SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 17 submissions in the queue.
SoylentNews
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.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Over 50 dead in mass shooting in Las Vegas
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 442 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
The last time I saw him he was walking down Lover's Lane holding his own hand.
-- Fred Allen
(Score: 2) by Arik on Tuesday October 03 2017, @05:17AM (4 children)
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)
> 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
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
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
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?