Active Shooter in Las Vegas Attacks Country Music Festival with Automatic Weapon

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**d-usa**

People morn in many ways. Looking for answers and solutions is one way.

Telling people to shut up because they are not mourning the way you want them to is pretty offensive.

**Shadow Captain Edithae**

Dreadwinter wrote:
You must only do one thing today. Mourn, you can have no other feelings. Do not even think about discussing the issues which may have caused this or any solutions to save future lives from such a tragedy. One train of thought today.

If this is going to be a "thoughts and prayers" thread with no meaningful discussion about solutions or ways to prevent shootings like this, then I agree. Shut it down, it serves no purpose.

One can only mourn so many times before one becomes desensitized or simply emotionally exhausted. This is a monthly, if not a weekly ritual and quite frankly all I can muster now is anger.

**Dreadwinter**

I think the sarcasm was missed.

**whembly**

d-usa wrote:
People morn in many ways. Looking for answers and solutions is one way.

Telling people to shut up because they are not mourning the way you want them to is pretty offensive.

^This.

The whole denigration towards "Thoughts & Prayers" is getting really tiresome.

I say this as someone who isn't all that religious.

**Nostromodamus**

AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Nostromodamus wrote:
Oh look, a lefty making sweeping generalizations saying the victims got what was coming to them, and trying to sound morally superior while doing so. Colour me unsurprised.

...he said, while making sweeping generalizations of the left.

Not really. I was talking about one idiotic woman.

**Iron_Captain**

Breotan wrote:
So, apparently you don't actually need a gun to cause a self inflicted wound.

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2017/10/02/top-cbs-lawyer-no-sympathy-for-vegas-vics-probably-republicans.html

CBS fires vice president who said Vegas victims didn't deserve sympathy because country music fans 'often are Republican'

Spoiler:

CBS has parted ways with one of the company’s top lawyers after she said she is “not even sympathetic” to victims of the Las Vegas shooting because “country music fans often are Republican,” when discussing the tragic mass shooting that occurred in Las Vegas late Sunday night.

“This individual, who was with us for approximately one year, violated the standards of our company and is no longer an employee of CBS. Her views as expressed on social media are deeply unacceptable to all of us at CBS. Our hearts go out to the victims in Las Vegas and their families,” a CBS spokeswoman told Fox News.

Hayley Geftman-Gold, the network's now-former vice president and senior counsel, took to Facebook after a gunman opened fire at the Route 91 Harvest Music Festival in Las Vegas, killing at least 58 people and sending more than 500 others to hospitals.

“If they wouldn’t do anything when children were murdered I have no hope that Repugs [sic] will ever do the right thing,” Geftman-Gold wrote in a now-deleted message that was first reported and captured by The Daily Caller.

Geftman-Gold continued: “I’m actually not even sympathetic bc [sic] country music fans often are Republican gun toters [sic].”

https://twitter.com/TheBrandonMorse/status/914885815901319168/photo/1

Geftman-Gold is presumably referring to Sandy Hook, which occurred in Newtown, Conn. back in 2012. A 20-year-old gunman, Adam Lanza, killed 20 children and six adults during the tragic event that sparked intense political debates regarding gun control.

Geftman-Gold did not work directly with the network’s news division. According to her LinkedIn bio, Geftman-Gold worked at CBS since September 2016 and graduated from the prestigious Columbia University law school in 2000.

Anyone know if ISIS has claimed credit for this yet?

Yes. Apparently the president of CBS has just converted to Islam and has changed his name to 'Abu Jahl al-Amriki'. CBS will be rebranded to the "Al-Kaddabin Media Corporation" and will use its resources to advocate sharia for the US.
(brownie points for the first person to get the Arabic names

)

**Ouze**

sirlynchmob wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:
she ain't wrong, and it's no worse than then trump & friends trying to paint the guy as a leftist or an antifa member

Which still means she's a gakhole.

not really, she's just an American, and as we've seen from others in this thread, compassion for victims is rarely a concern.

like this one.

We might be sad that this happen, but we have long ago decided that it's an acceptable consequence of our rights and freedoms. And truthfully, statistically speaking, events like this are a meaningless risk in the grand scheme of things.

Sure 58 people died and hundred were wounded, totally meaningless, it could have been worse.

