We KNEW it would happen sooner or later.. Vegas victim suing

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Las Vegas shooting: Lawsuit filed as new questions raised over timeline - CNN
California college student injured in the Las Vegas music festival massacre filed a lawsuit Wednesday against the hotel owners, the concert promoter and bump stock manufacturers, claiming they were all liable in the mass shooting.

The claims against MGM Resorts International, which owns both Mandalay Bay and the concert venue that hosted the festival, raise more questions about a timeline that has changed numerous times -- and, according to Clark County Sheriff Joe Lombardo, could change again. The suit also questions why hotel staff didn't notice the shooter's behavior in several instances.
Specifically, the lawsuit accuses MGM, of failing to respond in a timely manner to the "shooting of Mandalay Bay security officer Jesus Campos, who had gone to the 32nd floor to check on an alert from another guest room and who was shot six minutes prior to" the massacre beginning.
The lawsuit, which also names the shooter's estate and other entities, comes as an MGM employee says he owes his life to Campos' heroism, and as Lombardo tells the local newspaper that he refuses "to say that somebody dropped the ball."
---
Frivolous bullshit.
I bet she was in tears of joy before she even felt the blood coming out.
Dont even know the motive and already there are law suits.... SMH
Pathetic
I hope the judge throws it out and forces to her to pay everyones legal fees like they did an aurora victims mother.
My Daughter Was Murdered in a Mass Shooting. Then I Was Ordered to Pay Her Killer’s Gun Dealer. – Mother Jones

I know I will be pillaged for this, but I see some merit in suing the manufacture of the bump stock. The whole design was made to circumvent the law. At least in my opinion.

Although I don't believe having the bump stock necessarily caused the injury total to increase she would have to prove it did.

It was signed off by the ATF

The ATF doesn't make law or shouldn't make law.

Do you have a link that tells us they signed off? I am in serious disbelief that they would.

They did because the actual law prevents modification to the gun itself. A bump stock doesn't do that.

Link?

Google is your friend.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

It was signed off by the ATF

The ATF doesn't make law or shouldn't make law.

Do you have a link that tells us they signed off? I am in serious disbelief that they would.

They did because the actual law prevents modification to the gun itself. A bump stock doesn't do that.

Adding something to a gun doesn't modify it? Talk about unclear on the concept.

The bump stock is a legal mod because it doesnt alter the rate of fire. It SIMULATES it.

He said "the actual law prevents modification to the gun itself. A bump stock doesn't do that". That's simply not correct.

Adding a stock to the weapon does not change the mechanical operation of the gun. EOS.

 

[TNHarley]

They did because the actual law prevents modification to the gun itself. A bump stock doesn't do that.

Adding something to a gun doesn't modify it? Talk about unclear on the concept.

The bump stock is a legal mod because it doesnt alter the rate of fire. It SIMULATES it.

He said "the actual law prevents modification to the gun itself. A bump stock doesn't do that". That's simply not correct.

A bump stock doesnt modify the rate of fire. It is completely correct. It isnt his fault you are too slow to understand basic concepts and terminology.
Again, the stock SIMULATES, not MODIFIES.

Anything that you add onto a gun modifies it. Pretty simple concept really.

They did because the actual law prevents modification to the gun itself. A bump stock doesn't do that.

Adding something to a gun doesn't modify it? Talk about unclear on the concept.

The bump stock is a legal mod because it doesnt alter the rate of fire. It SIMULATES it.

He said "the actual law prevents modification to the gun itself. A bump stock doesn't do that". That's simply not correct.

A bump stock doesnt modify the rate of fire. It is completely correct. It isnt his fault you are too slow to understand basic concepts and terminology.
Again, the stock SIMULATES, not MODIFIES.

Anything that you add onto a gun modifies it. Pretty simple concept really.

No shit.. It doesnt modify the gun. It simulates fire. Goddamn son. THINK

 

[TNHarley]

To make an illegal modification to a semiautomatic gun involves changing the firing mechanism. An add on stock does not do that

Not what he said, re-read it. Then please try again.

I'm telling you since you obviously don't understand what makes an automatic weapon an automatic weapon

Still not what he said. You lose.

But he is still right. I dont think you have been right one time in this thread. Maybe i missed it? (lol)

You must have missed it, or more likely, misread it. As usual.

