Las Vegas shooting

[1892-LFCWasBorn]

[Rico1304]

I always liked Huey Morgan, seems he's part of the 'nows not the time to talk about gun control' mob.

[Boss]

 

A rare voice of reason. Sadly America's congress is bought and paid for by the gun lobby and a large percentage of it's population is brainwashed by NRA disinformation campaigns.

[Rico1304]

A rare voice of reason. Sadly America's congress is bought and paid for by the gun lobby and a large percentage of it's population is brainwashed by NRA disinformation campaigns.

It's probably been mentioned above but Trump got £30m from the NRA

[Sanjeev Nanda]

Its tragic to see so many people die. Horrible.

[Rico1304]

https://twitter.com/petercbowden/status/914860743446683649

[Jockey]

As a few people have pointed out - ironic that you get shot because it is a persons' 'right' to have a gun, yet, have to pay for treatment because health is a 'privilege'. 

 

We can recognise a terrorist planning by how many chemicals etc they buy - but, this jabroni stockpiles weapons and not one alarm went off. Considering almost all mass shootings have been by white men - you'd think the 'profiling' that we hear so much about would have helped. I realise people died, and any loss of life is heartbreaking and sad for those involved. 

 

But I do struggle to muster much emotion for these - when the Americans themselves seem so willing to live with them. 

[skend04]

Before the investigation starts?

 

The definition of domestic terrorism is over the page, do you think he looks like he fits the bill at the moment? Are the school shooters terrorism?

US media waited just long enough to establish his ethnicity so I suppose it was during the investigation.

 

I've not seen the definition, but buying 40+ weapons of death, shooting from 30 floors up into a crowd below, he might not be affiliated with a traditional terrorist organisation but he sure has now terrorised people.

[Pureblood]

When was he radicalised?  What he did was pretty rad. 

[Rick Sanchez C-137]

US media waited just long enough to establish his ethnicity so I suppose it was during the investigation.

 

I've not seen the definition, but buying 40+ weapons of death, shooting from 30 floors up into a crowd below, he might not be affiliated with a traditional terrorist organisation but he sure has now terrorised people.

 

Surely it depends on his motives? If he was just cuckoo-bananas and wanted to kill people, or had voices in his head etc, it wouldn't be terrorism.

[Jockey]

Surely it depends on his motives? If he was just cuckoo-bananas and wanted to kill people, or had voices in his head etc, it wouldn't be terrorism.

 

I think that. A lot of people are trying to be 'right-on' over this. The lad who shot the Black Church goers was a 'terrorist' and he wasn't described as so, but some people are just loons. 

[Harry Squatter]

I can understand that someone might need a small gun to shoot burglars but why are these ridiculously high powered rifles and machine guns available over the counter?.

 

Even if you go hunting you still don't need an M16 to kill a deer.

 

Can remember going into a gun shop in some small hick town when I was doing Camp America. The fella behind the counter was desperate to flog me and a few other lads all kinds of guns until he found out we weren't US Citizens. The accents would have been a giveaway.

[Pureblood]

Surely it depends on his motives? If he was just cuckoo-bananas and wanted to kill people, or had voices in his head etc, it wouldn't be terrorism.

 

An alternative view.

 

https://www.newstatesman.com/world/north-america/2017/10/motive-doesnt-matter-las-vegas-was-terror-attack-and-us-politicians-are

[Rick Sanchez C-137]

An alternative view.

 

https://www.newstatesman.com/world/north-america/2017/10/motive-doesnt-matter-las-vegas-was-terror-attack-and-us-politicians-are

 

Yea I think it's interesting, but i don't necessarily agree. If a white man attacks mainly gay people, or black people, or whatever, then there is no doubt. If any person, of any colour, creed or religion, conducts violent and illegal acts to further any cause, then yes. I guess I just don't agree with the broader definition where 'the act is the context'. But I don't think there is a universally accepted definition anyway so I'm not 'right' and they're not 'wrong'. The words just mean a slightly different thing to both sides.

 

I suppose I can see the benefit of opening the definition up if it makes it harder for white america to avoid the labels they place on the rest of the world.

 

I do concede that it's also hard to see how someone could be so organised and prepared if they had no ideology. It wouldn't be impossible but it's hard to picture a random looney just losing grip on reality and going to such lengths in terms of acquiring weaponry, explosives, ammo. Surely that would take months of planning, if not years?

[Jockey]

The description should also be the same for someone who is non-white but kills as well, in all fairness there are probably a fair few mass shootings by Black or Hispanics that are not described as 'terrorism'. 

 

270 odd mass shootings this year! 

[Rotpeter]

Yea I think it's interesting, but i don't necessarily agree. If a white man attacks mainly gay people, or black people, or whatever, then there is no doubt. If any person, of any colour, creed or religion, conducts violent and illegal acts to further any cause, then yes. I guess I just don't agree with the broader definition where 'the act is the context'. But I don't think there is a universally accepted definition anyway so I'm not 'right' and they're not 'wrong'. The words just mean a slightly different thing to both sides.

 

I suppose I can see the benefit of opening the definition up if it makes it harder for white america to avoid the labels they place on the rest of the world.

 

I do concede that it's also hard to see how someone could be so organised and prepared if they had no ideology. It wouldn't be impossible but it's hard to picture a random looney just losing grip on reality and going to such lengths in terms of acquiring weaponry, explosives, ammo. Surely that would take months of planning, if not years?

 

You need to expose yourself to more looneys.  It's more than possible IMO.