It's possible to understand that something is regrettable, and feel compassion for victims while simultaneously recognizing that the situation that led to their misfortune is a statistical outlier.

**whembly**

Interesting summation so far about the weirdness of this:

Based on the Early Reports, the Las Vegas Shooting Is Very, Very Strange

Before I begin, let me clearly state two things. First, as I note in the title of this post, my observations are based on early reports, and early reports are often wrong. Second, do not read this post as implying any sort of conspiracy theory of any kind. I’m merely noting the facts as we currently understand them — and how they differ from recent mass shootings.

As virtually everyone has noted from the abundant video footage of the incident, it certainly sounds as if the shooter used either fully-automatic weapons or semi-automatic weapons modified (through, for example, a bump fire stock) to closely simulate automatic fire. Moreover, the police are reporting that he had “more than 10 rifles.” He apparently rented his corner room for days and may have even set up cameras to detect when police were approaching. That’s all strange enough, but it’s even more unusual when you consider that his own family apparently didn’t know that he maintained a stockpile of guns. Here’s this, from the gunman’s brother, suggesting that the gunman wasn’t an avid gun guy at all:

CBS News ✔@CBSNews “Not an avid gun guy at all...where the hell did he get automatic weapons? He has no military background,” gunman’s brother says 9:22 AM - Oct 2, 2017 423 423 Replies 3,475 3,475 Retweets 3,966 3,966 likes

Put all this together, and the shooting is flat-out bizarre. It’s significantly different from virtually any other mass shooting in U.S. history. If the weapons were fully automatic, then he likely would have spent immense sums of money to obtain them legally, jumping through extensive legal hoops. This twitter thread, from Stephen Gutowski, is very helpful:

Stephen Gutowski ✔@StephenGutowski Since this is coming up a lot, I want to give some insight into the regulation of fully-automatic firearms in the United States. 9:59 AM - Oct 2, 2017 108 108 Replies 1,701 1,701 Retweets 2,449 2,449 likes Twitter Ads info and privacy

Stephen Gutowski ✔@StephenGutowski Replying to @StephenGutowski First, the sale of new fully-automatic firearms was effectively banned in 1986 under the Hughes Amendment. https://www.congress.gov/amendment/99th-congress/house-amendment/777 … 10:05 AM - Oct 2, 2017

tephen Gutowski ✔@StephenGutowski Replying to @StephenGutowski Fully-automatic firearms that were registered under the National Firearms Act before 1986 were grandfathered in & are still legal. 10:09 AM - Oct 2, 2017 7 7 Replies 210 210 Retweets 420 420 likes

Stephen Gutowski ✔@StephenGutowski Replying to @StephenGutowski However, in order to obtain a legal fully-automatic firearm you must apply to the ATF, pay a $200 tax, & register with the ATF. 10:12 AM - Oct 2, 2017

Stephen Gutowski ✔@StephenGutowski Replying to @StephenGutowski Here is the form anybody who wants to own a pre-86 fully-automatic firearm has to submit to the ATF: https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/form/form-4-application-tax-paid-transfer-and-registration-firearm-atf-form-53204/download … 10:14 AM - Oct 2, 2017

Stephen Gutowski ✔@StephenGutowski Replying to @StephenGutowski The ATF has a registry of every legally-owned full-auto firearm & informs local law enforcement of all who own them in their jurisdiction. 10:17 AM - Oct 2, 2017 9 9 Replies 213 213 Retweets 402 402 likes

Given these steps, it’s no wonder that crimes with fully-automatic weapons are extraordinarily rare. As my colleague Charlie Cooke tweeted earlier this morning, legally-owned fully-automatic weapons have been used in three crimes since 1934. So, a person who’s “not a gun guy” has either expended untold thousands of dollars to legally purchase fully-automatic weapons, somehow found them on the black market, or purchased and substantially modified multiple semi-automatic weapons — and did so with enough competence to create a sustained rate of fire.

This same person also spent substantial sums purchasing just the right hotel room to maximize casualties. I cannot think of a single other mass shooter who went to this level of expense and planning in the entire history of the United States.

And there was no real warning? His family was unaware? His brother also reported that the shooter had no meaningful political or religious affiliations. “He just hung out.” At the same time, however, there are reports that a woman told a group of concert-goers, “You’re all going to die tonight.”

