Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Monday October 02 2017, @04:18PM   Printer-friendly

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/10/02/554976369/section-of-las-vegas-strip-is-closed-after-music-festival-shooting

A gunman fired upon thousands of people attending a music festival on the Las Vegas Strip Sunday night, in a brutal attack that is blamed for at least 58 deaths, police say. In the mass shooting and panic that ensued, 515 people were injured. At least one of the dead is an off-duty police officer who was attending the concert.

Editorializing: Interesting how media always emphasize ISLAMIC terrorists, but downplay domestic terrorism as psychologically disturbed individual lone-wolfs.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by bob_super on Monday October 02 2017, @06:10PM (11 children)

    by bob_super (1357) on Monday October 02 2017, @06:10PM (#576040)

    273 mass shootings this year. About one per day. No reaction.

    While you can kill a lot of people with knives, it's a hell of a lot harder, requires someone who's an order of magnitude more nuts and healthy, and you can't do it from the other side of the street.

    Listen to the videos. I don't know if he was shooting full auto or just pulling the trigger really fast, but it's physically impossible to injure as many people as fast as with a modern "centuries of improvements in tech" firearm. And it's impossible to protect all crowds from a high remote shooter (even closed arenas have to fill and empty).

    Stockpiling issue? Yep, that horse has bolted already. But you can limit the inflow of new weapons, as not everyone is motivated enough to make their own replacement barrels.
    It's like suicide: you can't prevent them all, but you should reduce the impact of a someone having a crazy moment.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Insightful=2, Informative=1, Total=3
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 02 2017, @06:27PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 02 2017, @06:27PM (#576051)

    since he was shooting at a big crowd, it's possible that he was shooting two guns at once. it's not like he needed to aim...

  • (Score: 2) by takyon on Monday October 02 2017, @06:32PM (2 children)

    by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Monday October 02 2017, @06:32PM (#576057) Journal

    Could the 273 include shootings where nobody died? If not, what is the death threshold, 3? Maybe it was my fault and I should specify 10+ dead in 1 shooting daily. But the amount of killings needed to force change = arbitrary hypothetical speculation anyway.

    Nevermind, I found the definition [abc15.com]:

    According to data from the Gun Violence Archive, a total of 273 mass shooting incidents have occurred so far this year, as of October 2. There doesn't seem to be an official definition for a "mass shooting" in the United States, but according to the Gun Violence Archive, a mass shooting is described as four or more individuals being shot or killed in the same general time and location.

    I think you are probably right that a blanket ban (to include a repeal of the 2nd Amendment) would reduce the amount of people who can engage in these attacks. Kind of like that Soylentil AC who can't get cannabis because he's not cool enough and entirely antisocial. Remove the legitimate avenues to buy guns, and these peoples' actions will look much more suspicious as they are fumbling around trying to get machine guns from people who are FBI snitches. And going the 3D print/CNC mill route is either expensive, takes some skill, or produces an inferior weapon.

    That said, it could be offset by permanent war with militia types who have plenty of stockpiled guns and the skill to make some of their own. I think there are tens of thousands of people who are not committing violence but would start to do so if something as momentous as a 2nd Amendment repeal happened. Kind of like how Waco inspired the Oklahoma City bombing.

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
  • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday October 02 2017, @07:06PM (1 child)

    by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Monday October 02 2017, @07:06PM (#576094) Homepage Journal

    Check the audio in the videos. He was most definitely full auto.

    --
    My rights don't end where your fear begins.
    • (Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 03 2017, @08:36AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 03 2017, @08:36AM (#576495)

      While it could have been due to echoing sound reaching the recording cameras, I perceived a change in fire rate several times.

      It reminded me of what often happens when someone is using a "bump-fire" stock to turn a semi-automatic firearm into a kinda-sorta full-auto firearm. Example [youtube.com]

  • (Score: 2) by Arik on Tuesday October 03 2017, @05:17AM (4 children)

    by Arik (4543) on Tuesday October 03 2017, @05:17AM (#576434) Journal
    "While you can kill a lot of people with knives, it's a hell of a lot harder, requires someone who's an order of magnitude more nuts and healthy, and you can't do it from the other side of the street."

    It would be work to get to the same death toll as this one, for sure, but it wouldn't be that hard to match some of the earlier shooters, nor would it require the perpetrator be particularly healthy. Or even possess an actual knife for that matter. Knives can be improvised quite easily, and they're frightfully effective against a thin-skinned animal like a human. What actually makes them hard to use is psychology. There's no separation, there's no distance, they're used close-up where the perpetrator can see, and feel, and smell, the person he's slicing apart. This is no barrier to a sociopath and may even excite them, but for a normal person this provokes strong feelings of revulsion and aversion.

    The rifle makes it psychologically easier by allowing one to kill from a distance, to kill someone that is only a human-shaped blob of color in the distance, that has no facial expressions, no deeper reality.

    That's a fair point, but it needs to be set in context. The rifle allows one man to kill another from a few hundred yards, by carefully lining up the shot then easing the trigger over while controlling ones breathing precisely. ICBMs allow one man to kill millions, from the other side of the planet with the push of a button, all details taken care of for him. Which one should we be most concerned about?

    "Stockpiling issue? Yep, that horse has bolted already. But you can limit the inflow of new weapons, as not everyone is motivated enough to make their own replacement barrels."

    Big problem with that is that regulations disproportionately affect the law-abiding citizen, and are disproportionately ineffective at changing the armament of the criminal who acts with premeditation. Sure, you give them an increased risk that in isolation might result in some deterrence - the draconian gun law they now risk conviction under - but the decreased risk of a victim turning out to be armed means that, on net, you are actually encouraging them.
    --
    If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
    • (Score: 3, Funny) by bob_super on Tuesday October 03 2017, @07:59AM (3 children)

      by bob_super (1357) on Tuesday October 03 2017, @07:59AM (#576487)

      > the decreased risk of a victim turning out to be armed means that, on net, you are actually encouraging them.

      Which is why you'll get mugged by a guy with a knife in Europe, give him your wallet, and stay alive to bitch about the inconvenience and the lack of a guild receipt.
      Short of extremely extremely rare wackos, people with a clear upper hand will just move on in a peaceful way, a civilized no-injuries situation. Worrying about the other party pulling out a hero move is what gets people shot.

      • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday October 03 2017, @10:53AM

        by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Tuesday October 03 2017, @10:53AM (#576520) Homepage Journal

        You're full of shit but +1 Funny for the Guild receipt quip.

        --
        My rights don't end where your fear begins.
      • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 03 2017, @11:27AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 03 2017, @11:27AM (#576527)

        you'll get mugged [...] in a peaceful way, a civilized no-injuries situation

        Did this make more sense inside your head? Or do you really perceived armed criminals as "civilized"?

      • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Arik on Tuesday October 03 2017, @05:35PM

        by Arik (4543) on Tuesday October 03 2017, @05:35PM (#576684) Journal
        It's funny, and pathetic, that they really expect you to do that. Ignore the demands, grab the nearest object that can be used as a weapon, and focus on taking the knife. Watch how quickly robber turns into runner. I never actually had to hit a would-be mugger in Europe, not once.

        The difference between a society where people can leave their doors unlocked without worry and one where people are afraid to walk down the street is a few percentage of 'rare wackos' who are willing to do their duty for society even when that means accepting personal risk. After the events of the 20th century, european men tend to be extremely averse to accepting personal risk, which leaves their societies easy prey to parasites. Rather the reverse of the US problem, yet hardly a virtue nonetheless.
        --
        If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?