world

Gunman kills 59, injures 500, in Las Vegas concert attack; Trump calls it 'act of pure evil'

143 Comments
By Devika Krishna Kumar and Alexandria Sage

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2017.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

143 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

IS described Paddock as a "soldier of the caliphate," saying he converted to Islam several months ago and went by the nom de guerre Abu Abdel Bar al-Amriki -- "The American."

Abu Abdel Bar al-Amriki,

Right.

I would like to know if "the American" had started taking any medication recently.

-6 ( +7 / -13 )

U.S. law largely bans machine guns.

Then, where did he get them? Ok, he "modified" legally purchased assault rifles and used them for this massacre.

This was not just and act of rage, it took some planning, and there is a reason for it out there somewhere. I just hope that the authorities are honest in telling the world what it was.

13 ( +13 / -0 )

RIP to those murdered by this madman, condolences to their families and friends. Speedy recovery to all injured. Thank you to all emergency workers for all you do, thank you to any who helped in any way during and after the massacre.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

We are waiting on Trump to point finger towards the NRA. Imagine if the guy didn’t have access to such a destructive weapon...

6 ( +10 / -4 )

Cue the silly debates about banning all guns in the US now.....

-34 ( +3 / -37 )

Studies done of the people who do these things have shown a common link in childhood abuse/neglect, and with a bank robber father that is likely to apply here, too. Aggressive efforts in childhood education and health care, including mental health support for at-risk children and parents, would likely have an effect, but with Ms. Amway Devos defunding public education as fast as she can, it is unlikely this will ever happen. Add that to the ridiculous conflation of patriotism/freedom/masculinity with firearms that so many people have, and we can expect these incidents to continue, and keep getting worse.

5 ( +8 / -3 )

surpassed last year's massacre of 49 people at a gay nightclub in Orlando, Florida

Macabre competition.

10 ( +11 / -1 )

This is like a nightmare...I was trembling and calling families and friends who live there...we were just there this summer with the kids and I couldn't imagine the terror this brings to every person out there...

10 ( +10 / -0 )

What a terrible terrible situation, people enjoying music, one of the few pure joys in life shot down.

I hope the families and friends of the victims get the assistance they will desperately need.

I don't know much about this mans motives or state of mind so won't make any comment on it.

However this absolute disconnect between in the US about gun and their effects just baffles me.

People say guns don't kill people, and sure they alone can't as such, but they make it much easier, too easy as this horrible event shows.

18 ( +19 / -1 )

However this absolute disconnect between in the US about gun and their effects just baffles me.

It is quite simple really, the reason is due to the fact that they won't say out loud what they are feeling and that is they believe the lives of those killed or wounded by firearms are an acceptable cost to be able to own and enjoy firearms. Due to the fact that they are afraid of being shamed for holding those beliefs they will instead give you other arguments.

If you want the truth from them then you will have to create "safe" space for them to say it out loud without any social repercussions for saying those thoughts out loud. If the response is going to be hostile, public shamming, etc then will not get the truth from them. Nor will you be able to make any progress on the issue.

10 ( +13 / -3 )

 If Crooked Hillary got elected, you would not have a 2nd Amendment, believe me. You'd be saying, 'Here. Here. Here they are.'

Trump said that while campaigning last week for failed senate GOP nominee Luther Strange, and his audience predictable ate it up, resurrecting Trump's signature presidential kumbaya chant-a-long that made the US so resemble a banana republic, "Lock her up!"

That Trump dredged up the ghost of now-retired Hillary in a race with which she had zero involvement and in which both candidates subscribed to the belief that guns are good and more guns are better (the eventual winner took the stage baring a rifle in one hand) is bizzare unless one views it symbolically as a guttural tribal, quasi-religious call. He's feigning sorrow now but, believe me (as Trump would say), he will return to his "Hillary! "Guns!" hyperbole as soon as is politically possible.

16 ( +17 / -1 )

Authorities are not calling this terrorism, but can't we say that this is industry and government sponsored terrorism, since these institutions, by mass producing and selling and by not seriously banning assault weapons, directly give licence to killers?

22 ( +23 / -1 )

After a tragedy like this when innocent people are massacred and we eventually learn the perpetrator was a member of a group that’s often feared and reviled, some posters write in questioning why other members of that group aren’t appalled and doing more to prevent similar massacres from occurring. 

I have yet to read conclusive information showing this madman was representing any known terrorist organization, but he had in his possession and used high-powered weaponry to slaughter people. 

To me possessing and using those weapons puts him in a group which includes like-minded people, i.e. those who own and use high-powered weapons. 

Where’s the outcry from this group? Are they so concerned about keeping and using their own weapons that they couldn’t care less about this latest gun slaughter? Is the only response we’ll hear from them that they’re angry someone is questioning their ‘right’ to own these weapons?

17 ( +18 / -1 )

Noliving - It is quite simple really, the reason is due to the fact that they won't say out loud what they are feeling

Voters vote, and many of the candidates who were in favor of banning firearms did not get elected, or reelected. The voters seem to have spoken quite well. Some people simply refuse to hear what has actually been said.

-7 ( +4 / -11 )

Update: 59 dead. 527 injured. Ammonia, nitrogen were found in his car. His live in girl friend did not move to Philippine or Australia. Watch out. She is in Tokyo. Sheriff explained.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

@arrestpaul

That's only completely true if each candidate only represents a single issue. People running for office don't just run on a guns/ no guns platform. There are lots of issues and most people don't agree with their preferred candidate on every single issue.

There's plenty of voters who would support sensible gun legislation (such as licensing and background checks) but the candidates that align with the rest of their interests and needs don't fit that.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

It seems that America can't get of curse of guns. They would see more more tragedies in the future as long as they are holding guns in hands.

10 ( +11 / -1 )

His girlfriend's name is Marylou Dailey. She is person of interest.

The gunman stayed on there since 9/28 (US date). Authorities are checking security video now.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

IS described Paddock as a "soldier of the caliphate," saying he converted to Islam several months ago and went by the nom de guerre Abu Abdel Bar al-Amriki -- "The American."

The plot thickens.

I DO find it interesting that the usual suspects who casually say “carry on as usual “ after the almost daily Islamic terror attacks are now braying for instant change in America

-15 ( +2 / -17 )

People running for office don't just run on a guns/ no guns platform. There are lots of issues and most people don't agree with their preferred candidate on every single issue.

If this guy had several machine guns, one of which costs more than a car and takes a year of background checking, I'm not sure there was anything that could have stopped him.

-10 ( +2 / -12 )

Plz make strict gun laws. Else any psychopath can follow the track. And I am sure that with all this complex, and unjust world around us we are making more psychopaths then before.

11 ( +12 / -1 )

Oh the depths and the darkness of the lone psychopath armed to the teeth trying to figure out the best vantage point to create carnage. The pits of hell to this nutter, although he was already there. Now there's a new record body count for the next guy to work with.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Personally if I had a machine gun I expect lots of checking by law enforcement my family and friends interviewed about me. But it's America so not so much, 50 + dead that's 50 + family's who's greif will never be forgotten. It's a disaster avoided by prohibiting the sale of machine guns. WTF are the American public thinking.

12 ( +13 / -1 )

The dead in Las Vegas included a nurse, a government employee and an off-duty police officer.

Such a bizarre thing to say/write.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

US news is reporting that the shooter's girlfriend is now in Tokyo. Hope nothing is going on here too.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

TERRROR

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

From the sound the it appears that two guns were used, and reports say they were mounted on tripods. To me the sound was like an M60 machine gun, or similar a similar belt-fed rifle. Most assault rifles have a capacity of only 20 to 30 rounds, whereas I heard more than 50 shots at a time being fired.

You can indeed buy an M60 or automatic rifle in America, but the process is difficult and expensive, and you must give the state the right to inspect your property at any time, without a warrant. A legal, automatic rifle will cost upwards of $60,000, an M-60 will set you back more than $100,000.

In Las Vegas many people own such guns, and rent them out to customers who want to fire a real machine gun. It is legal for people to own machine guns in Nevada (but it is also legal in many other states, like Connecticut). Nevada has long been a favorite place for gun nuts.

