(October 5, 2017 at 9:56 am)A Theist Wrote: Just on the news. An unconfirmed report says that the shooter was possibly targeting nearby jet fuel tanks as well. One of the tanks was penetrated but did not cause an explosion. Could also have been a couple of stray bullets. Investigators aren't commenting.

Quote:The Las Vegas Review-Journal, citing an unnamed source, reported late Wednesday that two holes were found in one of the two jet fuel tanks near the site of the Route 91 Harvest concert. One of the bullets penetrated a tank, but did not cause an explosion, the report said.

The report said FBI agents inspected the tanks and considered the bullet’s trajectory from where Paddock opened fire on 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino.

 Also, the Clark County Sheriff is having a hard time believing that Paddock acted alone. The shooter had a stock pile ammo and explosives. A planned attack by a radical group, or a crazed shooter who acted alone?

Quote:Clark County Sheriff Joseph Lombardo said it's difficult to believe Paddock acted alone in the attack on the audience of an outdoor concert.

Lombardo said that items confiscated from Paddock included 1,600 rounds of ammunition and several containers of an explosive commonly used in target shooting that totaled 50 pounds. But it wasn't clear what, if anything, Paddock planned to do with the explosives, the sheriff said.

 http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/10/05/las...-says.html

FOX IS NOT NEWS it is a right wing conspiracy bullshit rag. 

You might as well be posting links to the former Soviet Union propaganda rag Pravda. 

Listen Eddie Haskell, we are not going to rape you, we wont eat your babies and we are not going to stick you in an oven. But it is not our fault the Little Rascal's network has convinced you to regurgitate their cons on Wally and the Beave. Because we are NOT Wally and the Beave.

How about you simply pull your fucking head out of your ass?

(October 5, 2017 at 10:06 am)Brian37 Wrote:

(October 5, 2017 at 9:53 am)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Apparently he left a note but they won't disclose what the note said.... ugh.

I WANT MY MOMMY!

CL it really is not just you, even my side is getting distracted here. And outside this website it is even worse on network and cable news.

"MOTIVE" only addresses the need for funding health care and mental health care.

I don't care if the death is a suicide, family violence, accidental, gang violence or a mass shooting.

FIREARMS ARE STILL WAY TOO EASY TO GET.

I'd guess this guy was pissed he lost all that money gambling and took it out on the casinos.

Roof was racially motivated.

The Pulse shooter was religiously motivated.

The Newtown shooter and Va Tech shooter had mental illness.

And again, this issue of access for me isn't just about mass shootings. I was almost a statistic as a kid when my dad got drunk off his ass and shot his 38 with me in the room. He had no record at time of buy either.

Most firearm injuries and deaths happen in the home from legally purchased firearms. That says to me that firearms are way too easy to get.

If we are going to talk about motive, it can only be done in the context of writing better vetting laws and funding mental health care and universal health care. 

Again, I am not aiming this at any one person, but trying to get the focus where it should be. Our flooded market and ease of access. 

The note is not as important to me as insuring the next nut cant buy firearms.

I heard somewhere he was a multi millionaire. Sorry. "Job creator"

It fits I think. An old psychopathic man, bored with life, feeling like he has reached the end of his good days... i guess he thought it was a good time to finally do something he always fantasized about and thought would be fun and thrilling.

(October 5, 2017 at 10:53 am)downbeatplumb Wrote:

(October 5, 2017 at 10:06 am)Brian37 Wrote: I WANT MY MOMMY!

CL it really is not just you, even my side is getting distracted here. And outside this website it is even worse on network and cable news.

"MOTIVE" only addresses the need for funding health care and mental health care.

I don't care if the death is a suicide, family violence, accidental, gang violence or a mass shooting.

FIREARMS ARE STILL WAY TOO EASY TO GET.

I'd guess this guy was pissed he lost all that money gambling and took it out on the casinos.

Roof was racially motivated.

The Pulse shooter was religiously motivated.

The Newtown shooter and Va Tech shooter had mental illness.

And again, this issue of access for me isn't just about mass shootings. I was almost a statistic as a kid when my dad got drunk off his ass and shot his 38 with me in the room. He had no record at time of buy either.

Most firearm injuries and deaths happen in the home from legally purchased firearms. That says to me that firearms are way too easy to get.

If we are going to talk about motive, it can only be done in the context of writing better vetting laws and funding mental health care and universal health care. 

Again, I am not aiming this at any one person, but trying to get the focus where it should be. Our flooded market and ease of access. 

The note is not as important to me as insuring the next nut cant buy firearms.

I heard somewhere he was a multi millionaire. Sorry. "Job creator"

Actually I posted an article to the cost of gun violence, so yea, he was a job creator, and so are the NRA and gun factories. The more death they protect, the more doctors, funeral homes, and shrinks make money.

Yep, death is profitable.

(October 5, 2017 at 7:55 am)Brian37 Wrote: Guys, i am really not angry at any one individual on this board, my response has to do more with seeing media on cable news and on the networks spend tons of time on motive, and  little to no time on access and flooded market.

It is true we need to fund mental health care, but firearms are still way too easy to obtain.