Doubtful. You cant even comprehend the difference between modification and simulation.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

They did because the actual law prevents modification to the gun itself. A bump stock doesn't do that.

Adding something to a gun doesn't modify it? Talk about unclear on the concept.

The bump stock is a legal mod because it doesnt alter the rate of fire. It SIMULATES it.

He said "the actual law prevents modification to the gun itself. A bump stock doesn't do that". That's simply not correct.

A bump stock doesnt modify the rate of fire. It is completely correct. It isnt his fault you are too slow to understand basic concepts and terminology.
Again, the stock SIMULATES, not MODIFIES.

Anything that you add onto a gun modifies it. Pretty simple concept really.

I can remove the stock from any gun and replace it with a broomstick. Does that modify the actual mechanical operation of the gun? No.

Why is this so hard for you? Was kindergarten too much of a challenge?

 

[Taz]

The ATF doesn't make law or shouldn't make law.

Do you have a link that tells us they signed off? I am in serious disbelief that they would.

They did because the actual law prevents modification to the gun itself. A bump stock doesn't do that.

Adding something to a gun doesn't modify it? Talk about unclear on the concept.

The bump stock is a legal mod because it doesnt alter the rate of fire. It SIMULATES it.

He said "the actual law prevents modification to the gun itself. A bump stock doesn't do that". That's simply not correct.

Adding a stock to the weapon does not change the mechanical operation of the gun. EOS.

Adding ANYTHING to a gun modifies it. Not saying it makes it illegal or anything, just that if you add something to something else, it modifies it.

 

[Taz]

Adding something to a gun doesn't modify it? Talk about unclear on the concept.

The bump stock is a legal mod because it doesnt alter the rate of fire. It SIMULATES it.

He said "the actual law prevents modification to the gun itself. A bump stock doesn't do that". That's simply not correct.

A bump stock doesnt modify the rate of fire. It is completely correct. It isnt his fault you are too slow to understand basic concepts and terminology.
Again, the stock SIMULATES, not MODIFIES.

Anything that you add onto a gun modifies it. Pretty simple concept really.

Adding something to a gun doesn't modify it? Talk about unclear on the concept.

The bump stock is a legal mod because it doesnt alter the rate of fire. It SIMULATES it.

He said "the actual law prevents modification to the gun itself. A bump stock doesn't do that". That's simply not correct.

A bump stock doesnt modify the rate of fire. It is completely correct. It isnt his fault you are too slow to understand basic concepts and terminology.
Again, the stock SIMULATES, not MODIFIES.

Anything that you add onto a gun modifies it. Pretty simple concept really.

No shit.. It doesnt modify the gun. It simulates fire. Goddamn son. THINK

If you paint the gun purple, you've just modified it from its original purchase state. SHEESH!!!!!

 

[Taz]

Adding something to a gun doesn't modify it? Talk about unclear on the concept.

The bump stock is a legal mod because it doesnt alter the rate of fire. It SIMULATES it.

He said "the actual law prevents modification to the gun itself. A bump stock doesn't do that". That's simply not correct.

A bump stock doesnt modify the rate of fire. It is completely correct. It isnt his fault you are too slow to understand basic concepts and terminology.
Again, the stock SIMULATES, not MODIFIES.

Anything that you add onto a gun modifies it. Pretty simple concept really.

I can remove the stock from any gun and replace it with a broomstick. Does that modify the actual mechanical operation of the gun? No.

Why is this so hard for you? Was kindergarten too much of a challenge?

If you remove the stock and replace it with a broom handle, you've just modified it. Geez you guys, buy yourselves a fucking dictionary.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

They did because the actual law prevents modification to the gun itself. A bump stock doesn't do that.

Adding something to a gun doesn't modify it? Talk about unclear on the concept.

The bump stock is a legal mod because it doesnt alter the rate of fire. It SIMULATES it.

He said "the actual law prevents modification to the gun itself. A bump stock doesn't do that". That's simply not correct.

Adding a stock to the weapon does not change the mechanical operation of the gun. EOS.

Adding ANYTHING to a gun modifies it. Not saying it makes it illegal or anything, just that if you add something to something else, it modifies it.

It does not modify the operation of the mechanical parts at all! I can take a gun, remove the stock, remove the pistol grip, cut off the barrel and it will still operate as though all of that were still present because they do not affect the mechanical operation of the weapon. You will still get just as dead.

