Vegas/Jason Aldean Concert Shooting

[thejeep]

Did they pull his voting history yet.?

 

[BadDogPSD]

I just saw a report where the shooter was prescribed diazepam.

Isn't a major common thread between a lot if not all of incidents like this the prescription use of this and similar meds? Actually a legit question because it seems I recall reading after Sandy Hook something on this.

If it's true, it would certainly seem to be something more to look at rather than guns. (Not that logic will factor into the gun-grabbers agenda)

Yes, the connection between psychotropic drugs and these kinds of shootings has been bright up before. Dr. Piazza of Frontsight has written about it several times.

 

[boomer81]

I will say it again ghenghis khan killed 10% of the worlds population on fucking horse back with Spears and bows and knives and shit. Over 40 million people so many it was good for the environment and that’s when the world was a lot smaller and you had to do it with your own two fucking hands. And ride your horse a long fucking way. No bombs no guns nothing but fucking horses hate and fucking hands and clubs and knives and shit. He bashed the fuck out of people’s brains. It was blood and gore and hell on earth 1000 years go. And if you take away guns what you gonna do next. Kill all the horses. Because horses have been used in as many mass killings as guns.

This is how I talk to dumb people. It freaks em out. Red pills em in about 15 seconds

 

[2ndamendfan]

So sad, you missed the point completely.

I get the point. So sorry that you feel your government did not screw your people over by banning guns.

I have a couple friends form Australia and they claim after the ban crime went up alot.

You say that 11,500 people have died so far from guns in the USA. Rather than say, that is a small town. Lets break that number down. On average 33,000 a year die from gun shots. Of that 2/3rds or about 22,000 are suicides. I discount those and i will explain why.

First USA is not even in the top 15 of countries based on per capita suicides. Japan is #5 i believe and they have no guns at all. If someone wants to kill themselves there are 100's of ways to do that. I personally believe if i want to die that is my right. I don't have the right to take someone with me. Also I would advocate suicide prevention. Many are young people that dont understand life much.

So now we are down to 11,000 deaths for the year that are actually someone killing someone else. And is that not what everyone is worried about? Being a random victim.?

Of that 6,600 are young men gang on gang killings (mostly black on black). Why is it that when 59 people are gunned down it becomes a national tragedy with 24 hrs media coverage yet in a few citys this is a weekly occurance that the media mostly ignores.

Next is 2000 women murdered each year by their spouse or boyfriend. Again tragic and something the media ignores.

That leaves 2,400 gun deaths left. Of those 90% the murder and the victim have a connection. Which leave about 240 "random" gun deaths.

While every life means something i would discount 240 deaths in a country of 350,000,000 as a statically insignificant.

Every day 91 people die in USA from opioid drugs. While this is something someone does to themselves it, same as suicide it is largely ignored by the media.

If people and the media truely wanted to save lifes dont you think they should focus their efforts where it would do the most good. Let's say you could save 10%. Would it be better to save 10% of people going to commint suicide (1100) or 10% of random murder victims (24). The media glorifies it and instills fear. This is not about saving lives but about taking away freedoms. Much like the focus the media puts on shark attacks, yet what are the actual odds of being bitten by a shark. Pretty low with only about 20 attacks world wide each year.

Rifles of any kind are used in less than 5% of crimes, yet they want to take those first. Why? Again not to save lives but to gain control.

Lastly, and if iI was Australian i would be so fucking offended. I believe it was Bill Clintin who asked the Australia Prime Minister how he got guns banned. His answer was " we don't have a 2nd amendment so we just did it". Holly fucking balls Batman.

That is bassicly saying. I could take a shit on my country so I did, no one could stop me.

 

[7.62willdo]

Thank you for the rational response. I'm in no way suggesting you need to ban guns, I really don't see your second amendment ever being amended and your government operates differently than that of Australia's. It's just sad that with the proliferation of so many firearms that these occurrences are sadly becoming more common, for a variety of reasons including society deteriorating as you mention. I'm a Federal Police officer in Australia, so I carry a gun every day at work, I've also had tactical training and gone head on with some serious crims here, plus I've investigated and dismantled international drug syndicates among other things so I take my safety seriously. I shoot F-class on weekends (love the smell of gunpowder on a Saturday arvo) and occasionally go hunting, so yes, I like guns. You've got access to firearms we simply don't have here, and there's a few nice tools for the trade which you make and sell which I'd certainly like to own but never will due to the laws here.

