I was reading a discussion on Vegas already yesterday and there were people on the Pro-Gun side talking about more concealed carry. I just had to ask them how much benefit Concealed carry does at 400 yards. and actually got a response that said, well you could get closer. There are really some dimwits on both sides.
Let's just assume for a moment that there were actually some people inside the Mandalay Bay. My assumption is that you could probably hear the gunshots from at a minimum the level the shooter was on and at least the one above and below, within say 20 rooms in any direction. If there was someone in that vicinity that had the ability enter the room and dispatch the shooter, we could be talking about a completely different situation. I'm not going to sit here and preach about conceal and carry, but the facts are that mass shooters ALWAY pick areas where they know they can inflict the most harm before someone with a gun shows up.
I'd much rather people focus their energy on solvable problems like cancer, ALS, dementia, etc.,. As bad as innocent death is, it's not preventable and all it does is cause political banter with no solution.
there are definitely situations where concealed carry would be beneficial. And very few where it would be negative. But in discussion on this shooting it is a pretty foolish argument to bring up. somebody running around with a gun is likely to get themselves or other hurt.
Haha, that is funny. But seriously, you'll be waiting longer if you think laws will ever prevent evil/murder.
There once were some people aboard an airplane that made the decision to take that plane down to keep the terrorist from completing their mission. Those people died as hero's. They made the ultimate sacrifice to protect the lives of others. There are many people that will run into danger to protect others. I'm just saying a good samaritan with a gun COULD have prevented much of this tragedy.
There are easily obtained substances (Fentanyl for example) in the US, where one could simply put those substances into an air vent and kill thousands of people quickly. No regulation is going to stop people from mass killings if they are determined. Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
Well this man had access to something a little bigger than a knife. "Public records show Paddock owned two planes and was a licensed pilot." I am sure if he used the crowd as a landing strip he could have done similar damage
"Drugs are illegal and people still use em. If guns are illegal, people will still find a way to use em." Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The answer is in changing the laws... But not as you think. Crimes against children, cops, murder, rape.... Punishable by death to be carried out with in 72 hrs. Prisons should be, well um... Let's strive for not being rehabilitation units. It's not supposed to be pleasant in there
And news need to have legislation stating that can only offer up unbiased facts and....REPORT what was said, done etc
When they plan to off themselves before capture, fear of death isn't really a deterent. There isn't a one size fits all remedy for this. Where there is a will, there is a way. This guy had months of planning, it's a bit hard to believe no one knew or suspected anything. How much information his girlfriend and electronics hold will be interesting.
For the record. As a gun toting, God fearing conservative; I will admit that there is absolutely no reason for civilians to have access to weapons that were designed for military use. Those weapons were designed for one thing. Brass knuckles and switchblades are illegal and we still have fist fights and hunting knives.
Remington 870, Remington Model 700 both are military use weapons. .30 Caliber ammunition and weapons were all designed for military use. if people want to know the truth, what makes "assault weapons" more deadly is the rounds they are shooting, not the design of the weapon.
I think a great change would be for both parties to get on the bandwagon and get Hollywood to stop glamorizing violence, rape and killing in their movies. Can you imagine what we would think about Quintin Tarantino and Hollywood producers were big NRA supporters and spokesman for the Republican Party? What would the left say about Hollywood movies and violet shows then? I think Trump should call the Democrats out. They put out a bill to stop violence in Hollywood movies and music he'll put out a bill reducing assault rifle's being available to the public. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Okay, more specifically then, military weapons that are designed to rapidly fire large quantities of rounds designed to kill people. I will never argue that I need the right to own a semi-auto or fully auto rifle that can hold dozens of rounds. I would argue that the design of the weapon does in fact make it much more deadly. Would you rather someone was shooting at your family with a bolt action rifle that holds three rounds or an AR that holds 100? Both could shoot the same round, but one is going to be much more effective at killing in numbers.
