Mass shooting at Country Music Festival in Las Vegas (50+ dead, 500+ injured)

Loki said:
We agree it can be a slippery slope, and criminals will break the law no matter what laws we pass, but closing the loophole, would not, remove the right to bear arms, just require people to register and provide more tracking information, again most Americans, by a large margin, approve of closing this loophole.

As far as the mental illness proposal from President Obama, it would only have affected a small % of people with mental challenges, and did provide an option for them to still be able to legally purchase a gun.

What was the rule?
The regulation, finalized in December under Obama's tenure, required the Social Security Administration to disclose information quarterly to the national gun background check system about certain people with mental illness.
While the list of eligible mental disorders is long -- ranging from anxiety to eating disorders to schizophrenia --those who would have been reported by the agency had to meet two main criteria: a) They were receiving full disability benefits because of a mental illness and couldn't work and b) they were unable to manage their own benefits, thus needing the help of a third party to do so.
The Obama administration estimated that the new rule would have affected roughly 75,000 individuals annually.
And according to a report by the Office of the Inspector General at the Social Security Administration, 81,000 disability awardees would have met the criteria in fiscal year 2015, which amounts to about 9% of the total disability awardee population.
Those affected would have been notified both orally and in writing that they could potentially be prevented from buying a gun.
Such individuals would have been allowed to request a relief from any firearm prohibitions if they could show evidence that they didn't pose a risk to public safety.
Click to expand...
That seems fair but l think like the no-fly list, once you're in, you are never getting off the banned list.

My friends son gets full disability for ADD. While he doesn't want a gun l don't feel he should be singled out. Same with Anxiety. And eating disorders. Even bi-polar.
I think hearing voices telling you to do things (Schizophrenia) is the one that should be banned.
In fact, l feel those who have tempers should be banned, but l'm not the one to decide your temper. I've even seen people lose it while drugged on Ambien, demanding their gun. They would pass under the law.
So who gets one and who doesn't is subjective.
 
Bliss said:
Do you have gun rights in NY City and Boroughs?
Click to expand...

NYC is comprised of the 5 boroughs. I'm one who favors NYC keeping it's strict gun laws. I do think it's obvious that they can't solve all, like a death penalty is clearly not much of a deterrent of people from murdering others.
 
Bliss said:
That seems fair but l think like the no-fly list, once you're in, you are never getting off the banned list.

My friends son gets full disability for ADD. While he doesn't want a gun l don't feel he should be singled out. Same with Anxiety. And eating disorders. Even bi-polar.
I think hearing voices telling you to do things (Schizophrenia) is the one that should be banned.
In fact, l feel those who have tempers should be banned, but l'm not the one to decide your temper. I've even seen people lose it while drugged on Ambien, demanding their gun. They would pass under the law.
So who gets one and who doesn't is subjective.
Click to expand...

Well its a moot point now as Trump already rolled back this legislation, so that regulation is no longer law. It is interesting that both the NRA and the ACLU (two groups who rarely agree) spoke out against the regulation when it was law...


Who opposed the rule?
Interestingly, the rule had opponents across a wide spectrum. Both the National Rifle Association and the American Civil Liberties Union spoke out against it.
The ACLU, which advocates for people with mental health struggles, said the rule reinforced a stereotype that people with mental disabilities are violent. The organization argued in a letter to members of Congress that there's no data to support a connection between receiving disability benefits and a propensity toward gun violence.
Susan Mizner, senior attorney with the disability rights program at the ACLU, also said that people with mental illnesses are more likely to be victims of violence.
While proponents of the rule argue that it only affects a limited group, opponents say that it unfairly targets the wrong people.
"75,000 people a year is a lot of people in my book," Mizner said. "And these are people who are already at the bottom of our social status. We don't need to kick them anymore."
 
archangel said:
really....?

If a guy is using a silencer, it is much harder to access the threat if you are not close to the area where people are being harmed. Why is this so political?
I have literally been in an area where no one was harmed but people were firing shots. I could tell because I HEARD it. Left the area by the way. Her comment is not simply in this context.

Also I want to point out that this guy got caught because hotel residents heard the shots. Had that been a silencer, the numbers would be higher because it would have taken more time.
Click to expand...
But it would have blown his face off before he shot off 500 rounds.

And silencers are not 'silent'.

For the record though, l don't like them. But l'm not sure they should be banned.
 
DudeNY12 said:
NYC is comprised of the 5 boroughs. I'm one who favors NYC keeping it's strict gun laws. I do think it's obvious that they can't solve all, like a death penalty is clearly not much of a deterrent of people from murdering others.
Click to expand...
Do you own a gun?
 
CBS Legal Exec: 'No Sympathy For Vegas ‘Because Country Music Fans Often Are Republican’

(She's been fired)
 
DudeNY12 said:
NYC is comprised of the 5 boroughs. I'm one who favors NYC keeping it's strict gun laws. I do think it's obvious that they can't solve all, like a death penalty is clearly not much of a deterrent of people from murdering others.
Click to expand...

It seems like things are improving gun violence wise, in New York since the passage of the SAFE act there. Of course both sides can twist the statistics to support their own narrative, but basically...