Amending your laws to reflect Australia's certainly wouldn't eliminate gun violence, that's impossible, as you say, you have too many guns in circulation as it is. We just had another government gun buyback here with 26,000 guns recently handed in. Won't solve gun violence here, arguably it makes some difference though. My question is, despite all of these recent tragedies you have gone through in the US such as Las Vegas, Sandy Hook, The Orlando nightclub, the list goes on...Is there anything as a nation which you can realistically do to prevent these types of tragedies from occurring? Are there any reasonable measures the US government could implement without being howled down? These questions go back to the news article I posted a bit further up, there's no way American citizens will give up their firearms, I'm not suggesting you should, but what happens the next time another shooting like this occurs? Is there an end game to this and any way to debate the issue rationally?

So what I read here is........I have guns but I don’t want any other Australians to have guns””.......sad pathetic little man......

 

[shootist2004]

https://www.fec.gov/data/receipts/in...12%2F31%2F2014



leaked photos of the dead shooter are on 4chan

 

[...]

https://www.fec.gov/data/receipts/in...12%2F31%2F2014

you mean the guy shooting up a bunch of country music fans was a DEMOCRAT.....huh...never would have guessed that..........



huh.....democrats shoot up the place.....and some how its us Gun owning conservatives who are the problem.

 

[pmclaine]

It's an absolute tragedy what has occurred in Las Vegas and it's impossible not to feel sorry for the victims and families of all the victims. No, I'm not American, I live in Australia where we suffered one of the world's worst mass shootings in 1996 at Port Arthur, Tasmania. The Australian government introduced gun control and reform after our tragedy, and thankfully we have never come close to experiencing anything like that again as a result. Secondly, I'm a cop, and the general public in Australia does not have access to semi-automatic rifles and the like, and to possess a firearm here you must have a genuine reason for doing, which is generally being a member of a competitive shooting club, or a letter from a rural land owner who gives you permission to hunt on their property. Anyway I digress, I thought I'd post the below article from a well travelled and respected Australian journalist, it's more of an outsider perspective looking in at your country but I feel he makes some valid points about the American way of life. I have several friends from Australia who live in the US, and several of them own guns, as is their right to do so but they were stunned at just how easy it is to acquire them.

Anyway, here is the article: Why Americans will never give up their guns


AMERICA truly is the greatest nation on earth. But there is a reason why they won’t give up their guns and more people will die. Joe Hildebrand - www.news.com.au

AMERICA is the greatest country on earth. Indeed, in terms of sheer power, scale and sphere of influence it is probably the greatest country that has ever been.
No other nation could destroy the world as many times over should it so choose, nor has any other nation so charmed and enthralled the world with all it produces. It conquers its enemies with its armies and colonises them with its culture.
And that is because the United States of America isn’t just a people or a place. It’s an idea. And it is because of that idea that the United States seems determined to literally shoot itself to death.
There is probably no nation on earth whose foundations have been so idealised and mythologised. It was “discovered” by a great explorer so hopelessly lost he thought he had landed in India.
It was colonised by “persecuted” pilgrims who then killed people for witchcraft. And it was enshrined as a nation which cherished “liberty” by men who themselves owned slaves. Even the name America comes from a colourful Italian businessman who may have fabricated the very documents about the New World that now bears his name.
In this sense it was the perfect successor to the first great Western power, Rome — a city which was established as a haven for criminals and rogues and populated by the kidnapping and rape of women but which historians would later declare founded by two brothers raised by a she-wolf and a Trojan prince.
Little wonder that even in its earliest days America considered herself to be the New Rome and that Washington DC was carefully constructed to emulate the awe and spectacle of the ancient capital.

But this is neither scandalous nor surprising. All great powers need more than land and armies; they need the mythology and founding principles that an army will fight for. They need that ideal.

In Rome the ideal was the humble citizen who diligently ploughed his farm until he was called upon to serve his country. This was embodied in the form of Lucius Quintius Cincinnatus, an elder statesman who was called upon to defend Rome from an invasion that was set to wipe out the fledgling republic — an event which could have completely recast Western civilisation as we know it today.

Cincinnatus accepted the role of dictator, saved the city and then gave up near-absolute power to return to his plough.

That was Republican Rome’s great myth, its great idea: That no matter how much power a man was given he would always be grounded in humility, hard work and service. Just like Elton John, even when he was offered the Yellow Brick Road, he would always go back to his plough.

But what has Lucius Quintius Cincinnatus got to do with America you might ask? Well, the Americans liked him so much they named a city after him. And not just any city but the first major city founded after the American Revolution: Cincinnati, Ohio — often referred to as the first “purely American” city.