I don't see much of a chance that this is an islamic state operation. The shooter was one of those numerous older white guys who blew a fuse. Most simply kill themselves without fanfare. When I worked in law enforcement, I responded to such suicide calls at least once a month. Most shoot themselves, others use pills, but the majority of suicides I have responded to were older white males.

As usual, the cable news outlets are having orgasms, flying their most famous talking heads to Las Vegas. They can barely hide their glee. This won't bring back the dead, but will likely encourage more nutcases to end their lives with a bang, and give them a world stage upon which to express their insanity. But Fox, CNN, and CNBC will make millions of dollars in ad revenue as people tune in to look at, and listen to the horror. It would be nice if they could give some of their blood money to the families of the victims.

24 ( +24 / -0 )

Heartbreaking. My condolences to their souls, friends, families. They were just having fun

8 ( +8 / -0 )

The ferocity of these attacks are definitely increasing, this time with the death toll likely going over 60. You can be 100% sure that not only will this record not last, but it most definitely will not last long and will be broken many, many times going forward.

How you could raise your children in a country with hundreds of millions of guns on the street in the hands of millions of mentally deranged psychopaths and still be proud after they are gunned down like cattle is completely beyond me and TBH I don't even care much anymore. Just won't be visiting again

11 ( +12 / -1 )

Amazingly, the NRA had a lobbying program called NRA Country that had country stars telling music fans to 'celebrate the lifestyle.' Also, country music lyrics and concerts are about as alcohol soaked as you can get--leading us to another major sponsoring industry. Some of the artists with integrity will speak out against the corporate interests. A new generation of outsider/outlaw country artists could lead the way.

16 ( +17 / -1 )

Right on cue, we have Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders bemoaning politization of an urgent issue that can only be solved politically:

There is a time and place for political debate, but now is a time to unite as a country.

and then politicizing by criticizing Hillary's opposition to the silencer bill and the NRA

It's very easy for Mrs. Clinton to criticize and to come out, but I think we need to remember, the only person with blood on their hands is that of the shooter. And this isn't a time for us to go after individuals or organizations.

while the Sportsman's Heritage and Recreational Enhancement Act (SHARE), which would allow gun owners to transport registered firearms across state lines, carry guns in national parks and eliminate barriers to purchasing silencers and their $200 transfer tax, stealthily moves through congress disguised as a "health" act to protect the tender ears of target shooters and hunters at the expense of the greater population (doesn't sound much like sharing to me). The NRA wrote last month

America’s gun owners have been waiting for many years for Congress to send the SHARE Act to the president’s desk. Their patience may now be rewarded with the strongest, most far-reaching version of the act yet.

This isn't the time. When the time comes, see, it will be to put the SHARE act on Trump's desk, where he will duly sign it with his Gothic signature.

10 ( +11 / -1 )

Aggressive efforts in childhood education and health care, including mental health support for at-risk children and parents, would likely have an effect,

I agree and there were such programs of social worker and other occupational therapist home visits I believe funded under Obamacare which had been having an effect in lowering abuse recidivism. And with Paddock's father being apparently diagnosed as suicidal and psychopathic it wouldn't be at all surprising for the son to have some version of the gene that's been linked to aggression and antisocial behavior.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Cue the silly debates about banning all guns in the US now.....

There shouldn't even be a debate. Just ban them already. Paddock used the guns in the exact way they were intended to be used, to kill people.

13 ( +14 / -1 )

America, your pathology about guns needs to be treated. Nobody has a damn "right" to own a weapon that can kill tens of people in a few seconds, it's a sick joke. Grow up.... or don't, and keep killing yourselves

17 ( +19 / -2 )

How can anyone in their right mind suggest that gun laws don't need changing in the US...

It's razy someone is able to get their hands on such deadly weapons.

14 ( +17 / -3 )

I don't think number of guns is the problem nor is easy access.

Back home gun-ownership is over 75%(we got conscription), ditto for South Africa where most people carry. Getting a gun is easy, quick course, 2-week cool down period.

But you don't read about large scale shootings, etc from those places now do you?

So what makes the difference?

-8 ( +2 / -10 )

We already have strict gun laws, all my life on the shooting range or on the hunt, I’ve never seen a shooting or a murder or any type of out of control violence and I’m originally from LA. It’s easy for people that don’t know anything about guns to scream and pass judgement over something that many people know nothing about. Liberals have no problem defending abortion, but want to take away the right for every American to arm itself.

The 2nd amendment will never be abolished because many Democrats and liberals own guns and support the NRA as well as many Democratic voters are gun owners, so all that idiotic bloviating and the grandstanding show they like to put on to drum up sympathy for their cause, they know that trying that would be political suicide for their party.

-28 ( +2 / -30 )

I don't know mainstream country right now, so I don't know if any of the Toby Keith generation will have the guts to stand up to their corporate handlers.

But in earlier years, who would have ever predicted that someone like Willie Nelson would go from straight laced industry songwriter to freak flag folk hero. Whenever you read about a Willie Nelson traffic stop/ weed bust recently, about 1000 people (many from conservative southern states) will immediately write comments to leave him alone and approximately 0 will talk about the fine job done by the police. So I imagine a number of country stars will be shifting into a more independent mode pretty soon.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

The issue is the disconnect gun supporters have for the laws they support and the impact of unintended consequences. I can promise you that every gun supporter feels bad for the victims, and I can also promise you that any kind of increased regulation is off the table in their eyes.

They will lobby for things like silencers and increased mag sizes, but when someone walks into a school with those things and shoots some kids, there's absolutely no connection in their minds about the positions they take and the consequences of them. There could be a school shooting every day in the US and they will still continue to fight for reduced regulations. Not my problem.

If the guy is just your standard loner white guy, the politicians will talk about mental health while proposing no changes to mental health, then the story will drop out of the headlines until the next one happens.

We live in a country awash with guns and easy acces to them, which means mass shootings are just a part of life. I just wish we could contain the danger to gun supporters, but that's not going to happen.

11 ( +12 / -1 )

Sangetsu03:  Fox, CNN, and CNBC will make millions of dollars in ad revenue

Don't forget about the gun companies. I'm sure they have a marketing plan in place that the (impossible) reality of a gun ban is just around the corner, so it's best to stock up now. They bought so many bullets under Obama that stores ran out of them...all because he was going to take your guns.

Bill Maher has a good talking point about this. If you want to say that Politician X is going to take your guns, you have to admit that you were wrong about every other time you said that, then the conversation can begin.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Every time I see IS claim responsibility for an attack, I question that claim. It sounds like an intelligent strategy actually. Claiming responsibility for attacks they had nothing to do with, in addition to the attacks they're responsible for, only increases our fear and paranoia. It wouldn't surprise me at all if they were claiming responsibility for attacks they have nothing to do with for exactly this reason, hoping that we will tear ourselves apart through fear and paranoia. We have to make sure that we don't give into these things, otherwise IS will get what they want.

Nevada has some of the nation's most permissive gun laws. It does not require firearm owners to obtain licenses or register their guns.

What the actual hell is wrong with Nevada? So basically, anyone can buy firearms and ammunition without license or a background check? They're pretty much up for grabs to any maniac who can afford to buy them, which going by the sheer number of gun crimes in the US; is pretty much everyone. Well congratulations Nevada: you facilitated this massacre. The blood is on your hands.

10 ( +11 / -1 )

The 2nd amendment will never be abolished because many Democrats and liberals own guns and support the NRA as well as many Democratic voters are gun owners,

It never takes you too long to blame everything on the Democrats does it Bass? I guess Americans will just keep offing each other in obscene numbers for the foreseeable future.

11 ( +12 / -1 )

59 dead 500 injured that is purely because the shooter had access to automatic weapons, land of the free, land of the target is more abdpt.

9 ( +10 / -1 )

A tragedy. But it really doesn't have a lot to do with gun control, registration, etc. This madman used legally obtained firearms, passed checks, etc. The weapons he used (semi auto rifles) are by and large not much of a problem in terms of crime and violence. Statistically speaking, handguns kill far far more people and are used in far more crimes. Millions of Americans own and enjoy rifles, and only a truly infinitesimally small minority ever use them for nefarious purposes.