I’m not ready to draw any conclusions from these reports, but it’s worth highlighting how extraordinary this attack seems to be. Given the firepower and the packed mass of people, it’s easy to see how the casualty count was so high, even firing from an extreme range (by the standards of mass shootings.) This was the University of Texas tower attack on steroids, conducted out of nowhere, with meticulous planning and at great expense, from a person who doesn’t seem to fit any normal profile of a mass shooter. There is much we have yet to learn, but for now, this is one of the most chilling and mysterious events I’ve ever seen.

UPDATE: The story just keeps getting more bizarre. First, it looks like the shooter’s father was a former bank robber who was arrested by the FBI after a wild confrontation in, you guessed it, Las Vegas. Here’s Reason with the details:

Patrick Paddock was arrested on July 28, 1960, in Las Vegas, where he had fled after the bank robbery in Phoenix. “The FBI said Paddock tried to resist arrest and attempted to run down an agent with his car,” reports a July 28, 1960, article in the Citizen. “A shot was fired and Paddock surrendered.” The FBI agents found nearly $3,000 and a loaded .38 caliber revolver in his car.

Second, ISIS had claimed responsibility for the attack — a claim I initially discounted — but it’s worth mentioning that it’s “tripling down” on the claim, even providing the shooter with a nom de guerre, Abu Abd El Bar. Here’s a tweet from the indispensable Rukmini Callimachi. Follow her thread for updates:

Rukmini Callimachi ✔ @rcallimachi Replying to @rcallimachi @AmarAmarasingam 11. There are 100s of ISIS-linked Telegram channels. Anyone imbibing their ideology typically has dozens of them on their phone. An ex: pic.twitter.com/PADO5BbfY9

Follow Rukmini Callimachi ✔@rcallimachi 12. ISIS is tripling down on its claim. The group has issued a communique where they identify shooter with nom de guerre Abu Abd El Bar pic.twitter.com/o4aYQjBWzI 1:34 PM - Oct 2, 2017

Finally, it looks like the shooter did indeed use “at least one fully automatic rifle,” which of course raises the question of how he obtained such a weapon. Purchase? Modification? Could it be a weapon his father owned? We’re only scratching the surface of a sad and horrible story.

**AlmightyWalrus**

Nostromodamus wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Nostromodamus wrote:
Oh look, a lefty making sweeping generalizations saying the victims got what was coming to them, and trying to sound morally superior while doing so. Colour me unsurprised.

...he said, while making sweeping generalizations of the left.

Not really. I was talking about one idiotic woman.

Why did you feel it was so important to point out that she was a lefty and that you were unsurprised? Because you were making a go at "lefties".

**sirlynchmob**

Ouze wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:
she ain't wrong, and it's no worse than then trump & friends trying to paint the guy as a leftist or an antifa member

Which still means she's a gakhole.

not really, she's just an American, and as we've seen from others in this thread, compassion for victims is rarely a concern.

like this one.

We might be sad that this happen, but we have long ago decided that it's an acceptable consequence of our rights and freedoms. And truthfully, statistically speaking, events like this are a meaningless risk in the grand scheme of things.

Sure 58 people died and hundred were wounded, totally meaningless, it could have been worse.

It's possible to understand that something is regrettable, and feel compassion for victims while simultaneously recognizing that the situation that led to their misfortune is a statistical outlier.

No, it's really not. How can you feel compassion or regret for anything you deem meaningless and acceptable?

It's no longer a statistical outlier, it's a daily occurrence. a mass shooting a day and a school shooting a month. Accepting this as normal is being complicit in the next one.

**AlmightyWalrus**

sirlynchmob wrote:
Ouze wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:
she ain't wrong, and it's no worse than then trump & friends trying to paint the guy as a leftist or an antifa member

Which still means she's a gakhole.

not really, she's just an American, and as we've seen from others in this thread, compassion for victims is rarely a concern.

like this one.

We might be sad that this happen, but we have long ago decided that it's an acceptable consequence of our rights and freedoms. And truthfully, statistically speaking, events like this are a meaningless risk in the grand scheme of things.

Sure 58 people died and hundred were wounded, totally meaningless, it could have been worse.

It's possible to understand that something is regrettable, and feel compassion for victims while simultaneously recognizing that the situation that led to their misfortune is a statistical outlier.

