Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > Las Vegas Carnage Questions      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 DDSearle
Joined: 5/20/2017
Msg: 1
Las Vegas Carnage QuestionsPage 1 of 7    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7)
Isn't there more to this massacre than meets the eye?
In some sectors of the media, such as that in the U K, it is being presented as an instance of how gun-keeping conservatives or the National Rifle Association may be responsible for it. Although US gun laws may need to be tightened or extended, shouldn't the focus be on the shooter and his associates, such as 'Stephen C Paddock's elusive companion, 'Marilou Danley'?
 LLove2LaughToo
Joined: 6/6/2016
Msg: 2
Las Vegas Carnage Questions
Posted: 10/4/2017 6:14:22 AM
One of the questions to ask is, why there is no federal law to notify the authorities when a person purchase 33 firearms, some of them AR-15 and AK-47 type rifles , in one year? I read somewhere that when a licensed gun dealer sells two or more handguns to an unlicensed buyer within five straight business days, it has to be reported to the ATF.
 DDSearle
Joined: 5/20/2017
Msg: 3
Las Vegas Carnage Questions
Posted: 10/4/2017 6:20:24 AM
The shooter, though presented as a 'multi-millionaire', appears to be insolvent. But he spent a small fortune on his armoury, much of which was gotten into his Mandalay Bay hotel suite. And wouldn't that have been with the connivance or assistance of an accomplice? And he seems to have transferred large amounts of money out of the U S A (in favour of what or whom?)

Were forecasts of the carnage-to-come made on the internet and at the front of the audience as it gathered for the concert? Was there more than one shooter? Were the Police Officers that were called to the scene, though brave or resourceful as individuals, less than well-organised?

Did 'Paddock' convert lately to Mohamedism? And could it be that he was somehow forced into the murderous rampage by threats unknown? For example, if a person whose cushy world were collapsing were told that unless he committed a murder that would culminate in his own death a weapon of mass-destruction would be detonated or unleashed, wouldn't he opt for the former?
 gtomustang
Joined: 6/16/2007
Msg: 4
Las Vegas Carnage Questions
Posted: 10/4/2017 7:02:19 AM
There's a lot of questions to ask. It would have been simpler if this wealthy white man had been one of the "usual suspects". If he had been a kid picked on at school, then we could blame that. If he was a disgruntled employee recently fired, we could explain. If he was "one of them Muslims we want to ban". If he was one of those "urban rap fans" and this was a rap concert. Our conservative media is in a twist, how can they politicize a wealthy retiree who seems to be living the dream, how can we explain him going off like a psychopath like his father?

He had enough "training" to set up surveillance cameras, he bought a supply of civilian rifles converted to bumpfire knowing they heat up and lose accuracy out of the barrel at the distances he required, how do we stop someone who didn't live in Yemen or Afghanistan to receive such training? Sean Insanity is claiming on Faux News he could have stopped a rifleman at long distances 35 stories up from the ground with a pistol, and even his coworkers on TV dismiss that as bullshit. The "good guy with a gun" myth has been debunked! Its the perfect nightmare for gun nuts as Congress tries to pull a ban on silencers AND armor piercing rounds (now there's a way to show respect for officers, let's put those "copkillers" back out on the streets again while chastising football players for taking a knee!). Even some singers who were all for guns, are changing their minds now that its THEIR ASS that got shot at. Funny how that works.

no wonder the "deplorables" are crying, this is the worst inconvenience they've ever had! the last time Congress tried to kill the ban to make the paymaster happy, one of their own got shot, so they couldn't go forward--just didn't look good to put a Republican on the sacrificial altar that already had schoolchildren blood on it. Now they have to deal with a wealthy white man, living the dream, showing how easily converted "big penis" rifles can shoot, of all things, Second Amenders at a concert (oh if only they had been gun fans at a rap concert, they are already trained to hate those!) and they can't be a good guy with a gun, not against a sniper with an arsenal of military rifles. We laughed at the Saudis for being so backward, they won't let women drive a car. And now the Saudis are closer to reality than we are.

