Las Vegas Massacre

[Lady Quagga]

I'd like to acknowledge all you rednecks for failing to mention the redneck who shot up a bunch of rednecks. It's good to know that in my absence I could count on you to keep GenDis topical and relevant. :Rolls Eyes:

1 homicidal recluse
58 people murdered
530 more injured
not one peep from anyone here

(shaking my head)

[Lady Quagga]

The victims of the Las Vegas shooting:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/las-vegas-shooting-victims-names-latest-list

(Courtesy CBSNews)

[steelhead]

Go away Troll, no one is condoning the actions of this monster. How about all the killings in Chicago on a weekly basis and hundreds to date and yes urban warrior on urban warrior violence! :-) Not a peep from you on that one either



I'd like to acknowledge all you rednecks for failing to mention the redneck who shot up a bunch of rednecks. It's good to know that in my absence I could count on you to keep GenDis topical and relevant. :Rolls Eyes:

1 homicidal recluse
58 people murdered
530 more injured
not one peep from anyone here

(shaking my head)

[Lady Quagga]

Go away Troll, no one is condoning the actions of this monster. How about all the killings in Chicago on a weekly basis and hundreds to date and yes urban warrior on urban warrior violence! :-) Not a peep from you on that one either

Bite me, steelplatehead. I don't recall accusing anyone of condoning this massacre.

I've addressed the subjects of gun rights and gun violence before - if racist illiterate schmucks like you bothered to peruse the board, you'd realize the falsity of your statement.

Of course, it hardly surprises me that you tried to make a "Vegas vs Chicago" comparison - a lot like the current Idiot-in-Chief and his recent "Maria vs Katrina" casualty comparison. :Rolls Eyes:

[Lady Quagga]

I see it didn't take long for the administration to roll out The Cryptkeeper and put a "Thanks Obama!" spin on this.

She even tried to insert some Clinton/Sanders hate into the mix. Nothing like trivializing a tragedy in order to advance your own anti-Russia-investigation agenda.

http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2017/10/05/kellyanne-conway-vegas-gun-control-trump-newday.cnn

Luckily, the CNN anchors are maintaining a strict regimen of methamphetamines in order to stay sharp.

[Natural Lefty]

One of the victims, Angie Gomez, was a 20 year old nursing student at the school where I teach, and I teach a lot of nursing students. I am still upset about her and all the other victims.

We still don't know Stephen Paddock's motives, but we do know that with better gun control laws, we can reduce the homicide rate; yet, GOP Congress people only seem to want fewer gun regulations, while the large majority of Americans want more gun regulation.

By the way, I have known several people during my lifetime who have died of gunfire. The most recent one was in fact one of my female students, about 10 years ago at an ATM.

[DarkShadow]

But we do know that with better gun control laws, we can reduce the homicide rate.

I really would wish this statement was true.

I just find it interesting, especially with this case, that someone can be far from a blip on the radar, and amass this type of arsenal without one red flag going off.

How would gun control solve this issue? We already have way too many individuals who have amassed firepower and ammunition legally who are 2 fries short of a Happy Meal.

But the NRA says our 2nd Amendment rights need to be upheld.

I'm sure Quagga would disagree.

[Lady Quagga]

I really would wish this statement was true.

I just find it interesting, especially with this case, that someone can be far from a blip on the radar, and amass this type of arsenal without one red flag going off.

How would gun control solve this issue? We already have way too many individuals who have amassed firepower and ammunition legally who are 2 fries short of a Happy Meal.

But the NRA says our 2nd Amendment rights need to be upheld.

I'm sure Quagga would disagree.

DS and I discussed this previously, and I made the case that this guy had every means available to him to take out many more people with an IED (such as a vest). It may have lacked the "Blaze o' Glory" factor, but it was certainly within his emotional/financial capacity. I really would like to know what drove him to commit this atrocity - only time will tell as the investigation unfolds.

Having said that, I support reasonable gun control regulation. "Bump stock" has become the new catchphrase (and scapegoat); nevertheless, I would have no problem with their outright ban. Let's not bullsh*t each other - they were designed specifically to circumvent Title II restrictions of the National Firearms Act. So, beyond this specific ban......

......what is the threshold? At what point do we say, "No, it's not okay for you own this or that," or "No, you lack the mental and emotional capacity to own this or that"? And once we agree to such standards, once we strike up a balance between the public interest and individual rights, what's to prevent either side from moving the goalpost to further their own cause?

[steelhead]

The predictable calling card of bullet point reading democrats, when a valid point is made the response is ....nothing intelligible of substance but will resort to calling the other person racist. You are a troll and the way you type I would hardly consider you a lady.




Bite me, steelplatehead. I don't recall accusing anyone of condoning this massacre.

I've addressed the subjects of gun rights and gun violence before - if racist illiterate schmucks like you bothered to peruse the board, you'd realize the falsity of your statement.

Of course, it hardly surprises me that you tried to make a "Vegas vs Chicago" comparison - a lot like the current Idiot-in-Chief and his recent "Maria vs Katrina" casualty comparison. :Rolls Eyes:

[Lady Quagga]

The predictable calling card of bullet point reading democrats, when a valid point is made the response is ....nothing intelligible of substance but will resort to calling the other person racist. You are a troll and the way you type I would hardly consider you a lady.

If dealing with the invalid falsehoods and idiot-comparisons made by racist illiterate schmucks like you is "predictable", then so be it.

[CHUCKY]

I'd like to acknowledge all you rednecks for failing to mention the redneck who shot up a bunch of rednecks. It's good to know that in my absence I could count on you to keep GenDis topical and relevant. :Rolls Eyes:

1 homicidal recluse
58 people murdered
530 more injured
not one peep from anyone here

(shaking my head)

This is the worst post you have ever made. Go fishing.

