quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
James Spader?

Yes... well actually the character he plays on Blacklist.

And the point of this is what?

quote:

Originally posted by ChuckFinley:

2. If the NRA had tried to make a hot red line stand against bump stocks then they could have risked being shut out of the conversation. This gives them a seat at the table.

5. If anything, while there was still a massive crowd to aim at overall, the bump stocks may have prevented him from hitting any one target that he, in his demonic mind, might have selected. This says nothing to distract from the abject tragedy of the whole situation, but perhaps there were some rounds that skipped harmlessly off the pavement without hurting anyone because of the negative effects of the gimmick stocks. One may hope that was the case.

Frankly I would rather have the NRA in this conversation than screaming "piss off," especially over a gimmick. I pay them dues to actually lobby, not to preach to the choir (be real, do any of their press releases actually get published outside of pro-gun media streams?). They'd probably make a lot of people here happy to just be screaming how stupid it is to ban these things off the bat, but that's not going to involve them in the debate, and if they're not involved in the debate then we're guilty of the same ineffective virtue-signaling we mock the snowflakes for.

I think Chuck is right. If the NRA and Congressional Republicans can get their frigging act together, this could work out legislatively. Don't want this to go sideways on us? Call your reps and lobbies and inform them of your expectations. I doubt the NRA legal teams are scouring SIGForum for expert advice on how their members expect to be represented.

Or non-members, in case of the proud Not-NRA Member in this thread.

Wayne LaPierre, Jr, is paid $972,000/yr to lead the largest gun rights organization in America, whose role and focus includes - purportedly - preventing the further erosion of the 2nd Amendment.

$972,000 per year.

And who pays for that? Many folks here do.

He has spent his entire adult life being a lobbyist or otherwise working in government and writing books. He is as Establishment and not really a friend of ours as Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan, and various others who pretend so. He is occasionally successful at his job, at best. When he "wins" it just means we didn't get hosed as badly, and that's on a good day.

He and his "leadership" primarily excel at selling branded schwag to the masses.

And what do we get for that money? Not enough, that's for sure.

And now, he jumps right out after a tragedy and proactively advocates further restrictions.

His time and utility has come and gone, if it ever really existed in the first place.

The NRA has many problems, and it's biggest one is abysmal leadership that's overpaid.

He's a loser, in fact, a terrible face man, and needs to resign or be fired, yesterday.

He's not "playing the game", he's gaming you and us and living the high life all along.

A lot like most in Congress.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by Jimineer:
Heads up if you're interested, Chris Cox will be on Tucker tonight and LaPierre will be on Hannity tonight.

I love watching Tucker debate these idiots. He's destroying some Brady Campaign moron right now. She has nothing.

He called her a liar at one point. Loved to see that. These gun grabbers have nothing but lies.

Chris Cox didn't address bump fire stocks which I was hoping for.

Look at this page. Not a single post has to do with the shooting.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
Look at this page. Not a single post has to do with the shooting.

What's next, recipe ideas?

quote:

Originally posted by bubbatime:

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
Look at this page. Not a single post has to do with the shooting.

What's next, recipe ideas?

Beanie Babies?

flashguy

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
And the point of this is what?

Just an observation, sorry for the thread drift.

quote:

Originally posted by Herknav:

quote:

Originally posted by FishOn:
They will not blow up their base.

I'll take that bet.

Really?

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:

quote:

Originally posted by showpro:
I don't think the shooter was insane. I think he was a psychopath, a heritable trait likely from his father. This lack of empathy enabled him to do what he did, not insanity.

You are splitting hairs. If you're a psychopath, you are insane. I'm not talking about legal definitions, Of course this asshole knew right from wrong, but it's very simple- no sane person commits an such as this. No one who is sane would do such a thing.

You can argue that 'til the cows come home, but that guy was nuts.

I agree. The guy was very smart, and he was nuts.

We'll see if drugs played a part. But that does not excuse a damn thing.

quote:

Originally posted by TXJIM:

quote:

Originally posted by Ozarkwoods:

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:

quote:

Originally posted by Ozarkwoods:

Did you listen to it? The video is constant

Yes, I did. Twice.

You don't know when he started the video. I'm saying he didn't start the video before the first shots were fired. How could he unless he knew when it was going to happen? He wasn't just driving around taking video and happened to capture the whole thing. If you accept that, then you can't say the first shots you hear on the video are not echoes and thus muted. In subsequent bursts of fire, you can hear the shots and their muted echoes fairly clearly.

The difference in volume of the report is not just at the beginning it’s through out the video, and the taxis cab driver identified herself as a female. You can see that the he video is continuously running, you will hear shots from a distance then you will hear shots fired close by.

Could very well have to do with the proximity of the muzzle to the open window. Also, the shape of that building would effect the sound as well.

Perhaps the guy firing the rifle from within the room, and then the guy standing at the window opening with the rifle beyond the window sill would make a huge difference in noise heard outside.

I've just finished watching several videos done by Slide Fire, as well as some from people who have bought their product.

Given the distance the shooter had to fire (400-plus yards) and the mechanics behind Slide Fire, I'd bet that more rounds missed the concert grounds than hit their mark. Even the steadier shooters in the videos had trouble keeping the rifle barrel anywhere close to still, which to me would result in bullets going all over the place.

I know he had at least one rifle with a bipod, but he must have also used boxes or other items to help brace the other weapons he fired.