Security will be increased, hopefully. Las Vegas casinos really focus on security, but those in the business knew this was a big loophole that was going to cause a problem one day. The divorced shooter may have sent money abroad in order to protect his gf. ISIS keeps claiming responsibility, and losing credibility as it goes on--makes you wonder how many other terrorist incidents had little to do with them. It also brings up the question of "domestic terrorism", which America actually has little legal definition. Was he just a crazy man? We keep trying to think it has to be "Muslim" somehow, but wouldn't there have been a manifesto a long time ago?

why would we be so much more comfortable if it was? What does it mean for America, that having money isn't a solution to unhappiness, what does it mean if white men can kill so many of "their own", what do we have to do to take tools out of their hands? There is a political movement of "angry white men" coming to a head right now in America, and the GOP is not their leader, and Chump isn't their leader, he's a three-time candidate who finally got the timing right. What happens with leaderless revolts and how long do we want to support them?

What happens when the next Clive Bundy armed landgrab has a Paddock in it?

I frigging guarantee, America is NOT READY for that one. All the snowflakes complaining about "bended knees" are going to have to swallow that one of their own fired on LEO. Will Chump let it go, will he only Twit about it, or will he decide he's been betrayed and let his dictatorial self loose?

Republicans may not like the roosters they created coming home to roost.
 HawkingJr
Joined: 4/16/2007
Msg: 5
view profile
History
Las Vegas Carnage Questions
Posted: 10/4/2017 8:05:58 AM
There’s only one way this carnage could have been reduced (not prevented, just reduced): never having legalized bump stocks. And now things are going to get much worse, because the genie’s out of the bottle: most gun stores interviewed say they rarely ever sold them until Monday, now they can’t keep them in stock.

Despite all the mystery surrounding him and his motivations, I’d have to say Paddock may end up being the most influential mass murderer in recent history. Most such shooters were not gun experts and likely didn’t even know about the existence of bump stocks, just like most of us didn’t. Now potential mass murderers realize they can significantly expand their kills with these things – the most comparable mass murderer to him is probably Whitman (15 kills, 31 injured in 96 minutes) because of the sniper style similarity, and just imagine what Whitman could have done with bump stocks – actually, you don’t have to imagine, since it just happened: 58 kills, 500+ injured in 10 minutes. Yeah, sure, somebody’s going to come along and argue bump stocks decrease accuracy, but mass murderers don’t give a damn about accuracy. This guy was shooting from hundreds of yards away IN THE DARK and managed to hit about 500 people in less than 10 minutes. Even most NRA-types admit there is no reason for bump stocks except to kill a whole lot of people clustered together in very little time, mostly because the accuracy is reduced with them – what other purpose could they serve? Target practice? Hunting? Self-protection? These things are best served by accuracy, not quantity of shots, unless you’re protecting yourself from an invading army (hence the reason automatic weapons are used by the military).

It’s just basically impossible to justify the legality of bump stocks, especially if you agree automatic weapons shouldn’t be easy for the average person to possess, and yet I can guarantee you nothing will happen with them anytime, at least not on a federal level. The NRA owns the federal government. All that said, I don’t think anything else other than making bump stocks illegal or as difficult to own as true automatic weapons BEFORE THIS would have prevented this level of carnage (but not the shooting altogether) from happening. As far as we can tell at the moment, this guy was clean as a whistle in almost every way, wearing an outstanding mask of sanity, a virtual blank check with no religious or political affiliations or legal run-ins, and it’s difficult to imagine what level of background check he would have failed. And he could have done all kinds of things to hide stockpiling an armory, even if it was illegal to do so. And there was nothing that could have been done to prevent him from getting the weapons into the hotel room (metal detectors for hotel guests? Please). And certainly it was nothing no “good guy with a gun” could have stopped (yeah, sure, shoot up a bunch of innocent people in other hotel rooms trying to hit the room where you think this guy is shooting from -- in the dark). I mean, I hate to say it, but sometimes people are just going to kill people, and that’s the way life is. Yeah, sure, this never happens in Japan with its strict gun control, but it also rarely happens in a lot of first world countries with lax gun control like the US (okay, NO first world has as lax gun control as the US), but I think this is more a cultural thing than a legal/constitutional question. We can come across many lessons in previous mass murders that might help prevent future ones, but I have my doubts you’re going to find one here. Paddock may turn out to be the Flight MH370 of mass murderers. It makes almost no sense.