And as soon as the War of Independence ended in 1783 its leading officers got together and formed an elite order to preserve the ideals of the Continental Army. They called it the Society of the Cincinnati and its first president was none other than the first president of the United States of America, George Washington himself.

Then in 1789, with another revolution afoot in America’s oldest ally of France, the Second Amendment to the Constitution proposed this now famous decree:

“A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

Just like in the Old Rome, the New Rome’s ideal hero was a farmer-citizen-soldier, a free man who, when duty called, would willingly down his tools and pick up a weapon in service of his country.

The only difference was that whereas the ideal Roman was supposed to down his weapon and return to his labours after the event, the ideal American was supposed to hold on to his weapon should the need arise again.

For Rome the national symbol was the plough, but for America it became the gun.
America’s latest shooting horror is little different to the multitude of previous mass shootings the nation has tolerated in the past, it is just bigger and more bloody. And thus there is little reason to think it will change America’s mind.

Personally, I still cannot contemplate anything more horrific than the Sandy Hook massacre in which 20 six and seven-year-old children were progressively shot dead by a young man wandering through a primary school with a bolt-action rifle.

I mean honestly, just think about that.

If the mass murder of six year olds cannot persuade US lawmakers to tighten gun controls then God help a bunch of country music fans in Vegas.

The response of the gun rights brigade to this and other atrocities is typically to entangle the issue in absurd hypotheticals or childish logic.

For Sandy Hook they said that the teachers should have had guns so they could kill the gunman, yet clearly that would have done nothing to stop a sniper from a 32nd floor window above the Strip.

Or they will say that terrorists use trucks to kill people — should we ban them too? This is just as excruciatingly dumb as a certain infamous leftist argument that falling refrigerators kill more people in the US than terrorists.

It hurts my brain to have to say this but here we go: Trucks, much like refrigerators, have uses other than random assassination. They are not designed to kill. Guns and terrorists, on the other hand, are.

And of course there’s the famous “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people” routine.

Well yes, people certainly do kill people, and they’re much more likely to kill them with a @#$%ing machine gun in their hand.

But all of these debates are actually completely beside the point. Because while the arguments of the American gun lobby are often painfully semantic, their basic position is in fact profoundly spiritual.

The belief among many Americans in the right to bear arms is an article of faith.That right, moreso even than the arms themselves, is part of the idea of America that they were born and raised to believe in. The idea of freedom, of the individual’s supremacy over government and of the need to resist any imagined tyranny that might be around the corner. This is pretty much unique to any Western country but it just so happens that the Western country it is unique to is the most powerful on the planet.

And so whereas many liberal Americans think about gun control as just throwing away a deadly piece of metal, many libertarian Americans see it as throwing away a fundamental cornerstone of the American ethos. As far as they’re concerned we might as well be asking them to stop being American at all.

The gun control debate will never be won unless we understand this chasm and bridge it but as usual the left and the right are arguing at cross purposes. Liberals think they’re talking about a machine and libertarians think they’re talking about an ideal.

Then there is the practical problem, and that great Catch-22 question of whether America needs more guns precisely because it has too many guns — almost as many as it has people.

Just today a senior correspondent told me about an American bloke he’d met who refused to drive through Maryland because state law required him to keep his gun in the boot of his car.

“How am I ever gonna get to it?” he asked, as though it was a rhetorical question.

And why would he need to get to it? Well in case someone pulled a gun on him of course.Indeed, it is impossible not to reason that many of the police shootings in the US that have sparked the Black Lives Matter campaign and torn the country in two have been fuelled perhaps not so much by blanket racism as skittish cops who never know when someone is going to pull a gun on them. How else to explain the equally bizarre shooting of a white Australian woman by a black police officer?

Thus America’s foundational obsession with the firearm isn’t just destroying people’s lives, it’s also destroying the very fabric of the union — which has always been stretched and frayed at best.

And this is deeply dangerous not just for Americans but for all of us.

Despite all its flaws and contradictions, America truly is the greatest nation on earth in terms of military might, economic prosperity and social, political and cultural capital.

There is still no power more vital to global security and stability and yet it is currently looking more insecure and unstable than at any other time in its century-long reign of influence.

More worrying is that this is occurring in a critical window of opportunity for China to become the dominant world superpower, Russia to reassert itself as a resurgent expansionist nationalist power and rogue elements such as North Korea and Syria to potentially spark seismic power shifts, if not all out war.

True American patriots might do well to wonder if continuing to allow unfettered access to all manner of firearms in this age of instability is really the best idea. They might also wonder if a bunch of innocent country music fans — of whom many were no doubt red-blooded Republican patriots themselves — deserved to be shot dead at random by a gun you can buy at a corner store.

