50+killed in Las Vegas concert shooting-200+injured

**aj3647** · October-05-17, 01:58 PM

Originally Posted by Richard

One of the most controversial bills — to allow commuters to carry loaded guns on public buses and trains — would have the most impact on Chicago Transit Authority riders. Under the current law, licensed carriers can take an unloaded gun onto public transit, though they need to find a secluded place to removed the ammunition before boarding. The unloaded weapon must be secured in a container, such as a case. A bill to allow loaded weapons never came up for a vote, and both sides agree it won't happen anytime soon.

That is your leval of common sense,concealed carry, but not allowing ammunition,somebody starts shooting on a bus what are you going to do,pull out an empty gun and get shot.

So Chicago has "some of the toughest gun laws in country" because you can't carry a loaded gun onto a city bus? That's it? That's what you got?

No handgun bans? No bans on gun stores? No bans on concealed carry? Just "you can't carry guns on buses?" OK then.

Not only are handguns 100% legal to own in Chicago, they are also 100% legal to carry concealed with a permit. Also, Illinois is a "shall-issue" CCW state, just like Michigan is, and that applies equally to Chicago.

Just like every other state that has legalized concealed carry, Illinois places some modest restrictions on where you can take them. The ban on carrying loaded gun on public transit was a part of state law, it was not a Chicago-specific ordinance or law.

Chicago's gun laws are no more "tough" than you would find here in Michigan, where for example you are not permitted to bring weapons on-board SMART buses.

**Richard** · October-05-17, 02:06 PM

Originally Posted by aj3647

So Chicago has "some of the toughest gun laws in country" because you can't carry a loaded gun onto a city bus? That's it? That's what you got?

No handgun bans? No bans on gun stores? No bans on concealed carry? Just "you can't carry guns on buses?" OK then.

Not only are handguns 100% legal to own in Chicago, they are also 100% legal to carry concealed with a permit. Also, Illinois is a "shall-issue" CCW state, just like Michigan is, and that applies equally to Chicago.

Just like every other state that has legalized concealed carry, Illinois places some modest restrictions on where you can take them. The ban on carrying loaded gun on public transit was a part of state law, it was not a Chicago-specific ordinance or law.

Chicago's gun laws are no more "tough" than you would find here in Michigan, where for example you are not permitted to bring weapons on-board SMART buses.

Read your own post,you said name one,I named one and you created a whole whining post because I did not name multiple.

Maybe we just have a different definition of what one actually is,to me it is or means singular,does it have the same meaning to you also?

**aj3647** · October-05-17, 02:41 PM

Originally Posted by Richard

Read your own post,you said name one,I named one and you created a whole whining post because I did not name multiple.

Maybe we just have a different definition of what one actually is,to me it is or means singular,does it have the same meaning to you also?

No, I think we have a different definition of what "tough" is. You can't bring guns on public buses = "some of the toughest gun laws in the country?" Really? I already pointed out, you can't do that HERE either. Does Michigan have "some of the toughest gun laws in the country" too? You know Michigan has restrictions too on what public places you can concealed carry, so does fucking Texas for that matter. And the law you cited isn't even one passed by the city of Chicago, it's a state law.

The point is, Chicago's gun laws AREN'T tough. Not at all. Not by a longshot. Their gun laws aren't too different from what we have here in Michigan. 10 years ago, yes, Chicago had some of the toughest gun control in the country. That is no longer true. All of its actual tough gun laws were struck down by the courts in the last 7 or 8 years. Ban on gun shops? Struck down. Ban on handgun ownership? Struck down. State ban on concealed carry? Struck down.

Chicago's "tough gun laws" are a Right Wing myth. It simply isn't true. It once was, but no longer.

Originally Posted by Richard

Show me where I ever posted he did not use a hammer?

Then what point were you trying to make? I'm asking, so here's your chance. Tell us what you think happened. You seem to want to dispute everything I say just for the sake of disputing it, even though I'm just reporting the known facts. So go ahead and enlighten me with your theories of the Las Vegas shooting.

**Richard** · October-06-17, 12:29 AM

The thing is that it is a discussion forum and you seem to prefer to turn everything into a debate and while doing so twisting and turning words and quotes into a directive that suits your needs,and even in desperation adding your own words to quotes.