I am not, nor do I want to be, a gun owner. But I do understand that many people enjoy guns as a hobby. Their unique place in the US Constitution means that a simple ban is not going to happen- it would require a constitutional amendment. Like others have said, the occasional idiot is the price that must be paid. Much like the occasional traffic accident is the price for the freedom to drive.

Not sure if there is an answer here, outside of better mental health care and treatment. Also, people need to watch out for their neighbors/friends/family, and keep in touch with them. Many of these killers are socially disconnected, with little to lose.

-9 ( +4 / -13 )

We already have strict gun laws, all my life on the shooting range or on the hunt

Define "we." Perhaps where you ive they do, but that certainly isn't true of all the US, especially Nevada.

, I’ve never seen a shooting or a murder or any type of out of control violence and I’m originally from LA.

And? That means they don't exist?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

We already have strict gun laws, all my life on the shooting range or on the hunt, I’ve never seen a shooting or a murder or any type of out of control violence and I’m originally from LA. It’s easy for people that don’t know anything about guns to scream and pass judgement over something that many people know nothing about. Liberals have no problem defending abortion, but want to take away the right for every American to arm itself.

I see. So if you personally haven't seen a shooting then they must not happen at all? This is the logic you are using?

Since we are going anecdotal, I spent several years in the army so I also know about guns and firearms, having worked with everything from automatic rifles to artillery pieces. I know that outside of hunting and very narrowly defined other purposes these things have no legitimate place in civilian life. I know that no other developed country in the world has anywhere near the level of gun deaths that the US has and unsurprisingly they all take gun control seriously. The obsession with guns is an American disease that is literally killing thousands each year. Sure glad I don't live there.

10 ( +11 / -1 )

Were his weapons obtained legally?

I would be curious to see video footage of the alleged shooter carrying the stuff (several large luggage) into the hotel.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

I'm still just in a state of shock. Who knew that hundreds of millions of guns and easy access to them would create a situation where a mass shooter picks off 50+ people and injures 500 more? I mean if I had a gun I'd be responsible, so that ends my involvement with the situation.

Just shocking that hundreds of millions of guns and easy access would create the perfect situation for mass shooters. But no, we won't be changing anything. Just enforce the current laws or mental heath or something.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

We will now witness how Trump comforts the grieving familiies. This is a difficult part of a president's job that Obama was able to carry out convincingly in a presidential manner. Trump's tweet of "warmest condolences" does not auger well for his ability to empathize with the grief and pain of others. Perhaps he cannot be blamed for his stunted emotional responses to tragedy, but he ought to display leadership by reining in the power of the gun lobby and helping to legislate gun control. If not, the number of victims will only increase in future massacres. Whatever Trump does in the aftermath of this predictable tragedy, this slaughter of innocents could be a game changer.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

We will now witness how Trump comforts the grieving families.

I read “confronts” for “comforts”.

Took a couple of moments to realise I might have made a mistake....

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Sorry about the families who lost loved ones. But until we find some link....any kind of link...between mass shootings and easy access to hundreds of millions of guns...well, we're just all lost.

Maybe mental health?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Their unique place in the US Constitution means that a simple ban is not going to happen- it would require a constitutional amendment.

The first part of the second amendment specifically mentions "a well regulated Militia" as part of the right. That part's often ignored by the second amendment people.

The "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms" part is vague at best. "Arms" can mean anything and meant single-shot muskets when the amendment was written. We have simple bans on all manner of heavier "arms" already. A ban on guns would simply require an updated interpretation of the amendment.

It wouldn't be the first time the second amendment was reinterpreted. The gun lobby successfully pushed for the extremely loose interpretation we have today in the 1970s. Until then, few people had access to guns, and more importantly, few people had a desire for them.

But I do understand that many people enjoy guns as a hobby... Like others have said, the occasional idiot is the price that must be paid. Much like the occasional traffic accident is the price for the freedom to drive.

So people have to die for a hobby vs. something (vehicles) that performs an essential function in our society...

7 ( +9 / -2 )

Trump-era USA -- 8 months of COMPLETE CCC-HHH-AAA-OOO-SSS ... and worse to come.

1 ( +6 / -5 )

We already have strict gun laws...

I stopped reading here.

Clearly not strict enough if psychopaths can get their hands on a weapon that can mow down 59 people.

9 ( +11 / -2 )

Lots of videos from Vegas online. Gun supporters must watch the videos and say to themselves, "Sure, that's bad, but nothing that would even make me consider giving up my guns. I'm a spineless weakling without them."

10 ( +12 / -2 )

The gun love is obscene and barbaric. It's the sort of thing you see in less developed countries.

59 people dead and the gun worshippers refuse point blank to see the connection between the availability and fetishising and the act of terrorism.

Cowards.

10 ( +12 / -2 )

"and then politicizing by criticizing Hillary's opposition to the silencer bill and the NRA"

Most likely he was speaking in regard of her Tweet right after she learned of the attack:

"The crowd fled at the sound of gunshots. Imagine the deaths if the shooter had a silencer, which the NRA wants to make easier to get," she tweeted Monday morning."

despite the fact that a silencer, even if it could be used on a continuously-firing a machine gun, would only knock 20 decibels off 160. Not the time to be politicizing, anyway. She just can't help herself, I guess.

-10 ( +3 / -13 )

I leave my house in the morning with zero fear of being a victim. Gun supporters wish the they could be me. But their lack of confidence and fear of others makes the most support a policy where endless guns and easy access to them should be the norm.

What cowards.

9 ( +11 / -2 )

Deity-bothering wretched cartoon Pat Robertson blames the Las Vegas shooting on disrespect for Trump, God, and the National Anthem.

The narrative goes pyschedelic.

10 ( +12 / -2 )

We already have strict gun laws

No, you do not. Obviously.

14 ( +16 / -2 )

If Trump wants to stand behind his words and actually combat the evil he speaks of, DO something! Put in a modicum of sensible gun control and put even a tiny sliver of an end to this madness. NO ONE who is not an officer of the law needs a gun, and certainly not 10 like this guy had, and not 24! Only insane people think they need them. And this is what such insanity gets.

Until he does something, his word are just the usual empty lip-service, and already the GOP is trying to avoid talking about guns or terrorism (he wasn’t Muslim after all!).

9 ( +11 / -2 )

The issue is the disconnect gun supporters have for the laws they support and the impact of unintended consequences. I can promise you that every gun supporter feels bad for the victims, and I can also promise you that any kind of increased regulation is off the table in their eyes. They will lobby for things like silencers and increased mag sizes, but when someone walks into a school with those things and shoots some kids, there's absolutely no connection in their minds about the positions they take and the consequences of them. There could be a school shooting every day in the US and they will still continue to fight for reduced regulations. Not my problem.

I disagree, the gun supports do in fact see the impact, the issue is that they don't feel they are in an environment where they can be honest and say "Yes I believe these casualties are an acceptable cost so that I can own/enjoy said product", hence why there is no progress on this issue in the USA. As long as there are attempts to publicly shame those people who express those beliefs out loud or try to socially isolate those people you will not get anywhere on the issue.

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

Shares of MGM Resorts International, which owns the Mandalay Bay, fell 5.58 percent on Monday to $30.77 a share.

How relevant is this to the story?

As far as an IS connection, I received an email from them just this morning. In it they announced that my daughter was an operative - I had asked her to watch the toaster so the piece of bread within wouldn’t burn. It did. She was on her iPhone.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Noliving: "As long as there are attempts to publicly shame those people who express those beliefs out loud or try to socially isolate those people you will not get anywhere on the issue."

So, the insecure little babies should be congratulated on the issue instead?

7 ( +9 / -2 )

It never takes you too long to blame everything on the Democrats does it Bass? I guess Americans will just keep offing each other in obscene numbers for the foreseeable future.

Don't hate the messenger bro, hate the message

If the guy is just your standard loner white guy, the politicians will talk about mental health while proposing no changes to mental health, then the story will drop out of the headlines until the next one happens.

Not this time.

We live in a country awash with guns and easy acces to them, which means mass shootings are just a part of life. I just wish we could contain the danger to gun supporters, but that's not going to happen.