[Lady Quagga]

This is the worst post you have ever made.

I beg to differ - I've made posts far worse than this. :Big Smile:


Go fishing.

What makes you think I haven't? :Big Smile:

[Natural Lefty]

What I said is true, Mr. Shadow, speaking in general. Just look at the correlation between gun control and lower homicide rate around the world. Whether it would have stopped this particular case, we cannot be certain, but I think it would have most likely helped for at least 3 reasons that I can think of. One, he wouldn't have been able to upgrade his weapons to fully automatic with gun control. Second, he probably wouldn't have been able to buy semi-automatic weapons with gun control. And third, gun dealers might have shared purchase information with police, with gun control, which would have sent up a huge red flag when it was discovered that this guy was stockpiling so many powerful weapons.

Oh, I did go fishing this late afternoon at my local lake, Lake Perris. I caught a Bluegill and a small Bass, which is actually relatively good for shore based fishing in Lake Perris' currently diminished state. LOL We are anxiously awaiting the completion of the dam renovation project and raising the water level once again.

[Lady Quagga]

What I said is true, Mr. Shadow, speaking in general. Just look at the correlation between gun control and lower homicide rate around the world. Whether it would have stopped this particular case, we cannot be certain, but I think it would have most likely helped for at least 3 reasons that I can think of. One, he wouldn't have been able to upgrade his weapons to fully automatic with gun control. Second, he probably wouldn't have been able to buy semi-automatic weapons with gun control. And third, gun dealers might have shared purchase information with police, with gun control, which would have sent up a huge red flag when it was discovered that this guy was stockpiling so many powerful weapons.

As to your three points:

- While I haven't heard about his entire arsenal, the weapons being focused on were not upgraded to full auto, per se. Trigger actuators (like bump stocks) allow a high rate of fire simulating full auto. I know this might sound like I'm splitting hairs, but if we are going to tackle issues like this, it is important to understand the facts. And as I have said previously, I have no problem banning bump stocks or any other type of trigger actuator device.

- I do not support banning private possession of semi-automatic weapons, period. I will not argue whether they make suitable hunting weapons or not (many do, in fact), because in my opinion that is not a valid criteria for (dis)allowing private ownership.

- Gun dealers DO report the sale of firearms. If you've ever been served with a search warrant, you will soon find that local law enforcement has a complete inventory of weapons sold to you in the state, courtesy of the state Department of Justice. The fact is, there was nothing illegal (so far as we've been told) about Paddock's purchasing history or how he equipped his firearms. While he may have owned a large number of them, there was nothing especially powerful about any of them, individually speaking. And there was nothing to disqualify him from making these purchases.

[Brent]

As to your three points:

- While I haven't heard about his entire arsenal, the weapons being focused on were not upgraded to full auto, per se. Trigger actuators (like bump stocks) allow a high rate of fire simulating full auto. I know this might sound like I'm splitting hairs, but if we are going to tackle issues like this, it is important to understand the facts. And as I have said previously, I have no problem banning bump stocks or any other type of trigger actuator device.

- I do not support banning private possession of semi-automatic weapons, period. I will not argue whether they make suitable hunting weapons or not (many do, in fact), because in my opinion that is not a valid criteria for (dis)allowing private ownership.

- Gun dealers DO report the sale of firearms. If you've ever been served with a search warrant, you will soon find that local law enforcement has a complete inventory of weapons sold to you in the state, courtesy of the state Department of Justice. The fact is, there was nothing illegal (so far as we've been told) about Paddock's purchasing history or how he equipped his firearms. While he may have owned a large number of them, there was nothing especially powerful about any of them, individually speaking. And there was nothing to disqualify him from making these purchases.

I'm 100% with you on this LQ. We have to do something, but I cannot and will not support going into anyone's house to remove weapons unless they are of extreme military grade with military type rounds. General public does not need a 50 cal. with armor piercing or phosphorous rounds. What about an anti tank missile or surface to air missile. Hey, you might need it to protect you from the government. where does the line stop?
A limit on how many may not be a bad idea. A 'collector' doesn't need 20 AR 15's and 20,000 rounds of ammo. If I'm 'collecting' Hot Wheels, I'm sure I don't need 20 of the same old Corvette. That's not 'collecting', that's stockpiling.
I know that even if there's a complete revolution against the government that I don't want these militia wacko jerks running around with more firepower than an army. The 2nd amendment was written when single shot muskets that require reloading after every shot were the only guns available, so no matter how many you had you could only fire one round from one gun at a time.
I'm all for self protection and gun rights, but controlling who can get them (psychological evaluation & thorough background checks). It's harder to get a job unloading ships at the port than to walk in and buy a gun (in most states). Nevada is as lenient as you can get. Who'd a thought that something like this might happen? Hmmmmm?????

[Brent]

I'd like to acknowledge all you rednecks for failing to mention the redneck who shot up a bunch of rednecks. It's good to know that in my absence I could count on you to keep GenDis topical and relevant. :Rolls Eyes:

1 homicidal recluse
58 people murdered
530 more injured
not one peep from anyone here

(shaking my head)

The guy was not a 'redneck'. You really should retract this statement as you made it a bit prematurely.
He didn't just target 'rednecks'. He looked at several different venues from rap to rock and roll and settled on this festival for some reason. Maybe the logistics fit his wacked out plan.
I'm waiting for ALL of the information before commenting on motives or anything else. There's more each day coming out and I believe his girlfriend knows or had more to do with it than she's letting on. Either that or she's really stupid and greedy.

[Natural Lefty]

Fine, Lady Quagga, if you want to stand with the rednecks you like to make fun of, on the wrong side of history.