You are not interested in anybodies theory or opinions,and your 100% predictions did not play out so well when you called everybody morons for supporting candidate Trump because Hillary was going to win,fair enough,a broken clock is right twice a day.

RT interviewed a psychology professor today from some university,supposedly accredited with a long list of degrees, etc. etc.

OF course your reply is going to be about RT being a Russian television and how Russians controlled the election,completely overlooking the fact that RT creates 5 million views per day which far exceeds any US based media source,maybe that is why the US based media is trying to have them banned,instead of trying to understand why most Americans are just tired of their crap.

Her theory was he was a white man practicing his white supremacy over others.

My theory is he was no different then the hoards that constantly show publicly their distaste for the currant president and supporters.

It may have been that simple,a country western concert=rednecks=Trump supporters.

We went down that slippery slope of a divided country that has been boiling over for 8 plus years.

But that is my theory and they are kinda like opinions everybody has one.

The one thing I am sure of,is what is going to be told to the public is what is going to be in the best interests of the country at the time.

So what is the fine line that gets crossed when one constantly shows their anger and displeasure of the currant president and taking action,it was crossed when the guy walked onto the ball field,I believe it was also crossed way before the glass was busted out.

Or he could have been just a guy that decided to shoot up a bunch of people with no motive at all.

So in the meantime lets ban Hammers,multi story hotels and tall buildings that provide a vantage point,bump stocks,clothes,because one can hide a weapon underneath,vehicles because he had means to create a bomb.It does become a bit silly when we speculate and provide knee jerk reactions before facts are presented.

**Zacha341** · October-06-17, 04:43 AM

Remembering The Victims

**Zacha341** · October-06-17, 07:46 AM

Info and Updates:

New aerial photos show aftermath of Las Vegas shooting scene
http://abcnews.go.com/US/aerial-phot...ry?id=50301236

Former FBI Profiler on the Vegas Shooter......
https://www.cbsnews.com/videos/forme...egas-shooting/

Las Vegas shooting: Paddock may have scouted other targets
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41520829

After Vegas Shooting, Country Music's NRA Ties Show Signs of
Fraying
http://www.rollingstone.com/country/...ooting-w507289

Hillary Clinton On Las Vegas Shooting: ‘We Must Stand Up To The NRA’
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b09538b509ab39

Clinton Attack on NRA 'Exploitative' as Vegas Shooting Was Still Unfolding
http://www.newsmax.com/TheWire/hilla.../03/id/817257/

**Zacha341** · October-06-17, 11:14 AM

15 Ordinary People Who Acted As Heroes During The Las Vegas Shooting And Restored Our Faith In Humanity
https://www.boredpanda.com/las-vegas...oting-heroes/c

**ABetterDetroit** · October-06-17, 12:51 PM

Originally Posted by Richard

The whole point is,no matter how many laws are in place and even if you removed every gun from the country,if somebody wants to do damage they will find away.

9-11 was done with a box cutter and airplane,no auto weapons used.

Yes, you can outlaw bump stocks and appease some by falsely making them think that they have accomplished something and feel better, but at the end of the day one can always jump into a vehicle and cause the same carnage.

The issiue of mental health care comes up every time but the response is always concentrated on the weapons and not mental health care because it is easier to deal with an inate object.

How many seconds does it take to drop a magazine and insert a new one and in this case and the 9 minute time frame how many lives would have been saved if 1 minute was saved in swapping magazines?

He had scopes and could have done a lot more damage with controlled shots from a ten round mag then uncontrolled spraying.

Weak, Weak and more weak. Go and try and sign up for some simulator time in a 737 or A330 post 9/11 with just a checkbook these days and see how well that works. The cockpit doors were upgraded considerably since those attacks. Screening what gets onboard is not the same either and to suggest that nothing should have been done because 'well there is always another way' is again nothing short of a stupid argument and your example proves it.

You know damn well that this piece of shit in Las Vegas did not possess the skill to snipe his way to a high death count at several hundred yards so please don't keep bullshiting me. His tactics were clear and obvious even to the most ignorant, put as much lead as possible into the thickest humanity he could put himself above with a big pile of guns and preloaded high cap mags that he could possibly surround himself with.