This was just pure evil.

http://video.foxbusiness.com/v...453001#sp=show-clips

Las Vegas shooter may have had a psychotic disorder: Dr. Siegel

Oct. 04, 2017 - 6:47 - Fox News Medical A Team’s Dr. Marc Siegel and former CIA officer Mike Baker on the Las Vegas gunman’s mental health.

quote:

Originally posted by LDD:

quote:

Originally posted by gw3971:
I'm not sure we need to hit him. As A1 said earlier in this thread, If we can get some rounds in the room, I'm betting that he would have scurried off and killed himself. Most of these guys quit at the first sign of resistance. We don't carry long guns at big arenas and events because admin is afraid it looks like military mentality. Perhaps its time to rethink that mentality.

What about landing rounds in other people's rooms?

Exigency can cover a lot, but hitting bystanders from 400 yards away is still setting yourself up to be every plaintiff's lawyer's [dream] next-meal.

Actually I was thinking about frangible Ammo.

quote:

Originally posted by gw3971:

quote:

Originally posted by LDD:

quote:

Originally posted by gw3971:
I'm not sure we need to hit him. As A1 said earlier in this thread, If we can get some rounds in the room, I'm betting that he would have scurried off and killed himself. Most of these guys quit at the first sign of resistance. We don't carry long guns at big arenas and events because admin is afraid it looks like military mentality. Perhaps its time to rethink that mentality.

What about landing rounds in other people's rooms?

Exigency can cover a lot, but hitting bystanders from 400 yards away is still setting yourself up to be every plaintiff's lawyer's [dream] next-meal.

Actually I was thinking about frangible Ammo.

We don't have that.

While, according to current policy and training, we are allowed to use "suppressing fire" (and they don't call it that, but it basically the same thing) we have to consider the potential consequences. Additionally, we could only do so when receiving actual fire, not afterward, not when moving (unless taking fire).

Shoothing up to a high floor, at a distance of 400 yards on the ground, which is more like 550 yards or so as the hypotenuse of the triangle...

That would be difficult to justify unless I was taking accurate fire.

Shooting into (likely) occupied hotel rooms, at a significant angle, not knowing the construction (as as such, potential for penetration and ricochets) plus the angles of error from the shooter (if taking fire, yours is gonna be way less accurate)... a tactical nightmare.

WIth an AR and a nonmagnified optic... I honestly don't know if i would have been able to shoot back from the ground. Especially when you consider if the asshole shooter was shooting at the center of the crowd from 400 yards, by the time officers got here and set up perimeter, they were probably 500 to 550 yards away, shooting significantly up hill.

Don't get me wrong, I would have wanted to, and it would have been my first instinct to shoot back...

BUt I am not sure I woulnd't be hung out to dry for making a bad decision had I done so.

quote:

Originally posted by 41:
http://video.foxbusiness.com/v...453001#sp=show-clips

Las Vegas shooter may have had a psychotic disorder: Dr. Siegel

Oct. 04, 2017 - 6:47 - Fox News Medical A Team’s Dr. Marc Siegel and former CIA officer Mike Baker on the Las Vegas gunman’s mental health.

Dr starts by leading off "I never examined him but..."

Then STFU, doc!. This shit is pure speculation and the problem with 24 hr news. It's all conjecture, garbage news. They all need to just stop randomly throwing darts out, and wait for the press releases from the police.

In my 25 years of the doing the 911 thing, I have seen my fair share of Ops Plans for “Dignitary Visits”.

I imagine going forward, these will be used for such major outdoor events as well. One thing to provide extra security at indoor venues, much easier to identify, contain, and control a threat. When you have large outdoor events it really opens up the potential for threats and adds many levels of difficulty.

Think surveillance and counter-sniper/overwatch elements around the perimeter in elevated positions, out of sight but in place to react and respond should something like this occur in the future.


Crazy times we are living in...

I think he was a quack of sorts, runs in some families. He had his medication, Valium seems mild but may point towards underlying issues.

I agree about loss of accuracy with the bumpfire. I never came close to wanting one.

Ankle biting aside, I rather have the NRA on our side than not. Of course it's easy to dream up a better alternative in a vacuum.

quote:

Originally posted by gw3971:
Actually I was thinking about frangible Ammo.

The unfortunate fact of life is that few, if any, law enforcement SWAT teams have clairvoyant members available for consultation to advise them that they would need to take along such specialized ammunition to engage someone barricaded in a hotel room. And if they could see the future, they would probably do things differently to simply prevent the event before it even occurred: “Hey, bro, how come you have all those guns set up in your room here?”

More to the point, though, there are two types of ammunition that are commonly referred to as “frangible.”

One is “pre-fragmented” of the Glaser “Safety Slug” variety that consists of something like small lead shot inside a copper jacket. Those bullets are specifically designed to disintegrate when they hit things like building materials, i.e., the stuff that hotel rooms are made of. Firing that ammunition at someone on the other side of a wall might distract him, that’s true, but it could just convince him to start firing real bullets through the wall back at the police who would then be at somewhat of a disadvantage.

The other true frangible ammunition uses bullets that are designed to break up into tiny pieces when they hit steel targets. That type of ammunition does not necessarily perform like pre-fragmented ammo because the bullets don’t always disintegrate when they encounter building materials; they might, but it’s not guaranteed. Such ammunition in rifle calibers is also not common or popular with police trainers. The biggest problem is its unreliability; sometimes the bullets break and cause malfunctions when being chambered. And because it often uses lead-free primers, misfires are more common. Those things mean that tactical teams are unlikely to rely on it for any serious purpose, and they’re especially unlikely to be lugging it around in the unlikely event of having to fire blindly at a barricaded subject (something that almost all LEOs are strongly admonished to not do under most circumstances).