As Trevor Noah pointed out last night, it’s so damn funny that Fox News is complaining about others “politicizing” the tragedy, when last year they and Trump were bending over backwards to make Pulse the poster child for their anti-Muslim/war-on-terror/anti-refugee political stance. They just have no idea what to do with this rich white accountant going on a killing spree, and the conspiracy theories are starting to get out of control, despite almost none of them making any sense (ISIS is not helping matters with their false claims). And as for the fired NBC executive, I seem to recall quite a few conservative Republicans saying of the Pulse nightclub victims “At least they were probably all going to be Hillary voters in a swing state!” (and some were saying good riddance on the gays/heathens/etc. -- bet you Alabama's next senator said that to a few trusty friends!). You know how many conservative Republicans are openly hoping for the quick death of McCain so he can be replaced with a “real conservative”? There are very sick people on both sides. (Jesus, I’m starting to sound like Trump! Who was fortunate this occurred in the middle of the night while he was sleeping so by the time he woke up, everyone already knew it was a white guy or else I’m sure he would have tweeted out something about “If the courts would leave my Muslim bans alone this wouldn’t be happening!” After all, he did exactly that with Pulse!)

I can certainly understand the frustration of feeling like we need to do something to prevent these sorts of things from happening again, but I’m not sure that a Paddock can ever be prevented – probably best for the gun control people to wait for the next guy (should be along any day now) because he’ll probably make more sense than this one, including politically.
 DDSearle
Joined: 5/20/2017
Msg: 6
Las Vegas Carnage Questions
Posted: 10/4/2017 8:24:37 AM
The one that wounds or murders on the scale of Anders Behring Breivik of Norway (319 + 77) would be more than lusting-after, say, seeing what it's like to slaughter human beings. The seeker of such a thrill would wish to kill one or two, perhaps a few more or, at most, a score. That the Las Vegas shooter killed so may more than that indicates, at least to me, that this deed was planned and executed for a purpose. And I wonder at what that might be
 poppata
Joined: 8/6/2017
Msg: 7
Las Vegas Carnage Questions
Posted: 10/4/2017 9:16:47 AM
^^^ Yea there was a purpose....he was an unhappy MF who, unlike most people who commit suicide, was so angry at the world that he wanted to cause as must devastation as possible to other innocent human beings, taking them with him. What other purpose could there possibly be?
 gtomustang
Joined: 6/16/2007
Msg: 8
Fox News demographic
Posted: 10/4/2017 9:21:26 AM
"most legitimate, normal, sane gun owners didn't know about "bumpstocks" b/c they had no need for such nonsense, and now psychopathic killers know all about it."

>>yep, I can attest to shooters not being gun experts, I got into a long argument with a militia member doofus who insisted a bumpstock is a malfunctioning rifle. Accuracy may not matter as much to someone who wants the godlike power from on high of making people scatter. Stampedes can handle the rest of the injuries. Morons too psychotic to make it into the military, or too scared to serve their country in an actual war, can now get their Rambo on.

