Las Vegas Shooting

[Vander Blue Man Group]

Semantics.  My "incidents of this nature" was referring to a person indiscriminately targeting a large group of people with lethal means without regard for numbers of injuries/fatalities.  Again, I agree that you can mitigate the severity of these attacks (i.e. reduce the numbers of injuries/fatalities), but you're not going to stop them completely.  The problem is that the left wants complete "elimination" and the right wants complete "freedom" (neither of which are realistic), and of course, this being a hot-button political issue, a solution that would save more lives (but not all) just isn't going to happen. 

That's what a turn-out based politic environment is all about... don't give up the ship, and never compromise.

Got it - thanks for the clarification. 

[Babybluejeans]

The moment I see draft language of a Constitutional Amendment repealing or modifying the 2nd Amendment being advanced for ratification in blue states, then I'll take people seriously when they say things like "Congress should get of its a** and do something."

There's a mechanism to advance gun control, but I haven't seen anyone actually start the process of moving it forward after any of these tragedies.

I'd be happy to consider and support well-drafted amendment language... but I haven't even heard of any being proposed in deep blue states.

Ha, you've got this seriously mixed up amigo. The 2nd amendment is not the mechanism to advance gun control. There's nothing in the Constitution or in Supreme Court precedent that says the right to bear arms includes the right to bear any weapon, including assault weapons (those didn't even exist when the Bill of Rights were drafted). Gun control legislation absolutely can be -- and has been! -- passed without running afoul of the 2nd amendment. What you meant to say was that the 2nd amendment would be the mechanism to advance gun prohibition, but not gun control.

[MU82]

A week or two after Sandy Hook, there were a couple of polls showing something like 80-90% of Americans wanted these kinds of weapons made illegal. When do that many Americans agree on ANYTHING? I think it was 70-80% of GUN OWNERS agreeing, too.

And yet nothing got done, so I agree with those who say the ship has sailed.

Some would argue it wouldn't do any good anyway. But what if you save just one life with a well-crafted law? Don't the abortion opponents argue all the time about the value of every, single life?

Again, I'm not holding my breath. Just not gonna happen. So we'll be the Wild Wild West the rest of our lives, and our kids lives and our grandkids lives ... if all of us are lucky enough to survive.

But here's an idea: Let's ban travel from a bunch of Muslim countries! Because they're bigger threats than ... well ... just about nobody.

It's a frustrating time. I really don't have solutions to offer. There probably aren't any. Damn.

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

Semantics.  My "incidents of this nature" was referring to a person indiscriminately targeting a large group of people with lethal means without regard for numbers of injuries/fatalities.  Again, I agree that you can mitigate the severity of these attacks (i.e. reduce the numbers of injuries/fatalities), but you're not going to stop them completely.  The problem is that the left wants complete "elimination" and the right wants complete "freedom" (neither of which are realistic), and of course, this being a hot-button political issue, a solution that would save more lives (but not all) just isn't going to happen. 

That's what a turn-out based politic environment is all about... don't give up the ship, and never compromise.

You're pretty spot on but I need to fix part of your statement:
The problem is that the right wants everyone to believe that the left wants complete "elimination" and the right wants complete "freedom".........

I think there's a middle ground to be found, but the right is so in bed with the NRA the only position they will take is complete "freedom".

[tower912]

Meh.   At this point, there is not going to be a serious discussion about gun control.    The NRA has won and too many politicians live in fear of them to have substantive debate.    We can keep arguing about it on message boards, but for now, the point is moot. 

[Tugg Speedman]

Meh.   At this point, there is not going to be a serious discussion about gun control.    The NRA has won and too many politicians live in fear of them to have substantive debate.    We can keep arguing about it on message boards, but for now, the point is moot.

Serious discussion???

This board is a microcosm of 'merica ... two groups that think they are correct yelling at the other group (and I'm as guilty as everyone else here).  This is essentially every topic in the Superbar.  The point is moot in every thread here.

There will be no "discussion" or "common ground."  Instead, both sides are looking to "win" and "defeat" the other side.

Eventually, we will split up into at least two countries (if not more) and we can all pick the one we want to live in, like the Facebook feed we subscribe to.

[tower912]

Fair point.    There is not going to be a serious discussion IN WASHINGTON about gun control.     And I agree that this board is a microcosm of America, without the gender or ethnic diversity.   With a few exceptions, we are a bunch of white guys with an alma mater in common.      But I haven't given up hope.   

[Spotcheck Billy]

reports now that he might not have used automatic weapons but a trigger crank or bump stock, both of which are legal

[Jockey]

Semantics.  My "incidents of this nature" was referring to a person indiscriminately targeting a large group of people with lethal means without regard for numbers of injuries/fatalities.  Again, I agree that you can mitigate the severity of these attacks (i.e. reduce the numbers of injuries/fatalities), but you're not going to stop them completely.  The problem is that the left wants complete "elimination" and the right wants complete "freedom" (neither of which are realistic), and of course, this being a hot-button political issue, a solution that would save more lives (but not all) just isn't going to happen. 

That's what a turn-out based politic environment is all about... don't give up the ship, and never compromise.

