Welcome to Detroit Sports Forum!

By joining our community, you'll be able to connect with fellow fans that live and breathe Detroit sports just like you!

Get Started
  • If you are no longer able to access your account since our recent switch from vBulletin to XenForo, you may need to reset your password via email. If you no longer have access to the email attached to your account, please fill out our contact form and we will assist you ASAP. Thanks for your continued support of DSF.

Vegas gunman kills 58, wounds 515 during outdoor music concert

haha so initially the NRA joined in saying bump stocks should be banned.

now enough time has passed that they figure no one cares anymore, and they can start the "let's not be too hasty about banning things" bullshit. fuck them.
 
Yeah I knew they were full of shit when it was first annouced like they always are.
 
Last edited:
Naked greed and sheer arrogance rule here in 21st century Murka, from the Offal Orifice on down. The RW doesn't even try to hide it anymore. The NRA knows that most Murkins are becoming increasingly desensitized to horrific and senseless violence, and only have to wait out the 48 hour news cycle's focus, and the jaded public's week or two outrage, before going back to business as usual.
 
Yeah I knew they were full of shit when it was first annouced like they always are.

I don't think they changed their position....they just don't want new restrictions on semi-automatic weapons. Really, this is on the ATF for saying they are legal in the first place.

From the article:

Adding to the uncertainty over the devices, the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives said last week it was in no position to re-examine its 2010 judgment that bump stocks were legal and that Congress would have to act.

"We think ATF ought to do its job, look at this, and draw a bright line," said Wayne LaPierre, CEO of the National Rifle Association. He said the group has been clear in supporting current law that bans fully automatic firearms and is concerned that action by Congress could "fuzz the line" such as by imposing new restrictions on semi-automatic weapons.
 
I don't think they changed their position....they just don't want new restrictions on semi-automatic weapons. Really, this is on the ATF for saying they are legal in the first place.

From the article:

Adding to the uncertainty over the devices, the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives said last week it was in no position to re-examine its 2010 judgment that bump stocks were legal and that Congress would have to act.

"We think ATF ought to do its job, look at this, and draw a bright line," said Wayne LaPierre, CEO of the National Rifle Association. He said the group has been clear in supporting current law that bans fully automatic firearms and is concerned that action by Congress could "fuzz the line" such as by imposing new restrictions on semi-automatic weapons.

Whatever who cares. Certainly not the nra. Does it matter what that group says .They only want one thing. When your born you get a gun issued to you .
 
Last edited:
Close. They want you to buy that gun though. They don't care who has a gun, they care how many people are paying for guns.

Yeah its really sad how political the are and how easy it is since Citzens Untied to influence our politics. Glad my dad tore up his Nar card when he was still alive. When the called and asked why he told them to stop backing the Gop. Sad how much influence they have.
 
Last edited:
a lawsuit...that didn't take too long.

A California college student injured in the Las Vegas music festival massacre filed a lawsuit Wednesday against the hotel owners, the concert promoter and bump stock manufacturers, claiming they were all liable in the mass shooting.

The claims against MGM Resorts International, which owns both Mandalay Bay and the concert venue that hosted the festival, raise more questions about a timeline that has changed numerous times -- and, according to Clark County Sheriff Joe Lombardo, could change again. The suit also questions why hotel staff didn't notice gunman Stephen Paddock's behavior in several instances.

Specifically, the lawsuit accuses MGM of failing to respond in a timely manner to the "shooting of Mandalay Bay security officer Jesus Campos, who had gone to the 32nd floor to check on an alert from another guest room and who was shot six minutes prior to" the massacre beginning.
 
Last edited:
a lawsuit...that didn't take too long.

A California college student injured in the Las Vegas music festival massacre filed a lawsuit Wednesday against the hotel owners, the concert promoter and bump stock manufacturers, claiming they were all liable in the mass shooting.

The claims against MGM Resorts International, which owns both Mandalay Bay and the concert venue that hosted the festival, raise more questions about a timeline that has changed numerous times -- and, according to Clark County Sheriff Joe Lombardo, could change again. The suit also questions why hotel staff didn't notice gunman Stephen Paddock's behavior in several instances.