Again, its just crazy the shooter is the exact demographic of a Faux News/Chump supporter--white, angry, large arsenal, rude to people, self-contained, multiple divorces, has an Asian gf b/c those western women are just too liberated. Maybe if he let loose on a mosque, it might make sense, but he targeted his own kind. Everyone at Faux News must walk around with nervous tics, that they just can't demonize a killer who is too much like their own demographic. What kind of talking points can they spread around? I wouldn't waste a second looking at NotSoBrightBart, but I bet they are in knots as well.

Even PU has shut up about evil liberals! Poor little PU, its so hard to talk about liberals taking over when its angry white men killing white folk by the score. what was Paddock's purpose? well, he's allowed an arsenal, he gets told by conservative news sources the world's going to hell...he has a need to do something, and he is allowed to buy the best tools to do it.

he did what felt good to him. News reports are saying he used to be rude to his own gf in public, neighbors say he was always standoffish. Sounds like he viewed other human beings differently than most of us do, and Republicans allow him the best tools to carry out his wishes.
 from site to sight
Joined: 11/30/2007
Msg: 9
Las Vegas Carnage Questions
Posted: 10/4/2017 9:23:19 AM
"...this deed was planned and executed for a purpose. And I wonder at what that might be"

When was the last time a mass murderer gave a logical explanation for going on a killing spree, where people said "Now I understand why so-and-so decided to murder people. It all makes sense now"? Could this be classified as an act of terrorism, like other acts of mass murder? Or does the killer need to have a foreign sounding name to be classified as terrorism?
 daynadaze
Joined: 2/11/2008
Msg: 10
view profile
History
Las Vegas Carnage Questions
Posted: 10/4/2017 10:36:48 AM
It's certainly an act of terrorism.
 L_LuuLuu
Joined: 8/2/2009
Msg: 11
view profile
History
Las Vegas Carnage Questions
Posted: 10/4/2017 12:29:23 PM
^^^^^
Agree with you Ms. Danya.

And add that there is no doubt this man was extremely deranged.

Lots of partisan speculation going on. But a little early in the game to determine his motives or his political leanings. (although his family says he was apolitical).

He did attract a crowd that would have included a lot of persons from the Right. But authorities also state that he may have been considering hitting a rap concert before/or as well as the country venue.

I guess there's nothing we can know for sure until the investigation is complete. His family insists that they knew nothing of his serious mental health condition. And his doctor apparently prescribed only 1 valium a day for it (band aid on a fatal wound).

So I guess we'll all have to wait till his girlfriend is questioned. Is it possible she was sent away BEFORE the purchase of the guns? Was she herself, too crazy to identify a problem? Or is it possible that she knew all along, but was too afraid of him to speak out?

So here's a hypothetical question for you all: IF authorities question Marilou, and it is determined that she knew, but was afraid to speak -- Should she be prosecuted? Or not? Why do you have your opinion?
 fullmoonguy2
Joined: 6/14/2017
Msg: 12
view profile
History
Las Vegas Carnage Questions
Posted: 10/4/2017 12:33:47 PM

But he spent a small fortune on his armoury, much of which was gotten into his Mandalay Bay hotel suite. And wouldn't that have been with the connivance or assistance of an accomplice?


Not necessarily.
Apparently, no connivance is necessary in Las Vegas.

I also wondered how he might have gotten all those weapons into the hotel without raising suspicions, but, according to a Las Vegas security expert who was asked the same question by a reporter, it's not an unusual sight to see someone check into a hotel with a stack of guns in cases or bags, because Las Vegas hosts quite a few gun shows all year long, including this coming weekend, Oct. 7/8.

And it will be hosting the largest gun show in the world this coming January:

"The world’s largest annual gun show will go on as planned in Las Vegas.

National Shooting Sports Foundation which hosts the “SHOT Show” said they would not be discussing any questions relating to Sunday’s massacre, including a venue change for the Jan. 23-26 show, which is being held about four miles away from where Stephen Paddock killed 59 people and injured hundreds more using an array of high-powered assault rifles."
-NY Post

And Nevada's gun laws are pretty lax, according to this info on CNN's website:

"Some facts about gun laws in the Silver State:

The right to bear arms is enshrined in the first article of Nevada's constitution: "Every citizen has the right to keep and bear arms for security and defense, for lawful hunting and recreational use and for other lawful purposes."

You don't need a permit to buy a gun, nor are you required to get a license or register a firearm. There's no limit on the number of guns a person can buy at one time.

Carrying an unconcealed firearm in public is legal.

It's legal to own assault weapons and large-capacity magazines for ammunition.

There is no mandated waiting period before buying a gun.

You can bring a gun to a polling place, to a casino and to a bar.

You cannot bring a gun to a school or a university campus.

Law enforcement are required to issue a concealed handgun permit to anyone who meets the basic qualifications. Nevada honors concealed handgun licenses from other states.

Nevada voters passed a ballot measure last year requiring a background check for firearm transactions between private parties. But the state attorney general put it on hold, saying it wasn't enforceable."

-CNN.com
 from site to sight
Joined: 11/30/2007
Msg: 13
Las Vegas Carnage Questions
Posted: 10/4/2017 1:07:13 PM
Has the U.S. reached the point where mass murders-even the murdering of school children like in Sandy Hook-is acceptable and expected from time to time, in order to protect the right to own guns? Is this how Trump is making America great again (seeing that he's an NRA supporter, after getting millions from them for his campaign)?
It will be interesting to hear what kind of spin the NRA puts on it, if/when they comment on it. Are they going to say that all concert goers should be armed-even though nobody knew exactly where the shots were coming from?
 Kj521
Joined: 11/16/2016
Msg: 14
Las Vegas Carnage Questions
Posted: 10/4/2017 1:56:36 PM
Part and parcel of living in the USA?
 HawkingJr
Joined: 4/16/2007
Msg: 15
view profile
History
Las Vegas Carnage Questions
Posted: 10/4/2017 2:21:33 PM
“So here's a hypothetical question for you all: IF authorities question Marilou, and it is determined that she knew, but was afraid to speak -- Should she be prosecuted?”

Knew what? That he had a gigantic arsenal of guns? It seems unlikely she didn’t know that. But as the NRA will be quick to tell you, that ain’t illegal and even if he was suddenly buying a bunch of guns, what responsibility of hers was it to tell the authorities since that’s not illegal and may not even have been anything unusual for the 4 years she knew him?

I highly doubt she knew anything about what he planned to do with the guns. Heck, it’s even possible HE didn’t know what he planned on doing with the guns, prior to the week before. It would be interesting to know if he asked for a room facing the concert (though there’s nothing too bizarre about that, because the concert was on the opposite side of the strip, meaning his room faced the Strip – I ask for such a room every time I stay in Vegas, because it’s such a pretty sight and worth the extra money; only thing is, the build and location of Mandalay is such that it overlooks the Strip in 2 directions, one of which is toward the concert and the other isn’t, so if he specifically asked for the concert direction, THAT would be interesting). How do we know he didn’t just drag 23 guns with him everywhere he went and suddenly popped, maybe because the concert had been annoying him all day? I’ve heard conflicting reports as to whether she was SENT to the Philippines that week or she went there to celebrate an anniversary of a family member, which would suggest he didn’t have much to do with it. I mean, unless he was telling her “I plan to commit mass murder in Vegas while you’re gone,” it’s difficult to imagine anything about his behavior beforehand would make her remotely guilty of anything, and apparently she’s stated she does not have a guilty conscience – though that’s just kind of weird, because pretty much anybody in her situation would feel somewhat guilty: “How did I not see the signs?”

Less someone thinks it’s impossible to completely hide such evil thoughts for years and years, let’s not forget the BTK Killer, who was a God-fearing upstanding community member whose children and wife idolized up until they discovered he’d spent several decades binding, torturing and killing people while taunting the police. At this point Paddock sounds so much like Rader, it’s not even funny.