No, it's really not. How can you feel compassion or regret for anything you deem meaningless and acceptable?

When we had to put down our oldest dog I felt as though my heart would break. I very much wish we wouldn't have had to do that, but it was preferable to the alternative (letting him suffer). It is very much possible to think something is regrettable and to have sympathy for people that get caught up in awful events and still think that those events are preferrable to the other options available.

**Prestor Jon**

Marmatag wrote:
Thoughts and prayers are just lip service. You can feel bad but at the end of the day that does nothing for anyone except yourself. You tell yourself that feeling sad is sufficient penance for doing nothing to stop this kind of tragedy and move on. We as a country have the power to stop this, but simply elect to let it happen, again and again.

If you insist on allowing this to happen, at least do something physical for the families. Donate money to the families that have children who lost a parent.

What power do we, as a nation, possess that would stop people from committing murder? What exactly do you think we could do that would stop people from shooting others? It's virtually impossible and certainly utterly impractical to remove the right to legally own firearms in the US and remove all the privately owned guns and it's completely impossible for a nation to exercise a level of control over its citizens that would be possible to physically prevent them from committing aberrant malicious acts like murder.

**AlmightyWalrus**

Prestor Jon wrote:
Marmatag wrote:
Thoughts and prayers are just lip service. You can feel bad but at the end of the day that does nothing for anyone except yourself. You tell yourself that feeling sad is sufficient penance for doing nothing to stop this kind of tragedy and move on. We as a country have the power to stop this, but simply elect to let it happen, again and again.

If you insist on allowing this to happen, at least do something physical for the families. Donate money to the families that have children who lost a parent.

What power do we, as a nation, possess that would stop people from committing murder? What exactly do you think we could do that would stop people from shooting others? It's virtually impossible and certainly utterly impractical to remove the right to legally own firearms in the US and remove all the privately owned guns and it's completely impossible for a nation to exercise a level of control over its citizens that would be possible to physically prevent them from committing aberrant malicious acts like murder.

Let's just give up trying to make the world better, because it'll never be perfect.

You'll have to try harder than that.

**Shadow Captain Edithae**

Prestor Jon wrote:
Marmatag wrote:
Thoughts and prayers are just lip service. You can feel bad but at the end of the day that does nothing for anyone except yourself. You tell yourself that feeling sad is sufficient penance for doing nothing to stop this kind of tragedy and move on. We as a country have the power to stop this, but simply elect to let it happen, again and again.

If you insist on allowing this to happen, at least do something physical for the families. Donate money to the families that have children who lost a parent.

What power do we, as a nation, possess that would stop people from committing murder? What exactly do you think we could do that would stop people from shooting others? It's virtually impossible and certainly utterly impractical to remove the right to legally own firearms in the US and remove all the privately owned guns and it's completely impossible for a nation to exercise a level of control over its citizens that would be possible to physically prevent them from committing aberrant malicious acts like murder.

Better preventative mental healthcare?

**Prestor Jon**

sirlynchmob wrote:
Ouze wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:
she ain't wrong, and it's no worse than then trump & friends trying to paint the guy as a leftist or an antifa member

Which still means she's a gakhole.

not really, she's just an American, and as we've seen from others in this thread, compassion for victims is rarely a concern.

like this one.

We might be sad that this happen, but we have long ago decided that it's an acceptable consequence of our rights and freedoms. And truthfully, statistically speaking, events like this are a meaningless risk in the grand scheme of things.

Sure 58 people died and hundred were wounded, totally meaningless, it could have been worse.

It's possible to understand that something is regrettable, and feel compassion for victims while simultaneously recognizing that the situation that led to their misfortune is a statistical outlier.

No, it's really not. How can you feel compassion or regret for anything you deem meaningless and acceptable?

It's no longer a statistical outlier, it's a daily occurrence. a mass shooting a day and a school shooting a month. Accepting this as normal is being complicit in the next one.

In a nation of over 320 million people one person a day deciding to commit murder with a firearm is very much a statistical outlier for the rest of us. The vast majority of people in the US will never be affected by gun violence and the majority of people who will be killed with a firearm will be people committing suicide with them. That's the reality.

**d-usa**

if everything is a tragedy of statistical significance, then nothing is.

You have to allocate resources based on incidence rates, not based on emotions. That’s why it’s acceptable to say that things are tragic, and statistically insignificant.

**Prestor Jon**

Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Prestor Jon wrote:
Marmatag wrote:
Thoughts and prayers are just lip service. You can feel bad but at the end of the day that does nothing for anyone except yourself. You tell yourself that feeling sad is sufficient penance for doing nothing to stop this kind of tragedy and move on. We as a country have the power to stop this, but simply elect to let it happen, again and again.

If you insist on allowing this to happen, at least do something physical for the families. Donate money to the families that have children who lost a parent.

What power do we, as a nation, possess that would stop people from committing murder? What exactly do you think we could do that would stop people from shooting others? It's virtually impossible and certainly utterly impractical to remove the right to legally own firearms in the US and remove all the privately owned guns and it's completely impossible for a nation to exercise a level of control over its citizens that would be possible to physically prevent them from committing aberrant malicious acts like murder.

Better preventative mental healthcare?

What does that look like and how would that have stopped recent mass shootings? The Sandy Hook shooter had known mental issues but his mother chose to handle that problem in a manner she that was a good idea. It resulted in her death and the deaths of over a dozen others. How does preventative mental health care force people into treatment against their will? In this most recent shooting in Las Vegas there's no sign of mental illness in the shooter, obviously mass murder is aberrant behavior but that doesn't mean he could have or would have been diagnosed with a mental health problem.

Better preventative mental healthcare certainly isn't a bad thing and would probably help a lot of people and a lot of societal issues but it wouldn't necessarily have stopped any mass shootings and there are societal issues and problems that are probably causes of mental illness and those kinds of problems can't be cured just by treating the symptoms.

**sirlynchmob**

d-usa wrote:
if everything is a tragedy of statistical significance, then nothing is.

You have to allocate resources based on incidence rates, not based on emotions. That’s why it’s acceptable to say that things are tragic, and statistically insignificant.

what's statistically non existent is refugee's committing any act of terrorism, yet look at all the effort the current administration has done to "fix" a non incident.

even more insignificant is in person voter fraud, yet a lot of effort has been made to disenfranchise voters, err I mean fix the problem.

The wall will have zero effect on illegal immigration, yet that seems to be a priority as well.

This give up and surrender and not try to fix a problem because it's hard is nonsense to say the least. Incident rates of daily are magnitudes more than never.

**Luciferian**

sirlynchmob wrote:
Ouze wrote:

It's possible to understand that something is regrettable, and feel compassion for victims while simultaneously recognizing that the situation that led to their misfortune is a statistical outlier.

No, it's really not. How can you feel compassion or regret for anything you deem meaningless and acceptable?

It's no longer a statistical outlier, it's a daily occurrence. a mass shooting a day and a school shooting a month. Accepting this as normal is being complicit in the next one.

That is plainly false. Numbers don't lie - events like this count for an infinitesimally small amount of deaths or murders, even when it comes to gun deaths. I don't care what your subjective experiences or feelings are; they don't somehow circumvent the value of factual evidence. I'll say it again:

Rifles of any type are responsible for fewer murders each year than fists or feet.

Hell, one more time, just in case:

Rifles of any type are responsible for fewer murders each year than fists or feet.

That being absolute fact, there is no way that people who come out of the woodwork after this kind of incident and try to project its outcome on gun ownership as a whole are not either grossly misinformed as to the actual realities of guns and violent crime, or intentionally dissembling and waving the bloody shirts of the victims in order to impose a political agenda. If you want to have a sober discussion about gun violence then we can do so while addressing facts instead of intuitions or feelings. However, since a reflection on the facts would not lead to the conclusion that ownership of any type of rifle contributes significantly to violent crime or murder, I have to assume that anyone who opportunistically makes such a claim at the time of a tragedy is only feigning outrage in order to score political points.

Third time's the charm:

Rifles of any type are responsible for fewer murders each year than fists or feet.

**Shadow Captain Edithae**

sirlynchmob wrote:
d-usa wrote:
if everything is a tragedy of statistical significance, then nothing is.

You have to allocate resources based on incidence rates, not based on emotions. That’s why it’s acceptable to say that things are tragic, and statistically insignificant.

what's statistically non existent is refugee's committing any act of terrorism, yet look at all the effort the current administration has done to "fix" a non incident.

The recent Marseille knife attacker says Hi.

**d-usa**

sirlynchmob wrote:
d-usa wrote:
if everything is a tragedy of statistical significance, then nothing is.

You have to allocate resources based on incidence rates, not based on emotions. That’s why it’s acceptable to say that things are tragic, and statistically insignificant.

what's statistically non existent is refugee's committing any act of terrorism, yet look at all the effort the current administration has done to "fix" a non incident.

even more insignificant is in person voter fraud, yet a lot of effort has been made to disenfranchise voters, err I mean fix the problem.

The wall will have zero effect on illegal immigration, yet that seems to be a priority as well.

This give up and surrender and not try to fix a problem because it's hard is nonsense to say the least. Incident rates of daily are magnitudes more than never.

You haven’t seen me argue in favor of any of the things you listed, but it’s a good example of people using emotion instead of facts to drive issues. Kind of like what we are witnessing with you in this thread.

But as a nation we accept incidents like that not because they are hard to fix, but because they are statistically very rare. We are upset when it happens, but the nation decided that our gun deaths are an acceptable price to pay.

**whembly**

sirlynchmob wrote:
Ouze wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:
she ain't wrong, and it's no worse than then trump & friends trying to paint the guy as a leftist or an antifa member

Which still means she's a gakhole.

not really, she's just an American, and as we've seen from others in this thread, compassion for victims is rarely a concern.

like this one.

We might be sad that this happen, but we have long ago decided that it's an acceptable consequence of our rights and freedoms. And truthfully, statistically speaking, events like this are a meaningless risk in the grand scheme of things.

Sure 58 people died and hundred were wounded, totally meaningless, it could have been worse.

It's possible to understand that something is regrettable, and feel compassion for victims while simultaneously recognizing that the situation that led to their misfortune is a statistical outlier.

No, it's really not. How can you feel compassion or regret for anything you deem meaningless and acceptable?

It's no longer a statistical outlier, it's a daily occurrence. a mass shooting a day and a school shooting a month. Accepting this as normal is being complicit in the next one.

"...complicit in the next one"???

That's asinine man...

**sirlynchmob**

d-usa wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:
d-usa wrote:
if everything is a tragedy of statistical significance, then nothing is.

You have to allocate resources based on incidence rates, not based on emotions. That’s why it’s acceptable to say that things are tragic, and statistically insignificant.

what's statistically non existent is refugee's committing any act of terrorism, yet look at all the effort the current administration has done to "fix" a non incident.

even more insignificant is in person voter fraud, yet a lot of effort has been made to disenfranchise voters, err I mean fix the problem.

The wall will have zero effect on illegal immigration, yet that seems to be a priority as well.

This give up and surrender and not try to fix a problem because it's hard is nonsense to say the least. Incident rates of daily are magnitudes more than never.

You haven’t seen me argue in favor of any of the things you listed, but it’s a good example of people using emotion instead of facts to drive issues. Kind of like what we are witnessing with you in this thread.

But as a nation we accept incidents like that not because they are hard to fix, but because they are statistically very rare. We are upset when it happens, but the nation decided that our gun deaths are an acceptable price to pay.

you accept it, 58% of the nation does not. Illicit use of drugs will see 17,000 deaths this year, yet look at the considerable effort and war on drugs to try and reduce that number. Rarer things have been studied and efforts made to fix them some of them have even been solved/cured. Until it's about guns, the people would rather clutch their guns and sacrifice 30,000 people a year and pretend nothing can be done.

**whembly**

Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:
d-usa wrote:
if everything is a tragedy of statistical significance, then nothing is.

You have to allocate resources based on incidence rates, not based on emotions. That’s why it’s acceptable to say that things are tragic, and statistically insignificant.

what's statistically non existent is refugee's committing any act of terrorism, yet look at all the effort the current administration has done to "fix" a non incident.

The recent Marseille knife attacker says Hi.

I had to google-fu that...

I was in that area/on that train from Paris to Marselille 10 years ago. O.o

Automatically Appended Next Post:

sirlynchmob wrote:
d-usa wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:
d-usa wrote:
if everything is a tragedy of statistical significance, then nothing is.

You have to allocate resources based on incidence rates, not based on emotions. That’s why it’s acceptable to say that things are tragic, and statistically insignificant.

what's statistically non existent is refugee's committing any act of terrorism, yet look at all the effort the current administration has done to "fix" a non incident.

even more insignificant is in person voter fraud, yet a lot of effort has been made to disenfranchise voters, err I mean fix the problem.

The wall will have zero effect on illegal immigration, yet that seems to be a priority as well.

This give up and surrender and not try to fix a problem because it's hard is nonsense to say the least. Incident rates of daily are magnitudes more than never.

You haven’t seen me argue in favor of any of the things you listed, but it’s a good example of people using emotion instead of facts to drive issues. Kind of like what we are witnessing with you in this thread.

But as a nation we accept incidents like that not because they are hard to fix, but because they are statistically very rare. We are upset when it happens, but the nation decided that our gun deaths are an acceptable price to pay.

you accept it, 58% of the nation does not. Illicit use of drugs will see 17,000 deaths this year, yet look at the considerable effort and war on drugs to try and reduce that number. Rarer things have been studied and efforts made to fix them some of them have even been solved/cured. Until it's about guns, the people would rather clutch their guns and sacrifice 30,000 people a year and pretend nothing can be done.

What would you recommend sirlynchmob???

What would "fix this"?

**d-usa**

The fact that we don’t elect people to fix this shows that we are okay with it. Our actions speak louder than words or survey answers.

**sirlynchmob**

Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:
d-usa wrote:
if everything is a tragedy of statistical significance, then nothing is.

You have to allocate resources based on incidence rates, not based on emotions. That’s why it’s acceptable to say that things are tragic, and statistically insignificant.

what's statistically non existent is refugee's committing any act of terrorism, yet look at all the effort the current administration has done to "fix" a non incident.

The recent Marseille knife attacker says Hi.

with his seven different identities in France, seems like he was a French citizen and not a refugee.

**d-usa**

We also have 60,000 overdose deaths from drugs, then add deaths from health complications due to drug use, accidents caused by drugs, people neglected because of drugs. It’s an issue that has a higher impact than guns, and it can be fixed easier with the laws we have. The nation just looked at drugs as a criminal problem rather than a mental health problem and a disease, so we have a fethed up approach on “fixing” the problem.

**Ouze**

sirlynchmob wrote:
Until it's about guns, the people would rather clutch their guns and sacrifice 30,000 people a year and pretend nothing can be done.

I think you're missing a distinction here. I personally don't pretend nothing can be done, I understand the political will doesn't exist in this country to do anything significant to alter the current status quo, and it's not going to change any time soon. If a school full of dead children didn't change us as a country, man, nothing will.

**daedalus**

I feel like I keep seeing the same argument no matter what happens when bad things happen:

"A bunch of people dying is terrible, but don't take our <noun> because that would only stop a tiny fraction of the issues for the amount of lives it would impact."

Some people fill in that blank as immigrants or refugees. Other people fill in the blank with guns. Most times it seems like the venn diagram of the two has remarkably little overlap for how much they agree on the core part of the argument.

This is a bad thread.

**Luciferian**

sirlynchmob wrote:

you accept it, 58% of the nation does not. Illicit use of drugs will see 17,000 deaths this year, yet look at the considerable effort and war on drugs to try and reduce that number. Rarer things have been studied and efforts made to fix them some of them have even been solved/cured. Until it's about guns, the people would rather clutch their guns and sacrifice 30,000 people a year and pretend nothing can be done.

Once again, your rhetoric here is transparently dishonest. Events like this, or even ALL of the murders committed with ANY type of rifle, whether it be a bolt-action .308 or a fully automatic AK variant, account for less than 1% of gun deaths. Oh, and did I mention that fists, feet, baseball bats and hammers are each individually responsible for more murders than rifles every year? Saying that we need to get rid of scary black rifles and their accessories because they contribute to some kind of epidemic of violence is an outright lie. Out of those 30,000 gun deaths each year, nearly ALL of them are committed using standard capacity, small caliber, concealable handguns. And a majority of them are committed by criminals in major urban areas that have restrictive gun laws. Again, facts. If you had an honest interest in reducing gun violence you would start there, but you don't even know about any of what you're saying. You're arguing solely from demonstrable falsehoods and emotions.