I don't agree, Benny. You know I am about as far left as possible and I have no problem with people owning a handgun for protection or owning hunting rifles. I know of very few lefties who want to eliminate guns. Almost all lefties want elimination of large clips and assault rifles.

Your point is part of the problem by locking everyone into an all-or-nothing group. Most people don't think that way. There are many things that can be done to fight the constant mass shootings. Even YOU say that steps can be taken to "mitigate" the problem.

Sadly, people like you are the problem (not meant as a personal attack). I say that because it is ONLY when people on the right like you stand up and say something has to be done, that it will happen. We have tried on the left, but every time there is a mass shooting, those on the right say more guns is the answer. Until YOU guys stand up and say that life has value, nothing will be done.

[Pakuni]

reports now that he might not have used automatic weapons but a trigger crank or bump stock, both of which are legal

Wall Street Journal says there was at least one automatic rifle:

The gunman who authorities said killed at least 58 people at a Las Vegas music festival appears to have used at least one fully automatic rifle and had more than a dozen other firearms in his hotel room, a law-enforcement official said.
Investigators found 18 to 20 firearms, some fully automatic, in a room on the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino, the law enforcement official said.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/las-vegas-suspect-likely-used-automatic-rifle-in-massacre-1506966716

[Jockey]

reports now that he might not have used automatic weapons but a trigger crank or bump stock, both of which are legal

OK, cool. I don't mind all of the dead people if that is the case. 

[Vander Blue Man Group]

Meh.   At this point, there is not going to be a serious discussion about gun control.    The NRA has won and too many politicians live in fear of them to have substantive debate.    We can keep arguing about it on message boards, but for now, the point is moot.

While you may be right isn't this a defeatist attitude? 

[Tugg Speedman]

Fair point.    There is not going to be a serious discussion IN WASHINGTON about gun control.     And I agree that this board is a microcosm of America, without the gender or ethnic diversity.   With a few exceptions, we are a bunch of white guys with an alma mater in common.      But I haven't given up hope.

The problem with guns is they are cultural for a lot of people.  They are the very representation of free will.  They will have another civil war than giving them up, even their AR-15s with 30 round magazines.  For every state in the south and east of the Mississippi, except CA, OR and WA, over half the population owns at least 1 gun. 

For others, they represent a disgusting symbol of what is wrong with 'merica.

About now, people like MU82 and other likeminded are gearing up a post with references to banjos, hee-haw and missing teeth.  Jockey already beat him to it two posts below. Again a microcosm of 'merica, winning and feeling superior is more important than a rational conversation.  And we act surprised both sides are so dug in it is impossible to find common ground.

So how do we bridge the gap?  We don't ... Eventually, we split up into multiple countries.  See Catalonia in Spain this weekend, coming in 'merica in the next several years.

[Vander Blue Man Group]

The NRA cares about money - not human life.  Look at impact of the shooting on stocks, etc. already. 

http://fortune.com/2017/10/02/las-vegas-mass-shooting-gun-stocks/

[Jockey]

Actually, we should all just shut up. The White House has told us this is not the time to discuss this.

[Pakuni]

So how do we bridge the gap?  We don't ... Eventually, we split up into multiple countries.  See Catalonia in Spain this weekend, coming in 'merica in the next several years.

This prediction is even worse than your thoughts on AAPL.

[Tugg Speedman]

The NRA cares about money - not human life.  Look at impact of the shooting on stocks, etc. already. 

http://fortune.com/2017/10/02/las-vegas-mass-shooting-gun-stocks/

Tower, I repeat, you want to have a rational conversation when people make this kind of statements.

Everyone dig in as the war is just beginning.

PS

Gun stocks always rally when these type of events happen, it is fear that you have to rush and uy an AR before they are made illegal.  And the NRA is so powerful not because of its money but because of the feverant support single issue gun owners will give them when voting.  They are the "traditional" equivalent of minorities that vote democrat no matter what.



I'll make you a deal, I'll stop calling black lives matter a terrorist organization if you stop thinking the NRA actually wants mass shootings.

[Jockey]

About now, people like MU82 and other likeminded are gearing up a post with references to banjos, hee-haw and missing teeth.  Jockey already beat him to it two posts below.

I don't know why I respond to someone like you, but what the h*ll are you talking about?

People get upset that I call chicas a liar; well, sorry, you are also a liar. Show me the quote where I (or 82) referenced "banjos, hee-haw and missing teeth".

If you can't do it then get the h*ll off the board!!

[mu03eng]

I don't agree, Benny. You know I am about as far left as possible and I have no problem with people owning a handgun for protection or owning hunting rifles. I know of very few lefties who want to eliminate guns. Almost all lefties want elimination of large clips and assault rifles.

Care to articulate what the difference is between an assault rifle and a hunting rifle?

Extended mags make no sense unless you are a wanna be warrior, and I'd be all for banning anything over 15 shot mags(hell I don't really know what the number should be but 15 sounds like a totally reasonable number that no gun nut should be able to quibble with)

However, even without extended mags, if you've got a fully automatic weapon its going to do a lot of damage. The mag switch would add about 10 seconds of non-fire time vs the extend mags. That's not nothing and likely means more people alive now(assuming he didn't home make his mag extensions) but in a pragmatic sense it means very little in these types of cases. And automatic weapons are very illegal and no legal ones have been used in a crime ever(that I'm aware of).