If they really want to make America great again perhaps they could start by changing the laws so that Americans kill more terrorists than they do each other.

PS: The other thing about gun control is that it wasn’t always the NRA’s fault. Up until the mid-1970s the National Rifle Association was a group focused on hunting and sports shooting. Then in 1977 at a late-night meeting in a Midwestern city a group of gun rights activists launched a surprise coup and made it the undefeatable lobby group it is today.

They even had a name for that night. They called it the Revolt at Cincinnati.

Total misunderstanding of what the Second Ammendment is about.

In the last 100 years Government is second only to disease in killing human beings.

The reason for the Second Ammendment is providing the people with a means to protect themselves from govt.

That is not some "preppers" fantasy of the Second Ammdendment crowd, it is backed by solid evidence of the time spoken by people very much better educated than people today in philosophy and human nature.

The idea is for the people to be as least as well armed as the military with weapons "in common use".

Restricting Australians to weapons other than semi auto is providing big advantage to the government and more or less disarming the people of effective self defense against their govt.

People will say well the government has F16s and M1 Abrams you are screwed anyway. You need look no further than 16 years of war to realize guys that make guns from shovels are still able to be effective.

Fortunately we live in countries with "benevolent" govts. So did Germany circa the 1920's.

Its a country of 350 million. That much freedom requires responsibility to maintain. Sadly we have eliminated responsibility from our way of life. Its not the gun its the person and the lack of accountability in society as a whole.

It seems no amount of accountability would have effected Paddock as he appears to have never been in the system.

Sometimes bad shit happens. If you want govt to try and prevent every bad thing you will not be free.

Sorry for posting this if someone has already answered. Read that shit and couldn't help hitting "Quote" to make a reply.

 

[THE SENTINEL]

https://www.fec.gov/data/receipts/i...ddock&min_date=01/01/2013&max_date=12/31/2014

[h=4]Contributor information[/h]

Name	PADDOCK, STEPHEN
City and state	SARASOTA, FL, 34238
Occupation	RETIRED
Employer	RETIRED
Year to date	$25.00

[h=4]Contribution information[/h]

Amount	$25.00
Receipt date	May 27, 2014
Memo	EARMARKED FOR DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSIONAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE (C00000935)
Reported on	Form 3X on line 11AI
Election type

[h=4]Recipient information[/h]

Committee	ACTBLUE
Political party
Type	PAC with Non-Contribution Account - Qualified
State	Massachusetts

 

[...]

yup, clearly the NRAs fault democrats keep killing people.....bet you this will never make it into MSM.....

 

[pmclaine]

By all means, Australia is far from perfect but that's beside the point of this thread. Please re-read my comment - I didn't suggest you ban anything. Is there anything your country can rationally do to reduce the likelihood of these events occurring again?

Yes there is but the Dems wont consider it.

Enforce responsibility in the court room.

Commit a felony using a gun legal or otherwise, you go to jail mandatory ten years.

Dems don't want their voters locked up though. They may agree to this if all the govs do like MaCauliffe (D - VA) did and in a contravention to the constitution allow felons to vote.

Hold the human responsible not the tool.

Our mental health care system is failing. Fact is some people need institutionalization. Institutions are house of horror but so is 59 dead concert goers.

In evey set of human ther is 1-2% that don't belong.

We have to take it as a given 1-2% of the population needs to be locked up. Its a cost of doing business.

You can limit those costs by applying a quick and speedy death penalty to the likes of Tsarnaev or McVey. They get six month to make their appeal and if convicted on appeal the truck takes them right to the sleeping table.

That is the answer, period.

 

[pmclaine]

Just saw the room photo that shows Paddocks dead legs......why the gloves? With that many guns appears he is throwing an empty one down to pickup a loaded one. Not like heat is an issue.

Too much COD. Why wouldn't he have bought some proper operators gloves if that's the case. The dairy case worker gloves are not OAF nor do they provide a good grip.

Sorry for questioning minutia when we cant get an answer to the big question "WHY?".

 

[MarinePMI]

By all means, Australia is far from perfect but that's beside the point of this thread. Please re-read my comment - I didn't suggest you ban anything. Is there anything your country can rationally do to reduce the likelihood of these events occurring again?

KWilson,

I believe the short term answer is no. Long term; it would require some changes to our society at a very basic level.

As to the article you posted, I have some thoughts.

First, the author makes some valid comparisons to Rome, but fails to realize the difference between Roman civilization and the US. I believe Dinesh D'Souza summed up the difference very succinctly with a basic diagram. If the "America" society is a diamond shaped square, the founding cultures that made America what it is, are Rome and Jerusalem (top two sides of the diamond), and with them they brought the marriage of logic (Rome) and Judeo Christian values (Jerusalem). These two major components represent the bottom two sides of the diamond. Rome at its time was the melting pot of the world, but assimilation to a single set of moral codes did not exist. It was the wild wild west of religions, and many degrees of moral conduct were accepted/tolerated. The US was founded on, and assimilated everyone to a single set of moral values, largely based on Judeo Christian concepts.

Now, understanding that, lets get back to the discussion of people in general. Humans, by their very nature are war-like. It doesn't matter if it is a club, a rifle, or a pen. We tend to want to compete and crush our opponents. We're also very tribal. I would argue one of the points that the author misses, is that America (I think) has probably the most warrior like culture and history. It is imbued in our national psyche and identity. From our history of the revolution, to the expansion west into the frontier, to our involvement in WWI and WWII. We (I believe) assume a very warrior like attitude towards most things. I'm not saying other countries don't have similar folks, but not many have a national identity that supports that.

I would also argue that that same warrior like culture is what made the US the super power that it is today; that drive to conquer, overcome or overwhelm obstacles. Whether they be enemies, disease, the environment, the need for industrial expansion, manufacturing, etc.; it doesn't matter, the American attitude and warrior culture has constantly and consistently overcome many of the things making America hugely successful (and those ethos were once highly priased). Now of course, the challenge of a warrior culture is the propensity for it to turn inwards and devour itself with internal strife and competition. This is where the difference between Rome and US comes into play.

The Judeo Christian values that sustained the US throughout most of its history were the same values that made warriors into "civilized warriors" (so-to-speak). Much like the Japanese concept of a the warrior poet, these values constrained our society from self destruction, by putting boundaries on what is morally right, and wrong, pushing that warrior aggression into other (more acceptable) efforts, while creating the environment where concepts such as honor, compassion, integrity, and warrior prowess were praised and respected equally. Where a balance of these values were actively sought after, and respect was acknowledged for attaining those.

The way I see it, both of the two founding principles that make American great (logic and judeo christian values) have been severely eroded over the years, some by (well intention-ed) liberal progressives, some by not so well intention-ed liberal progressives, and some by technology (which I think makes it easier to stray from a solid moral foundation). Our education system (the logic side of the equation) has been corrupted by liberal progressive thinking that is often in a complete vacuum from reality. This is where a similarity with Rome resides, you have only to look at the writings of Marcus Aurelius and the debates between the Stoics and the Epicureans. Rome's liberal logic (Epicureans) shattered the single guiding principle behind their republic, unbiased logic (Stoics). They had little moral fabric built into their society to buffer these social battles, so the down fall was hastened, once one side gained enough momentum to then control the thoughts and emotions of the mob. I believe this is why their version of democracy failed/imploded; because it allowed mob rule. And when one side can control the mob...well, I think we all understand the shit storm that can be (just look at some of the third world countries today)

In the US, we have had a system where mob rule is buffered or constrained by a common set of judeo christian values/morals, as well as a governing system that counter balances population density (cities) representation with geospatial identity (states) representation (but that is another discussion). The JC values have been eroded from our government over the years, through many efforts on the liberal progressive side under the guise of the "Separation of church and state" argument. The flaw in this argument (IMHO), is the liberal assumption that people are somehow naturally moral, and that religious overtones are not needed or desired in governing the population. That (I believe) is the distinction I see between our founding fathers and the current politicians. Many (not all) of our founding fathers did not seek power, and in fact embraced the JC values of humility, selflessness, personal responsibility and duty to the community. Many values that no longer are respected, admired or espoused by our leaders, media and teachers (unless it fits their agenda).

All of these values effect the firearm related incidents we see today. Whether it be the individual conducting these senseless acts of violence, or those around them, who blindly look the other way. The issue is not the firearms, it is the values (or lack thereof) that is the core issue. This core issue of logic and values being in balance is what will determine the fall of the US. Rome fell from corruption within, mainly because it was founded primarily on the Roman/Greek philosophy of logic and citizen driven law (singular pillars, not really associated with each other). If the US falls (like Rome from internal destruction) it will be because the people themselves have failed, not because of the system itself as originally laid (which has tried to interlace the two pillars to prevent the inevitable periodic weakness that can and will happen as society ages). The people, through their well intention-ed desire to remain safe, fat, dumb and happy (not being a warrior culture, but embracing the lazy, easy way to live) will undo the system (disentangle the two pillars) to the point where it fail to govern and constrain the population (if either pillar fails, it pull down or destroy the other), and the warrior ethos will not be there in sufficient quantity to stave off the fall or regain strength for the next periodic weakness of either pillar. Factions will begin, and the mob will gain power...to the point that the system will collapse.

That being said, the system can recover, it was designed that way. But people have to be willing to do the work, accept the pain of correcting the system (and it will be painful to many) and re-embrace a moral foundation that has (IMHO) been lost on the last couple generations. That is how the gun problem, and the US decay will be resolved.

Mass shootings aren't the problem, they are the symptom of a much worse disease. And you can't treat the symptom and hope for it to cure the disease. You have to treat the disease; the erosion of unemotional logic (call it critical thinking), and degradation of Judeo Christian values that guide a sense of right and wrong.

At any rate, sorry for the long winded response, but I found the article interesting, if (IMHO) deeply flawed in its understanding of America...

 

[pmclaine]

I don't think America has a warrior culture.

I think America has government that tends to go to war with no strategy and no tactics but often with a vague idea in the back of their mind that this is going to be "good business".

America has a culture of "getting things done" whether it be war or business.

The people become very good warriors once committed but their preference is to live a peaceful free life.

What fucks it up is when the government commits to war with no strategy and meddles with the chosen tactics of the warriors. There is no way for that motivated population to than win.

We go to war trying to provide "bullets and beans" to everyone. Fact is we need to go to war with the understanding there is only going to be bullets until we win so let's all get involved and end this shit most expeditiously.

We haven't done that since WWII.

Smedly Butler was a true warrior. He fully understood the US system of war in his pamphlet "War is a Racket"

 

[pmclaine]

Photo circulating of dead Paddocks face with pocket revolver above his head.

 

[KWilson]

KWilson,

I believe the short term answer is no. Long term; it would require some changes to our society at a very basic level.

As to the article you posted, I have some thoughts.

First, the author makes some valid comparisons to Rome, but fails to realize the difference between Roman civilization and the US. I believe Dinesh D'Souza summed up the difference very succinctly with a basic diagram. If the "America" society is a diamond shaped square, the founding cultures that made America what it is, are Rome and Jerusalem (top two sides of the diamond), and with them they brought the marriage of logic (Rome) and Judeo Christian values (Jerusalem). These two major components represent the bottom two sides of the diamond. Rome at its time was the melting pot of the world, but assimilation to a single set of moral codes did not exist. It was the wild wild west of religions, and many degrees of moral conduct were accepted/tolerated. The US was founded on, and assimilated everyone to a single set of moral values, largely based on Judeo Christian concepts.

Now, understanding that, lets get back to the discussion of people in general. Humans, by their very nature are war-like. It doesn't matter if it is a club, a rifle, or a pen. We tend to want to compete and crush our opponents. We're also very tribal. I would argue one of the points that the author misses, is that America (I think) has probably the most warrior like culture and history. It is imbued in our national psyche and identity. From our history of the revolution, to the expansion west into the frontier, to our involvement in WWI and WWII. We (I believe) assume a very warrior like attitude towards most things. I'm not saying other countries don't have similar folks, but not many have a national identity that supports that.

I would also argue that that same warrior like culture is what made the US the super power that it is today; that drive to conquer, overcome or overwhelm obstacles. Whether they be enemies, disease, the environment, the need for industrial expansion, manufacturing, etc.; it doesn't matter, the American attitude and warrior culture has constantly and consistently overcome many of the things making America hugely successful (and those ethos were once highly priased). Now of course, the challenge of a warrior culture is the propensity for it to turn inwards and devour itself with internal strife and competition. This is where the difference between Rome and US comes into play.

The Judeo Christian values that sustained the US throughout most of its history were the same values that made warriors into "civilized warriors" (so-to-speak). Much like the Japanese concept of a the warrior poet, these values constrained our society from self destruction, by putting boundaries on what is morally right, and wrong, pushing that warrior aggression into other (more acceptable) efforts, while creating the environment where concepts such as honor, compassion, integrity, and warrior prowess were praised and respected equally. Where a balance of these values were actively sought after, and respect was acknowledged for attaining those.

The way I see it, both of the two founding principles that make American great (logic and judeo christian values) have been severely eroded over the years, some by (well intention-ed) liberal progressives, some by not so well intention-ed liberal progressives, and some by technology (which I think makes it easier to stray from a solid moral foundation). Our education system (the logic side of the equation) has been corrupted by liberal progressive thinking that is often in a complete vacuum from reality. This is where a similarity with Rome resides, you have only to look at the writings of Marcus Aurelius and the debates between the Stoics and the Epicureans. Rome's liberal logic (Epicureans) shattered the single guiding principle behind their republic, unbiased logic (Stoics). They had little moral fabric built into their society to buffer these social battles, so the down fall was hastened, once one side gained enough momentum to then control the thoughts and emotions of the mob. I believe this is why their version of democracy failed/imploded; because it allowed mob rule. And when one side can control the mob...well, I think we all understand the shit storm that can be (just look at some of the third world countries today)

In the US, we have had a system where mob rule is buffered or constrained by a common set of judeo christian values/morals, as well as a governing system that counter balances population density (cities) representation with geospatial identity (states) representation (but that is another discussion). The JC values have been eroded from our government over the years, through many efforts on the liberal progressive side under the guise of the "Separation of church and state" argument. The flaw in this argument (IMHO), is the liberal assumption that people are somehow naturally moral, and that religious overtones are not needed or desired in governing the population. That (I believe) is the distinction I see between our founding fathers and the current politicians. Many (not all) of our founding fathers did not seek power, and in fact embraced the JC values of humility, selflessness, personal responsibility and duty to the community. Many values that no longer are respected, admired or espoused by our leaders, media and teachers (unless it fits their agenda).

All of these values effect the firearm related incidents we see today. Whether it be the individual conducting these senseless acts of violence, or those around them, who blindly look the other way. The issue is not the firearms, it is the values (or lack thereof) that is the core issue. This core issue of logic and values being in balance is what will determine the fall of the US. Rome fell from corruption within, mainly because it was founded primarily on the Roman/Greek philosophy of logic and citizen driven law (singular pillars, not really associated with each other). If the US falls (like Rome from internal destruction) it will be because the people themselves have failed, not because of the system itself as originally laid (which has tried to interlace the two pillars to prevent the inevitable periodic weakness that can and will happen as society ages). The people, through their well intention-ed desire to remain safe, fat, dumb and happy (not being a warrior culture, but embracing the lazy, easy way to live) will undo the system (disentangle the two pillars) to the point where it fail to govern and constrain the population (if either pillar fails, it pull down or destroy the other), and the warrior ethos will not be there in sufficient quantity to stave off the fall or regain strength for the next periodic weakness of either pillar. Factions will begin, and the mob will gain power...to the point that the system will collapse.

That being said, the system can recover, it was designed that way. But people have to be willing to do the work, accept the pain of correcting the system (and it will be painful to many) and re-embrace a moral foundation that has (IMHO) been lost on the last couple generations. That is how the gun problem, and the US decay will be resolved.

Mass shootings aren't the problem, they are the symptom of a much worse disease. And you can't treat the symptom and hope for it to cure the disease. You have to treat the disease; the erosion of unemotional logic (call it critical thinking), and degradation of Judeo Christian values that guide a sense of right and wrong.

At any rate, sorry for the long winded response, but I found the article interesting, if (IMHO) deeply flawed in its understanding of America...

Don't apologise for the long winded reply mate, I appreciate the level of detail you've gone to. It's interesting to read this perspective, as despite the US and Australia being democratic countries and allies etc, if we had a Las Vegas incident here, our government would enact legislation change regardless of the opinion or voice of the legitimate, law-abiding gun owners in Australia. So bearing that in mind, I was simply curious as to how US citizens feel when these incidents receive such media coverage, what it means to you and whether there is anything you can do moving forward to prevent it from happening again. I guess the quandry here is that Paddock had no crim history and no apparent warning signs that he was going to go postal.

 

[Mike_Honcho]

Brother’s second interview.

Man is either high, under pressure that I can not relate to, within the autistic spectrum, or a nutter. Cliff notes - brother’s a whack, spews about the incomprehensibility of it all, brother was an introvert who lavished his few friends / cash no problem / makes brother seem detached / hopes that the autopsy reveals some weird tumor, suggests anyone could pop.

It’s punishing to watch, but on the verge of comedy gold too.

 

[THE SENTINEL]

This is the 1st video of his brother
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtROxaJL9cQ

 

[2ndamendfan]

I guess the quandry here is that Paddock had no crim history and no apparent warning signs that he was going to go postal.

Yes that is the quandry. Normally if the person has a past criminal history the question of "why was he not in prison" comes up. This is obviously not the case.

To be a FREE society I believe requires us/you to be a "reaction" based society. You have to let something happen before you can react. The thought of "prevention" is really a fantasy. Most people are followers and for 99% of the people it is a non-issue. But when a person figures out that they can not be stopped from doing something then all bets are off. This puts disregard for consequences in the picture.

