Las Vegas Shooting

[Revoltingest]

As long as you want. I thought you were done?
I didn't deny anything. Just kept you from making it about you, so you could feign personal injury.

Blaming those you insult for calling you on it, eh?

 

[Mister Silver]

If I didn't know any better, I'd swear they were married.

 

[Revoltingest]

If I didn't know any better, I'd swear they were married.

The argument isn't vicious enuf for marriage.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Blaming those you insult for calling you on it, eh?

Should I get offended you called me sanctimonious or will you dither on calling the view sanctimonious instead of the person? Would it make you feel better if I said 'the view that a person should need to be, and feel entitled to be, able to stockpile that much weaponry is insane and unethical'?

 

[Mister Silver]

The argument isn't vicious enuf for marriage.

Just because it's not "War of the Roses" violent.....

 

[Revoltingest]

Should I get offended you called me sanctimonious.....

What I actually said was....
"That's a tad sanctimonious."
I was careful to observe the rules about criticizing the post & not the poster,
assuming that on 2nd thought, you wouldn't really call your loyal opposition
"unethical" or "insane" for believing he had a right to own such rifles.

 

[Onyx]

Holy Hell.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

What I actually said was....
"That's a tad sanctimonious."
I was careful to observe the rules about making it about the post & not the poster.
We little folk must take care lest sanctions be levied.
But you insulted the people who believed he had a right to own such weapons.

That's what I thought, you're complaining about what you think is backhand slighting while also doing it.

Alright. I am officially done now.

 

[Revoltingest]

Just because it's not "War of the Roses" violent.....

We haven't even gotten around to how poorly I load the dishwasher.
(It's amazing how universal that complaint about menfolk is.)

 

[Revoltingest]

That's what I thought, you're complaining about what you think is backhand slighting while also doing it.

Alright. I am officially done now.

Woo hoo!
So am I.

 

[MrMrdevincamus]

You mean like this entire defensive rant? You seem no less emotional in your advocacy. And pretty light on anything but reductionism and equivocacy.

You missed the point entirely. By emotions I meant allowing ones heartstrings to overrule common sense, logic, and the truth. Yes I am passionate about subjects like gun control but unlike you and many other gun control advocates I don't allow emotion to cloud others lawful rights or the issue. I have asked many times what is a law that would of stopped the mass killings in Vegas, with no response, sans emotional diatribes and my humanity being questioned. Let me ask you. The second amendment has been upheld to mean we have the right to own and bear arms. Is it more important to deny citizens of a right simply to make a law that probably would do nothing to solve the problem? Even if denial of rights would reduce deaths by firearm that would not be a good enough reason to deny anyone their constitutional rights! Now that is an emotional argument vs a logical response!

Which is no more sound an argument than saying a dedicated enough crazy will get their hands on napalm and we therefore shouldn't bother regulating it. After all, he could have found another way to kill people.

That is true. There is a difference between regulating and banning. Firearms are regulated as is nearly everything else. But if you meant to say 'banned' I do have a problem with that. Banning never works, never has never will. For example napalm is easy to make. In fact since the constitution doesn't specify I feel all weapons should be legal except for a very few, ie weapons of mass destruction etc. In fact I bet that a case could be made to legalize all arms. However I do have emotions too and would not agree with legalizing some truly horrific weapons.

Speaking of highly emotional irrationality.

You fail to vet that response. I was simply agreeing with the constitution, your comments welled from emotional concerns.

First of all, you are not a well regulated militia. Second of all, the constitution is not an unchanging document and can and will be amended as it has in the past.

Wrong on point one; The SCOTUS has ruled that INDIVIDUAL CITIZENS have the right to keep and bear arms. Second I am a originalist' but you are correct. However UNTIL the beloved Constitution IS changed my arguments and comments are valid. Most arguments and nearly all comments of gun control advocates are wishful thinking peppered with false hoods and other base tactics, such as questioning the integrity etc of firearm owners.

Thirdly, even the most generous interpretation of the constitution does not justify amassing enough firepower to kill hundreds of people. Nor does it protect all forms of arms, nor should it.

Machine guns are legal so is cannon and other 'destructive devices'.

Once again, I'm telling you as an ethical, sane person, that if someone believes they should be able to legally have what that man had, then they're not an ethical or sane person.

You see that is one of those base tactics I mentioned earlier. Your judgment means very little because it comes from emotion (lol), well it does. Some people that would not hurt a fly and have a unblemished record have far more firepower than that man had. All LEGAL. That last comment is the entire gun control argument in a nutshell. A statement of falsehood made from an emotional concern. Those kinds of statements are precisely what dictators love to use to enslave their subjects. They deny their people their natural rights and promise to make them safe (after all the weapons are removed). No thanks.