"In 2016, there were 10,007 violent crimes with a firearm reported to police, according to data from the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services. In 2013, there were 12,235. The percentage of violent crimes with a firearm also fell from 16 percent in 2013 to 13.5 percent in 2016.

Looked at another way, the number of firearm-related violent crimes per New York state resident also has declined. There were 62 firearm-related violent crimes reported for every 100,000 residents in 2013, compared with 50 for every 100,000 residents by 2016.

The number of firearm-related violent crimes has decreased statewide each year since 2012, the first year New York City was included in the data."

http://www.politifact.com/new-york/...s-collins/how-has-gun-crime-changed-safe-act/
 
Loki said:
It seems like things are improving gun violence wise, in New York since the passage of the SAFE act there. Of course both sides can twist the statistics to support their own narrative, but basically...

"In 2016, there were 10,007 violent crimes with a firearm reported to police, according to data from the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services. In 2013, there were 12,235. The percentage of violent crimes with a firearm also fell from 16 percent in 2013 to 13.5 percent in 2016.

Looked at another way, the number of firearm-related violent crimes per New York state resident also has declined. There were 62 firearm-related violent crimes reported for every 100,000 residents in 2013, compared with 50 for every 100,000 residents by 2016.

The number of firearm-related violent crimes has decreased statewide each year since 2012, the first year New York City was included in the data."

http://www.politifact.com/new-york/...s-collins/how-has-gun-crime-changed-safe-act/
Click to expand...
Did stabbings go up?
 
Bliss said:
CBS Legal Exec: 'No Sympathy For Vegas ‘Because Country Music Fans Often Are Republican’

(She's been fired)
Click to expand...

Not only is that a despicable thing to say/think, it's career suicide. Usually lawyers are not that level of stupid. Boy, and to think many said this country was divided under President Obama, Trump is taking things to a whole new level....
 
Bliss said:
But it would have blown his face off before he shot off 500 rounds.

And silencers are not 'silent'.

For the record though, l don't like them. But l'm not sure they should be banned.
Click to expand...
You should start off with there is no silencer for the kind of weapon he was using. I also don't ever recall hearing of a silencer for that much rapid fire but her comment is still true for guns that have silencers. Also, I don't name these things. I said the same thing when I saw someone use it. I think we all hear the sound. It just makes it less "noisey". There is no way that you are up to something good if you need your gun to be silent in a populated area. My thoughts.

Why don't you think they should be banned in a major city like Las Vegas or NYC? I can't think of a reason. I understand if you are hunting animals but I don't think a deer is going to show up in the middle of a casino too often.
 
Loki said:
Not only is that a despicable thing to say/think, it's career suicide. Usually lawyers are not that level of stupid. Boy, and to think many said this country was divided under President Obama, Trump is taking things to a whole new level....
Click to expand...
They would have said that under any Republican President. The intolerance and lack of any semblence of sympathy from the radical Left is being exposed, not unlike the radical Right were under Obama. Even here, certain individuals expressed apathy if not glee, that the Opioid epidemic is killing white people. Even though Black people are dying too...which might change their mind, which shows their fraud'ism' even more.
 
Cherok33 said:
The whole story unfolding leaves us with so many questions because everything is so odd...
Click to expand...
The usual story.
A mad person who is able to buy military type weapons.
Nothing new.
WE can ask all the questions we wish ....... until next time it happens.
 
Whatever. I'm done with this. Mass shootings in this country unfortunately are not rare. Mass shootings are rare in France and Germany, not here.

Fuck it. We've got over 300 million firearms, mostly unregistered, in this country, and nobody thinks that's too much. Pro gun rights people argue assault and military rifles should NOT be banned, although if they were banned 20 years ago it's very likely such an attack in LV never happens.
Too many Americans have a gun fetish that clouds their sense of decency and common sense.

So Americans can buy almost any kind of gun they want, as many as they want, not have to register them, unlike your car or computer modem, and then they pretend to be shocked and heartbroken when shootings like this happen.

We're never going to have sane gun control laws until gun owners decide it's time. So until then I'll watch these horrific tragedies, feel bad for the families and victims and be glad it didn't happen to someone I knew personally.
 
Bliss said:
No, people are just being assholes.

If it was a politically motivated terror attack of course President Trump would tweet about it.
It would be no different than when President Obama would call a Press conference to blame guns and the 2nd Amendment, etc.
Each had/has their way of getting their anger across.
Additionally, the person of color he would not. A Sudanese man shot up a White church last month killing and injuring parishioners worshipping, and no one barely said a thing. Thete is a JD investigation but not much publicity.

Mass shootings have always been occurring - I remember being in Australia in the early eighties and reading about a McDonald's massacre - it made International headlines. We would constantly hear stories about mass shootings - look what happened in the 60s at the Berkley (?) college.

All it takes is one person to get their hands on a gun legally or illegally and they can cause extreme Terror and human carnage. Politician cannot stop it otherwise we wouldn't have Chicago Philadelphia Camden Trenton St Louis New Orleans Etc, which have either a complete ban on guns or excessive restrictions.
Click to expand...


You know how lame it sounds that if we can't stop EVERY incidence of gun violence, there's no point in doing anything at all??
 
Why is this a political debate? Is Nevada not free to make their own stricter gun laws like NY did?? Are they not adults capable of making that decision for themselves?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom