'Active shooter' near Las Vegas casino

[nausea]

26 minutes ago, FreddieRoyle said:

edit to add that ISIS have never made a false claim in this respect, which tends to lend some credibility to their claim.

Not true:

 

Paul Cruickshank 

 

✔@CruickshankPaul

2. Exhibit A of a false ISIS claim was their claim for attack on Manila, Philippines casino resort in June. Perpetrator was indebted gambler

9:29 PM - Oct 2, 2017

 

[chrisinth]

41 minutes ago, julietx said:

the shooter looked like the type of american expat you see in thailand...... thank god those wackjobs can't bring their weapons here

 

Judging books by covers often ends up with a very disappointing read...................

 

Stop being a wind-up.

[notmyself]

I would like to apologise to fellow member for my perhaps too sarcastic comment 'now is not the time to talk about regulation'. They are like Creationists but for some other cause. Sorry.

 

[nasanews]

They are republicans.

[JCauto]

48 minutes ago, FreddieRoyle said:

Now is not the time to go on a "White right wing conspiracy nutcase" witch hunt. I know some people start salivating at the thought that maybe, finally the terrorist is white, but we have no confirmed motive at present, but I did note that the ISIS news agency has claimed him as one of their own. We will see, but I advise you not to start denigrating white people at this stage, jut because of the actions of one person.

edit to add that ISIS have never made a false claim in this respect, which tends to lend some credibility to their claim. Compared to western authorities that have repeatedly made false claims about the shooter not being of a certain ideology which turns out to be false.

 

"maybe, finally the terrorist is white" - you mean like the last two attacks that have taken place in the USA that are classified as terrorism? The ones in June and August 2017? Or do you mean the ones in March 2017 and May 2017? 

 

More Americans have been killed by Right-Wing Extremists in the USA than by Islamic Terrorists between 2001 and 2015. (Edit: Not including 9/11)

[FreddieRoyle]

Just now, JCauto said:

 

"maybe, finally the terrorist is white" - you mean like the last two attacks that have taken place in the USA that are classified as terrorism? The ones in June and August 2017? Or do you mean the ones in March 2017 and May 2017? 

 

More Americans have been killed by Right-Wing Extremists in the USA than by Islamic Terrorists between 2001 and 2015. 

I'm not sure that is true. Did you forget about the 3,000 people killed in NYC late 2001?

 

 

[craigt3365]

2 minutes ago, FreddieRoyle said:

I'm not sure that is true. Did you forget about the 3,000 people killed in NYC late 2001?

 

 

Still, that pales in comparison to the many killed by fellow Americans with guns.

 

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/10/02/opinions/america-lethal-nation-opinion-bergen/index.html

 

Quote

 

In 2011 alone, according to FBI statistics, more than 11,000 Americans were killed by firearms in the United States (a figure that excludes suicides).

 

Despite all the reasonable concerns in the United States about jihadist terrorism, in any given year Americans are almost 2,000 times more likely to be killed by a fellow American armed with a gun than by a jihadist terrorist. Since the 9/11 attacks, 95 Americans have been killed by jihadist terrorists, on average about six Americans a year, according to data collected by New America.

 

 

[OMGImInPattaya]

25 minutes ago, bazza73 said:

Oh? Why not?

Because guns are already highly regulated.

[notmyself]

Guns don't kill people, people with guns kill people and they can kill a lot more people that any can with a knife. 

[FreddieRoyle]

Just now, craigt3365 said:

Still, that pales in comparison to the many killed by fellow Americans with guns.

 

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/10/02/opinions/america-lethal-nation-opinion-bergen/index.html

 

 

That may be so, but JCauto's claim(which you liked) was that "More Americans have been killed by Right-Wing Extremists in the USA than by Islamic Terrorists between 2001 and 2015."

 

 

[JCauto]

6 minutes ago, FreddieRoyle said:

I'm not sure that is true. Did you forget about the 3,000 people killed in NYC late 2001?

 

 

Sorry, should have said "since 9/11".

 

http://time.com/3934980/right-wing-extremists-white-terrorism-islamist-jihadi-dangerous/

[OMGImInPattaya]

2 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Still, that pales in comparison to the many killed by fellow Americans with guns.

 

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/10/02/opinions/america-lethal-nation-opinion-bergen/index.html

 

 

And 90% of those shootings are commited with HANDGUNS by gangbangers and hood-rats fighting over turf so not really a concern for ordinary law abiding citizens. Unless you advocate for confiscation of handguns, "gun control" will do little to reduce gun deaths.

[notmyself]

NV does have pretty lax gun laws too. Or so I hear.

 

Like the need to be able to pay for it.

[OMGImInPattaya]

3 hours ago, julietx said:

makes you wonder how bad it has to get before the USA will actually consider gun control.......my guess is never.

Gun ownership and use is already heavily controlled in the U.S. 

[notmyself]

What percentage of the people would like tougher gun control? Is it like 20-25 %?

 

[tonray]

37 minutes ago, chrisinth said:

 

IMO that is a very rash statement from the authorities and I personally wouldn't believe that for a minute, that she is cleared.

 

Of course pure speculation, based on the convert theory after the ISIS claims, the authorities would need to do a complete background check on this lady, her religious followings, circumstances of her being abroad (she was earlier stated as being an employee of the hotel), etc, etc before being cleared by simply contacting her.

 

Perhaps...whatever the case, I think she is the key to understanding his actions as she lived with him and is apparently the only one who has had any real communication with the guy and might know if he was depressed or using drugs or some other reason, such as they just had a huge argument and she went overseas to see family against his wishes. She is the key

[tonray]

2 minutes ago, notmyself said:

What percentage of the people would like tougher gun control? Is it like 20-25 %?

 

Closer to 50 % I would think nationwide

[notmyself]

3 minutes ago, OMGImInPattaya said:

Gun ownership and use is already heavily controlled in the U.S. 

 

The EPA was 'upgraded' because the model was working so well.

[OMGImInPattaya]

3 hours ago, joecoolfrog said:

The problem is that too many people are being literal , the guns are good / bad arguments are not working , there needs to be some form of concensus or these slaughters will just keep happening.

I agree. The basic problem is that "gun control" is code for gun confiscation by Democrats and others of their ilk. That is why Second Amendment supporters can't give an inch on this issue...because then they'll find themselves living in Australia. There is no good faith on the Democrat side.

[craigt3365]

7 minutes ago, OMGImInPattaya said:

And 90% of those shootings are commited with HANDGUNS by gangbangers and hood-rats fighting over turf so not really a concern for ordinary law abiding citizens. Unless you advocate for confiscation of handguns, "gun control" will do little to reduce gun deaths.

Hand guns are guns and would fall under gun control.  As being proposed by many currently in office.  Though sadly, most proposals related to gun control fail.

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-many-gun-control-proposals-have-been-offered-since-2011/

Why more than 100 gun control proposals in Congress since 2011 have failed

[craigt3365]

5 minutes ago, notmyself said:

What percentage of the people would like tougher gun control? Is it like 20-25 %?

 

It's over 50% currently. 

 

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/06/20/politics/cnn-gun-poll/index.html

 

Quote

 

Support for tighter gun control laws increased 9 percentage points after the Orlando terror attack, and support for background checks and other measures being debated in the Senate hovered around 90%, according to CNN/ORC poll released Monday.

The support for tougher gun laws rose to 55% in the newest poll -- the highest number since just one month after the shootings in Newtown, Connecticut, in January 2013.

But support for specific gun control measures was very strong, with 92% saying they wanted expanded background checks, 87% supporting a ban for felons or people with mental health problems and 85% saying they would ban people on federal watchlists from buying guns.

 

 

[OMGImInPattaya]

1 minute ago, craigt3365 said:

Hand guns are guns and would fall under gun control.  As being proposed by many currently in office.  Though sadly, most proposals related to gun control fail.

