Another fucking spree shooting. Great.

hmm

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/10/04/bump-stock-ban-republican-senators-243453

speaking as a total idiot here but i'm all for a sit-in at NRA hq. someone ( Οὖτις?) broached this the other day..

that was Morbius

“I’m a Second Amendment man,” said Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.). “I’m not for any gun control, OK? None.”

“I don’t think we ought to punish 80, 90 million gun owners who have a right to own a weapon under the Constitution because of the act of one idiot,” said Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.). “Just like I don’t think we ought to condemn all Muslims because of the act of one jihadist.”

go fuck yourselves

already seeing "multiple shooter conspiracy" posts on FB :(

Because if ordinary people were to accept that just one deranged person with the right guns can really kill 59 and injure more than 500 people in a few minutes, they might get the idea that there is a limit to the firepower any one person should be allowed to wield. If you can confuse them about this, you might be able to forestall that conclusion.

there's also always initial reports and rumors of more than one shooter and its almost always not correct - except like the dc sniper and I think they took turns shooting and didn't work in tandem.

http://www.wnyc.org/story/breaking-news-consumers-handbook-pdf/

4. There's almost never a second shooter.
In the case of the DC Navy Yard shooting, the Sandy Hook shooting, and many others, initial reports included possible second and third shooters. “There’s pretty much never another one,” says Fisher. “So if you hear that, you can almost always discount."

Klebold and Harris set the template

San Bernardino was the only other one I can think of at this second.

XP, was curious whether my above suggestion of some sort of more objective measure (sustained aimed fire total muzzle energy) would distinguish hunting and self-defense firearms from assault weapons. As opposed to earlier assault weapons bans based on cosmetic features. After searching around for sustained/effective ROF, I think it would:

semi-auto 9mm/.45 pistol: 40 rds/min x 400 ft-lbs = 16000 ft-lbs/min
.357 Magnum revolver: 30 rds/min x 600 ft-lbs = 18000 ft-lbs/min
bolt-action .308 hunting rifle: 15 rds/min x 2800 ft-lbs = 42000 ft-lbs/min
12 ga 5 rd pump shotgun: 15 rds/min x 3000 ft-lbs = 45000 ft-lbs/min

semi-auto magazine-fed 5.56 rifle: 90 rds/min x 1300 ft-lbs = 117000 ft-lbs/min
automatic 7.62 rifle: 120 rds/min x 1500 ft-lbs = 180000 ft-lbs/min

There's a threshold issue with SMGs (automatic weapons firing pistol rounds), eg an Uzi would come in at 120x383 = 46000 ft-lbs/min, but strengthening current restrictions on automatic weapons would resolve this. How would one obtain sustained aimed rates of fire? Why not have a contest among ATF agents with the candidate weapon, with the winner or top 3 setting the value. Does a weapons modification (larger magazine, bump stock, crank) push values higher? Put it to the test.

“I don’t think we ought to punish 80, 90 million gun owners who have a right to own a weapon under the Constitution because of the act of one idiot,” said Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.). “Just like I don’t think we ought to condemn all Muslims because of the act of one jihadist.”

why just condemn when you can ban them from the country outright

punish 80, 90 million gun owners

totally psyched to help these fine americans out w/ increased risk of meaningless death, glad i could contribute to the american idea somehow

http://highline.huffingtonpost.com/articles/en/gun-violence

xxp -

The number of people on Earth who can reload and fire a .357 five times in one minute is probably in the dozens. Even with Moon Clips/reloaders and practice, that's an incredibly high threshold.

Three magazine changes for a 9mm semi-auto is pretty much anyone who spends a full day practicing.

What any 'objective measure' along the lines of what you're trying to do is going to end up with centerfire semi-autos being the weapons that need to be banned. Just start from that point and skip the million things that could be nitpicked (different ammo and barrel lengths drastically alter force, etc.).

I'd also say that what you're looking is a question relevant to spree shootings and ignores the way guns are used every single day in American violence. A low-powered .22lr or slow revolver is every bit as useful to/dangerous in the hands of gangs or a domestic abuser.

