Las Vegas

Here's an interesting tidbit. Practice run maybe?
Authorities also revealed that the weekend before the shooting, Paddock, 64, had rented a high-rise condo in a building that overlooked the Life is Beautiful alternative music festival featuring Chance the Rapper, Muse, Lorde and Blink-182. Lombardo offered no other details on what led Paddock there.
Click to expand...

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/10/0...iller-likely-had-some-help-at-some-point.html

Lombardo is now casting doubt on Paddock as a lone wolf. Says he had to have help at some point. FBI lead agent said they are following clues that lead them all over the U.S. and the World.

Paddock shot bullet holes in airport gas storage tanks that were over 500 yards from his shooting perch, probably trying to get them to explode.

Not one car out on the Strip was hit. He was a good shot and was focused on a particular group of people he wanted to punish.
 
mchammer said:
IMG_5565.PNG
Click to expand...

I know this is getting onto thin ice, but to look at it from a different perspective, Serbia has the 2nd highest incidence of gun ownership per population in the world yet among the lowest homicide rates.

Guns are banned in Brazil yet they have ~64,000 a year murdered by gun

How do you explain this?

At a minimum, the facts refute the gun-controllers' argument that gun ownership is behind mass homicide

And Serbia is not a complete statistical outlier either. The same holds for Finland, Sweden and Switzerland who have "lenient" gun laws. France, in the other hand, has extremely stringent gun laws.

DLKkdSMXoAIipNG.jpg
 
Last edited:
Isn't there middle ground between what we have now with the gun show loophole, or the fact that Deez can meet me in Durant and sell me whatever weapon he has that I want to buy and there's no duty/liability on him if I'm a nutjob Okie trying to shoot up an eastern Oklahoma meth hampsterdam and "banning guns". Hell, just address .50 cal rifles and take some steps that will have an effect in 10 years or so. As it stands now, capitalism is seeing gun manufacturers and the NRA fan the flames that "they're coming after your guns" or they're going to get them off the market so you better buy them now.

The gun dealer who sold the gun that was part of the Virginia Tech shooting a while back said his business went up tenfold AFTER the shooting.

Jade Helm!!!!
 
OUBubba said:
Isn't there middle ground between what we have now with the gun show loophole,...
Click to expand...

Your "gun show loophole" is not real. Whatever gun laws there are apply just as much to gun shows as they do to any other place where guns are sold.
 
OUBubba said:
....The gun dealer who sold the gun that was part of the Virginia Tech shooting a while back said his business went up tenfold AFTER the shooting. ....
Click to expand...

Gun maker stocks usually go up after each one of these. Which means the opportunity is always there to profit off these tragedies, if you know what you are doing and dont have a moral issue with it.
 
Joe Fan said:
All licensed gun sellers perform the same required background checks at a gun show as they do at any other time or place. There is no gun show loophole
Click to expand...
Did you read the link? As many as 50% of vendors at these shows are "private sellers".

63% of the private sellers sold guns to under cover folks after being told "I probably couldn't pass a background check". 94% of licensed dealers did so.

"A February 2011 poll found that over 82% of poll respondents, including more than 77% of gun owners, in the bellwether states of Arizona, Colorado, Indiana, Virginia and Ohio support laws requiring all sellers at gun shows to run background checks."
 
OU the problem is not there is no law, it's already there. The problem is enforcement and penalty. I think everyone who supports law enforcement agrees that we need enforcement of existing laws already on the books,,,,,,,ummmm just like immigration.
 
OUBubba said:
...... As it stands now, capitalism is seeing gun manufacturers and the NRA fan the flames that "they're coming after your guns" or they're going to get them off the market so you better buy them now. ....
Click to expand...

And this is probably true. The last idea I saw put forward is a ban on the latest new phrase progressives have just learned -- "bump stock." But, if this were allowed, they would quickly move to an all-out ban on the weapon itself. Nevermind that the weapon can be modified in other ways and a bump stock ironically offers a lower firing rate. If you ever tried one, you know this already.

Same is true with Hillary's misguided mission to ban 'silencers." The existence of 3D printers shows you that these people are not really serious.