What's easily available and having no actual skill with a firearm made this tragedy so much easier for this malfunction of a human being to do what he did. That's a big part of the fucking problem.

Just admit it, guns give some people a chubby when they fondle them. They make them feel all big and powerful and that feeling is more important to them than other peoples kids, mothers and fathers, family and friends when they get slaughtered and bleed out to death wherever it happens in America. You know it's the truth. All gun nuts do. Even most of the stupid ones.

Using your dumb argument and your math on "how many lives would have been saved if 1 minute was saved in swapping magazines?" SIX COMPLETELY INNOCENT PEOPLE in this single case.

How many cops in Dallas? How many first graders in Sandy Hook? How many people who went to see a movie? How many in drive by shootings? Students at Virginia Tech? It's actually a very long list of DEAD people and children that are DEAD because of those high capacity magazines being everywhere in this country.

DetroitNightLights · October-06-17, 01:09 PM

Originally Posted by oladub

Ah, well then there are at least three possibilities that allowed Stephen Paddock to shoot so rapidly. He could have had a fully automatic weapon, employed a full auto clip on a modified semi-automatic rifle, or "bump fired" a semi automatic weapon. From the CNN article, "Audio from witnesses clearly shows the shooter was firing at a rate impossible for even the most skilled shooters with specialized triggers." We will have to wait to find out just how he accomplished such rapid fire. If they were all illegal, Mr. Paddock would have had to resort to driving a truck through a crowd or something.

Or something. Her three year old child was in the car when this happened just before last Christmas. Seems like Vegas is a place I will be staying away from for awhile.

Las Vegas Strip: Driver hits dozens of pedestrians in 'intentional' act

"Authorities haven't said anything yet about what might have motivated a woman to drive her car onto a busy sidewalk along the Las Vegas Strip, but new details emerged Monday about what she told investigators she did before and after the crash.

Lakeisha N. Holloway, 24, is accused of killing one person and injuring more than three dozen when she struck pedestrians on the sidewalk."

**Richard** · October-06-17, 01:26 PM

Originally Posted by ABetterDetroit

Weak, Weak and more weak. Go and try and sign up for some simulator time in a 737 or A330 post 9/11 with just a checkbook these days and see how well that works. The cockpit doors were upgraded considerably since those attacks. Screening what gets onboard is not the same either and to suggest that nothing should have been done because 'well there is always another way' is again nothing short of a stupid argument and your example proves it.

You know damn well that this piece of shit in Las Vegas did not possess the skill to snipe his way to a high death count at several hundred yards so please don't keep bullshiting me. His tactics were clear and obvious even to the most ignorant, put as much lead as possible into the thickest humanity he could put himself above with a big pile of guns and preloaded high cap mags that he could possibly surround himself with.

What's easily available and having no actual skill with a firearm made this tragedy so much easier for this malfunction of a human being to do what he did. That's a big part of the fucking problem.

Just admit it, guns give some people a chubby when they fondle them. They make them feel all big and powerful and that feeling is more important to them than other peoples kids, mothers and fathers, family and friends when they get slaughtered and bleed out to death wherever it happens in America. You know it's the truth. All gun nuts do. Even most of the stupid ones.

Using your dumb argument and your math on "how many lives would have been saved if 1 minute was saved in swapping magazines?" SIX COMPLETELY INNOCENT PEOPLE in this single case.

How many cops in Dallas? How many first graders in Sandy Hook? How many people who went to see a movie? How many in drive by shootings? Students at Virginia Tech? It's actually a very long list of DEAD people and children that are DEAD because of those high capacity magazines being everywhere in this country.

How is it weak,terrorist attacks happen all over the world,if gun controls were the answer please share that information with Israel and every other country because they do not have a clue.

No matter how many laws are put in place,people that want to cause harm will find a way.That is a proven fact.

If there was a way to stop them they would not be happening.

Israel deploys armed military on the street corners but still suffers from terrorist attacks.

Weak is useing an inate object as a feel like something is being done feel good excuse.

You are calling everybody else stupid,be the smart one and show the stupid people and governments of the world how to stop them.

There is a long list of dead children from walking to school in the morning,how are you going to help the stupid people and prevent that from happening?

**ABetterDetroit** · October-06-17, 02:12 PM

Originally Posted by Richard

How is it weak,terrorist attacks happen all over the world,if gun controls were the answer please share that information with Israel and every other country because they do not have a clue.

You argue like a ignorant child.

Israeli Firearm Laws would be FUCKING FANTASTIC.

Yes Richard, the FACT is the Israelis have a very large clue how to keep there citizens from being slaughtered.

https://www.loc.gov/law/help/firearm...rol/israel.php

DetroitNightLights · October-06-17, 02:27 PM

Gun bans are a bad idea.

Imagine Detroit's police response times and lack of 911 service during the worst years. Then imagine that they banned guns, were able to keep ordinances that looked for law-abiding civilian guns, but were unable to keep up the ban against the criminal element.

That is exactly what happened during Venezuela's ongoing collapse. Guns were banned. Police put all their resources in getting guns off the streets. Police realized that the gangs were unaffected by the gun ban. Police were unable to then help the defenseless citizens of whose guns they had just confiscated and destroyed.

Name: f7067fbd602227e1a142c38a47a74e8c.jpg
Views: 1015
Size: 64.5 KB

Just like Detroit was able to maintain perfect parking enforcement, Venezuela has been able to ticket and hound those who do not post the gun ban notices at their places of business. Just don't expect anyone to come when you call police.

Gun bans can easily equate to the government being there when you don't need them, and not being there when you do. Essentially, it is the worst possible scenario. The gun ban did not stop the flow of weapons to the gangs of Venezuela. The gun ban did stop the flow of weapons to those defending their business or family.

**Richard** · October-06-17, 02:40 PM

Originally Posted by ABetterDetroit

You argue like a ignorant child.

Israeli Firearm Laws would be FUCKING FANTASTIC.

Yes Richard, the FACT is the Israelis have a very large clue how to keep there citizens from being slaughtered.

https://www.loc.gov/law/help/firearm...rol/israel.php

But yet it continues.

You would really love France,they have been under national emergency for two years,that gives law enforcement the power to detain without cause and charges and enter private property for search and seizure with no judicial over site.

In order to prevent terrorist attacks,how has that worked for them?

Sounds like a place you would really like.

**canuck** · October-06-17, 03:43 PM

Originally Posted by Richard

The thing is that it is a discussion forum and you seem to prefer to turn everything into a debate and while doing so twisting and turning words and quotes into a directive that suits your needs,and even in desperation adding your own words to quotes.

You are not interested in anybodies theory or opinions,and your 100% predictions did not play out so well when you called everybody morons for supporting candidate Trump because Hillary was going to win,fair enough,a broken clock is right twice a day.

RT interviewed a psychology professor today from some university,supposedly accredited with a long list of degrees, etc. etc.

OF course your reply is going to be about RT being a Russian television and how Russians controlled the election,completely overlooking the fact that RT creates 5 million views per day which far exceeds any US based media source,maybe that is why the US based media is trying to have them banned,instead of trying to understand why most Americans are just tired of their crap.

Her theory was he was a white man practicing his white supremacy over others.

My theory is he was no different then the hoards that constantly show publicly their distaste for the currant president and supporters.

It may have been that simple,a country western concert=rednecks=Trump supporters.

We went down that slippery slope of a divided country that has been boiling over for 8 plus years.

But that is my theory and they are kinda like opinions everybody has one.

The one thing I am sure of,is what is going to be told to the public is what is going to be in the best interests of the country at the time.

So what is the fine line that gets crossed when one constantly shows their anger and displeasure of the currant president and taking action,it was crossed when the guy walked onto the ball field,I believe it was also crossed way before the glass was busted out.

Or he could have been just a guy that decided to shoot up a bunch of people with no motive at all.

So in the meantime lets ban Hammers,multi story hotels and tall buildings that provide a vantage point,bump stocks,clothes,because one can hide a weapon underneath,vehicles because he had means to create a bomb.It does become a bit silly when we speculate and provide knee jerk reactions before facts are presented.