Owning firearms is a Constitutional right so why shouldn't they be easy to obtain?

---

(October 5, 2017 at 8:30 am)Little lunch Wrote: I think the primary reason for the shooting may have been spending too much time at casinos, Brian.

They're going to pass a law that people will be limited to 8 hours total in casinos per week.  All patrons will be injected with a chip that tracks their time in casinos and when there 8 hours per 168 hour time period is up they will receive an electric shock to encourage them to leave.

(October 5, 2017 at 11:46 am)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote:

(October 5, 2017 at 7:55 am)Brian37 Wrote: Guys, i am really not angry at any one individual on this board, my response has to do more with seeing media on cable news and on the networks spend tons of time on motive, and  little to no time on access and flooded market.

It is true we need to fund mental health care, but firearms are still way too easy to obtain.

Owning firearms is a Constitutional right so why shouldn't they be easy to obtain?

---

(October 5, 2017 at 8:30 am)Little lunch Wrote: I think the primary reason for the shooting may have been spending too much time at casinos, Brian.

They're going to pass a law that people will be limited to 8 hours total in casinos per week.  All patrons will be injected with a chip that tracks their time in casinos and when there 8 hours per 168 hour time period is up they will receive an electric shock to encourage them to leave.

Because the sicko whom murdered 59 people and injured 500 HAD NO FUCKING RECORD OVER THE PAST YEAR WHEN HE BOUGHT 30 RIFFLES.

Owning firearms is a right. NO SHIT. 

Please stop harping on that bullshit.

You have the right to sell porn, just not to 5 year olds.

You have the right to sell beer, but you have to check ID.

You cant have it both ways.

You cant say, "The mentally ill should not have them" 

And I agree.

Then not take the responsibility as the seller to insure that the buyer isn't nuts.

Otherwise why is it illegal for bars to sell more booze to drunk people? Why is it illegal to sell booze to the underage?

BECAUSE IT IS VETTING before something goes wrong. That isn't a presumption of guilt.

If an aspiring pilot wants to fly a jet, do you simply go " meh, you don't need any vetting or training".

NO, so please stop harping on rights. THAT IS NOT THE ISSUE

This guy was disturbed, but because of our crappy laws, we basically sold a drunk driver a Sherman tank. 

Demanding better vetting before a sale isn't a denial of rights.

(October 5, 2017 at 11:46 am)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote:

(October 5, 2017 at 7:55 am)Brian37 Wrote: Guys, i am really not angry at any one individual on this board, my response has to do more with seeing media on cable news and on the networks spend tons of time on motive, and  little to no time on access and flooded market.

It is true we need to fund mental health care, but firearms are still way too easy to obtain.

Owning firearms is a Constitutional right so why shouldn't they be easy to obtain?

From the wiki:
In United States v. Cruikshank (1876), the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that, "The right to bear arms is not granted by the Constitution; neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence" and limited the scope of the Second Amendment's protections to the federal government.[9] In United States v. Miller (1939), the Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment did not protect weapon types not having a "reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia."[10][11]


What the constitution says is:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.




Of course, this means that people are allowed to have "Arms" and the constitution says that the government cannot infringe upon that right.
But the government can regulate on what types of Arms are available to the public.
Clearly, nuclear missiles are out. So, it is good to find an optimum point between "the right to keep and bear Arms" and "I want all guns".

Legislation can be passed that only allows the public to have access to a maximum of 8mm caliber fire arms. This does not infringe on "the right to keep and bear arms".
Would this prevent mass shootings? No, but it would keep most automatic weapons out of the public's hands.
I believe that some even more restrictive legislation could even be found that would prevent any automatic fire arm from being legally sold.

I don't know what the rules are in Europe, but they're restrictive enough that the grand majority of people don't even consider the possibility of purchasing a fire arm. As a result, you never even think that someone else may have such a weapon.
I was in Madison, Wisconsin in 2016 and what shocked me the most was the need to have University buildings post signs saying that guns were not allowed inside. It's like everything seems normal and decent.... but remember that almost everyone has a weapon.

Even constitutional rights have limits.

You can't yell fire in a crowded theater when there is no fire.
But apparently you can buy all the fucking guns you want, and shoot up said theater. Nothing will ever infringe on that right. Nope.

(October 5, 2017 at 12:36 pm)Divinity Wrote: Even constitutional rights have limits.

You can't yell fire in a crowded theater when there is no fire.
But apparently you can buy all the fucking guns you want, and shoot up said theater.  Nothing will ever infringe on that right.  Nope.

You can't yell "Ambulance" in a crowded law school either. 

(October 5, 2017 at 12:44 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote:

(October 5, 2017 at 12:36 pm)Divinity Wrote: Even constitutional rights have limits.

You can't yell fire in a crowded theater when there is no fire.
But apparently you can buy all the fucking guns you want, and shoot up said theater.  Nothing will ever infringe on that right.  Nope.

You can't yell "Ambulance" in a crowded law school either. 

You can shout it outside a classroom full of third-year students, so the aspiring personal injury attorneys among them get practice running in the direction of opportu-- . . . I mean regrettable pain and suffering.