But, can we please be honest about just this one thing -- their real goal is to take away the Second Amendment in its entirety. We know from leaked emails, this was one of Hillary's litmus test items for the vetting of Fed Ct nominees.


DLYI9VnV4AAUisT.jpg


Lastly, as a reminder, this is what happens when the Federal Govt comes for your guns
DLYMourU8AEU1w1.jpg
 
Last edited:
OUBubba said:
Isn't there middle ground between what we have now with the gun show loophole, or the fact that Deez can meet me in Durant and sell me whatever weapon he has that I want to buy and there's no duty/liability on him if I'm a nutjob Okie trying to shoot up an eastern Oklahoma meth hampsterdam and "banning guns". Hell, just address .50 cal rifles and take some steps that will have an effect in 10 years or so. As it stands now, capitalism is seeing gun manufacturers and the NRA fan the flames that "they're coming after your guns" or they're going to get them off the market so you better buy them now.

The gun dealer who sold the gun that was part of the Virginia Tech shooting a while back said his business went up tenfold AFTER the shooting.

Jade Helm!!!!
Click to expand...
Has there any been legislation which included a provision that further legislation and/or repeal of said legislation would have to meet a higher vote count?

for example, if we voted now to say that every sale, no matter the transaction source and consumer would have to have a background check. Could the legislation also include a provision that said there could be no other infringement on gun sales without a 70% approval in both houses?

I don't think it's possible to curtail the voting power of future assemblies but thought maybe someone else would know for sure.
 
Joe Fan said:
It's arguably two meals as well.
Although admittedly hard to say with any certainty
If it is one meal, then its alot to eat for a guy who was supposed to be skinny/losing weight
Click to expand...
Again, not weighing in definitively on one versus two, but most of the larger rooms tend to have both a microwave and a small refrigerator. If he was truly limiting contact, even if it WAS two meals, the fridge and microwave add to plausibility of ordering for one...

I've never stayed at Mandalay Bay and base my room equipment experiences on other Strip properties...
 
Jeez, hadn't thought about Nancy Sinatra in 30 years or more.

Watch out NRA, her boots were made for walkin'!
 
Joe Fan said:
Your "gun show loophole" is not real. Whatever gun laws there are apply just as much to gun shows as they do to any other place where guns are sold.
Click to expand...

I find myself constantly using that "loophole" in New York City parking laws where I get to park on the sidewalk where there aren't any signs saying I can't.
 
I, for one, am shocked and uphauled that the pro-gun control folks have not swayed the anti-gun control folks over to their camp in this thread and vice versa.
 
Here is a chart that blows up some of the talking points you see out there. The source is credible, the AEI, using CDC and Congressional Research Service (CRS) stats. I havent seen anyone go through the stats like they have. Nor have I seen these disputed by anyone credible. The best I could find are only through 2013

Here the CDC says there were 7 firearm-related homicides for every 100,000 Americans in 1993 (light blue line). But the gun homicide rate had fallen by nearly 50% to only 3.6 homicides per 100,000 population by 2013 (dark line).

This was while gun ownership was increasing, suggesting a positive link to increased gun ownership not a negative one. While even significant correlation doesn’t imply causation with certainty, it’s logical to conclude that the two trends are related.


guns4.jpg
 
Joe Fan said:
The anti-gun folks want to kill millions of people they disagree with ... using ... guns
Click to expand...
That would be more humane than death by boot heel. Cause we all know that one of these day Nancy's boots are gonna walk all over you.
 
This one confirms what I posted above about Serbia applies globally for the most part -- there is no strong correlation between gun homicides and forearm ownership.


correlation1.jpg
 
Last edited:
Joe Fan said:
Here the CDC says there were 7 firearm-related homicides for every 100,000 Americans in 1993 (light blue line). But the gun homicide rate had fallen by nearly 50% to only 3.6 homicides per 100,000 population by 2013 (dark line).
Click to expand...
Yep. In the hands of responsible gun owners, guns are no threat. I just wonder why the NRA works so hard to protect retailers who make hundreds of wink wink deals with straw buyers and rapid fire weapons with vast magazines.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top