 

[Taz]

Adding something to a gun doesn't modify it? Talk about unclear on the concept.

The bump stock is a legal mod because it doesnt alter the rate of fire. It SIMULATES it.

He said "the actual law prevents modification to the gun itself. A bump stock doesn't do that". That's simply not correct.

Adding a stock to the weapon does not change the mechanical operation of the gun. EOS.

Adding ANYTHING to a gun modifies it. Not saying it makes it illegal or anything, just that if you add something to something else, it modifies it.

It does not modify the operation of the mechanical parts at all! I can take a gun, remove the stock, remove the pistol grip, cut off the barrel and it will still operate as though all of that were still present because they do not affect the mechanical operation of the weapon. You will still get just as dead.

By adding this piece, you've modified that gun from its original purchase state.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The bump stock is a legal mod because it doesnt alter the rate of fire. It SIMULATES it.

He said "the actual law prevents modification to the gun itself. A bump stock doesn't do that". That's simply not correct.

A bump stock doesnt modify the rate of fire. It is completely correct. It isnt his fault you are too slow to understand basic concepts and terminology.
Again, the stock SIMULATES, not MODIFIES.

Anything that you add onto a gun modifies it. Pretty simple concept really.

I can remove the stock from any gun and replace it with a broomstick. Does that modify the actual mechanical operation of the gun? No.

Why is this so hard for you? Was kindergarten too much of a challenge?

If you remove the stock and replace it with a broom handle, you've just modified it. Geez you guys, buy yourselves a fucking dictionary.

So, if I take the stock off my rifle, does it change the rate of fire? Does it change the range? Does it change the ability to chamber a certain caliber round?

The answer to all of these is "no", so the gun's operation is not modified.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The bump stock is a legal mod because it doesnt alter the rate of fire. It SIMULATES it.

He said "the actual law prevents modification to the gun itself. A bump stock doesn't do that". That's simply not correct.

Adding a stock to the weapon does not change the mechanical operation of the gun. EOS.

Adding ANYTHING to a gun modifies it. Not saying it makes it illegal or anything, just that if you add something to something else, it modifies it.

It does not modify the operation of the mechanical parts at all! I can take a gun, remove the stock, remove the pistol grip, cut off the barrel and it will still operate as though all of that were still present because they do not affect the mechanical operation of the weapon. You will still get just as dead.

By adding this piece, you've modified that gun from its original purchase state.

It does not change the OPERATION of the weapon.

 

[Taz]

He said "the actual law prevents modification to the gun itself. A bump stock doesn't do that". That's simply not correct.

A bump stock doesnt modify the rate of fire. It is completely correct. It isnt his fault you are too slow to understand basic concepts and terminology.
Again, the stock SIMULATES, not MODIFIES.

Anything that you add onto a gun modifies it. Pretty simple concept really.

I can remove the stock from any gun and replace it with a broomstick. Does that modify the actual mechanical operation of the gun? No.

Why is this so hard for you? Was kindergarten too much of a challenge?

If you remove the stock and replace it with a broom handle, you've just modified it. Geez you guys, buy yourselves a fucking dictionary.

So, if I take the stock off my rifle, does it change the rate of fire? Does it change the range? Does it change the ability to chamber a certain caliber round?

The answer to all of these is "no", so the gun's operation is not modified.

But the look... is changed because you now have an extra piece on it? Or is it swapped out? Either way, you've modified it in some way, maybe not the rate of fire, but it's been modified.

 

[Taz]

He said "the actual law prevents modification to the gun itself. A bump stock doesn't do that". That's simply not correct.

Adding a stock to the weapon does not change the mechanical operation of the gun. EOS.

Adding ANYTHING to a gun modifies it. Not saying it makes it illegal or anything, just that if you add something to something else, it modifies it.

It does not modify the operation of the mechanical parts at all! I can take a gun, remove the stock, remove the pistol grip, cut off the barrel and it will still operate as though all of that were still present because they do not affect the mechanical operation of the weapon. You will still get just as dead.

By adding this piece, you've modified that gun from its original purchase state.

It does not change the OPERATION of the weapon.

It changes the weapon from its original purchase state, does it not?

 

[Faun]

Adding something to a gun doesn't modify it? Talk about unclear on the concept.

The bump stock is a legal mod because it doesnt alter the rate of fire. It SIMULATES it.

