Where, oh where will the next mass shooting be?

Easy:
Logic. Reason. Maturity. Absence of irrational fear.

 

Unsupportable nonsense.

 

More unsupportable nonsense.

 

Look at you, completely unaware of the fact both of these crimes took place in gun-free zones.

 

Really?
What about existing weapons and bump-stocks?

Only the irrational blame inanimate objects, so...

Unsupportable nonsense.

 

Do you have a point here?

 

#1. You can't legally carry, open or not if you've been drinking.. or in a drinking establishment of some sort.
#2. over a hundred million unarmed people were starved to death or murdered by their governments last century.. and the tally continues in countries with strict gun control. Mass shootings by the mentally unbalanced in this country is a tragedy, but it pales to the murder of an unarmed populace.
#3. The next mass shooting will be in an area of strict gun control, the murderers may be mental cases, but they aren't totally stupid and will chose their target with the likelihood of being at least partially successful.
#4. Yes, these murders are sociopaths, they hate humanity and by extension, themselves, which is why they often commit suicide before being apprehended.
#5. If you could wave a magic wand and remove all guns from the world, the murders would go back to using what ever is available; explosives, swords and pikes, rocks, sharp sticks, etc....

 

Only 450? Only that? Well that is different. Lol

 

I'll make a point, IMHO the Vegas shooting was a globalist elite/deep state operation.. designed, just like Obama's "Fast and Furious" operation, to convince the American public that all guns must be banned. Once the American people are disarmed there it nothing stopping them from ushering in there One World Government and total control over the world's population. (who would stop them? The Commies? LOL they are all of the same mind!)

 

That's no excuse. I doubt the mothers and fathers, daughters and brothers who lost loved ones would agree with that assessment.

 

Why do we care about the opinions of the ignorant, unreasoned and irrational?

 

What exactly could the NRA have done to prevent the act?

 

Are mass shootings the vast majority of all firearm-related crimes committed in the united states? Or are they a statistical minority in terms of scope?

 

Following such logic, you yourself are condoning every single case of sexual assault, human trafficking, and drug smuggling that is going on in the united states at this very moment, especially those being committed by illegal aliens from the nation of Mexico, simply by not speaking out in favor of actual border security.

 

They do not need to agree with the assessment for it to be factually correct.

 

Unlike what some people imagine, even the most totalitarian gun control wouldn't end mass shootings.

We've seen them take place in recent years in the UK and France.

(I'm not saying it wouldn't reduce them, I'm just saying the phenomena is not going to completely end)

Let me also point out all the mass killings that have, in recent years, taken place in Venezuela and Brazil, a result of poverty and social chaos.

Anyway, thank goodness we still live in a country where we're more likely to die from colorectal cancer or obesity than die from a shooting involving more than one victim.

 

Possibly the coldest thing I have ever heard on here

 

The location of the next mass shooting is in someone's mind, right now.

Whatever the mind of man can conceive and believe, it can achieve. Napoleon Hill.

I'm sure glad an eel-like conceived thought such as that isn't in my mind.

 

The fact is the NRA is indirectly (keyword here being indirectly) condoning these attacks by not calling for the ban of the AR15, the ban of bump stocks, or the denial of any firearm to anyone with even a history of mental illnesses.

You can choose to deny it, but that doesn’t make it any less obvious the NRA stood behind the murderer in Vegas.

 

Remember: "Those who would give up liberty for safety deserve neither".

 

The AR-15 is protected by the Second Amendment, and not even the ACLU is calling for the denial of a firearm to anyone with even a hint of mental illness.

 

You are fully aware of the fact your statement here is false.

 

Why should the NRA support any of the above? To present the public image that they are doing something to demonstrate their concern for the victims of mass shootings? There is no point in such useless, meaningless gestures, that would ultimately do nothing of substance.

Unless there is a willingness on the part of yourself, to propose and support the forceful confiscation of private, legally owned firearms from their legal owners, to actually insure they are taken out of circulation and thus unable to be misused at some point in the future, no proposal would produce any measurable, meaningful, significant, or worthwhile effect. So long as any firearms remain available, even through the secondhand market, those that will misuse them will acquire them and do just that.

 

First, a bump stock isn’t needed to ‘bump fire’ (use a semi auto gun’s recoil to reset and fire rapidly).
Second, given the duration of the shooting, I can think of at least three bolt action guns and a couple of pump action rifles that could have been used to potentially rack up a higher number of fatalities than the LV shooter did...focusing on bump stocks is an excessive in Hollywood inspired irrational fear and ignorance.
Third, if he wanted a larger death toll rather that cause terror and panic with his choice of weapons, he had a pilot’s license... he could have used a plane to increase the number of fatalities.
Fourth, given his financial resources, nothing the NRA or any one else could have made a difference.
Fifth, open carry had nothing to do with the crime; the shooter didn’t walk in with his weapons slung over his shoulder.
Facts... you don’t know what one is.

 

Nah, the 2A doesn't have limitless protections. Once a certain gun has caused enough bloodshed, and has a track record of doing so, the best move for the people of a country in terms of their safety is to ban that gun. It's cheapening the 2A to constantly use it as a shield against logic. Guns are not holier than thou in terms of people's lives. Let me ask this question. Do you support a schizophrenic having access to a gun, or maybe a psychopath? Maybe someone who is clinically depressed, or has bipolar disorder? When the 2A was created, we didn't know anything about schizophrenia, dementia, depression, psychopathy, any mental illness that overpowers ones ability to act sensibly, I am confident the Founding Fathers, as intelligent as they were, would put certain provisions in the 2A to protect the would-be Americans of their country.