Mass Shooting in Las Vegas - 58 Dead at Least 515 Injured, Suspect Killed - Sensationalist Headlines

[QUOTE=evilweazel;52739775]Yes. That's exactly what I'm asking. I have a very large interest in seeing Americans keeping the right to keep arms until the nation itself is dissolved or until the last second of the heat death of the universe, whichever comes firsty. I 100% hope at the very least, the next generation has exactly the same rights I do, though I would prefer more. You're free to say "Well, we're just trying to get universal background checks!" But I absolutely refuse to believe that's where the idea ends for most people on the anti-gun side of the aisle, whether yours do or do not personally agree with that. History verifies that notion. It doesn't matter what other factors are addressed- poverty, inequality, mental health, etc. Every little erosion of 2nd amendment rights is something that I have every reason to believe will [I]never[/I] be given back to the people. So yes, I'm incredibly skeptical of the idea that limiting what I can buy or when I can buy it (when I don't have so much as a parking violation, and an allegedly healthy mental state :v: ) will do anything to stop events like this from happening.[/QUOTE] Because the majority of people are for these "sensible" measures that you skew as some kind of slippery slope. 33,000 people die in America per year due to gun violence. You're saying we can't, no, we [i]shouldn't[/i] do anything to reduce that number? [QUOTE=catbarf;52739797]Excuse me, no. Full stop. [URL="http://news.gallup.com/poll/1645/guns.aspx"]According to Gallup[/URL], [B]37%[/B] of Americans support stricter gun control. [B]42%[/B] are happy with where we are, and and [B]11%[/B] want looser laws. The number of Americans who want stricter gun control are outnumbered by those that don't. You see skewed results on those questions of 'universal background checks' because they're phrased like 'should the "gun show loophole" be closed' and not 'should it be a felony for your dad to give you grandpa's old hunting shotgun as a family heirloom'. And then people blame the NRA and gun lobby, because obviously if a public measure that most people support (spoiler: they really don't, when the full ramifications are explained) isn't passed, it must be because of gun industry lobbying. Edit: I'm not against further gun regulation where it makes sense, but it has to be give and take. There are so many stupid restrictions already on the books, especially on a state-by-state basis, that gun owners see further erosion of their rights as arbitrary and inevitable and consequently dig their heels in. If you want gun owners to compromise and give up some of their freedoms, you have to actually compromise too and give them something in return. This is not a matter of the public overwhelmingly wanting something and a tiny minority opposing it, this is more that the public has already seen pointless gun control measures (a lot of people still remember the useless 1994 Assault Weapons Ban) and have had enough.[/QUOTE] Excuse me, yes. You're criticizing me because I'm using data that uses less vague questions? I'm sorry, but I fail to see why I'm wrong when you're the one making an argument supported by the broadest question in your source. Yes, if you ask an extremely broad "do you want more gun control" question people tend not to support it. But when you go issue by issue, they [i]do[/i] support basic, common sense shit like a background check. Your own source asked the same question. 86% in favor. So what are you trying to argue here? Are you for or against a policy that 86% of people support? I'm absolutely against the arbitrary, ineffective state-by-state legislation. I'm in favor of specific policies that the majority of people want and what the statistics bare out that will reduce the number of people killed by firearms. [quote]This is not a matter of the public overwhelmingly wanting something and a tiny minority opposing it,[/quote] That's absolutely what it is. What else do you call it when the Republican party takes money from the NRA and then surprise surprise, do jack shit to pass legislation that would affect gun sales? You're saying that has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the ability for legislation to be passed? I know you're not that naive.

Why is anyone surprised at how he got guns into his hotel room? Have you ever seen tourists in America? They stroll around with luggage on wheels large enough to store a body. No one is going to question a man wheeling up a large suitcase in a hotel.

How well does Americas police work? Like there are so many people that keep guns to defend themselves, are cops really that bad at solving crimes that criminals can commit crimes and get away with it usually?

[QUOTE=brushtool;52739802]Since when was this about politics and gun control?[/QUOTE] Since it happened and "news" stations started talking about it. It's nothing new and it has happened after every one of these events for the last 20 years.

[QUOTE=Morgen;52739303]Something like a gun should be a privilege. Something that is capable of this kind of thing should be something you have to prove you understand, and prove you are fit to use it. It's not a bloody toy. Sure illegal firearms will always be a thing but it's not an all or nothing thing. If you make it much harder for people to get them, then you will see a lot less events like this, and more than likely lower death tolls.[/QUOTE] Agreed, they are capable of massive devastation if in the wrong hands but in the right ones are safer than the average sedan. An outright ban is dumb, trying to restrict what kind of guns are out is dumb, gun control should instead focus on who is acquiring them and their conpetencies/mental stability.

[QUOTE=Kiwi;52739808]Christ. How do you even get 17 guns in 1 hotel room? What the fuck was he carrying?[/QUOTE] Carrying a golf club bag and "Hitting the green" every day. Would be pretty inconspicuous actually.