There is no legitimate reason for people to have automatic or semi-automatic guns; thus, they should be outlawed.

If gun dealers report their sales to police, why aren't they noticing when a person stockpiles large numbers of high powered weapons? There must be something missing in the translation.

P.S. Have you ever known anyone who was killed by gunfire?

[DarkShadow]

P.S. Have you ever known anyone who was killed by gunfire?

Quagga did shoot a rat once.

[Natural Lefty]

I whacked a mole with a shovel once. ;) Well, actually it was a gopher.

[Lady Quagga]

The guy was not a 'redneck'. You really should retract this statement as you made it a bit prematurely.
He didn't just target 'rednecks'. He looked at several different venues from rap to rock and roll and settled on this festival for some reason. Maybe the logistics fit his wacked out plan.
I'm waiting for ALL of the information before commenting on motives or anything else. There's more each day coming out and I believe his girlfriend knows or had more to do with it than she's letting on. Either that or she's really stupid and greedy.

Brent, it's a cultural reference, and there's nothing I've seen in the news or heard from officials which makes me inclined to change it at this time.

[Lady Quagga]

Fine, Lady Quagga, if you want to stand with the rednecks you like to make fun of, on the wrong side of history.

Is this the "colonial musket" argument? If not, do you care to elaborate?


There is no legitimate reason for people to have automatic or semi-automatic guns; thus, they should be outlawed.

"Legitimate" reason? Is this the "hunting use" argument? Once again, do you care to elaborate?


If gun dealers report their sales to police, why aren't they noticing when a person stockpiles large numbers of high powered weapons? There must be something missing in the translation.

Because at this time, there is no law against collecting a large number of firearms.


P.S. Have you ever known anyone who was killed by gunfire?

As a matter of fact, I have.

And not that it has any bearing on the current topic, I might add that my own father was shot and nearly died from his injuries. He never completely recovered from it.

[Lady Quagga]

Quagga did shoot a rat once.

Now DS, you saw the vid. It was clearly a plank. :Beat Stick:

Rats require bats. I only shoot snakes.

[Lady Quagga]

https://image.ibb.co/hxDFiw/Untitled.png (http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2017/10/us/las-vegas-shooting-victims/)

http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2017/10/us/las-vegas-shooting-victims/

(Courtesy CNN)

[DarkShadow]

Now DS, you saw the vid. It was clearly a plank. :Beat Stick:

Rats require bats. I only shoot snakes.

I dunno yo....you messed up that rat good.

[Natural Lefty]

Sure, first of all, I find it strange that you seem to be defending personal gun arsenals at the same time as you are criticizing the violence that gun culture produces, Lady Quagga.

What are the basic elements that people want in life? They want happiness, security, and freedom. The Declaration and Constitution talk about these things. However, I consider no document perfect, and these were written over 200 years ago, when life was much different and humanity's knowledge base much less.

The crucial questions are:

Does knowing that people around us may have their own personal gun arsenals make us happy? NO! Quite the opposite.

Does knowing that people around us may have their own personal gun arsenals make us more free? NO! Quite the opposite.

Does knowing that people around us may have their own personal gun arsenals make us more secure i.e. safe? NO! Quite the opposite.

It is long past time for reasonable gun regulation to reduce the influence of gun culture, which is hurting America and Americans.

This is not anti-hunting. The weapons used in hunting are not what we are talking about. In that sense, yes, I do consider hunting a legitimate use of rifles. "Protection" may also be a legitimate use of guns, but not when the apparent use of such weapons would only be instigating violence against people.

As far as muskets are concerned, I really don't know what you mean, but in the Constitution, the authors were referring to citizen soldiers with muskets, not career soldiers with drones and nuclear bombs. The argument about protecting the citizens from a tyrannical government, I am afraid (not that you made that argument but it is one that I see from libertarian and conservative types), has gone down the drain, because if our government really wanted to kill us, they could and there is nothing that citizens could do about it with measly guns. Thus, it is imperative that government represent us and our interests, that it care about us, and that we participate in it and make it be "our government." As part of being "our government," I think we need gun control reforms, along with many other reforms.

That it is legal to own a bunch of guns is one of the things that needs to be addressed. Legal or not, it seems to me that a person who is accumulating a large arsenal should be noted and checked upon, if not outright stopped from owning so many lethal weapons. Again, as I said, that should be a huge red flag.

[DarkShadow]

Sure, first of all, I find it strange that you seem to be defending personal gun arsenals at the same time as you are criticizing the violence that gun culture produces, Lady Quagga.

What are the basic elements that people want in life? They want happiness, security, and freedom. The Declaration and Constitution talk about these things. However, I consider no document perfect, and these were written over 200 years ago, when life was much different and humanity's knowledge base much less.

The crucial questions are:

Does knowing that people around us may have their own personal gun arsenals make us happy? NO! Quite the opposite.

Does knowing that people around us may have their own personal gun arsenals make us more free? NO! Quite the opposite.

Does knowing that people around us may have their own personal gun arsenals make us more secure i.e. safe? NO! Quite the opposite.

It is long past time for reasonable gun regulation to reduce the influence of gun culture, which is hurting America and Americans.

This is not anti-hunting. The weapons used in hunting are not what we are talking about. In that sense, yes, I do consider hunting a legitimate use of rifles. "Protection" may also be a legitimate use of guns, but not when the apparent use of such weapons would only be instigating violence against people.

As far as muskets are concerned, I really don't know what you mean, but in the Constitution, the authors were referring to citizen soldiers with muskets, not career soldiers with drones and nuclear bombs. The argument about protecting the citizens from a tyrannical government, I am afraid (not that you made that argument but it is one that I see from libertarian and conservative types), has gone down the drain, because if our government really wanted to kill us, they could and there is nothing that citizens could do about it with measly guns. Thus, it is imperative that government represent us and our interests, that it care about us, and that we participate in it and make it be "our government." As part of being "our government," I think we need gun control reforms, along with many other reforms.