Which is to say that trying to make objective measurements that determine the potential lawfulness of a gun would be wasted energy, IMO. Making violence more abstract isn't convincing a soul.

The pretense that any gun is designed for anything besides killing other humans is a fucking joke anyway. Usefulness for hunting game remains a side benefit of the basic design

Force gun owners to trade their boomsticks in for bows and spears, imo. And then they have to teach themselves flint flaking if they actually want an edged weapon. Let's just return to the Paleolithic and see if we can get it right with a do-over, is what I'm saying here.

narrator: they didn't.

So my congressman Carlos Curbelo is writing a bill to ban bump stock.

milo z: That's the point. I took the most extreme rates possible rates of fire for typical hunting and self-defense weapons, and the total kinetic energy involved is still less than half of what can be achieved with assault rifles, whether semi-auto or fully auto.

What I'm looking for is a way to ban AK and M4/16 type weapons, that isn't mainly cosmetic (and hence comical/circumventable), that could could create fissures amongst gun owning voters. Personally, I'd like to see a day when only (some) law enforcement, and biologists/geologists in the wilderness, carry, but that would require a marked cultural shift, and every journey starts with a step.

tombot otm

The problem with that is that there are dozens of rifles just as 'capable' as the AK/AR platforms. The Ruger Mini-14 would just make a comeback - it was a favorite of the survivalist types back in the day because it had all the capabilities of an AR without the stigma (or legal restrictions). There is nothing special about AKs/ARs aside from current ubiquity - any magazine-fed centerfire semi-automatic is as capable or more capable. Differentiating beyond that is pointless.

Naming certain types of rifle is a fool's errand - anyone you can convince to get down with a 'ban' on ARs would be fine with banning semi-auto centerfires in general.

I'm not sure you're reading Sanpaku's post, there.

Heaven forfend such an abomination should come to pass.

xp yeah, Sanpaku only named certain rifles as examples while suggesting a metric that should ban a more general set.

And I'm giving the general set and it doesn't require speed-shooting competitions or assumptive math about joules of energy delivered (which is also a terrible measure - we adopted a 5.56 round despite generating less power because it tumbles when it hits flesh and causes more damage) : centerfire externally magazine-fed semi-automatic weapons. That's the entirety of the meaningful differentiation and what that math will lead to.

ah, I see. Thanks for clarifying.

If our political goal is to (if possible) find fissures among gun owners between those who have hunting rifles/shotguns and self-defense handguns, and the much smaller number who are hoarding military guns for a revolution, then I'm not sure "external magazine + centerfire + semiauto" would work, as it would include too many handguns. There are centerfire pistol cartridges, some used in external magazine handguns. Politically, we're not going to find final solutions tomorrow, but we can chip away at the margins.

Why are assault style weapons favored by some spree killers? Magazine fed semi-auto volume of fire + rifle cartridge kinetic energy. These aren't cosmetic distinctions. A Mini-14 is little different from the AR-15s found at Mandalay Bay, here (and yes, there are bump stocks for Mini-14s).

Why are assault style weapons favored by some spree killers?

Almost* every semi-auto centerfire rifle (chambered for a rifle round) made could been used to commit the Las Vegas shooting - a pistol-caliber rifle probably could not in the same way, but it could have in Sandy Hook or Pulse.

(exceptions being things like very large caliber sniper rifles or weapons made so poorly they wouldn't shoot)

fissures among gun owners between those who have hunting rifles/shotguns and self-defense handguns, and the much smaller number who are hoarding military guns for a revolution

The place to exploit fissures would be with the gunshow loophole. It wouldn't do much, if anything, in the short term as far as spree shootings or day to day violence (but no less than an 'assault weapons ban') and could easily be ignored but legally requiring that sales take place at a dealer who can perform the paperwork and background check (and benefits because he gets to charge $30 for the process) normalizes further gun control. That's been the most successful process - background checks at all were anathema thirty years ago but no one bats an eye now, until 1968 we didn't have even the licensed dealer/paperwork setup we have now but no one in the country could imagine returning to completely unfettered new gun sales.