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."


: {>

 

[MrMrdevincamus]

It's a tough call. And it's constitutionally murky.

When it comes down to it gun control advocates don't much care about the constitutionally of owning firearms.

I also favor more training required of gun owners, particularly
those who carry in public. (I think this gives me enemies on both sides of the debate, eh.)

I would bet there are many gun owners who feel the same about full auto etc. However those same owners are scared ****less of the ' give an inch take an mile' rabid gun control advocates. So they pile on the side of 'give no quarter' gun owners. The gun control advocates are their own worst enemies! Know why? They are emotional, lol!

You have always been reasonable, besides I do not chunk friends or make enemies because of their 'political' ideas, to do so would be emotional.You can use that if you want!

; { >

 

[YmirGF]

Well, to be honest, when I heart Las Vegas massacre the first thing came into my mind was it must have been jihadists again . It is time to do something about my own prejudiece, too.

My deepest condelences for the people who lost their beloved ones.

Say no to guns. Unless you carry guns on your waist 7/24 they won't help you to defend yourself.

The jihadi angle has not been ruled out, but authorities haven't found anything they have released to the public to backup the claims of the Islamic State.

 

[Stevicus]

Back to the topic of the shooting itself, they can't seem to find much info or get any clue as to what Paddock's motive is. The mystery of Stephen Paddock: Why? - CNN

Clark County Undersheriff Kevin C. McMahill seemed almost apologetic Friday afternoon when he told reporters that despite running down some 1,000 leads, investigators still haven't come up with "credible information" concerning Paddock's motive. Chasing down all those leads "helped create a better profile into the madness of this suspect," McMahill said, but "we still do not have a clear motive or reason why."

The previous evening, Sheriff Joe Lombardo summed up the mystery man this way: Paddock "spent decades acquiring weapons and ammo and living a secret life, much of which will never be fully understood."

Even the people closest to the shooter are struggling to understand why, on a Sunday night on the Las Vegas Strip, Paddock perched in a posh hotel suite at the Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino and fired round after round at a crowd of 22,000 country music fans 32 stories below.

"Steve was a private guy -- that's why you can't find any motive," said his younger brother, Eric, who spoke for half an hour with reporters Tuesday in the driveway of his home in Florida.

Eric Paddock's anguish was there for all to see as he struggled to wrap his head around the cold, hard fact that the affluent, successful big brother who was "fun to hang out with" rigged a sniper's nest in a hotel suite and shot 58 strangers to death and wounded hundreds more.

His brother liked country music, Eric Paddock said. So it makes little sense that he chose others who shared that enthusiasm as his targets.

None of it makes any sense at all.

 

[Wirey]

CBC is reporting he had a hooker right before:

Las Vegas gunman hired a prostitute before shooting, official says

I bet she's feeling pretty lucky right now.

 

[oldbadger]

We haven't even gotten around to how poorly I load the dishwasher.
(It's amazing how universal that complaint about menfolk is.)

Yes!
I get it!
When Mrs Badger loads the washer it just hums away sweetly.
When I load the bloomin' thing it jumps all over the kitchen.

Washing machines are gender prejudiced.... obvious.

 

[MrMrdevincamus]

Well, to be honest, when I heart Las Vegas massacre the first thing came into my mind was it must have been jihadists again . It is time to do something about my own prejudiece, too.

My deepest condelences for the people who lost their beloved ones.

Say no to guns. Unless you carry guns on your waist 7/24 they won't help you to defend yourself.

True. After I was mugged getting used to a concealed carry firearm was the most difficult thing. Eventually I got used to it and made sure I was wearing it every time I went out of the house, especially when going to work (emptying my machines). Finally I found a Smith&Wesson .38 Air-weight revolver that was so compact and light I hardly knew it was there. It is only a five shot, and in over ten years of CC I have not had to take it out of its holster, well except to practice. I plan on buying a .40 semi auto 17 shot compact semi auto next week and sell the .38. The only thing I didn't like was the $100.00 required CC class to get my permit. It was only good for padding the pockets of the instructors and sheriffs dept.and as butt wipe.

; {>

 

[MrMrdevincamus]

The jihadi angle has not been ruled out, but authorities haven't found anything they have released to the public to backup the claims of the Islamic State.

Its starting to look like the guy just wanted to be the most infamous serial killer in history. I tend to think that people like that are so far off the scale of normal and so deviant that they are mentally ill. Of course his type of mental illness does not afford him any release from receiving total accountability for his monstrous actions.

; {>