That it is legal to own a bunch of guns is one of the things that needs to be addressed. Legal or not, it seems to me that a person who is accumulating a large arsenal should be noted and checked upon, if not outright stopped from owning so many lethal weapons. Again, as I said, that should be a huge red flag.

I wish Tucky's posts were like this.

[DockRat]

I have no problem banning bump stocks or any other type of trigger actuator device.

So, now you want to ban Belt Loops and Pockets ? You want us to use suspenders ? :Shocked:

You might get a ban on Bump Fire stocks BUT you'll never Ban Belt loops or pockets ! :LOL:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrTctbTiJCA



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-IArMvGlzys

[fishmounter]

Natural Lefty… I sent you a PM..

[Natural Lefty]

Thank you, Jeff. I answered your message. ;)

[Lady Quagga]

Sure, first of all, I find it strange that you seem to be defending personal gun arsenals at the same time as you are criticizing the violence that gun culture produces, Lady Quagga.

As an enthusiast who has owned a collection of firearms (both historical and modern), I always find derogatory connotations like "arsenal" and "gun culture" amusing.

Being a gun owner and expressing grief and anger over a tragedy like this are not mutually exclusive.


What are the basic elements that people want in life? They want happiness, security, and freedom. The Declaration and Constitution talk about these things. However, I consider no document perfect, and these were written over 200 years ago, when life was much different and humanity's knowledge base much less.

Agreed - and I have no problem adapting the Constitution or the U.S. Code to accommodate the changes in modern society.


The crucial questions are:

Does knowing that people around us may have their own personal gun arsenals make us happy? NO! Quite the opposite.

Does knowing that people around us may have their own personal gun arsenals make us more free? NO! Quite the opposite.

Does knowing that people around us may have their own personal gun arsenals make us more secure i.e. safe? NO! Quite the opposite.

These questions and your answers to them make certain assumptions. While your happiness or sense of freedom & safety may be influenced by the other people's gun ownership, doesn't automatically make it true for me or anyone else.


It is long past time for reasonable gun regulation to reduce the influence of gun culture, which is hurting America and Americans.

I'd argue that there are other social factors which play just as much (if not more) a part in crime and violence than guns. That's not to say that there's no room for tighter regulation (I believe there is), but demonizing guns (or gun enthusiasts) will not prevent psychopaths like Paddock (or other "lesser" criminals) from engaging in violence against others.


This is not anti-hunting. The weapons used in hunting are not what we are talking about. In that sense, yes, I do consider hunting a legitimate use of rifles. "Protection" may also be a legitimate use of guns, but not when the apparent use of such weapons would only be instigating violence against people.

The use of a weapon instigates violence against people? Or did you mean ownership?


As far as muskets are concerned, I really don't know what you mean, but in the Constitution, the authors were referring to citizen soldiers with muskets, not career soldiers with drones and nuclear bombs. The argument about protecting the citizens from a tyrannical government, I am afraid (not that you made that argument but it is one that I see from libertarian and conservative types), has gone down the drain, because if our government really wanted to kill us, they could and there is nothing that citizens could do about it with measly guns. Thus, it is imperative that government represent us and our interests, that it care about us, and that we participate in it and make it be "our government." As part of being "our government," I think we need gun control reforms, along with many other reforms.

Ugh, I won't argue the legitimacy of an citizen militia, which is a another can of worms altogether. I will point out one thing you mentioned - the subject of drones and nukes. In the grand scheme of things, neither has made much of an impact in our overseas conflicts, against enemy combatants using little more than small arms.


That it is legal to own a bunch of guns is one of the things that needs to be addressed. Legal or not, it seems to me that a person who is accumulating a large arsenal should be noted and checked upon, if not outright stopped from owning so many lethal weapons. Again, as I said, that should be a huge red flag.

I think this is fair. I think we need a much more thorough review of potential gun owners, and would consider reasonable checks on existing gun owners to ensure they are a) compliant with local gun laws, and b) haven't had changes in their criminal/mental status which would precluded them from ownership.

[Brent]

you might get a ban on bump fire stocks but you'll never ban belt loops or pockets ! :lol:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urtctbtijca



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-iarmvglzys

no pants for you dock rat! Lmao

[Brent]

As an enthusiast who has owned a collection of firearms (both historical and modern), I always find derogatory connotations like "arsenal" and "gun culture" amusing.

Being a gun owner and expressing grief and anger over a tragedy like this are not mutually exclusive.



Agreed - and I have no problem adapting the Constitution or the U.S. Code to accommodate the changes in modern society.



These questions and your answers to them make certain assumptions. While your happiness or sense of freedom & safety may be influenced by the other people's gun ownership, doesn't automatically make it true for me or anyone else.



I'd argue that there are other social factors which play just as much (if not more) a part in crime and violence than guns. That's not to say that there's no room for tighter regulation (I believe there is), but demonizing guns (or gun enthusiasts) will not prevent psychopaths like Paddock (or other "lesser" criminals) from engaging in violence against others.



The use of a weapon instigates violence against people? Or did you mean ownership?



Ugh, I won't argue the legitimacy of an citizen militia, which is a another can of worms altogether. I will point out one thing you mentioned - the subject of drones and nukes. In the grand scheme of things, neither has made much of an impact in our overseas conflicts, against enemy combatants using little more than small arms.



I think this is fair. I think we need a much more thorough review of potential gun owners, and would consider reasonable checks on existing gun owners to ensure they are a) compliant with local gun laws, and b) haven't had changes in their criminal/mental status which would precluded them from ownership.