“Has the U.S. reached the point where mass murders-even the murdering of school children like in Sandy Hook-is acceptable and expected from time to time, in order to protect the right to own guns?”

I’d be one of the last people on earth to defend or support the positions of gun nuts or Trumpettes, but there is really no cure for our “gun problem” at this point. Even retracting the 2nd amendment, outlawing guns and attempting to confiscate all those on the streets would accomplish little – there are more guns in America than there are people, and getting more guns across the border would be/is surprisingly easy. Not to mention, most NRA-types aren’t kidding when they say “You’ll have to pry my guns from cold, dead hands” – there would be a civil war if anything remotely close to outlawing guns was attempted. And most less extreme legislation actually probably wouldn’t accomplish much of anything and would be circumvented by the most determined mass murderers. Paddock is turning out to be the exception of all exceptions, but even though virtually everyone agrees Mateen shouldn’t have been able to do what he did and Lanza shouldn’t have been able to do what he did and Holmes shouldn’t have been able to do what he did, there’s really not much question that the legislation suggested to stop them from getting guns would have been circumvented or might not have even been put into action in their cases anyway.

The time to get our “gun problem” under control was decades ago when people in this country were still reasonable about the subject and there weren’t hundreds of millions of high-powered guns in civilian hands. What we have now is basically the runaway greenhouse effect, with guns. Eventually we’ll be the Venus of guns.
 daynadaze
Joined: 2/11/2008
Msg: 16
view profile
History
Las Vegas Carnage Questions
Posted: 10/4/2017 6:11:24 PM
I think it's the same thing as being involved in a murder, even if you weren't the actual murderer, you are guilty too. There are others things that can deem you not equally guilty, but in most cases you should be. If she knew about his guns and didn't turn it in, yes she's part of what happened. It is possible to be living with a monster but not know it, but honestly, most people know. Lots of people are attracted to crazy, dangerous, abusive partners.
 Yule_liquor
Joined: 12/7/2011
Msg: 17
Las Vegas Carnage Questions
Posted: 10/4/2017 6:23:06 PM
#14 says


Part and parcel of living in the USA?


yup...now why don't you tell that ^ to one of the 500 victims who got machine gunned, or maybe the parents of the Sandy hook children where gunned down in cold blood

Just walk up to them and say it with the same dvmb smirk on your face that you have in your picture...and let us know how it works out for ya!...that is, if you have the guts to stand up for what you (and Trump) believe in.
 Kj521
Joined: 11/16/2016
Msg: 18
Las Vegas Carnage Questions
Posted: 10/4/2017 6:31:27 PM
^^^^Are you saying we shouldn't just accept terrorist acts as part of today's society?
 Yule_liquor
Joined: 12/7/2011
Msg: 19
Las Vegas Carnage Questions
Posted: 10/4/2017 6:59:57 PM
Firstly,
The WH is not making this an official terrorist act, as there is no political or religious agenda behind it.

The real issue here is that assault guns(or enhancers) should not be made readily available to anyone
As it was already pointed out, the loss of life would have been far less...had it been otherwise.

That we accept acts of terror which we cannot control is one thing...but its a whole other matter when our very laws (or lack of)facilitate this kind of thing
 deetristate
Joined: 12/4/2014
Msg: 20
Las Vegas Carnage Questions
Posted: 10/4/2017 8:05:24 PM
Yule. What law could have prevented this horrible event?


Interesting Huffington Post piece on why it is not called terrorism ( by some)


"""""A 64-year-old man slaughtered dozens of people late Sunday night, firing hundreds of rounds into a crowd of concertgoers in Las Vegas.

President Donald Trump called it an “act of evil.” But why, many wondered on social media, aren’t authorities using the term terrorism to describe a horrific attack that left at least 58 dead and more than 500 people injured? Was it because the shooter wasn’t Muslim? Was it because he was white?