Specifically, the lawsuit accuses MGM of failing to respond in a timely manner to the "shooting of Mandalay Bay security officer Jesus Campos, who had gone to the 32nd floor to check on an alert from another guest room and who was shot six minutes prior to" the massacre beginning.

whatever the merits of the lawsuit, I've thought the timeline was a little off. seems the police should've known what room he was in pretty quickly, but he was shooting people for a very long time.
 
whatever the merits of the lawsuit, I've thought the timeline was a little off. seems the police should've known what room he was in pretty quickly, but he was shooting people for a very long time.

I heard on the radio in a discussion on the publicity and online fascination helping to enable these types of attacks that he had done things to slow the police.
 
I heard on the radio in a discussion on the publicity and online fascination helping to enable these types of attacks that he had done things to slow the police.

yeah, I read he had cameras in the hall to detect the police, and he could spray bullets through the drywall and doors; he wounded the first security guard on the scene by shooting him through the door.

maybe there is no scandal, and the police response was as good as it could get. but the timelines I've read seem to indicate there was well over an hour between him shooting the security guard and then committing suicide, ending the spree.

so like, far be it for me to demand anyone risk their lives by charging into a hail of bullets to stop a suicidal spree killer, but that's kinda the police - or at least SWAT's - job, no?

and don't they have all that military grade gear for just this sort of situation? Or do they only bring that out when facing peaceful unarmed protestors (like BLM)?

and why not just spray bullets back at him through the wall? innocent people are dying and getting wounded by the dozens below. Certainly damage to a hotel room can be repaired quickly; assault rifle rounds hitting human flesh not so much.
 
yeah, I read he had cameras in the hall to detect the police, and he could spray bullets through the drywall and doors; he wounded the first security guard on the scene by shooting him through the door.

The doors to get on his floor were bolted shut too.
 
huh. they might as well have just thrown in the towel at that point.

You were questioning why they took so long right? There were cameras in the halls, the stairwells were bolted shut, one officer was already shot, and they were worried there could be boobie traps.
 
You were questioning why they took so long right? There were cameras in the halls, the stairwells were bolted shut, one officer was already shot, and they were worried there could be boobie traps.

so they were also worried about boobie traps.

Look, I get it; it (apparently) wasn't just a matter of kicking open his door and shooting him, but you add a new fact in each post.
 
It seems to me that they handled the situation very well, given the circumstances

so according to the updated wikipedia page, the security guard investigated drilling sounds coming from his room was the first one shot, at around 10:00 pm, and he and a maintenance man were on the floor when the shooting started & were in radio contact with the hotel management & staff.

apparently Paddock only shot at people outside for 10 minutes (from 10:05-10:15). shortly thereafter, at 10:17 cops got to the 32nd floor and met with the security guard who confirmed the room Paddock was in. he had apparently stopped shooting by this time. then they evacuated all other guests on the floor until 10:55, then at 11:20 blew off the door to his room and discovered Paddock dead.

so at least according to this account, it's not like they were dicking around while he was still shooting people. that's good.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Erm.... "boobie" traps are bras, booby traps are hidden devices meant to subdue. incapacitate, wound, maim, injure, or kill.
 
so the security guard who was apparently first on the scene and wounded by Paddock, bailed on interviews at the last minute and has secluded himself in his house, and someone hired security to keep media away from him. and the local law enforcement has changed their story twice on when he was shot. link.

it seems like a minor point either way; if he had been shot 6 minutes before the shooting, doesn't seem to me like it justifies criticism of the police response. How would they know a security guard getting shot was a precursor to a massacre? but combined with the security guard suddenly making himself scarce makes it seem like the cops are trying to cover something up. from article:
The correction raises questions about why it took police 12 minutes to find the gunman?s hotel room when officers were already in the building and why they were searching other rooms when they were told the gunman was on the 32nd floor.​
 
Back
Top