[QUOTE=LennyPenny;52739867]How well does Americas police work? Like there are so many people that keep guns to defend themselves, are cops really that bad at solving crimes that criminals can commit crimes and get away with it usually?[/QUOTE] Very well, thing is, the response time of a shotgun on the bedstand or a glock on your hip is always faster than the police.

[QUOTE=LennyPenny;52739867]How well does Americas police work? Like there are so many people that keep guns to defend themselves, are cops really that bad at solving crimes that criminals can commit crimes and get away with it usually?[/QUOTE] You gonna ask the dude that just kicked your door in at 2am to patiently wait 5 minutes for the police to respond or are you gonna arm yourself to protect your property and your life?

[QUOTE=LennyPenny;52739867]How well does Americas police work? Like there are so many people that keep guns to defend themselves, are cops really that bad at solving crimes that criminals can commit crimes and get away with it usually?[/QUOTE] the primary argument (which, imo, is a valid point) that gun rights supporters focus on is that emergency response time in the US is hugely variable. In some jurisdictions you may need to wait upwards of 20 minutes after calling 911 - the consequences of that delay can be severe, and consequently some people feel that they need to be able to protect themselves.

[QUOTE=Jim Morrison;52739860]Because the majority of people are for these "sensible" measures that you skew as some kind of slippery slope. 33,000 people die in America per year due to gun violence. You're saying we can't, no, we [i]shouldn't[/i] do anything to reduce that number? Excuse me, yes. You're criticizing me because I'm using data that uses less vague questions? I'm sorry, but I fail to see why I'm wrong when you're the one making an argument supported by the broadest question in your source. Yes, if you ask an extremely broad "do you want more gun control" question people tend not to support it. But when you go issue by issue, they [i]do[/i] support basic, common sense shit like a background check. Your own source asked the same question. 86% in favor. So what are you trying to argue here? Are you for or against a policy that 86% of people support? I'm absolutely against the arbitrary, ineffective state-by-state legislation. I'm in favor of policy that the majority of people want and what the statistics bare out that will reduce the number of people killed by firearms. That's absolutely what it is. What else do you call it when the Republican party takes money from the NRA and then surprise surprise, do jack shit to pass legislation that would affect gun sales? You're saying that has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the ability for legislation to be passed? I know you're not that naive.[/QUOTE] Its close to what I'm saying. 33k people dying (the large majority of which are suicides and gang violence if we're being intellectually honest, which should have zero bearing on how easily I can own weapons) Isn't worth taking rights away from 300+ million Americans for the rest of time.

I hate how the death toll keeps ticking up by one at a time. Presumably when new people die of their injuries in the hospital. Horrifying.

[QUOTE=-nesto-;52739895]You gonna ask the dude that just kicked your door in at 2am to patiently wait 5 minutes for the police to respond or are you gonna arm yourself to protect your property and your life?[/QUOTE] Does that genuinely happen enough to be constant threat for you guys.

[QUOTE=LennyPenny;52739867]How well does Americas police work? Like there are so many people that keep guns to defend themselves, are cops really that bad at solving crimes that criminals can commit crimes and get away with it usually?[/QUOTE] Where is this country where we have teleportation belts for officers? Can we have some? [editline]2nd October 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=RainbowStalin;52739900]Does that genuinely happen enough to be constant threat for you guys.[/QUOTE] Rather have it, just in case, even though I'm almost positive I'll never need it.

[QUOTE=RainbowStalin;52739900]Does that genuinely happen enough to be constant threat for you guys.[/QUOTE] IDK, every year there's one to two major nationally covered stories about maniacs killing people with guns so you decide that for yourself.

If the threat of sudden home invasion and murder is a realistic problem then I'd say your country has bigger problems than guns.

Yeah because nobody ever breaks into homes and steals stuff in other countries.

[QUOTE=evilweazel;52739897]Its close to what I'm saying. 33k people dying (the large majority of which are suicides and gang violence if we're being intellectually honest, which should have zero bearing on how easily I can own weapons) Isn't worth taking rights away from 300+ million Americans for the rest of time.[/QUOTE] What rights does a universal background check take away? If that number is acceptable to you then really there isn't much reason to further discuss the problem, since you don't seem to think there [i]is[/i] a problem.

[QUOTE=usaokay;52739883][B]Update:[/B] Turns out more people are injured and one has recently died. [media]https://twitter.com/AP/status/914977169557868544[/media] come the fuck on[/QUOTE] [media]https://twitter.com/MLevineReports/status/914976066774732802[/media] Per ABC News. It keeps getting weirder and weirder, something tells me that it is going to take a long while before this investigation is anywhere near finished.