Gotta go with LQ on this one.
Great replies LQ

[SamMcGraw]

I think this is fair. I think we need a much more thorough review of potential gun owners, and would consider reasonable checks on existing gun owners to ensure they are a) compliant with local gun laws, and b) haven't had changes in their criminal/mental status which would precluded them from ownership.

I agree with this. Don't blame the weapon, blame the man pulling the trigger.

[smokehound]

It's pretty sickening that anyone on either side would use this shooting as an excuse to one-up one-another.

Y'all disgust me.

[Lady Quagga]

It's pretty sickening that anyone on either side would use this shooting as an excuse to one-up one-another.

Y'all disgust me.

Save your disgust. No one here is trying to one-up anyone here. (Except maybe steelplatehead, but he doesn't count. :Big Smile:)

[DarkShadow]

I think this is fair. I think we need a much more thorough review of potential gun owners, and would consider reasonable checks on existing gun owners to ensure they are a) compliant with local gun laws, and b) haven't had changes in their criminal/mental status which would precluded them from ownership.

Yeah, I can totally see this.

So, when you finally go bat-**** crazy, I'm sure you're gonna be thrilled when the cops stroll in to take your guns.

I'm buying front row tickets for this one.

And what basis do we use to determine if someone qualifies to own a gun? I wouldn't trust 50% of the population to run around with scissors.

[Lady Quagga]

Yeah, I can totally see this.

So, when you finally go bat-**** crazy, I'm sure you're gonna be thrilled when the cops stroll in to take your guns.

I'm buying front row tickets for this one.

Actually, confiscation already happens. But it's usually a) not proactive and b) limited to local law enforcement level.


And what basis do we use to determine if someone qualifies to own a gun? I wouldn't trust 50% of the population to run around with scissors.

Considering the ridiculous amount of regulation (https://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/things-more-heavily-regulated-than-buying-a-gun-in-the-united-states) we place on other daily activities, I don't think it would be that hard to come up with some stricter gun-ownership requirements.

[DarkShadow]

I don't think it would be that hard to come up with some stricter gun-ownership requirements.

I'll play.

If you think the world is flat, you can't own a gun.

If you think the dinosaurs didn't exist, you can't own a gun.

If you can't use 'their,' 'there,' or 'they're' properly, you can't own a gun.

[Lady Quagga]

I'll play.

If you think the world is flat, you can't fish.

If you think the dinosaurs didn't exist, you can't fish.

If you can't use 'their,' 'there,' or 'they're' properly, you can't fish.

FTFY. Amazing how that works, no?

Although......


If you think the world is flat, you can't own a gun.

You just wiped out half the gun owners in this country.


If you think the dinosaurs didn't exist, you can't own a gun.

There went the other half.


If you can't use 'their,' 'there,' or 'they're' properly, you can't own a gun.

Now you're just being mean......

[DarkShadow]

You just wiped out half the gun owners in this country.



There went the other half.

See?

Gun control.

[Lady Quagga]

Resort disputes police timeline of Las Vegas shooting
By Nicole Chavez, CNN
Updated 11:03 PM ET, Thu October 12, 2017

(CNN) Las Vegas gunman Stephen Paddock opened fire at a crowd at a music festival just after shooting a Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino security guard -- not six minutes later, the resort owner said Thursday, disputing a police timeline.

This week, authorities reversed the timeline, saying Paddock shot Jesus Campos at 9:59 p.m. on October 1, injuring him, before the gunman opened fire on the crowd six minutes later. Initially, police said Campos had approached Paddock's room as the shooting was underway, diverting the gunman's attention.

Paddock then shot Campos through the door and quit firing at concertgoers at the Route 91 Harvest Festival from his hotel room on the 32nd floor, the timeline said.

But MGM Resorts International, which also owns the concert venue, said the time the security guard was reported shot is wrong.

"The 9:59 p.m. PDT time was derived from a Mandalay Bay report manually created after the fact without the benefit of information we now have. We are now confident that the time stated in this report is not accurate," MGM said.

"We know that shots were being fired at the festival lot at the same time as, or within 40 seconds after, the time Jesus Campos first reported that shots were fired over the radio," MGM said.

Police were with armed Mandalay Bay security officers in the building when Campos first reported shots were fired over the radio, the statement said. The officers and the armed security personnel immediately responded to the 32nd floor, MGM said.

Las Vegas Metro Police Department spokesperson Laura Meltzer said the department would not comment on the MGM statement.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/12/us/las-vegas-shooting-investigation-updates/index.html

[steelhead]

You are one sorry sack of @#%T Quagga! Have a nice weekend and try to go out and get some fresh air!


Save your disgust. No one here is trying to one-up anyone here. (Except maybe steelplatehead, but he doesn't count. :Big Smile:)

[Lady Quagga]

You are one sorry sack of @#%T Quagga! Have a nice weekend and try to go out and get some fresh air!

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/244/211/566.jpg

[DarkShadow]

Resort disputes police timeline of Las Vegas shooting
By Nicole Chavez, CNN
Updated 11:03 PM ET, Thu October 12, 2017

(CNN) Las Vegas gunman Stephen Paddock opened fire at a crowd at a music festival just after shooting a Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino security guard -- not six minutes later, the resort owner said Thursday, disputing a police timeline....

http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/12/us/las-vegas-shooting-investigation-updates/index.html

You know what I find interesting?

That with ALL the cameras and recording devices that contain time stamps in Las Vegas, why the timeline has been so difficult to pin down.

They probably know exactly what this dude ate for lunch, but all authorities involved with the investigation can't agree on timelines?

[Natural Lefty]

Then you agree with me about regulating who can own guns, and even regarding modifying the Constitution or laws to prevent gun crimes, which are probably my main concerns, Lady Quagga.