Again, blame the guns and not the perpetrator, I think as long as the left tries to demonize and attack the 2nd amendment like this, there can never be any dialogue on how to solve this without infringing on the rights of law abiding and responsible.

They bought so many bullets under Obama that stores ran out of them...all because he was going to take your guns.

No, but being the president and given his history towards the 2nd amendment. So can’t say I blame them.

No, you do not. Obviously

Yes, we do. California, New York and Illinois have some of the toughest gun laws in the country, but that doesn’t mean, he couldn’t find a way. You guys don’t have firearms, but you guys still have terrorist attacks from loons that will use knives, trucks, bombs whatever they can get their hands on. You guys have your problems and we have ours, there are other ways to solve this problem, but eliminating the 2nd amendment is not going to happen.

-15 ( +2 / -17 )

This inident will be forgotton a week later. Trump wont raise his voice at the NRA, they are too strong and out of control!  The gun lovers will tell those victim families if you resent the 2nd ammendment of the US constitution you can goto live in elsewhere!

4 ( +6 / -2 )

You guys have your problems and we have ours, there are other ways to solve this problem, but eliminating the 2nd amendment is not going to happen.

Other ways to solve this problem.... So come on America. Show us.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

As long as there are attempts to publicly shame those people who express those beliefs out loud or try to socially isolate those people you will not get anywhere on the issue.

So what do you suggest? What you call "public shaming," I call disagreement and discourse.

And people already say "Yes I believe these casualties are an acceptable cost so that I can own/enjoy said product." Just look at the people who compare guns to cars.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

Again, blame the guns and not the perpetrator, I think as long as the left tries to demonize and attack the 2nd amendment like this, there can never be any dialogue on how to solve this without infringing on the rights of law abiding and responsible.

Left/right/up/down seems pretty irrelevant when we are talking about lax restrictions allowing someone to obtain something that can kill numerous people in seconds.

I'm curious of your opinion on NK and their right to bear arms. Or is this just a U.S. thing because there is an archaic rule saying it's ok?

6 ( +8 / -2 )

You guys have your problems and we have ours, there are other ways to solve this problem, but eliminating the 2nd amendment is not going to happen.

Every other developed country in the world has figured out the way to solve the problem - pass laws that prevent guns from ending up in the wrong hands.

You don't even need to eliminate the 2nd amendment, though I agree with you that it is unfortunate that you are stuck with it. The amendment doesn't say every pscyho has a right to buy guns no-questions asked.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

This inident will be forgotton a week later. Trump wont raise his voice at the NRA,

Nor should he.

they are too strong and out of control! 

No, it's the gun haters that will do anything to take the rights away from law abiding gun owners.

The gun lovers will tell those victim families if you resent the 2nd ammendment of the US constitution you can goto live in elsewhere!

No, many of them are probably gun owners and as I said before, there are more liberals that own guns than people would like to believe.

If Trump wants to stand behind his words and actually combat the evil he speaks of, DO something!

Like what? Build more mental asylums that we used to have and during that time less mentally disturbed people were walking around.

Put in a modicum of sensible gun control and put even a tiny sliver of an end to this madness. NO ONE who is not an officer of the law needs a gun, and certainly not 10 like this guy had, and not 24!

Ok, that's your personal opinion, you may think we don't need guns, I can't speak for other people, but I need them and want them, that's my right. And you are not American, so why worry what we do with our laws?

Only insane people think they need them. And this is what such insanity gets. 

I think Gun haters have their own emotional issues they need to sort out. I personally find them in need to help. But that's just my personal opinion.

Until he does something, his word are just the usual empty lip-service, and already the GOP is trying to avoid talking about guns or terrorism (he wasn’t Muslim after all!).

Doesn't matter if the man was a Muslim or not, irrelevant. Well, people can hate on Trump if they want, but he is a supporter of the NRA, I am a member myself and I know many liberals that belong to the NRA, even that trouble maker Harry Reid is a huge supporter. The Democrats they will wave their fists, but they know if they try to take on the NRA, that would further erode the small support they already have.

-10 ( +3 / -13 )

I think Gun haters have their own emotional issues they need to sort out.

Yeah, its really weird how gun haters get so emotional about stuff like 59 innocent people being murdered, which clearly shouldn't elicit any sort of emotional response whatsoever.

10 ( +12 / -2 )

Yeah, its really weird how gun haters get so emotional about stuff like 59 innocent people being murdered, which clearly shouldn't elicit any sort of emotional response whatsoever.

That's not what I meant and you know it. Far sight, please! I am talking about the gun haters that are so giddy when it comes to trying to take away our 2nd amendment.

-12 ( +2 / -14 )

A tragedy. But it really doesn't have a lot to do with gun control, registration, etc. This madman used legally obtained firearms, passed checks, etc.

So clearly it has everything to do with gun control and the fact that it just isn't stringent enough. If Americans are content to let each other run around toting guns shooting peeople up like the good old wild west then let them get on with it, if not, something drastic needs to change and fast.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

I can't speak for other people, but I need them and want them, that's my right. And you are not American, so why worry what we do with our laws?

As pathetic as that sounds, yes, you have that right... but until something changes, the right to bear arms also means supporters must bear some responsibility. And non Americans who comment do so because they actually care.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

@bass

That's not what I meant and you know it. Far sight, please! I am talking about the gun haters that are so giddy when it comes to trying to take away our 2nd amendment.

This is what you don't seem to understand. Those people are one and the same. Why else do you think "gun haters" want to reform gun laws? (We can't "take away" the second amendment, only reinterpret it.)

3 ( +3 / -0 )

This is what should be happening immediately and for starters:

No automatic or semi-automatic or modifiable weapons.

Proper background checks for all purchasers regardless of whether at a shop, fair, or from a private individual. At least one week cool-off period.

Secure locked storage space requirement for guns and ammunition separately, to be available for random spot-checks.

Uniform laws across the US, matched to at least the strictest standards of any state now.

Amnesty to encourage handing in of guns of any kind, no questions asked, and for all these to be destroyed.

Easy, isn't it?

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Bass: You guys have your problems and we have ours, there are other ways to solve this problem, but eliminating the 2nd amendment is not going to happen.

Of course not. Until we find a way to implant testsicles onto fearful gun owners, they will always need something to help them get through the day.

I don't need a gun. You do. You are just too afraid to leave your house without the ability to instantly kill someone. A gun closes the gap between confident men and spineless weaklings. Hold it in your hands and feel what a real man feels. You need it.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

*This is what you don't seem to understand. Those people are one and the same. Why else do you think "gun haters" want to reform gun laws? (We can't "take away" the second amendment, only reinterpret it.)*

Lose argument.

Of course not. Until we find a way to implant testsicles onto fearful gun owners, they will always need something to help them get through the day. 

Seems like that would be the perfect remedy for the left.

I don't need a gun. You do.

And proud of it, but I can't go hunting with a fork and knife and if you don't want or need a gun, that's your prerogative.

You are just too afraid to leave your house without the ability to instantly kill someone.

No, I don't have fear of anyone and I have never in my whole life seen or witnessed a gun shooting, a body or murder. Also, I use my guns for hunting and if need be, for my protection and by the way and because the left could REALLY care less.

A gun closes the gap between confident men and spineless weaklings. Hold it in your hands and feel what a real man feels. You need it.

Ahh, so comment was supposed to make me feel guilty for owning a gun. Please! LOL

-11 ( +2 / -13 )

That's not what I meant and you know it. Far sight, please! I am talking about the gun haters that are so giddy when it comes to trying to take away our 2nd amendment.

Who is giddy? People are pissed that guns are so easy to acquire that any psycho can easily get them and murder as many people as possible. And rightly so. No giddiness in that.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

With a nod to theastisred....

This is what should be happening immediately and for starters:

No lethal weapons.

No sale of lethal weapons to the general public except for a very good reason; chefs can have a kitchen knife. Hunting and 'self-protection' are not good enough reasons.

-

Uniform law across the US, banning all lethal weapons.

Amnesty to encourage handing in of guns of any kind, no questions asked, and for all these to be destroyed.