Similar questions came up after a left-wing extremist opened fire on a Republican congressional baseball practice in Alexandria, Virginia, in June. And again when a white supremacist crashed into a crowd of anti-racist demonstrators in Charlottesville, Virginia, in August. Weren’t those acts of terror as well?

There’s a reason that law enforcement authorities are hesitant to label an attack like the one in Las Vegas as terrorism. Specific federal statutes target international terrorism and acts associated with groups that the U.S. government has labeled as foreign terrorist organizations. But there’s no specific federal statute aimed at acts of domestic terrorism, meaning acts inspired or carried out on behalf of domestic extremist organizations. Some federal laws are aimed at particular acts that might be carried out for terrorist purposes, like hijacking planes or assassinating government officials, but mass shootings are not on that list.

So had Stephen Paddock lived, it’s unlikely that he would have faced federal terrorism charges. And unless authorities turn up evidence that his attack was motivated by hatred for a specific racial group ? which is unlikely, given that he fired indiscriminately into a crowd of thousands ? there’s a good chance he wouldn’t have faced any federal charges at all.

HuffPost reported in August that the Justice Department had been discussing the possibility of asking Congress to pass a federal law against domestic terrorism. FBI Director Christopher Wray said last month that he was aware of such discussions in the executive branch.

Yet even if such a law were on the books, it’s not clear the Las Vegas massacre would qualify as an act of domestic terrorism. There is a federal definition of the term ? yes, even though there isn’t a charge. An act of domestic terrorism must be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, to influence a government policy by intimidation or coercion, or to affect the conduct of government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping. We don’t know yet if Paddock had any of those goals in mind.""""
 Yule_liquor
Joined: 12/7/2011
Msg: 21
Las Vegas Carnage Questions
Posted: 10/4/2017 9:13:56 PM
^


Yule. What law could have prevented this horrible event?


are you joking ^, or are you plain drunk!

why does a person need to have military style assault weapons?
why does a person need weapons or devices that covert to a machine gun?
why can a person buy unlimited guns without being put in a state or national registry.

If a person gets a prescription for a narcotic, and takes it to a pharmacy to be filled...it will go into a registry
If that same person goes to another doctor, and gets another narcotic prescription the next day...it will come up on the registry that he was already given a prescription the day before!

we monitor pple who prescribe and get pain killers,...... but we can't do it with guns!
 John252817
Joined: 8/24/2016
Msg: 22
Las Vegas Carnage Questions
Posted: 10/5/2017 1:39:17 AM
"So here's a hypothetical question for you all: IF authorities question Marilou, and it is determined that she knew, but was afraid to speak -- Should she be prosecuted? Or not? Why do you have your opinion?"

^^^^Yes, she should be prosecuted if she knew what was going on. Just knowing he likes guns or sees that he is buying lots of them, that doesn't prove she knew anything about Sunday. But if the officials can prove she knew more then just that he had weapons, then yes, she is tied into this tragedy imo.
 from site to sight
Joined: 11/30/2007
Msg: 23
Las Vegas Carnage Questions
Posted: 10/5/2017 3:35:55 AM
"IF authorities question Marilou, and it is determined that she knew, but was afraid to speak -- Should she be prosecuted? Or not?"

The guy legally bought the weapons. There are a lot of Americans who have gun collections. How many spouses of gun collectors believe their spouse is going to use the guns to commit mass murder? So unless his girlfriend says to the police that he told her about his plans to commit murder, there's no reason to charge her. Even if she knew something was up, I'm sure she's not going to say anything because there's no way of proving she knew what he was about to do. The only other person who would know what she knows about the plan is dead. Dead people make lousy witnesses.




we monitor pple who prescribe and get pain killers,...... but we can't do it with guns!


Try convincing politicians who get payoffs from the NRA (or fear their power) that there should more regulations on guns.
 gtomustang
Joined: 6/16/2007
Msg: 24
the level of our insanity
Posted: 10/5/2017 5:51:52 AM
"Has the US reached the point where killing children and adults in large numbers is acceptable in order to protect gun ownership?"