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-many-gun-control-proposals-have-been-offered-since-2011/

Why more than 100 gun control proposals in Congress since 2011 have failed

Why...bcause the people don't support them obviously. It's also the reason the NRA endorsed candidate won the presidency in the most recent election.

[notmyself]

 

Less guns less gun crime. If Trump builds the <oops> wall then no more guns, people or drugs from the south and what are Canada going to provide? Half price medicine and old guns they used to shoot moose with?

 

[craigt3365]

13 minutes ago, notmyself said:

NV does have pretty lax gun laws too. Or so I hear.

 

Like the need to be able to pay for it.

NV does have very lax gun laws.  It's an open carry state.  I was in a Walmart one time when a guy behind me started talking about his new purchase.  Some big looking handgun strapped to his waist.  Right there in the checkout line.  He made comments like "nobody will mess with me now that I've got this".  Scared the hell out of me.

[craigt3365]

3 minutes ago, OMGImInPattaya said:

Why...bcause the people don't support them obviously. It's also the reason the NRA endorsed candidate won the presidency in the most recent election.

Because the politicians are afraid to make a stand for what's right thinking they might not be reelected.  Sad commentary on the state of affairs for the Republican party.  Who currently has about a 20% approval rating.

[OMGImInPattaya]

1 minute ago, craigt3365 said:

Because the politicians are afraid to make a stand for what's right thinking they might not be reelected.  Sad commentary on the state of affairs for the Republican party.  Who currently has about a 20% approval rating.

In other words, they're doing what their constituents want...I'm sorry if democracy is distasteful to you. I'm also sorry you were triggered by the sight of a gun.

[OMGImInPattaya]

6 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

NV does have very lax gun laws.  It's an open carry state.  I was in a Walmart one time when a guy behind me started talking about his new purchase.  Some big looking handgun strapped to his waist.  Right there in the checkout line.  He made comments like "nobody will mess with me now that I've got this".  Scared the hell out of me.

That's why crime is low in NV, and other "lax" states; and why its highest is states and cities with strict gun control like Chicago, Wash. D.C, and California.

[pegman]

5 minutes ago, OMGImInPattaya said:

I agree. The basic problem is that "gun control" is code for gun confiscation by Democrats and others of their ilk. That is why Second Amendment supporters can't give an inch on this issue...because then they'll find themselves living in Australia. There is no good faith on the Democrat side.

When the pendulum swings back that's exactly what's going to happen. Your side has gone too far. The reason he did this is because he could. The reason he killed more than any other gun massacre in the USA since Wounded Knee was he was smart. Most of the other mass killers were misfits. With the easy access to gun arsenals you just have to hope no other smart guys get it in their heads to kill as many as posible. 

[boomerangutang]

 

  7by7 asks; Maybe if the USA had proper gun control then this and the almost daily similar attacks would not have happened?

 

It's a complicated issue. There is some gun control in the US, but it's not strict enough. Every rule can be broken. And, it's not possible to reign in all homicidally crazy people.  There are indications, however. 

 

If you're sitting with Uncle Bob, while he's polishing his semi-automatic weapon, and he speaks up, "You know, I spent money on these beautiful weapons, but I don't get to use them much. I want to go out and shoot some people.  I want to see what this baby can really do."

 

Do you report uncle Bob to the local police?  Of course not.  Even if you did, the cops would snicker or tell you it's a family issue, and deal with it.   

[boomerangutang]

22 minutes ago, notmyself said:

What percentage of the people would like tougher gun control? Is it like 20-25 %?

 

15 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

It's over 50% currently. 

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/06/20/politics/cnn-gun-poll/index.html

 

I venture it's way over 50% currently. But that's only a part of the equation. Even if just 15% favored semi-automatic ownership, they carry political clout far beyond their numbers.  Hopefully, the LV turkey shoot tragedy will sway more people over to the side of sanity.