Easier still.

it's the gun haters that will do anything to take the rights away from law abiding gun owners...Build more mental asylums that we used to have and during that time less mentally disturbed people were walking around.

Paddock was a law-abiding gun owner.

Until he wasn't.

He had no history of mental illness.

Until he went crazy with a machine gun.

7 ( +10 / -3 )

Ok, that's your personal opinion, you may think we don't need guns, I can't speak for other people,

You appear to be doing just that.

but I need them and want them, that's my right. And you are not American, so why worry what we do with our laws?

There weren't just Americans in Vegas when that guy used his "rights" to kill and maim hundreds.

Besides, why do you worry about DPRK, Germany and other countries? The former you want to see in ashes and the latter you said you "weep for".

I think Gun haters have their own emotional issues they need to sort out. I personally find them in need to help. But that's just my personal opinion.

Wow. Would you say that to the parents of Sandy Hook victims and countless other gun massacres? Unbelievably crass.

Doesn't matter if the man was a Muslim or not, irrelevant.

Seemed to matter yesterday, though, didn't it?

The Democrats they will wave their fists, but they know if they try to take on the NRA, that would further erode the small support they already have.

Ugh. Marginally better than "from my cold, dead hands", I suppose.

Seems the revised travel ban should be turned inwards on America. Just how many more hundreds, nay, thousands must die until the reality sinks in.

8 ( +10 / -2 )

It is quite revealing how certain Americans treat the constitution like the 12 commandments. Cast in stone from Mt Sinai.

An amendment is a formal or official change made to a law, contract, constitution, or other legal document. It is based on the verb to amend, which means to change.

The law just needs amending again.

7 ( +9 / -2 )

You can indeed buy an M60 or automatic rifle in America, but the process is difficult and expensive, and you must give the state the right to inspect your property at any time, without a warrant. A legal, automatic rifle will cost upwards of $60,000, an M-60 will set you back more than $100,000.

I believe the guy was a very wealthy man, so perhaps this is what he used.

I think the US is simply unable to have any clarity on this issue.

A slightly paranoid idea that has lodged itself deeply into the American psyche and is written into their constitution is that the Red Coats (metaphorically speaking) are just over the hill and coming to threaten and quash their 'freedoms', and that they need guns in order to prevent that happening. It's a complete load of antiquated nonsense perpetuated by all kinds of lobby groups, but you'd have to say that their 'freedom' in this case, namely; the right to bear arms, makes them slaves and hostages to firearms industries, as well as their paranoia. Which is no freedom at all. You can't even go to a concert for fear of being shot!!!

340 million guns in civilian hands is complete madness. It's lunatic asylum crazy. It's a completely DUMB right for a nation to covet and nurse to their breast so tenderly.

How can you possibly have an individual kill and injure 500 PEOPLE by himself and not think your system is flawed, broken, and in need of a complete overhaul???!!! How can you be that deluded???

Wake up America, you country will be so much better without guns.

8 ( +10 / -2 )

 I don't have fear of anyone ..... I use my guns for hunting and if need be, for my protection

Why do you need protection if you have no fear of anyone? I thought you knew not to go into 'dangerous' areas in America? How would your firearm have protected you in Las Vegas? Do you cower in your boots all the time you're in Japan, with no 'protection'?

and by the way and because the left could REALLY care less.

Strewth. Divided by a common language....what on earth does that mean?

10 ( +12 / -2 )

Bass: No, I don't have fear of anyone

You said you don't leave your house without your gun. You are petrified of your fellow man and you can't function in regular society without the ability to instantly kill someone.

I leave my house with no fear. You wish you were me, but until you find your courage, a gun will make up for the difference. You + your gun = me without a gun. I bet if you left your house without your gun you would piss your panties.

10 ( +12 / -2 )

Superlib and Bass4funk, please do not address each other any further on this thread, since all you are doing is bickering.

If only the GOP were as aggressive about gun crime as they are on terrorism, we might actually get somewhere. But nope, laws that work elsewhere won't work in America, because we're special. Good grief.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

I feel like this, we have laws on the books already and I don't believe getting rid of guns would help at all, the people that would want to kill you use something else, trucks, poison, knives etc. Congress will NOT pass any sweeping laws that will defy the 2nd amendment (thank God) not if the Democrats want to get reelected to anything, of course they will do the usually crying and moaning, the typical rhetoric, but since there are so many Democrats that reside in cities where a lot of people own guns, it would be a very risky thing for them to challenge it and the Democrats know it, but for the optics ( I get it) they have to at least pretend they are outraged that the GOP won't take a position on the issue. We all have our issues worldwide, Europe has their terrorism problems, we have our gun problems and Europe has its way of dealing with it, I think it's stupid, but that's my opinion and many Europeans as well as some Americans think our gun culture is stupid and in the end, whatever works. I love guns and I am a legal owner and law abiding citizen and hunter as well as the rest of my family and children and I make NO apologies for it.

-12 ( +2 / -14 )

bass4funk: "And proud of it, but I can't go hunting with a fork and knife and if you don't want or need a gun, that's your prerogative."

You leaving your house with a gun is, you admit, for "hunting"? Do you cut your steak with a gun? because you 'lose' that argument, too. Guns are for killing, and that's all. Period. Speaking of:

"Lose argument."

Yes, you did, and so do all gun-nutters, and some lose their lives to such massacres and only THEN do family ask "why" without the answer being obvious. That this massacre is no surprise should dumbfound you guys as to how ignorant gun-nutters are, but it doesn't, and that's why we'll see it again before the year is through. You guys never learn. The reason you need a gun is because you are scared of others with guns. Eliminate the guns, eliminate the problems. Clearly we need to eliminate the lunacy, first.

takeda: "If only the GOP were as aggressive about gun crime as they are on terrorism"

Why do you think they always want to shift the blame onto terrorism... unless it's a white guy.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

I feel like this, we have laws on the books already and I don't believe getting rid of guns would help at all

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I love guns and I am a legal owner and law abiding citizen and hunter as well as the rest of my family and children and I make NO apologies for it.

No issues with you having one as you seem like a stand up citizen. The issue is that is unpreventable for idiots to get them too...

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Humans are the worst animals on the planet.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

I love guns

Why?

2 ( +4 / -2 )

You leaving your house with a gun is, you admit, for "hunting"?

Yes, when I go hunting or is that now a crime as well?

Do you cut your steak with a gun? because you 'lose' that argument, too. Guns are for killing, and that's all. Period. Speaking of:

Exactly, you just made my point. LOL

Yes, you did, and so do all gun-nutters, and some lose their lives to such massacres and only THEN do family ask "why" without the answer being obvious.

Selective arguments again? You can make a tragedy out of anything, guns are just one issue, it has nothing to do with me, I don't around killing innocent people. 

That this massacre is no surprise should dumbfound you guys as to how ignorant gun-nutters are, but it doesn't, and that's why we'll see it again before the year is through.

No, I don't see that point as it does not relate to me at all.

You guys never learn.

Right back at you.

The reason you need a gun is because you are scared of others with guns. Eliminate the guns, eliminate the problems. Clearly we need to eliminate the lunacy, first. 

Again, I am NOT scared of anything, but I grew up with guns, I love guns (actually, I collect all kinds of weapons) and while I don't worry about my safety so much, I still enjoy having it, when I travel back to the States, I go hunting or I go to the desert or shooting range. I follow the laws and I follow the rules and been doing so since I was 5 years old. But make no mistakes, nothing will be eliminated and guns aren't going anywhere.

Why do you think they always want to shift the blame onto terrorism... unless it's a white guy.

Geez...of course what that guy did was an act of terror, even if some of the libs want to call it derangement syndrome.

-7 ( +2 / -9 )

So one guy legally obtains numerous firearms and passes FBI background check as required by current law. But because of what this one guy did, we need to immediately change the laws to control guns for EVERYone?

But when a radical Islamic extremist does something we just have to live with it, no new laws or bans need to be put in place. his actions are his alone and we shouldn't inconvenience anyone else or restrict their "rights" just because of the actions of one?