However, you argue that nuts can still create havoc without guns. I find this a false equivalence. If you were asked to choose sides between a group of cavemen with clubs, versus modern guns, I think we know which side you would choose. I have never heard of a man with a knife killing 58 people. He would soon be overpowered. The use of guns kills far more people than would otherwise be possible. There are various factors contributing to the high homicide rate in the U.S., of course. I would argue that the widespread availability of guns is one of those factors, along with cultural attitudes or traditions, poverty, stress, psychopathology, wealth inequality, and even military culture spilling over into civilian life. (Look how many veterans commit suicide tragically, or are accused of murder here in the U.S., for example.)

My point about the idea of citizens overthrowing a tyrannical government with guns is that it is really a far-fetched fantasy, actually both the tyrannical government part, and the way that we would undo it. Drones and nukes were just used as convenient shorthand for the military arsenal. They have and are developing weapons and protective devices that we probably have never heard of. If needed to stop angry citizens, they could make our ears or skin hurt, temporarily blind us, use remote control or "invisible" tanks, guns that can accurately shoot a person from 1/3 of a mile away, etc. Here is an article from 2011 about the new weapons the U.S. military has developed. I am sure that they have even more now. http://www.businessinsider.com/11-incredible-weapons-that-only-america-has-2011-9#china-is-a-bit-farther-behind-in-its-arms-program-12

My comments about gun arsenals and gun culture were directed toward people such as Stephen Paddock. I had no idea that you were a gun collector, but knowing that now, helps explain some of your attitudes. Gun collections are fine, but my point about them is that aside from displaying them, they seem to have little to no use for hunting or self-protection. Perhaps they are fired during target practice or for demonstrations, but otherwise, they are most likely to be used against other human beings. Apparently, Stephen Paddock bought something like 47 powerful guns in the last year of his life.

[Natural Lefty]

I want to add that this site has come a long ways in the past few years, to come to a point where we can have a rational discussion about gun violence and gun control, for instance. Even most conservatives and gun enthusiast liberals tend to agree on the basics of gun control. I don't know who Steelhead means is trying to one up whom in this thread, though.

[DarkShadow]

I want to add that this site has come a long ways in the past few years, to come to a point where we can have a rational discussion about gun violence and gun control, for instance.

I'm sure the absence of the Confederate Flag Waving Folks who now use Facebook as their medium to spew their $h!t miiiiight have something to do with that.

That, or the fact that we have people on GenDisc now that can use commas correctly, thus preventing the mouth breathers from throwing their hat in the ring.

The fact that DockRat can't post pics anymore because Photobucket doesn't allow third party postings?

The fact that the village meth head isn't around anymore to respond to his own posts?

Take your pick.

[Natural Lefty]

I think the Confederate Flag waving folks moved back to what used to be the confederacy in a futile attempt to revive it. LOL

I am sure they are on Facebook somewhere, but nowhere that I have been anywhere near.

[etucker1959]

I think the Confederate Flag waving folks moved back to what used to be the confederacy in a futile attempt to revive it. LOL

I am sure they are on Facebook somewhere, but nowhere that I have been anywhere near.

The Confederate Flag waving folks are still here checking on FNN on a daily basis. (one of them did have enough sense to take his Confederate Flag avatar down) However, they are too afraid to speak!!! If you shot your mouth off on a daily basis how terrible pResident Obama and all his supporters were. Could they now even remotely try to defend what Trump does on a weekly basis??? They can't and they know it, so they just keep quiet. Some might say, "that is justice for their insolence!!" I feel it just shows what they were really made of all along!!!

[Natural Lefty]

Yes, I think they still check this site, and some even still make comments.

Which one is the village meth head, Mr. Shadow? And what was the deal with this Hooked character (anyone)? I clearly missed a lot in the years I was dealing with sick parents and selling their house.

[etucker1959]

Yes, I think they still check this site, and some even still make comments.

Which one is the village meth head, Mr. Shadow? And what was the deal with this Hooked character (anyone)? I clearly missed a lot in the years I was dealing with sick parents and selling their house.

One of them was checking this site just 5 minutes ago. Yet they did not respond even when we were talking about them in every thing but by name. I suggest since they once proudly displayed the Confederate battle flag, they live up to the fighting spirit of others who served under it.

The actions of a true Confederate warrior is best exemplified by that of Captain Raphael Semmes of the CSS Alabama. (commerce raider) When confronted by the Union warship "USS Kersarge" off of the coast of France. Captain Semmes acted like a true warrior and came out to duel with the enemy vessel. If it wasn't for his long voyage that had his powder wet, he probably would have won that duel. He didn't choose to run and hide but face his adversary's head on.

That's the "Heritage" argument given on the Confederate flag. Yet these people on here couldn't even live up to that!!! lol

There has been a lot of ranting on here in recent weeks. So I thought I would take my turn!! lol

[Brent]

Yes, I think they still check this site, and some even still make comments.

Which one is the village meth head, Mr. Shadow? And what was the deal with this Hooked character (anyone)? I clearly missed a lot in the years I was dealing with sick parents and selling their house.

You have actually answered your own question/questions

[Natural Lefty]

Okay, I got it. Hooked must have been the village meth head, so he was hooked, not a fish. Thanks Brent.

[Ssortasober]

Okay, I got it. Hooked must have been the village meth head, so he was hooked, not a fish. Thanks Brent.

And you Lefty are brilliant, teaching nurses? So do I. An acute setting, For 20 years. Judgement on a book by its cover, I'm questioning what your right is doing. Pompous arragant d bag. To my face I think you would curl your tail, and piss a little.
Internet loudmouth little man.

[Natural Lefty]

Didn't you promise to leave this site last time, Ssrtasober? I guess you chose to make scurrilous accusations instead.