[QUOTE=TestECull;52739878]Very well, thing is, the response time of a shotgun on the bedstand or a glock on your hip is always faster than the police.[/QUOTE] I wasn't arguing response time I was arguing that people aren't even gonna commit a crime if they can be sure to get caught For this to work you need good police though I'm not sure how good this site is but this doesn't make it seem very promising [url]http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/03/01/most-violent-and-property-crimes-in-the-u-s-go-unsolved/[/url] For example in germany violent crime is at almost 100% [url]https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aufkl%C3%A4rungsquote[/url] While in the us it's just 65%

[QUOTE=-nesto-;52739895]You gonna ask the dude that just kicked your door in at 2am to patiently wait 5 minutes for the police to respond or are you gonna arm yourself to protect your property and your life?[/QUOTE] That's rare as hell though. Also most burglars fuck off when you wake up and spot them, gun or no gun, there's a reason they don't break in during waking hours.

[QUOTE=usaokay;52739883][B]Update:[/B] Turns out more people are injured and one has recently died. [media]https://twitter.com/AP/status/914977169557868544[/media] come the fuck on[/QUOTE] I hope it isnt actual explosives and is instead tannerite or someshit. They also confirmed he had bump fire stocks. Here come the calls for bans. [QUOTE=RainbowStalin;52739900]Does that genuinely happen enough to be constant threat for you guys.[/QUOTE] Depends where you live. Here for example, suburbs of Chicago, the crime rate is rising as the violence in the city starts spilling out into the surrounding villages. You see alot of CC training schools out here now and more and more people are starting to carry.

[QUOTE=RainbowStalin;52739908]If the threat of sudden home invasion and murder is a realistic problem then I'd say your country has bigger problems than guns.[/QUOTE] Welcome to the actual "gun" debate: Mental health and the stigma Americans have for it. [QUOTE=Jim Morrison;52739913]What rights does a universal background check take away? If that number is acceptable to you then really there isn't much reason to further discuss the problem, since you don't seem to think there [i]is[/i] a problem.[/QUOTE] Other than your ridiculous right-wingers, I can't tell you one gun owner I know that has opposed improving background checks.

[QUOTE=LennyPenny;52739918]I wasn't arguing response time I was arguing that people aren't even gonna commit a crime if they can be sure to get caught For this to work you need good police though[/QUOTE] Most people who commit violent crimes and robberies are not the smartest people or are on drugs and are not operating with logic and self preservation as their main drives. Our police are as good as any law enforcement, but when it comes to guns those help those who are actively being attacked or put as risk to defend themselves. Police can't help you in your own home. They can only hope to catch the person once the act has been done.

[QUOTE=Jordax;52739914][media]https://twitter.com/MLevineReports/status/914976066774732802[/media] Per ABC News. It keeps getting weirder and weirder, something tells me that it is going to take a long while before this investigation is anywhere near finished.[/QUOTE] Isnt an area in the Philippines under some sort of "martial law" right now because of whats been happening over there?

[QUOTE=Ajacks;52739931]Most people who commit violent crimes and robberies are not the smartest people or are on drugs and are not operating with logic and self preservation as their main drives. Our police are as good as any law enforcement, but when it comes to guns those help those who are actively being attacked or put as risk to defend themselves. Police can't help you in your own home. They can only hope to catch the person once the act has been done.[/QUOTE] I updated my post with some statistics, it doesn't seem like it's as good as any other

[QUOTE=LennyPenny;52739918]I wasn't arguing response time I was arguing that people aren't even gonna commit a crime if they can be sure to get caught For this to work you need good police though I'm not sure how good this site is but this doesn't make it seem very promising [url]http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/03/01/most-violent-and-property-crimes-in-the-u-s-go-unsolved/[/url][/QUOTE] You could have the best police force on the planet that can see through walls, use psychic powers and literally fly, and some person will still think they can outsmart them. There will always be crime no matter what country or how nice of a neighborhood you are in.

[QUOTE=Cmx;52739939]You could have the best police force on the planet that can see through walls, use psychic powers and literally fly, and some person will still think they can outsmart them. There will always be crime no matter what country or how nice of a neighborhood you are in.[/QUOTE] I'm not arguing that there will never be crime again lol Just saying that you need a police that is good enough that the risks of guns being abused is higher than the need to defend oneself with them

[QUOTE=RainbowStalin;52739908]If the threat of sudden home invasion and murder is a realistic problem then I'd say your country has bigger problems than guns.[/QUOTE] Home invasions are actually exceptionally rare in the US. Because people don't like getting shot.

[QUOTE=LennyPenny;52739954]I'm not arguing that there will never be crime again lol Just saying that you need a police that is good enough that the risks of guns being abused is higher than the need to defend oneself with them[/QUOTE] Police aren't exactly the best proactive measures against crime. They are supposed to be reactive. If you want proactive policing, get ready for freedoms to fly out the window.

Managed to get in contact with a friend of the family that's a uber driver up there. He said he had people running up to his cab and banging on the window begging to get in. Scary shit