Dems all immediately jumped on this as a gun control issue after waiting to confirm the race/status of the shooter first to make sure it was "safe" to do so.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

I grew up with guns

Indoctrinated from an early age, which leads to the cycle of ...

I love guns (actually, I collect all kinds of weapons)

And one day, when common sense prevails and they come to confiscate your toys, what then?

nothing will be eliminated and guns aren't going anywhere.

Uh oh.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

I love guns

How about the one used in Las Vegas to massacre a crowd of innocents? That was quite a gun.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

when I go hunting

You seem to have dropped the 'if need be, for protection' thing. It didn't/doesn't hold any water, does it?

7 ( +9 / -2 )

Yes guns are also for protection from criminals and evil people who always have them no matter what the laws are.

what do you think is being used in Chicago every weekend to kill people? Guns obtained illegally.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

Yes, it does, a lot of water. I go hunting twice a year and will hunt anything that I can eat and I have a sizable collection in my house and my kids love to hunt as well and lastly. But I don't have a license to carry a conceal weapon, that's more tricky. Look, you don't like guns, I respect that, I love guns and that's that and if people don't like it, oh-well.

-9 ( +3 / -12 )

So how many people were killed at the Bataclan in France by guns and how did their gun control laws not prevent this?

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

I go hunting twice a year and will hunt anything that I can eat and I have a sizable collection in my house and my kids love to hunt as well and lastly.

If I was a religious sort; I'd be praying right now.

This "love" coupled with family in the very same sentence; it's probably the saddest, most gut wrenching thing I've read here.

Where did America go wrong?

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Arms Companies Stock prices went up after the shooting.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Liberals: too expensive and time consuming to deport 11 million illegal aliens! but we must try to control 300 million guns from law abiding citizens, we can do it!!!

Liberals again: we know we can't remove all guns and prevent all crimes but we have to do something to try! Forget people's 2nd amendment "rights" to have guns that can be easily changed.

conservatives: we know we can't stop all radical Islamic terrorists but we have a list of countries and we want to try.

liberals: you can't stop them all so it's total waste of time to even try. We are going to sue you for their "rights" which cannot be changed.

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

How do they do this, exactly?

Where were you last week?

Not being a liberal, I came to realise off my own bat that flags and patriotism are meaningless.

Well, you are not a conservative and that's ok if you find patriotism and flags meaningless, I don't.

Nobody taught me that; it was just plain obvious that people who kill, main, scream and threaten over such things are out of synch.

I lot of people died under that flag and a lot of people are buried under that flag and were killed or sacrificed their lives for our freedom and cherish that very deeply.

And one day, when common sense prevails and they come to confiscate your toys, what then?

Your question be when common sense hits the left one day, maybe they will be able to understand that the 2nd amendment is something that should be respected, but to answer your question, that probably won't happen, not if the Dems want to be reelected to anything ever again.

And there we have it. To protect your toys you will do battle.

Of course.

But thousands killed by guns? The ever present ills of racism? Nah; not worth making a stand.

Excellent point and what about the war towards law abiding citizens like myself that want to preserve the right to own firearms. My rights are not as equally as important? It's not worth taking a stand? Are we being selective again?

Or a kneel.

And this is why America is sullied by the NRA taliban and it's fanatical supporters.

Hmmmm...way off the mark, but kneeling and doing your job is not the same thing as an individual American that buys a firearm for his job, protection or for hunting. I think the left are more like the Taliban, because it's either our way or we will force you to see it our way. LOL

That will never happen.

I think the end result of the of the kind of 'indoctrination' you mentioned doesn't see thousands of people getting killed per year. So, I'd say different.

No, but it sees thousands of people that are ready to beat you into seeing everything from their warped perspective.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

Arms Companies Stock prices went up after the shooting.

Yep, the cycle of violence will continue. A disgusting attack with a particularly efficient killing device leads the arms manufacturers to rub their hands in expectation of people buying more devices designed to kill people.

What a sick situation. Hear from you all here soon when the next depraved lunatic goes on a rampage and fiscal conservatives start talking about pumping money into mental health.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

What a sick situation. Hear from you all here soon when the next depraved lunatic goes on a rampage and fiscal conservatives start talking about pumping money into mental health.

It's not a conservative or liberal issue, it's about respecting the rights of law abiding citizens and excoriating them for daring to exercise their lawful and legal right to own a firearm. I think the lunatics on either side, but mostly on the left that would fight us on this are the nut jobs that could care less about individual rights, but want to enforce a fascist political agenda on the country.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Whenever guns are used in a mass murder in this country, what the two political parties will say is predictable.

Democrats will say that we should have some common sense gun control laws, such as not allowing psychotics to buy guns, and closing the loop holes that allow virtually anyone, including psychotics and terrorists, to buy an assault rifle.

Republicans will echo the talking points of the National Rifle Association, that the only way to keep us safe from guns is to put more guns into the hands of more people.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

There is a way to cut down on these kinds of incidents without taking guns from law abiding citizens, but it would involve investment in education and mental health care, particularly for children. So Republicans would just prefer to let people be gunned down.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Yes guns are also for protection from criminals and evil people who always have them no matter what the laws are.

So much paranoia, such a defeatist attitude. You aren't even prepared to try, are you?

Here's the news flash, tiger. There are criminals all over the world, including Japan. I've come across a few in my time, trying to break into my cars, house whatever. None of them had guns (because they can't get them), all of them ran like hell when I caught them in the act, and I'm an average sized guy. IF they had a gun, the situation would have been completely different because they would have been emboldened, and possibly even tempted to use it. Who knows what they would have done?

But because they CAN'T get them, they take off like a scolded cat. Now, I'm guessing the only difference between your criminals and mine, is that yours have guns, they aren't special or different from any other criminals worldwide in any other way.

Can you see my point?

0 ( +2 / -2 )

So much paranoia, such a defeatist attitude. You aren't even prepared to try, are you?

I think there are other ways than confiscating guns and let's say hypothetically, you could get all the guns off of people, you would see a spike in gun sales on the black market, so either way, it would never work.

Here's the news flash, tiger. There are criminals all over the world, including Japan. I've come across a few in my time, trying to break into my cars, house whatever. None of them had guns (because they can't get them), all of them ran like hell when I caught them in the act, and I'm an average sized guy.

Every country and every circumstances are different and none of these countries have a 2nd amendment, so it's a pointless debate.

IF they had a gun, the situation would have been completely different because they would have been emboldened, and possibly even tempted to use it. Who knows what they would have done?

If you have a conceal permit, who knows, maybe you could draw first on them, you never know.

But because they CAN'T get them, they take off like a scolded cat. Now, I'm guessing the only difference between your criminals and mine, is that yours have guns, they aren't special or different from any other criminals worldwide in any other way.

Can you see my point?

To a point, I understand what you are trying to say, but I just don't see it that way and I don't expect you to. I grew up between Europe and America and have seen violence in both countries and to be honest the violence what I saw done to some very good friends of mine would never have happened if they would have had a firearm. But again, we just have a difference of opinion, what might work in one country, might not work in another one.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Noliving: "As long as there are attempts to publicly shame those people who express those beliefs out loud or try to socially isolate those people you will not get anywhere on the issue."

So, the insecure little babies should be congratulated on the issue instead?

SmithinJapan - How are you coming to the conclusion? You don't have to congratulate people who find human life is an acceptable cost to own/enjoy firearms or any other recreational activity. The point that you should be taking is that if your tactic is to publicly shame people whom you disagree with then you will never get an honest debate. I would have thought that would be obvious.

Also considering the results of your shaming attempts, in the words of Dr. Phil "How's that working for you?"

From where I'm sitting it doesn't appear to be working very well to be getting what you want....

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Some, actually many people are obsessed with records, including maybe this latest gunman.

OK, it was maybe the deadliest mass shooting, in the USA, so far, (three conditions) but it pales into insignificance compared to Timothy McVeigh's ammonium nitrate fertilizer and nitromethanetruck bomb which took 168 lives in 1995. And as Toshiko says above, the Feds found traces of ammonium and nitrogen in Stephen Paddock's car, showing he was thinking in some of the same ways as McVeigh.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I grew up between Europe and America and have seen violence in both countries and to be honest the violence what I saw done to some very good friends of mine would never have happened if they would have had a firearm

Do you think people should be carrying a firearm all of the time?