One of the issues is that we only have "serious talks" when serious events occur which allows the opposite side of the political spectrum to cry "they're politicizing this event, shame!" which derails any practical serious talk.

[Vander Blue Man Group]

Tower, I repeat, you want to have a rational conversation when people make this kind of statements.

Everyone dig in as the war is just beginning.

PS

Gun stocks always rally when these type of events happen, it is fear that you have to rush and uy an AR before they are made illegal.  And the NRA is so powerful not because of its money but because of the feverant support single issue gun owners will give them when voting.  They are the "traditional" equivalent of minorities that vote democrat no matter what.



I'll make you a deal, I'll stop calling black lives matter a terrorist organization if you stop thinking the NRA actually wants mass shootings.

The NRA is not so powerful because of it's money?  Wow......

[mu03eng]

The problem with guns is they are cultural for a lot of people.  They are the very representation of free will.  They will have another civil war than giving them up, even their AR-15s with 30 round magazines.  For every state in the south and east of the Mississippi, except CA, OR and WA, over half the population owns at least 1 gun. 

You'd be surprised how much gun ownership there is in OR and WA....they have some of the strongest "militias" in the country and for every hippie in Portland there is a least one gun nut in Bend.

Larger point is correct, and what Benny was saying as well....gun ownership has been embedded in segments of this country for over 200 years. Any challenge to that, perceived or otherwise, is a non-starter....especially when taken in the aftermath of a tragedy where hyperbole is rampant.

[Tugg Speedman]

I don't know why I respond to someone like you, but what the h*ll are you talking about?

People get upset that I call chicas a liar; well, sorry, you are also a liar. Show me the quote where I (or 82) referenced "banjos, hee-haw and missing teeth".

If you can't do it then get the h*ll off the board!!

82 yesterday in the now locked NFL thread about NASCAR fans

http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=54575.msg950195#msg950195

Good bye!!


Again, I'll admit what you or Pakuni cannot ... We just yell at each other trying to be morally superior, there is no actual discussion here about anything.

In the locked NFL threat, we could not even agree if the NFL was seeing a decline, let alone the causes of that decline (if it was happening).  Here we started yelling about gun control before we knew anything.

If we get french type gun control, crazies rent a truck and run over people, the carnage is about the same.  So shouldn't we talk about stopping suicidal maniacs because no matter what we do with guns they will find a way to inflict mass casualties? (if Paddock rented a large truck and mowed down 58 people leaving the concert, does that make it better?)

[Galway Eagle]

The problem with guns is they are cultural for a lot of people.  They are the very representation of free will.  They will have another civil war than giving them up, even their AR-15s with 30 round magazines.  For every state in the south and east of the Mississippi, except CA, OR and WA, over half the population owns at least 1 gun. 

For others, they represent a disgusting symbol of what is wrong with 'merica.

About now, people like MU82 and other likeminded are gearing up a post with references to banjos, hee-haw and missing teeth.  Jockey already beat him to it two posts below. Again a microcosm of 'merica, winning and feeling superior is more important than a rational conversation.  And we act surprised both sides are so dug in it is impossible to find common ground.

So how do we bridge the gap?  We don't ... Eventually, we split up into multiple countries.  See Catalonia in Spain this weekend, coming in 'merica in the next several years.

As much as I agree the states should be broken up I doubt we will ever see that happen.  We have wayyy too much psycho national pride on both sides to split up without a massive change of landscape or invasion.

[Vander Blue Man Group]

Satire from the Onion that is all too true.

http://www.theonion.com/article/nra-says-mass-shootings-just-unfortunate-price-pro-57094

FAIRFAX, VA—In the aftermath of a shooting in Las Vegas that left at least 58 people dead and more than 500 wounded, National Rifle Association officials said Monday that mass shootings are just the unfortunate price of protecting people’s freedom to commit mass shootings. “What happened in Las Vegas is a horrific tragedy, but it’s sadly the inevitable cost of safeguarding the rights of Americans to perpetrate such horrific tragedies,” said NRA executive vice president Wayne LaPierre, adding that defending the constitutional right to commit mass murder meant accepting that mass murders were occasionally going to happen. “As saddened as we are today, we must always remember that preserving our sacred liberty to go on violent rampages is far more important than any one violent rampage.” LaPierre went on to say that legislation like recent state laws permitting guns on college campuses and an upcoming House bill that would relax restrictions on the purchase of gun silencers were vital to ensuring people had more freedom to commit much deadlier massacres, even if they sometimes lead to much deadlier massacres.

[Tugg Speedman]

The NRA is not so powerful because of it's money?  Wow......

Where does the money come from and why do they get it?  Becuase owning guns is cultural and there are a lot of people that take the threat of them going away seriously.

Trump election should have proven that money does not matter.  Hillary outspent him more than any other race in history and lost.  What matters is the NRA has millions and millions of people that will vote however the NRA tells them to vote.  The money is not that important.