He said "the actual law prevents modification to the gun itself. A bump stock doesn't do that". That's simply not correct.

Adding a stock to the weapon does not change the mechanical operation of the gun. EOS.

Adding ANYTHING to a gun modifies it. Not saying it makes it illegal or anything, just that if you add something to something else, it modifies it.

It does not modify the operation of the mechanical parts at all! I can take a gun, remove the stock, remove the pistol grip, cut off the barrel and it will still operate as though all of that were still present because they do not affect the mechanical operation of the weapon. You will still get just as dead.

With a bump stock, would Paddock have been able to empty a clip while simply holding his finger on the trigger?

 

[TNHarley]

The bump stock is a legal mod because it doesnt alter the rate of fire. It SIMULATES it.

He said "the actual law prevents modification to the gun itself. A bump stock doesn't do that". That's simply not correct.

Adding a stock to the weapon does not change the mechanical operation of the gun. EOS.

Adding ANYTHING to a gun modifies it. Not saying it makes it illegal or anything, just that if you add something to something else, it modifies it.

It does not modify the operation of the mechanical parts at all! I can take a gun, remove the stock, remove the pistol grip, cut off the barrel and it will still operate as though all of that were still present because they do not affect the mechanical operation of the weapon. You will still get just as dead.

With a bump stock, would Paddock have been able to empty a clip while simply holding his finger on the trigger?

No, he would have to keep pulling the trigger. There is only a difference of about two bullets per second, typically. Big difference between modification and simulation.

 

[TNHarley]

Adding a stock to the weapon does not change the mechanical operation of the gun. EOS.

Adding ANYTHING to a gun modifies it. Not saying it makes it illegal or anything, just that if you add something to something else, it modifies it.

It does not modify the operation of the mechanical parts at all! I can take a gun, remove the stock, remove the pistol grip, cut off the barrel and it will still operate as though all of that were still present because they do not affect the mechanical operation of the weapon. You will still get just as dead.

By adding this piece, you've modified that gun from its original purchase state.

It does not change the OPERATION of the weapon.

It changes the weapon from its original purchase state, does it not?

But it doesnt modify the GUN ITSELF. Thats what he was trying to say. You keep saying it is a mod, which it is. But you dont understand beyond that. THAT is the problem.

 

[Faun]

He said "the actual law prevents modification to the gun itself. A bump stock doesn't do that". That's simply not correct.

Adding a stock to the weapon does not change the mechanical operation of the gun. EOS.

Adding ANYTHING to a gun modifies it. Not saying it makes it illegal or anything, just that if you add something to something else, it modifies it.

It does not modify the operation of the mechanical parts at all! I can take a gun, remove the stock, remove the pistol grip, cut off the barrel and it will still operate as though all of that were still present because they do not affect the mechanical operation of the weapon. You will still get just as dead.

With a bump stock, would Paddock have been able to empty a clip while simply holding his finger on the trigger?

No, he would have to keep pulling the trigger. There is only a difference of about two bullets per second, typically.

If he had to keep pulling the trigger, what purpose does a bump stock serve?

 

[Skull Pilot]

To make an illegal modification to a semiautomatic gun involves changing the firing mechanism. An add on stock does not do that

Not what he said, re-read it. Then please try again.

I'm telling you since you obviously don't understand what makes an automatic weapon an automatic weapon

Still not what he said. You lose.

I'm not commenting on his remark I am addressing your obvious ignorance

Then you took it out of context, or simply felt like jumping in with a random comment, your choice.

No unlike you I understand what makes a rifle an automatic

 

[TNHarley]

Adding a stock to the weapon does not change the mechanical operation of the gun. EOS.

Adding ANYTHING to a gun modifies it. Not saying it makes it illegal or anything, just that if you add something to something else, it modifies it.

It does not modify the operation of the mechanical parts at all! I can take a gun, remove the stock, remove the pistol grip, cut off the barrel and it will still operate as though all of that were still present because they do not affect the mechanical operation of the weapon. You will still get just as dead.

With a bump stock, would Paddock have been able to empty a clip while simply holding his finger on the trigger?

No, he would have to keep pulling the trigger. There is only a difference of about two bullets per second, typically.

If he had to keep pulling the trigger, what purpose does a bump stock serve?

I misunderstood your question. I took it as without a bump stock.