That seems to be your logic.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

so either way, it would never work.

It works perfectly well in other countries. The US is just another country. It's not special.

none of these countries have a 2nd amendment, so it's a pointless debate.

Of course it isn't. If an antiquated ideal no longer serves the purpose of the people, you change it. Common sense.

If you have a conceal permit, who knows, maybe you could draw first on them, you never know.

A conceal permit is irrelevent and unnecessary in a country without guns.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Bass: No, I don't see that point as it does not relate to me at all.

That's the disconnect. I follow the law so I can't be blamed for supporting laws that make it easy for the bad guys to get guns.

It's not a conservative or liberal issue, it's about respecting the rights of law abiding citizens and excoriating them for daring to exercise their lawful and legal right

But in the Joe Arpaio thread you openly said that trampling on the rights of legal Latinos in order to catch the illegal ones was OK in your book because of the massive problem with illegals. I guess you're more cavalier about stripping others of their rights than your own.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

I rarely defend Bass, and I'm not going to here, but his conclusions here are pretty much spot on; there is no way on Earth you are going to get huge swathes of the American population to give up their guns. It's just not going to happen. It's part of their national culture, and part of their family upbringing for many. No amount of deaths will change that. Responsible gun owners will always feel like they shouldn't be punished for the sins of the occasional nutter. So there is no real point in arguing about changing the 2nd amendment, because nobody would be able to enforce it. And if the authorities tried there'd be the Alamo on every other street corner. It would be like asking the Brits to give up tea, or the Japanese to stop peeing in the street.

It's a complete national tragedy of course, but they've already decided on the culture they want and I've yet to hear a practical solution on how to stop Vegas & co. happening again and again and again.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Do you think people should be carrying a firearm all of the time? 

If they so chose provided they have the permit to do so.

That seems to be your logic.

No, you're putting words in my mouth. I have them in my home and when I go hunting, but I don't have a special permit to carry a concealed weapon. If I did that and the police would catch me, that's 10 years.

It works perfectly well in other countries.

And unlike us, we have the 2nd amendment, thank God!

The US is just another country. It's not special.

Maybe not to you, but for me and millions of others, it is very much so and without us, the world would fall to crap, so I do think we are special.

Of course it isn't. If an antiquated ideal no longer serves the purpose of the people, you change it. Common sense.

Again, that's your opinion, most Americans don't want it changed, we like our 2nd amendment just the way it is.

A conceal permit is irrelevent and unnecessary in a country without guns.

But I live in the US and I could care what other countries have or don't.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

thank God

Yas, thank god we have the 2nd Amendment, so crazy men can kill a lot of people. As an American, I feel blessed- that we have guns on top of guns. We r so gr8.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Do you think people should be carrying a firearm all of the time? 

If they so chose provided they have the permit to do so.

That seems to be your logic.

No, you're putting words in my mouth. I have them in my home and when I go hunting, but I don't have a special permit to carry a concealed weapon. If I did that and the police would catch me, that's 10 years.

It's just that you said your European friends could have avoided violence ( which you saw ) if they had firearms. Where was this violence carried out? What kind of violence was it? I'm assuming it wasn't at their home as you saw it firsthand.

It just came across as an idea it would be better to be armed at all times. After all, violence can occur in all places.

Just a hypothetical question regardless of permits - would it be better if people could be armed at all times? Bad guys with guns can show up anywhere.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Yes, it does, a lot of water. I go hunting twice a year and will hunt anything that I can eat and I have a sizable collection in my house and my kids love to hunt as well and lastly.

Does that make you feel manly, Bass? "Anything I can eat"... Jeez, do you actually read what you write, matey?

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Time to start legislating bump stocks and high capacity magazines as instruments of terrorism. Because that's what this was. Maybe he was nuts and not driven by ideology, but it's still terrorism. I write this while looking at the shotgun hanging on the wall in my home office. But it holds 2 shells. More than enough for the woodchuck who fancies my vegetable garden. NOBODY outside the military needs the type of weaponry this guy had.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Does that make you feel manly, Bass? "Anything I can eat"... Jeez, do you actually read what you write, matey?

Thunderbird2 - It makes him human, humans are predators, we eat meat. Humans have always killed animals for consumption. If there is any part about masculinity involved it most likely has to do with father and son traditions and not about proving to other people his masculinity.

I have yet to hear Bass ever claim that vegan males are feminine or that to not eat meat makes you feminine.

Quite frankly I find that the people who like to imply that gun owners/hunters are doing it to be a "man" are the ones who are insecure, especially around gun owners, and like to prove their "masculinity" by taunting/harassing gun owners. They seem to think that by "taking on" gun owners, especially over the internet, that they are more masculine than the gun owners when really all it is just cowardly behavior under the guise of righteousness.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Yes, it does, a lot of water. I go hunting twice a year

I was asking about the 'for protection' thing, bass. Not about your passion for killing four-legged furry things. You don't have a permit to carry, you don't take a weapon with you except when you go out to kill animals...how, what, why, where do you reckon you need a firearm 'for protection'?

without us, the world would fall to crap

lol Please bass, give up the day job and go on the stage. You're wasted here.

Every country and every circumstances are different and none of these countries have a 2nd amendment

Sounds like you're saying the precious 2nd amendment is a problem.

I’ve never seen a shooting or a murder or any type of out of control violence

followed nine and a half hours later by...

I grew up between Europe and America and have seen violence in both countries 

Do try to get your story straight.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

takeda.shingen.1991@gmail.com - Yas, thank god we have the 2nd Amendment, so crazy men can kill a lot of people

Or these crazy people/terrorists/mass murderers could again resort to the use of explosives to murder as many people as they can. Bombs don't kill people, bombers kill people. I heard one news media outlet say that police had found ammonia nitrate in this mass murderer's vehicle.

OTHO, it appears that your side simply does not have the votes to ban/confiscate personal firearms in the U.S.. I guess they don't find your type of argument to be very convincing.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

It's just not understandable how people here are so quick to try to take away the legitimate rights of some people. while at the same time adding new "rights" to illegal aliens, non citizens and any liberal cause groups that they support.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Even Dems know gun control won't pass. They just want to push it to a vote so they can score political points after every tragedy against any republicans who vote against it.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

cleo - You seem to have dropped the 'if need be, for protection' thing. It didn't/doesn't hold any water, does it?

"Hold any water"? Who are you trying to fool? The need for personal protection is an important issue with many voters, which is why the Democrats have lost many seats in the various state legislatures and the U.S. Congress. Just because the term "personal protection" isn't used in every post does not mean it's not important to the voters.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Toasted Heretic - Indoctrinated from an early age, which leads to the cycle of ...

And one day, when common sense prevails and they come to confiscate your toys, what then?

Why would the voters allow elected Democrats to confiscate firearms? That's what you're suggesting, isn't it? That elected Democrats will confiscate firearms. That's one of the many reasons that Democrats have lost seats in the various legislatures.

All you, and the Democrat Party, need is to gather enough votes in Congress to pass an amendment that overturns the 2nd Amendment, AND then gather enough votes in enough states to ratified your amendment by three-fourths of state legislatures.

The bottom line is that you do not have the votes. The voters have spoken.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Tamarama - Wake up America, you country will be so much better without guns.

Wake up Tamarama. You do not have the votes to confiscate/ban the private ownership of firearms in the U.S.A.. Honest, law-abiding, firearm-owning, 2nd Amendment-supporting, citizens, who haven't broken any laws, are not going to let you turn them into felons because it would make you feel better.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Just a hypothetical question regardless of permits - would it be better if people could be armed at all times?

That would be up to the individual, I support the NRA, so I worry about myself, my family and my rights, each person should do what they think is right and within the laws of their State. I follow the law, so I don't worry about repercussions.

Bad guys with guns can show up anywhere.

Yes, they can and I am always prepared gun or no gun.

Does that make you feel manly, Bass? "Anything I can eat"... Jeez, do you actually read what you write, matey?

Has nothing to do with feeling manly or not. It's just my right and that's it and that's all. If gun haters don't like it...oh, well.