[Pureblood]

Yea I think it's interesting, but i don't necessarily agree. If a white man attacks mainly gay people, or black people, or whatever, then there is no doubt. If any person, of any colour, creed or religion, conducts violent and illegal acts to further any cause, then yes. I guess I just don't agree with the broader definition where 'the act is the context'. But I don't think there is a universally accepted definition anyway so I'm not 'right' and they're not 'wrong'. The words just mean a slightly different thing to both sides.

 

I suppose I can see the benefit of opening the definition up if it makes it harder for white america to avoid the labels they place on the rest of the world.

 

I do concede that it's also hard to see how someone could be so organised and prepared if they had no ideology. It wouldn't be impossible but it's hard to picture a random looney just losing grip on reality and going to such lengths in terms of acquiring weaponry, explosives, ammo. Surely that would take months of planning, if not years?

 

I think it's fascinating the differing treatment these attacks get.

 

From what I can tell nobody on Facebook is "standing with Nevada" and I can't see anyone with a superimposed flag over their photo.  In a way it devalues the status of the victims.  They're just people who have been gunned down, deemed not worth standing with because of a slow uptake on the "T" word.  The response doesn't have the same degree of empathy that it would carry if a Muslim in a truck had run down a crowd in a European city.

[Rick Sanchez C-137]

I think it's fascinating the differing treatment these attacks get.

 

From what I can tell nobody on Facebook is "standing with Nevada" and I can't see anyone with a superimposed flag over their photo.  In a way it devalues the status of the victims.  They're just people who have been gunned down, deemed not worth standing with because of a slow uptake on the "T" word.  The response doesn't have the same degree of empathy that it would carry if a Muslim in a truck had run down a crowd in a European city.

 

I'd guess its because of the lack of 'connection' between the lone wolf attacks. The terrorist attacks are loosesly part of the same cause so the facebook flag shite is about standing up across the world against this cause.

 

I don't think it's right, mind you, but that's my take on why it happens.

[Jockey]

I think it's fascinating the differing treatment these attacks get.

 

From what I can tell nobody on Facebook is "standing with Nevada" and I can't see anyone with a superimposed flag over their photo.  In a way it devalues the status of the victims.  They're just people who have been gunned down, deemed not worth standing with because of a slow uptake on the "T" word.  The response doesn't have the same degree of empathy that it would carry if a Muslim in a truck had run down a crowd in a European city.

 

Would it not also be the act itself. By that I mean - Terrorism by definition is designed to strike 'terror' into the population - until a supposed goal has been achieved, whereas in this case - there is a fair amount of acceptance by Americans, which I think a lot of non-Americans have inferred. 

Whatever you think of the act - these are not 'rare' anymore. So misquote Homer Simpson - this is the biggest mass killing - so far! 

 

There is no goal to be achieved to stop these attacks. I don't think this is terrorism, but I think the cynicism that had there been a political motive he may still not have been described as such is fair. Because I don't think he would have been. 

[Pureblood]

I'd guess its because of the lack of 'connection' between the lone wolf attacks. The terrorist attacks are loosesly part of the same cause so the facebook flag shite is about standing up across the world against this cause.

 

I don't think it's right, mind you, but that's my take on why it happens.

 

It's perverse, though, isn't it?  History shows that as far as US soil is concerned these so-called "lone wolf" attacks are far more common. 

[Pureblood]

Would it not also be the act itself. By that I mean - Terrorism by definition is designed to strike 'terror' into the population - until a supposed goal has been achieved, whereas in this case - there is a fair amount of acceptance by Americans, which I think a lot of non-Americans have inferred. 

Whatever you think of the act - these are not 'rare' anymore. So misquote Homer Simpson - this is the biggest mass killing - so far! 

 

There is no goal to be achieved to stop these attacks. I don't think this is terrorism, but I think the cynicism that had there been a political motive he may still not have been described as such is fair. Because I don't think he would have been. 

 

As the article above says, the Nevada attack caused mass terror in a very literal sense.  Yet nobody will touch the word (if they want to be taken seriously).

[Rick Sanchez C-137]

It's perverse, though, isn't it?  History shows that as far as US soil is concerned these so-called "lone wolf" attacks are far more common. 

 

I agree. And if anything there are just as political, in that they are being allowed to happen. Maybe their motives aren't, but the laws are.

[Jockey]

As the article above says, the Nevada attack caused mass terror in a very literal sense.  Yet nobody will touch the word (if they want to be taken seriously).

 

I'm not sure - I think the object of Terrorism is to cause terror without an act, in your day to day life. I don't think that is the same - it is a literal use of the phrase. Terrorism isn't really. 

 

The only connection between lone-wolf attacks is access to guns. So, they are clearly not seen as part of anything bigger than that. As I say, 270 plus 'mass shootings' this year. I think the problem is when a white guy shoots a Church full of black people and they focus upon his 'mental' state and he isn't described as a terrorist when he clearly is. 

[Rick Sanchez C-137]

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2017/oct/02/america-mass-shootings-gun-violence

 

 

 

1,516 mass shootings in 1,735 days: America's gun crisis – in one chart
The attack at a country music festival in Las Vegas that left at least 58 people dead is the deadliest mass shooting in modern US history – but there were six other mass shootings in America this past week alone.
No other developed nation comes close to the rate of gun violence in America. Americans own an estimated 265m guns, more than one gun for every adult.
Data compiled by the Gun Violence Archive reveals a shocking human toll: there is a mass shooting – defined as four or more people shot in one incident, not including the shooter – every nine out of 10 days on average.

 

Insane

[Jockey]

Six other mass shootings this week! 

 

I think it is safe to assume that a majority of those at the actual concert itself, would be advocates for gun ownership! I wonder how many of them have altered their view or, simply gone out and bought another gun for 'protection'.