Richard, Richard. You know darn well that highrise hotels and clothing don't need to be banned but rather tv's and coffee machines that can be dropped from high up do need to be outlawed. High powered guns have very little effect on people if used in moderation.

**canuck** · October-06-17, 03:49 PM

Originally Posted by Richard

But yet it continues.

You would really love France,they have been under national emergency for two years,that gives law enforcement the power to detain without cause and charges and enter private property for search and seizure with no judicial over site.

In order to prevent terrorist attacks,how has that worked for them?

Sounds like a place you would really like.

I was in Paris last week, and to be honest, I wouldn't mind living there in the least. Don't you think that anti-terrorist police units, border patrol and homeland security don't have broad powers in the US?

**oladub** · October-06-17, 04:37 PM

Originally Posted by ABetterDetroit

Give me a break Richard. You, myself and everyone else knows that what's readily available in Wisconsin, Iowa, Indiana, Missouri etc... can be had easily in Chicago. It such a stupid argument that even a 10 year old can see your flaws. The gun show, cash and the trunk of a car have all been around a long time now. Duh.

and on post# 71 Canuck wrote, "A bike ride away in a Chicago suburb, you'll likely pick up all the guns and ammo your heart desires. The availability makes it moot whether you dispatch the arms legally or not to the end user."

I guess the idea is that Chicago's gun laws didn't work because people in Chicago can get around those laws by purchasing guns in "a Chicago suburb" or "Wisconsin, Iowa, Indiana, Missouri etc.." That implies two things. Gun laws sometimes don't work because people work around them and Chicago's gun laws are strict relative to those of its suburbs, and those of Wisconsin, Iowa, Indiana, Missouri, etc..

What is totally ignored is that the populations of Chicago suburbs, and Wisconsin, Iowa, Indiana, Missouri, etc. always have access to those same guns that people kill each other with in Chicago but do not kill each other at nearly the same rate as Chicago residents. Why is that?

A more extreme disparity is between the homicide rates from all causes of New Hampshire and Washington, D.C.. 22 times as many people die in homicides in Washington, D.C., per capita, as in New Hampshire. My guess is that New Hampshire has more guns per capita than Washington, D.C. and less strict gun laws. So there must be some other variable besides who has the most guns and the strictest laws. Yet the left that never lowers flags to half mast every other month when Chicago has 59 homicides wants to believe that applying Washington, D.C.'s bromides to the rest of the country will be a magic elixir.

**ABetterDetroit** · October-06-17, 07:24 PM

Originally Posted by oladub

and on post# 71 Canuck wrote, "A bike ride away in a Chicago suburb, you'll likely pick up all the guns and ammo your heart desires. The availability makes it moot whether you dispatch the arms legally or not to the end user."

I guess the idea is that Chicago's gun laws didn't work because people in Chicago can get around those laws by purchasing guns in "a Chicago suburb" or "Wisconsin, Iowa, Indiana, Missouri etc.." That implies two things. Gun laws sometimes don't work because people work around them and Chicago's gun laws are strict relative to those of its suburbs, and those of Wisconsin, Iowa, Indiana, Missouri, etc..

What is totally ignored is that the populations of Chicago suburbs, and Wisconsin, Iowa, Indiana, Missouri, etc. always have access to those same guns that people kill each other with in Chicago but do not kill each other at nearly the same rate as Chicago residents. Why is that?

A more extreme disparity is between the homicide rates from all causes of New Hampshire and Washington, D.C.. 22 times as many people die in homicides in Washington, D.C., per capita, as in New Hampshire. My guess is that New Hampshire has more guns per capita than Washington, D.C. and less strict gun laws. So there must be some other variable besides who has the most guns and the strictest laws. Yet the left that never lowers flags to half mast every other month when Chicago has 59 homicides wants to believe that applying Washington, D.C.'s bromides to the rest of the country will be a magic elixir.

Absolutely there is great disparity in homicide rates all over the country.

Newtown Connecticut for example with a population of 27,000 and absolutely nothing like Chicago had 20 first graders murdered in 2012.

There is no magic elixir. A ban is ridiculous and impossible. It is fair to say that common sense has been completely lost though. Doing absolutely nothing to address the issue has resulted in some horrific events and some terrible statistics for a first world nation. Pride in country should go a hell of a lot deeper than who kneels or stands for a song. A high regard for the lives of our citizens would be nice.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newtown,_Connecticut

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sand...chool_shooting

DetroitNightLights · October-08-17, 01:28 PM

Data isn't there for earlier shootings

...Fox offers another line of thinking for why we tend to think of mass shootings in a modern sense: Our own experiences and, perhaps, our own fear.

"A significant portion of America wasn't alive in, say, the 1940s, so part of it is just a function of memory," he says. "The bigger part has to do with technology and media. When these things happened, maybe we saw some grainy film days later, but we certainly didn't hear it like we do now. There weren't satellite trucks that would rush to the scene of a mass shooting and carry images of carnage right into our living rooms, making it feel like it's happening just down the street."

**Jimaz** · October-08-17, 02:22 PM

I find that hard to believe. It sounds like the author's trying to minimize the tragedy. She's pretty young. Maybe the possibility of searching through microfiche newspaper archives wasn't the first thing that popped into her mind.

Now I have to take that back. Here's another of her articles that goes into much more detailed data: Mass shootings in America are a serious problem -- and these 9 charts show just why.

From that article:

There's your American exceptionalism right there.

DetroitNightLights · October-08-17, 05:23 PM

Originally Posted by Jimaz

I find that hard to believe. It sounds like the author's trying to minimize the tragedy. She's pretty young. Maybe the possibility of searching through microfiche newspaper archives wasn't the first thing that popped into her mind.

Now I have to take that back. Here's another of her articles that goes into much more detailed data: Mass shootings in America are a serious problem -- and these 9 charts show just why.

Are you really saying you'd prefer to have limbs chopped off, be mowed down by a car, be filled with shrapnel from a explosion, or die from a cross bow instead of getting a nice clean death from a gun? What exactly are you trying to assert?

Mass shootings are a subset of mass killings. Higher gun ownership equals a higher likelihood of mass shootings,the same way that a higher number of airplane trips results in a higher likelihood of plane crashes. What we saw when all the airplanes were banned/grounded on 9/11, a shift to automobile travel created an explosion of car crashes.

Name: oecd-homicide-rates.jpg
Views: 992
Size: 103.2 KB

Name: oecd-homicide-rates.jpg
Views: 992
Size: 103.2 KB

The United States has a disproportionate number of mass killings in general. Banning one of the methods just makes the killer choose an even more gruesome weapon of choice.

We should be discussing how to lower the mass murder rate, not changing how mass murders are carried out.

**Jimaz** · October-08-17, 06:16 PM

Originally Posted by DetroitNightLights

Are you really saying you'd prefer to have limbs chopped off, be mowed down by a car, be filled with shrapnel from a explosion, or die from a cross bow instead of getting a nice clean death from a gun?

Of course not.

Originally Posted by DetroitNightLights

What exactly are you trying to assert?

Nothing whatsoever. I was simply adding more information from the same author you quoted.

It's probably important to also remember that the vast majority of us will die of natural causes.

**oladub** · October-08-17, 07:44 PM

Right column is number of murders from all causes per 100,000 population.


New Hampshire	1,330,111	14	1.1
Hawaii	1,425,157	19	1.3
Vermont	626,088	10	1.6
Maine	1,329,453	23	1.7
Utah	2,990,632	54	1.8
Idaho	1,652,828	32	1.9
Massachusetts	6,784,240	128	1.9
Iowa	3,121,997	72	2.3
Missouri	6,076,204	502	8.3
Maryland	5,994,983	516	8.6
Mississippi	2,989,390	259	8.7
Louisiana	4,668,960	481	10.3
District of Columbia	670,377	162	24.2

There were 17,250 homicides in the US in 2016. There were also 908,000 abortions in the US in 2015 although abortions are not considered homicides. "Between 2014 and 2016, the nationwide homicide rate has increased more than 20%, and the 3.4% increase in the US violent crime rate from 2015 to 2016 was the largest single-year increase in 25 years, the Justice Department said." -CNN,

**Honky Tonk** · October-09-17, 07:11 AM

Originally Posted by Zacha341

Info and Updates:

New aerial photos show aftermath of Las Vegas shooting scene
http://abcnews.go.com/US/aerial-phot...ry?id=50301236

Former FBI Profiler on the Vegas Shooter......
https://www.cbsnews.com/videos/forme...egas-shooting/

Las Vegas shooting: Paddock may have scouted other targets
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41520829

After Vegas Shooting, Country Music's NRA Ties Show Signs of
Fraying
http://www.rollingstone.com/country/...ooting-w507289

Hillary Clinton On Las Vegas Shooting: ‘We Must Stand Up To The NRA’
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b09538b509ab39

Clinton Attack on NRA 'Exploitative' as Vegas Shooting Was Still Unfolding
http://www.newsmax.com/TheWire/hilla.../03/id/817257/

I wonder how many people will die because hubby Bill let the Soviets have a share of a Uranium mine. I guess it doesn't matter as long as the Foundation profits. Has-Been Hillary needs to retire and count her millions.

**Richard** · October-10-17, 06:52 AM

Yea it's no problem as long as it is somebody else dieing.

Our north of the border friends like to chastise us about our gun laws,but yet are still trying to figure out what happened to thousands of automatic weapons that they shipped that kind of just disappeared to nobody knows where.

Which usually translates into some warlord that should not really be armed in order to create their own little ethnic cleansing party.

Every country does it though,it is okay to provide 10 year olds with automatic weapons elsewhere but not in this country.

You are in a crowded market,it is a 100 degrees in the shade,you see a ten year old with heavy garb on and a bulge underneath,it may be explosive and if he or she sets it off hundreds will die.

You have three seconds to decide weather or not to shoot them,if you do and they are carrying,you just saved hundreds of lives,if they are not carrying you can be up on murder charges.

That is the reality of everyday life in a lot of places,where you learn to scan everybody and have a split second reaction.

We have been lucky that we do not expirence what others do in their daily life.

**aj3647** · October-10-17, 12:59 PM

Originally Posted by oladub

What is totally ignored is that the populations of Chicago suburbs, and Wisconsin, Iowa, Indiana, Missouri, etc. always have access to those same guns that people kill each other with in Chicago but do not kill each other at nearly the same rate as Chicago residents. Why is that?

A more extreme disparity is between the homicide rates from all causes of New Hampshire and Washington, D.C.. 22 times as many people die in homicides in Washington, D.C., per capita, as in New Hampshire. My guess is that New Hampshire has more guns per capita than Washington, D.C. and less strict gun laws. So there must be some other variable besides who has the most guns and the strictest laws. Yet the left that never lowers flags to half mast every other month when Chicago has 59 homicides wants to believe that applying Washington, D.C.'s bromides to the rest of the country will be a magic elixir.

What about population densities, are those the same? What about poverty rates?

You know, if you wanted to reframe the debate away from guns and focus on the underlying conditions that cause gun violence, I'd be all for that. We could talk about how we need better mental health treatment, reduce poverty, address the problems of distressed inner-cities ravaged by decades of manufacturing decline and racist housing policies, improved educational opportunities for at-risk communities and youth, etc.

Except, for the gun-loving Right, nobody wants to do anything about those things either, because it might cost money. And instead, the Right goes one step further and does the exact opposite, it tries to slash funding to any and all programs that fund education, mental health care, housing, etc.

You don't like gun control? Fine. Propose something else then. We have a problem, surely even you must acknowledge that. Propose something to make things better, as an alternative to gun control. The problem is, the Right offers no alternative to the Left's suggestion of gun control. The Right's solution is "do nothing." Bill O'Reilly said that gun massacres like this are simply "the cost of freedom." Republican Senator John Thune said that Americans should simply learn techniques on how to protect themselves when they're shot at, like "getting low" and creating a low profile that makes you harder to hit.

Do you think Americans want to hear that? That these massacres are just a part of life in America and we should just learn to accept it? That if I don't want to be shot by a crazy man with an AR-15, I should learn how to dodge bullets?