I was asking about the 'for protection' thing, bass. Not about your passion for killing four-legged furry things. You don't have a permit to carry, you don't take a weapon with you except when you go out to kill animals...how, what, why, where do you reckon you need a firearm 'for protection'?

Because I have a permit, I'm allowed to keep a firearm in my home, I can't keep it in my office or at my in-laws. I just have a small gun collection and I like collecting guns and other weapons and all I am saying is hypothetically, if someone WERE stupid enough to enter my home DOUBT IT, but IF they did, they would NOT be very happy that's a promise. But in my neighborhood we didn't have a home break in. The last one was about 32 years in a city of 160,000

lol Please bass, give up the day job and go on the stage. You're wasted here.

Hey, just telling the truth, why hate on me?

Sounds like you're saying the precious 2nd amendment is a problem.

No, it's not a problem at all, but the problem of the people that hate it. I love our 2nd amendment.

followed nine and a half hours later by...

I'm sorry, I meant my 20 years living in Los Angeles, not one time.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

theeastisred - This is what should be happening immediately and for starters:

No automatic or semi-automatic or modifiable weapons.

Proper background checks for all purchasers regardless of whether at a shop, fair, or from a private individual. At least one week cool-off period.

Secure locked storage space requirement for guns and ammunition separately, to be available for random spot-checks.

Uniform laws across the US, matched to at least the strictest standards of any state now.

Amnesty to encourage handing in of guns of any kind, no questions asked, and for all these to be destroyed.

Easy, isn't it?

Isn't that what the Democrat Party has been demanding all along? Destroy all firearms, strictest national standards based on one state's laws, random spot-checks w/o a warrant, no semi-automatic firearms, no modifiable weapons, no firearms, etc., etc., etc.

How's that been working out for ya, so far?

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Odd to mock people who are trying to end mass shootings, yet here we are...

atrestpaul is right. We are a million miles away from banning guns because of the sheer number of votes it takes. The only ones who believe this is possible are people who don't know about the system and gun owners.

The gun owners are pumped with constant messages by the NRA that the gubment is this close (holding up my fingers) to taking away your guns.....so go out and stock up. People shovel their money to the gun industry, and then the gun industry donates part of that back to the NRA for their cut.

Maybe someone in the NRA can confirm this, but my guess is the NRA will start a campaign soon to ask for donations to "protect your rights" after Vegas.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Japan seems to be doing okay without handguns. You can own shotguns and rifles, so bass4funk should move to Japan and enjoy the hunting.

The US has more guns than people.

More people in the US will die by gunfire in the next six hours than will die by gunfire in Japan for the entire year.

Which is more likely in America, die in a car crash or die from gunfire? The odds are the same.

Almost a million people in the US have been killed by gunfire in the last 30 years.

The constant bleeting about US troops protecting the freedoms of Americans is kind of strange. They're protecting American freedom to kill each other more than have been killed in wars?

Insanity

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Even Dems know gun control won't pass. They just want to push it to a vote so they can score political points after every tragedy against any republicans who vote against it.

As they should. Name and shame. Draw the line, and force those on each side to clearly state which side they are on. Let the voters decide if those stances are acceptable.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

The need for personal protection is an important issue with many voters

The guy who was putting on the show where all those people got killed. He's released a statement saying he was always a proponent of the 2nd amendment, and that his crew had guns for personal protection. Yet they couldn't use those guns out of fear of being thought of as the shooters by the police, and he has now completely reversed his stance on gun control, saying we need it "NOW" (caps are his).

The 'personal protection' plea has been shown to be based on a false sense of confidence. The reality is that it's very rare that a person with a gun stops another with a gun. The reality is that the first person with the gun can usually kill a few, and there isn't much others can do about it whether they have a gun or not.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

people here are so quick to try to take away the legitimate rights of some people

How 'bout the legitimate rights of people to attend a peaceful music concert without getting shot at and killed by the dozen?

I'm allowed to keep a firearm in my home

Bass, thank you for the clarification about your need for 'personal protection'. With you having a permit and being a law-abiding citizen an'all, I'm sure you keep your collection of guns unloaded and securely locked away, with the ammunition also securely locked away separately, as the law and common sense both demand.

So when that hypothetical stupid someone does eventually break into your home, what will make him unhappy will be the wait imposed on him while you rush to your gun cupboard, unlock it, take out a gun, rush to your ammo store, unlock it, take out the right ammo for that gun, load then and point it at the someone? Or maybe, anticipating that you might have a weapon in the house, he will just shoot you as soon as he sees you, before you have time to get your keys out?

 I guess they don't find your type of argument to be very convincing

Obviously. Then again, American voters put Baby Bush and Trump in the White House, so whether they find any argument convincing would seem to have little bearing on whether or not it is in fact a sensible argument.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

As they should. Name and shame. Draw the line, and force those on each side to clearly state which side they are on. Let the voters decide if those stances are acceptable.

Trust me, nothing would make me smile more than to see the Democrats lose even more seats, but they know the political fallout, not going to happen, at least, not the way the left would want it. It won't pass congress.

The 'personal protection' plea has been shown to be based on a false sense of confidence. 

By whom? We don't know the day to day lives of every American or what they go through or how they live or what dangers they face at home or work or if they need a firearm for their job. Amazing at what the left will lie and lie and they don't even care, there is no way they or anyone gun enthusiast or haters would know.

The reality is that it's very rare that a person with a gun stops another with a gun. 

Doesn't matter, gun haters can't decide if a gun law abiding citizen can purchase a firearm or not.

The reality is that the first person with the gun can usually kill a few, and there isn't much others can do about it whether they have a gun or not.

And you would know this how?

How 'bout the legitimate rights of people to attend a peaceful music concert without getting shot at and killed by the dozen?

Oh, I agree and they are already about better security and going to change how people will be admitted to a concert venue.

Bass, thank you for the clarification about your need for 'personal protection'. With you having a permit and being a law-abiding citizen an'all, I'm sure you keep your collection of guns unloaded and securely locked away, with the ammunition also securely locked away separately, as the law and common sense both demand. 

Yes, except for one.

So when that hypothetical stupid someone does eventually break into your home, what will make him unhappy will be the wait imposed on him while you rush to your gun cupboard, unlock it, take out a gun, rush to your ammo store, unlock it, take out the right ammo for that gun, load then and point it at the someone? Or maybe, anticipating that you might have a weapon in the house, he will just shoot you as soon as he sees you, before you have time to get your keys out?

I think you watch a lot of movies, doesn't necessarily always work like that. I'm not stupid, I always have one firearm in the house loaded. I'm always equally prepared for an Earthquake, I'm just a very organized person and think way ahead of the game.

Obviously. Then again, American voters put Baby Bush and Trump in the White House, so whether they find any argument convincing would seem to have little bearing on whether or not it is in fact a sensible argument.

And proud of it!!!

1 ( +4 / -3 )

You've been posting virtually non-stop on this thread for about 24 hours. Please take a break.

 except for one

You keep one loaded weapon on you at all times at home, ready to deal with an intruder? In a safe neighbourhood that hasn't had a burglary in 32 years?? Why?? Why are you so afraid?

Or is it, as someone suggests higher up the thread, a problem with perceived masculinity issues? Does carrying a loaded gun around indoors make you feel more like a real man?

On another note, the law says that guns and ammunition must be stored separately and securely. So by admitting you carry a loaded gun around at home instead of keeping it unloaded and locked away, aren't you saying that you are not a 'law abiding citizen' - you know, one of those decent, upright people whose rights the 2nd supposedly guarantees?

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

 Honest, law-abiding, firearm-owning, 2nd Amendment-supporting, citizens, who haven't broken any laws, are not going to let you turn them into felons because it would make you feel better.

Oh dear. It's not going to do anything for me, Tiger. It might just save your life, though.

If you had been shot in Las Vegas, do you think you would feel differently?

But of course not, right?. You are American. You need a gun....

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Better control and registration on Ammo purchases are needed.

When you can order thousands of ammunition online with no checks or registration something is wrong.

Here in Japan all ammo purchases are registered and you need to show spend cartridges before new ammo can be purchased.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites