again!?!

That has not a damned thing to do with the cartoon I responded to, dope. Funny that every one of the retarded brotherhood all missed that and responded out of context.

No, you were caught showing your ignorance as usual.

Let be clear you believe guns are bad and only if America would repeal the Second Amendment lives would be saved but reality is people will still die but the terrorist will use their car, truck or themselves as a human bomb.

So cut the shot and accept you believe guns kill more people quicker but terrorists disagree woth you!

Hell terrorists hope you will repeal the second amendment so they can kill easier...
 

Thanks to the NRA, 250,000 guns walk across the border every year. But let's concentrate on the 20 the ATF lost track of in a misguided attempt to track them.

Just like the gun nut, try to change the subject when there's a tragedy.

As stated earlier, the number of gun crimes, accidents, police shootings and so on are not even a noticeable blip against the total numbers of privately owned firearms or the number of gun owners.

Maybe not. But there's no countervailing benefit to having that many guns out there.

For instance, yes, we have a lot of car accidents, but we also have millions of cars getting people to work, to the store, etc. That's a countervailing benefit to car ownership.

The difference is, while the Auto Industry strives to make their product safer, the gun industry strives to make their product more dangerous, and to put them in the hands of some fucking scary people so the rest of us will be scared and want guns, too.
upload_2017-10-2_7-25-11.png

upload_2017-10-2_7-25-39.png
 
You ever hear of bombs? Are you that stupid?
No bombs in this attack, dope.
The cartoon shows physical attacks. Not bombs.

Bombs aren't physical attacks?

The cartoon I responded to did not feature bombs, dope.

Your comment was guns could only do that amount of damage!

So you were proven wrong and now you want to change it you only meant the cartoon.

In real life if someone want to kill they will us guns, bombs, knives, bats hammers, trucks, planes and so much more but the only thing those like you focus on is the gun and not the damn individual!
So you were proven wrong and now you want to change it you only meant the cartoon.

My post was a response to the cartoon, retard.
Nice try, middle eastern terrorism much prefers bombs and vehicles…
 
... firearms do not kill people people kill people
I'm pretty sure this people was using machine guns.
So you're saying the firearms control people?
Nope. This guy used a machine gun to carry out his task. A Super Soaker probably wouldn't have cut it.
.
What kind of machine gun? .30 cal? .50? Foreign?

MG249?
Screws me. Listen to the tape, the shots were coming out extremely quickly, that's all I can tell you.
.

You can't hear any separation between the shots.
Just a lengthy burst and then a pause then another lengthy burst

Seems like he had multiple automatic rifles
 
Police are still looking for the motivation of the killer.
The people at the concert did not know at the beginning of where the shots came from as for the bataclan people lying on the ground believing a shooter on the horizon. three policemen saw that it came from the 32nd floor and they were able to rescue people by sheltering them behind a concrete block ( CNN).
This kind of mass shooting from a high building Is not a thing that happens often nobody could pretend it would happen but it sadly already happening in the past.

Ex-Marine Charles Whitman shoots at the University of Texas tower in 1966

sniper30a-5-web.jpg

Charles J. Whitman, a 24-year-old student at the University of Texas, is shown in this is a 1966 photograph.
(AP)

Ex-marine Charles Whitman shoots at victims from a tower in 1966
 
You ever hear of bombs? Are you that stupid?
No bombs in this attack, dope.
The cartoon shows physical attacks. Not bombs.

Bombs aren't physical attacks?

The cartoon I responded to did not feature bombs, dope.

Your comment was guns could only do that amount of damage!

So you were proven wrong and now you want to change it you only meant the cartoon.

In real life if someone want to kill they will us guns, bombs, knives, bats hammers, trucks, planes and so much more but the only thing those like you focus on is the gun and not the damn individual!
So you were proven wrong and now you want to change it you only meant the cartoon.

My post was a response to the cartoon, retard.

Sure it was fucktard!
 
And people with easy access to guns kill more.
HMM I have has easy access to guns my entire life who have I killed?

We have regular mass shootings.

Answer the question.

You say easy access to guns makes it more likely to kill. More likely than what? I know many people personally and know of thousands of people in my county that have easy access to guns and don't kill anyone and never will.


That would be like me saying you having easy access to your dick makes you more likely to rape

I know many people personally and know of thousands of people in my county that have easy access to guns and don't kill anyone and never will.

That's what this terrorist's friends and family said also

And?

It's still not proof that easy access to guns makes one more likely to kill.

It's proof that the killer is more likely to kill more people only because they are easily available.
 
Um, if I didn't care, I wouldn't be in this thread making my opinion on the matter. You on the other hand, only seem to care when it plays along the narrative of your political worldviews. Why else would you be here? Goodness gracious, you guys are like clockwork. Guy with a gun offs scores of innocent people and you come preaching the ills of gun ownership and the supposed deficiencies of our current gun laws.

Um, yeah.

When a crazy person kills 50 people and injures 400 others because he was able to get a hold of military grade weapons despite being crazy, then yes, someone should ask why it's so damned easy to get guns.

Now, if this sort of thing never happened, then calling for gun control would be a bit silly. But it happens all the time, and we always find out that it was a crazy person with a gun.

On a side note...

Life is life, young or old. And when that innocent life is brutally taken away, we all should care. We shouldn't politicize it either.

The point is, if we had sensible gun laws, and maybe health care for mental illness, then these sorts of things wouldn't happen.
We have plenty of sensible gun laws we choose not to enforce them
I will love to hear what gun laws were not enforced in this shooter's case.
 
HMM I have has easy access to guns my entire life who have I killed?

We have regular mass shootings.

Answer the question.

You say easy access to guns makes it more likely to kill. More likely than what? I know many people personally and know of thousands of people in my county that have easy access to guns and don't kill anyone and never will.


That would be like me saying you having easy access to your dick makes you more likely to rape

I know many people personally and know of thousands of people in my county that have easy access to guns and don't kill anyone and never will.

That's what this terrorist's friends and family said also

And?

It's still not proof that easy access to guns makes one more likely to kill.

It's proof that the killer is more likely to kill more people only because they are easily available.

Cars and trucks are as available, and boy do they use them a lot!

So when will you call for the banning of automobiles, planes and bombs!?!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum List

Back
Top