This guy bought six of his weapons at a Cabela's, and his (12, according to some reports) bump fire stocks online, it seems. He had enough firepower in that hotel room for not just an infantry squad, but a full section (the ol' half-platoon). Closing gun show loopholes would have had no effect on *this* spree shooting.

Personally, I have to take (too abbreviated) driver's licence testing every decade, have brake tags checked every 2 years, and carry insurance in case my driving harms others or their property. The idea that anyone can obtain more lethal mechanical devices, with no training, no licencing, and no insurance, should appall us.

This actually suggests another, "market friendly", approach. Mandate that home insurance cover medical/civil lawsuit costs of guns in the home. If the insurance lobby can save us from drunk drivers, not wearing seatbelts, and building in flood plains, perhaps they could save us from the American gun pandemic. This hasn't stopped drunk driving, vehicular mortality, or hurricanes, but it has incentivised better behavior.

Would I be out of line in suggesting this conversation move to a gun control thread or Repeal the Second Amendment? Y'all are having a good discussion based in real knowledge, but there are times of day one doesn't want to mentally reenact a recent tragedy running hypotheticals of what would have been possible with this or that weapon. It's all 100 percent relevant but idk I feel like this thread despite its horrible title is more an emotional support/processing space (on top of news clearinghouse) and looking-through-the-eyes-of-the-killer type mental exercises are anxiety-inducing in a similar way as watching video of these events and mentally inserting oneself in the crowd. But if it's just me I'll shut up.

LAS VEGAS—The gunman who murdered at least 59 people at a country-music concert on Sunday might have originally targeted another Las Vegas music festival held the previous weekend, according to a senior law enforcement source.

Stephen Paddock rented multiple condos overlooking the annual Life Is Beautiful Festival, which this year was headlined by Lorde and Chance the Rapper, said the source, who is not directly involved in the investigation but has been briefed on its progress.

In an effort to confirm the report, The Daily Beast visited the Ogden, a 21-story luxury condominium tower with a line of sight to the concert-grounds.

“We're not in a position to confirm or deny anything about Mr. Paddock's dealings. I suggest you contact Metro [police]. As you know this is an on going investigation,” said Melissa Warren, public affairs officer for Fais Foley Warren, owner of the Ogden.

xpost Dr C otm

Just found out that a friend of a good friend of mine had her biceps blown off by one of the (many, many) bullets.

jesus sorry to hear that

And still, she's saying she feels incredibly lucky to have survived

The sheer murkiness of this all still.

https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/girlfriend-of-vegas-shooting-suspect-it-never-occurred-to-me-that-he-was-planning-violence

The thing is, if hes dead and left zero notes/evidence of why he did this, whats going to happen?

He'll get a footnote in the Guiness Book of World Records and the victims and their families and friends will always wonder wtf it was all about.

agree that detailed ballistics and policy thoughts should migrate to the threads designated for such things

inspiration for other secret nihilists

He'll get a footnote in the Guiness Book of World Records

Assuming they publish a new edition in the next 6-9 months.

It might be a good idea to have a separate thread for discussing this particular shooting. A lot of shit does not add up for me. The utter absence of motive + tactical aspect + insane amount of artillery. Wiring money to the Philippines. Reports of someone rushing the stage 45 minutes before the shooting started screaming "You're all going to die!!!"

the Alex Jones thread is thataway

Better yet, head to 4chan.

the dude who draws Dilbert is truthering the fuck out of this as we speak

Reports of someone rushing the stage 45 minutes before the shooting started screaming "You're all going to die!!!"

OK thats the first Ive heard of that.

That's because there's a very good chance it's bullshit.

Oh it's been in the news (reported by concertgoers )but it doesn't really 'prove' anything more than the "Leo Phoenix" story on USEnet proved anything about 9/11. I get told I'm going to die by random crazies in downtown Orlando all the time

Given the unreliability of eyewitness accounts, my general rule is "video or it didn't happen"

here's the claim...http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/vegas-shooting-stephen-paddock-attack-warning-eyewitness-what-happened-latest-news-updates-a7978821.html