Politics - Jason X

[Chilloutman]

I think we are getting caught up in the details of the gun, when that seems a bit like a dead end. Whether it was illegal or not, modified, etc. is going to mean very little because you will have one side crying out for gun control and the other (NRA) side shutting down any notion of that sort. It will get us nowhere, and I see it as pointless. Besides, is it really any better if he has to fire slower? The guy was in an elevated position and there was no simple way to get to him. 

 

I'm more interested in what hotels will be changing and how will large concert venues handle security differently. Bag checks? Cameras in the rooms? Metal detectors? 

 

Why are you focused on Hotels, they are not only elevated place on earth. It was just one of the options

[Hurlshort]

Because it happened in a hotel overlooking a large concert venue? That seems like a dumb question.

[Chilloutman]

Because it happened in a hotel overlooking a large concert venue? That seems like a dumb question.

 

no its not, there are tons of buildings overlooking a large concert venue, what is so special about hotels in that regard?

[Gfted1]

I was going to mention that the windows in Las Vegas hotels are only capable of opening ~1-2" (to deter jumpers). Looks like this guy shot them out. Perhaps bullteproof glass?

[injurai]

 

Because it happened in a hotel overlooking a large concert venue? That seems like a dumb question.

 

no its not, there are tons of buildings overlooking a large concert venue, what is so special about hotels in that regard?

 

 

In the same way that book depositories are special.

[Gfted1]

And bell towers?

[injurai]

Being fair, you get your own room were you can setup with relative privacy over multiple days. Hotels may certainly implement more security measures to prevent the exploitation of that privacy.

[Gfted1]

Perhaps a camera in your bathroom?

[Hurlshort]

 

Because it happened in a hotel overlooking a large concert venue? That seems like a dumb question.

no its not, there are tons of buildings overlooking a large concert venue, what is so special about hotels in that regard?

You can purchase a hotel room and carry up a number of heavy bags to said room. What other buildings allow you to do that? Also I am not sure how many tall buildings look down on open concert venues, I would not guess there are that many. In Vegas literally every tall building is a hotel.

[Guard Dog]

I think we are getting caught up in the details of the gun, when that seems a bit like a dead end. Whether it was illegal or not, modified, etc. is going to mean very little because you will have one side crying out for gun control and the other (NRA) side shutting down any notion of that sort. It will get us nowhere, and I see it as pointless. Besides, is it really any better if he has to fire slower? The guy was in an elevated position and there was no simple way to get to him. 

 

I'm more interested in what hotels will be changing and how will large concert venues handle security differently. Bag checks? Cameras in the rooms? Metal detectors? 

 

Not necessarily. If he has an unmodified full auto weapon that a civilian would be unable to acquire except from a broker overseas at costs greater than the shooters means you just went from lone gunman to conspiracy. Had the weapon been semi-auto we would not be discussing it. The fact that is was firing in full auto is both important and compelling.  

[Guard Dog]

 

 

And guns seem less dangerous than stampedes. 

 

As pointed out, almost any semi-automatic weapon can be converted to full automatic in under 10 minutes. An AR-15 modified to full auto can shoot approximately 2 rounds per second. So if we consider the 27 seconds of firing time he should only have been able to get off ~60 rounds. People are reporting "hundreds" of rounds fired so I wonder if he was dual wielding fully automatic weapons or if he had help.

 

Listen to the audio in the link I posted. That was no 30 round magazine. Even if he did convert and AR you can't make it belt fed. It doe not have the hardware to self feed. AR and AKMs use a spring in the magazine to feed the next round into the rifle. And if you did make an AR full auto you can't control the rate of fire anymore. In other words once you pull the trigger it empties the magazine. But even then the biggest magazine is 30 rounds. The HK-21 & MG-34 can be modified to be belt fed. Both are illegal in the US.

 

 

Just last week I saw someone convert an ar-15 to eject casings out of the lower receiver and feed in from an p90 50-round box mag. They sell even higher capacity casket fed p90 magazines. I think if someone really wanted to rig something up they could.

 

 

I don't see how the barrel could stand the heating from the rate of fire. Unless as someone suggested there was more than one. I don't know. That's possible I guess. It still sounds like the pause was just long enough to change a drum to me. 

[Malcador]

How quickly does it become useless due to the heat ? Might have rigged something up just to last long enough, but that depends.

[Volourn]

Disgusting piece of ****. 'Nough said.

[Gromnir]

am gonna wait for info.  immediate after these incidents, people like to guess.  unfortunate, even when actual facts is known, the arguments and debates started sans facts don't end easily.  from the video we seen/heard, sure sounded like full-auto, which makes it very unlikely the weapons were purchased and owned legal.  there is limited exceptions whereby an ordinary non-gun dealer/manufacturer could posses/own an automatic weapon, but we got no way o' knowing if the shooter and his weapons met such exceptions.  we don't know if the shooter had mental health issues.  we don't know if the shooter were affiliated with an organization being investigated by the fbi (or even the cia) as extremist or terrorist.  we don't know if the shooter's body were found half buried in a small mountain o' empty twinkie wrappers and coca-cola cans. etc.

 

...

 

however, we do know the shooter were not an immigrant or a recent visitor from chad.

 

we mourn the senseless loss, but am gonna sit this one out 'til we know something... anything. 

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

I don't see what the big deal is tbh. These shootings happen all the time and at most there's a half-hearted attempt to improve secruity or push to view porn history to crack down on suspects. Shedding crocodile tears is a boring song and dance anyways.

[Hurlshort]

Would KP's post qualify him as an Edgelord? I'm not really hip on these internet labels.  

[ShadySands]

Maybe but he's kind of right in that nothing really ever changes. I think the most we've gotten were some magazine size restrictions and at least here in Colorado most of those politicians lost their jobs for it.

[Hurlshort]

Airports are pretty different after 9/11, schools have implemented changes since Columbine. I'd guess clubs have changed as well since Orlando. There is obviously a limit, and as a lone gunman it is nearly impossible to really stop when it comes down to it.

 

I'm not sure what kind of response KP is looking for though. 

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Maybe but he's kind of right in that nothing really ever changes. I think the most we've gotten were some magazine size restrictions and at least here in Colorado most of those politicians lost their jobs for it.

That's exactly my point. Even if gun control would work it isn't going to happen and at most some law will pass that barely gets followed by underpaid hotel clerks. So we get condemnations and crying for a week and go back to business as usual until the next shooting happens in a month of two.

[Guard Dog]

He was using a full auto weapon. Full auto weapons are already illegal. Even if it was modified it was already illegal. What kind of gun control are they hoping for here. Make it really, really illegal? Or just take them all away? If so my invitation still stands. They want my firearms come take them, smoking from my dead hands. The ammo I'll be happy to serve up first, as fast as I can fire it. 

[aluminiumtrioxid]

He was using a full auto weapon. Full auto weapons are already illegal. Even if it was modified it was already illegal. What kind of gun control are they hoping for here. Make it really, really illegal? Or just take them all away? If so my invitation still stands. They want my firearms come take them, smoking from my dead hands. The ammo I'll be happy to serve up first, as fast as I can fire it. 

 

It always cracks me up how eager you are to shoot your fellow countrymen who are just doing their jobs 

[Hurlshort]

If we didn't push through any gun control after Sandy Hook, when small children were gunned down with a legal weapon, I don't see how we push anything through for this. In that I can see where KP is coming from.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

It's not just that, you remeber after the theater shooting in colorado how movies would check purses and other bags? Well about a year later I'd see dudes coming in with backpacks that weren't even checked at the door, across several different theaters and different staff most of the time. I predict a similar response here, with hotels barely checking bags a while after because sorting through undies to find something that won't be there gets old and staff largely won't give a ****.

 

It sucks that people died and all, but nothing is going to change from this and public figures being sad is a ritual performance.

[Hurlshort]

I can see decent hotel chains implementing a bag scanning system. That doesn't seems too crazy.

[injurai]

On the other hand. After mass shootings you get large amounts of liberals talking about needing to make societal changes to prevent such things from ever occurring again. When a terrorist attack occurs you get a similar response from the right, while the left says that's just letting the terrorists win. I believe much of the right feels the winning move is to collect oneself and move forward with the parts of life that matter, that restricting gun control is letting outliers win. This sort of "double-standard/symmetry" I've never seen talked about.

 

So in the end what is the right move? More laws, bureaucracy, more acting like we have real power over terrible things? Or do we collectively vote with our time and money to charge ahead with what really takes precedence. I feel people would rather donate to help victims than politically engineer a solution that may or may not work. The optics of either of those two scenarios may hurt people's idealistic sensitivities, but collectively I think the answer to the cost/benefit analysis is revealed.