>>>the answer is....it has for certain people. Can we label them "deplorable" for brevity? Tho one country band has confessed, now that they nearly got shot at, now they realize the problem. Australia has a ban, has it lowered gun homicides?

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/gun-control-in-australia-updated/ar-AAsUlDP?ocid=spartandhp

For some, gun bans are really about individual freedom. But do we need to ban all weapons? No, we can ask for registration, just like all cars you own have to be registered, and the registration has to be updated. Do we complain that there is a tax to pay for it? Each car has to be insured, in case you injure someone with it...and if someone else is driving, the insurance company is still at fault and will raise rates accordingly.

A comedian once proposed, own all the guns you want, but restrict ammunition like handing out pills should be. Except of course some shooters hand-load their rounds. Still, why can we buy ammo online?

"Upon delivery of any package from FedEx / UPS, AmmunitionStore assumes no responsibility for the package. If the package shows "delivered" according to the tracking info, the package is YOUR RESPONSIBILITY. Packages get stolen, plain and simple. It doesn't matter what neighborhood you live in, it happens. Please click here to add an adult signature to ensure your order ends up in your hands.

To enable us to sell ammo at the lowest price possible, we may use the manufacturers original packaging to ship your order in. If you would prefer a non-descript box, please leave a note in the comments section when you checkout and we will be glad to repack your order in a plain box.

http://ammunitionstore.com/can-i-buy-ammo-online/

"“As you know, the ban on “armor piercing” ammunition was created by the Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act (LEOPA) of 1986,” Goodlatte wrote. “The Act was conceived to protect police officers from the hazards presented by so-called “armor piercing” projectiles–originally designed for law enforcement and military use—that can be fired from handguns and penetrate the sort of soft body armor typically worn by police officers.”
Well, now, there is a problem. Why didn’t you just get police officers better armor rather than usurp the Constitution and the rights of the rest of the people? When you weren’t given authority to write such a law in the first place and that gets usurped, isn’t it logical that others will just say, “Well, you did it, why not us?” "

http://gunsinthenews.com/atf-no-constitutional-authority-ban-ammunition/

What do we legally need armor-piercing rounds for? But Republicans wanted to vote this week to let "Copkiller" rounds be for sale again. Why do police depts. not get better vests? B/c they weigh more, cost more, are more restrictive...better question, why do we not just sell the rounds? Now, there's some sanity!

Gun owners say there's enough laws. That's true, so why restrict government ability to enforce the laws that exist?

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/02/atf-gun-laws-nra/

interesting article on what if BATF was connected to Secret Service and how it terrified the NRA something might actually get done yet they couldn't demonize it:

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/atf-obama-gun-reform-control-alcohol-tobacco-firearms/

maybe instead of an "Acting director", the Republican Congress can get a real, full time director in and avoid mistakes like Operation Fast And Furious. How about we finally let the CDC study gun violence, so that way we can find out if there's an actual problem we should do something about? What is the NRA terrified a study may actually find (and the world already suspects)?

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/no-funds-studies-gun-violence-article-1.1809263
http://www.businessinsider.com/cdc-nra-kills-gun-violence-research-2013-1

three Federal laws that could reduce deaths by 90%:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/10/health/gun-laws-background-checks-reduce-deaths/index.html
 MizPurl
Joined: 6/11/2016
Msg: 25
Las Vegas Carnage Questions
Posted: 10/5/2017 8:16:49 AM
https://www.facebook.com/AustralianDemocraticSocialists/videos/1416864731762991/

This was an interesting and an amusing watch....
Gun control is needed in all countries...imo.
If it stops "one" mass shooting from happening.....that's a good thing.
I don't understand why the NRA and anyone would argue this point???
Seriously?
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > Las Vegas Carnage Questions