I did not judge anyone. I simply repeated what others called a certain former member, for the sake of clarity, so that everyone would know who we were talking about.

I didn't say that I am a nursing school teacher, either. I said that I teach a lot of nursing students. I teach psychology, and a lot of nursing students take my classes.

[Lady Quagga]

Then you agree with me about regulating who can own guns, and even regarding modifying the Constitution or laws to prevent gun crimes, which are probably my main concerns, Lady Quagga.

I don't think we'll be seeing any constitutional conventions any time soon. But federal law is easier to change, though the last major legislation we had in this country sunset during the Bush administration (and really didn't address the issue of mass shootings).


However, you argue that nuts can still create havoc without guns. I find this a false equivalence. If you were asked to choose sides between a group of cavemen with clubs, versus modern guns, I think we know which side you would choose. I have never heard of a man with a knife killing 58 people. He would soon be overpowered. The use of guns kills far more people than would otherwise be possible. There are various factors contributing to the high homicide rate in the U.S., of course. I would argue that the widespread availability of guns is one of those factors, along with cultural attitudes or traditions, poverty, stress, psychopathology, wealth inequality, and even military culture spilling over into civilian life. (Look how many veterans commit suicide tragically, or are accused of murder here in the U.S., for example.)

This country has neglected individual and collective mental health issues for decades. And I would agree that economic & social factors, as well as certain "cultural norms", including treating mental health as some sort of taboo, have only contributed to its deterioration.

But in this particular case, I was referring to Paddock specifically. This man had the means - and the materials - to kill as many (if not more) victims than he had, without ever having to pull a trigger. And he is not the only mass/serial murderer to have been found with explosives. Would an expansion of our laws have prevented the possession/use of those explosives?


My point about the idea of citizens overthrowing a tyrannical government with guns is that it is really a far-fetched fantasy, actually both the tyrannical government part, and the way that we would undo it. Drones and nukes were just used as convenient shorthand for the military arsenal.

As I said before, I really don't care to entertain notions like this, which are really nothing more than civil war variants of "Red Dawn" scenario. The point I was trying to make was that, regardless of the nature of modern "super" weapons, you will find that in virtually all conflicts past and present, conventional small arms ultimately play the dominant role.


My comments about gun arsenals and gun culture were directed toward people such as Stephen Paddock. I had no idea that you were a gun collector, but knowing that now, helps explain some of your attitudes. Gun collections are fine, but my point about them is that aside from displaying them, they seem to have little to no use for hunting or self-protection. Perhaps they are fired during target practice or for demonstrations, but otherwise, they are most likely to be used against other human beings. Apparently, Stephen Paddock bought something like 47 powerful guns in the last year of his life.

Aside from my collectors pieces, I'd argue that the firearms I've owned made excellent hunting, sporting, or self-defense guns. That one or two of them were based on military platforms doesn't delegitimize them, particularly when I can purchase hunting rifles which are even more powerful.

However, I do agree that flags should have gone up at the sheer number of guns Paddock purchased. Even if they had been purchased for legitimate use, I'd be hard-pressed to justify what that use would be, outside of a gun club or Branch Davidian sect. (Okay, maybe not the Davidians.)

[DarkShadow]

... I'd argue that the firearms I've owned made excellent hunting, sporting, or self-defense guns.

Uh huh....

That AR-15 sure showed that squirrel who's boss! And for shooting clays? Break out the Garand. Too bad you don't have an AK. Then we can recreate an Ice Cube song all while having a competition shooting empty Bud Light bottles in the back.

https://i.pinimg.com/564x/19/4d/8f/194d8f0c554bcbeb184fb8af5cd432f5--smoking-weed-ice-cubes.jpg

[Natural Lefty]

Yes, individual and collective mental health is part of the cultural aspect which influences violence, LQ.

Good point about explosives. They can kill people en masse and need to be regulated too. Most of the United States' "superweapens" are things that go boom, in fact. American air superiority has made warfare a totally different beast than in the past. It doesn't necessarily translate into beating foes into submission on the ground, where small arms may play a such a large role, but it tilts the playing field toward the side with the fancy airplanes and weapons. However, defending home turf is a lot easier than invading and overtaking another nation, I gather. But when we are talking about domestic situations in the United States, I am not sure how that applies. It is home turf for both sides.

[DarkShadow]

Good point about explosives. They can kill people en masse and need to be regulated too.

While I realize that I can't go get some C4 at my local Home Depot, let's hope bombs can't be made by sourcing regular products, or else, are you going to be regulating steel water pipes? Fertilizer?

"I just need threaded end caps for my pipes! Why do I need to wait 3 weeks? My basement is flooding and the wife is gonna be pissed!"

Then again, we already regulate Sudafed to make sure Hookd doesn't make meth in his garage, so I guess the regulation of anything is pretty much possible in Future America.

Carry on.

[steelhead]

Guns paired with a crazy person kill people, getting rid of guns does nothing to stop the crazies from killing. Look at Europe where most of the terror has been auto related. They are handing out licenses left and right in California with little screening. At what point will you outlaw automobiles?


I want to add that this site has come a long ways in the past few years, to come to a point where we can have a rational discussion about gun violence and gun control, for instance. Even most conservatives and gun enthusiast liberals tend to agree on the basics of gun control. I don't know who Steelhead means is trying to one up whom in this thread, though.

[steelhead]

No I'm laughing at you, that was funny!

[Natural Lefty]

Yeah, right, Steelhead. Let's do a little comparison of the homicide rate in the United States versus European nations. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/14/upshot/compare-these-gun-death-rates-the-us-is-in-a-different-world.html Well, that one only includes guns.

This one has homicide rates around the world from all causes. There are places with higher homicide rates than the United States, but they are much lower in most of Europe, Asia and Canada as well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

[Lady Quagga]

That AR-15 sure showed that squirrel who's boss!

Now now, I've never shot a squirrel. I have been known to feed them Nilla Wafers on occasion, however.


And for shooting clays? Break out the Garand.

Wasting a $1.20 round to hit a $0.13 clay? I think not......


Too bad you don't have an AK. Then we can recreate an Ice Cube song all while having a competition shooting empty Bud Light bottles in the back.

Actually I did own a WASR-10, a Romanian semi-auto variant of the AKM. :Big Smile:

Unfortunately, I had to give it up for personal reasons. Which is just as well - the CRV they charge for bottles is ridiculous!

[SamMcGraw]

Uh huh....

That AR-15 sure showed that squirrel who's boss! And for shooting clays? Break out the Garand. Too bad you don't have an AK. Then we can recreate an Ice Cube song all while having a competition shooting empty Bud Light bottles in the back.

https://i.pinimg.com/564x/19/4d/8f/194d8f0c554bcbeb184fb8af5cd432f5--smoking-weed-ice-cubes.jpg

Lol! Ice Cube and guns, the perfect combination. :LOL:

[Brent]

Guns paired with a crazy person kill people, getting rid of guns does nothing to stop the crazies from killing. Look at Europe where most of the terror has been auto related. They are handing out licenses left and right in California with little screening. At what point will you outlaw automobiles?

steelhead,

The "they'll kill you another way" argument is absurd. So let's just hand out bomb materials, nerve gas, rocket launchers and hand grenades, because "they're going to run you over if they don't blow you up anyways". We have to do something. If there's a candy that is killing kids all over our country and we can stop or slow it down, then we do it for the best interest of the people. There's tons of other candy to choose from, just not the mass killing candy that everyone's addicted to. The entire point is that we have to do something relevant to slow and curb the ease with which this is happening. Not just make excuses and watch everyone get killed. I guess you're fine waiting until they're killing you or your family before you decide to do something. I don't get it. If one persons life can be saved, then it's worth doing. It may be you or a loved ones life. That's all I'm saying.

[commiechew]

steelhead,

The "they'll kill you another way" argument is absurd. So let's just hand out bomb materials, nerve gas, rocket launchers and hand grenades, because "they're going to run you over if they don't blow you up anyways". We have to do something. If there's a candy that is killing kids all over our country and we can stop or slow it down, then we do it for the best interest of the people. There's tons of other candy to choose from, just not the mass killing candy that everyone's addicted to. The entire point is that we have to do something relevant to slow and curb the ease with which this is happening. Not just make excuses and watch everyone get killed. I guess you're fine waiting until they're killing you or your family before you decide to do something. I don't get it. If one persons life can be saved, then it's worth doing. It may be you or a loved ones life. That's all I'm saying.


I do not own a gun and never held or shot one. To say that a candy is killing kids and we can and should stop it is correct. If a candy manufacturer is making poison candy, stop the manufacture of it and arrest the maker, depending on his intent, maybe throw him in jail. If the candy manufacturer is making good candy but someone is poisoning the candy and putting it back into the hands of children, killing them; then arrest the "tainter" and throw him in jail. If a gun manufacturer is making guns that unintentionally shoot, stop the manufacturer and if done intentionally to cause harm, arrest him and throw him in jail. If the gun manufacturer is making good guns but someone is using the gun to shoot at children, killing them; arrest the "shooter" and throw him in jail. You all aim at the wrong target. I like candy, I am indifferent to guns. If either cause harm, poison candy or defective guns, stop them. But, make sure you stop the right thing at the right point. And, not the wrong thing at just "any point" (without purposeful intent). Please do not take this the wrong way. I do not want to be banned.

[Lady Quagga]

I do not own a gun and never held or shot one. To say that a candy is killing kids and we can and should stop it is correct. If a candy manufacturer is making poison candy, stop the manufacture of it and arrest the maker, depending on his intent, maybe throw him in jail. If the candy manufacturer is making good candy but someone is poisoning the candy and putting it back into the hands of children, killing them; then arrest the "tainter" and throw him in jail. If a gun manufacturer is making guns that unintentionally shoot, stop the manufacturer and if done intentionally to cause harm, arrest him and throw him in jail. If the gun manufacturer is making good guns but someone is using the gun to shoot at children, killing them; arrest the "shooter" and throw him in jail. You all aim at the wrong target. I like candy, I am indifferent to guns. If either cause harm, poison candy or defective guns, stop them. But, make sure you stop the right thing at the right point. And, not the wrong thing at just "any point" (without purposeful intent). Please do not take this the wrong way. I do not want to be banned.

What about candy guns?

https://image.ibb.co/bDxzmR/images.jpg

[commiechew]

what about them?

[Lady Quagga]

what about them?

https://42d3agjcsyy46s3v5209co3g-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/sales-lead-management-01.gif

[commiechew]

50445




The message you have entered is too short. Please lengthen your message to at least 10 characters.

[Lady Quagga]

The message you have entered is too short. Please lengthen your message to at least 10 characters.


http://78.media.tumblr.com/6cd525bbe0c842075415241a70bbbd2a/tumblr_mqi4heIFd41qz8x31o4_500.gif

[DarkShadow]

http://78.media.tumblr.com/6cd525bbe0c842075415241a70bbbd2a/tumblr_mqi4heIFd41qz8x31o4_500.gif

Hey, anybody not senile should own a gun, as you said.

Don't yell at me.

[commiechew]

.......
.......
.......
50446

[Lady Quagga]

Hey, anybody not senile should own a gun, as you said.

Don't yell at me.

We don't know if this new candidate is senile or not......or meth'd out for that matter......