To be a "proactive" society that trys to prevent citizens from doing an activity requires a totalitarian or dictatorship government where you can and are punished for something you might do, at the whim of the government. This Instills fear. Most people are okay with punishment after an action has been made. But very few can stomach punishment before action even if that is what they think they want.

Those that are now yelling "prevent prevent prevent" either are to naive to fully think through what the unintended consequences of that will be. OR they want to be the dictator!!

 

[Dewey7271]

Those that are now yelling "prevent prevent prevent" either are to naive to fully think through what the unintended consequences of that will be. OR they want to be the dictator!!

Man, that's spot on.

 

[Deleted member 10043]

Well, it's official. The libs drew first blood. Some nut is going to reciprocate and then we are going to have a nice little gang war on our hands.

 

[Shooter McGavin]

The drug diazepam has some nasty ass side effects that could have cause his ass to go off the deep end https://www.drugs.com/sfx/diazepam-side-effects.html

 

[pmclaine]

I guess the quandry here is that Paddock had no crim history and no apparent warning signs that he was going to go postal.

So no level of law/restriction would have prevented his act unless you accept severely curtailing the freedoms of people with no criminal history and no apparent warning signs.

It seems to me you have had a moment of revelation here.

You are getting there, don't be afraid, the truth will set you free.

 

[Veer_G]

https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/742ik3/paddock_left_a_note_new_pictures_from_inside/

 

[jbailey]

The drug diazepam has some nasty ass side effects that could have cause his ass to go off the deep end https://www.drugs.com/sfx/diazepam-side-effects.html

Unlikely this massacre is related to diazepem. Diazepam and its broader class of anti-anxiety meds known as benzodiasepines (benzos) have been around for 50+ years and have been the most widely prescribed drugs in the history of prescription drugs. Literally hundreds of millions of people haven taken them. Those side effects you are reading are very rare and are most likely caused by the underlying human problem, not the drug. They have been so widely used because they are mild and have such a benign safety profiles. And drug companies are no longer pushing these and no one is making any money on them anymore.

There have been some studies that note higher levels of violence and suicides in patients taking benzos, but these aren't well control studies and the medical community doesn't widely consider this a risk related to the drug, but rather to the patient group.

I note that he was RX only 50 of them. Not enough to build an addiction, nor to cause a serious problem if he suddenly stopped taking them. (Toughest thing about benzos is the addiction forming nature - you stop taking them and the underlining mental problems come roaring back). If he had a history of using them, I would imagine doctor would have RX'ed either a stronger benzo (maybe Xanax), or a recurring RX in a different class. Likely doc was RXing them in response to mild sleeping problems or on-off anxiety, rather than a chronic issue.

Just guesses based on the very limited medical hx we have on this POS.

 

[...]

Brother’s second interview.

Man is either high, under pressure that I can not relate to, within the autistic spectrum, or a nutter. Cliff notes - brother’s a whack, spews about the incomprehensibility of it all, brother was an introvert who lavished his few friends / cash no problem / makes brother seem detached / hopes that the autopsy reveals some weird tumor, suggests anyone could pop.

It’s punishing to watch, but on the verge of comedy gold too.

Holy shit i wanna punch that guy in the face....

typical liberal, "me me me, im rich, me me me, were so smart, me me me"

Huh....so $100k isnt a lot of money eh?......he may be wealthy.....but i know a lot of wealthy people....none of them would just shrug at $100K and act like its no big deal

and the whole "something horrible happened to my brother!"

oh yeah, like were supposed to feel bad for your brother, you fucking cunt

 

[Spooky68]

1. Why did he stop firing?
2. What was he doing between the time he stopped and the time the law arrived? ~1 hr

 

[Veer_G]

https://www.fec.gov/data/receipts/in...12%2F31%2F2014



leaked photos of the dead shooter are on 4chan

They're getting scolded by the media.

http://metro.co.uk/2017/10/02/4chan-users-treat-las-vegas-shootings-like-a-game-6971576/

 

[wfjames22]

1. Why did he stop firing?
2. What was he doing between the time he stopped and the time the law arrived? ~1 hr

1. He shot himself in the head.
2. Laying in the floor dead.

At least that's what I'd surmise from the reports I've seen/read.

 

[Maggot]

KWilson,

I believe the short term answer is no. Long term; it would require some changes to our society at a very basic level.

As to the article you posted, I have some thoughts.

First, the author makes some valid comparisons to Rome, but fails to realize the difference between Roman civilization and the US. I believe Dinesh D'Souza summed up the difference very succinctly with a basic diagram. If the "America" society is a diamond shaped square, the founding cultures that made America what it is, are Rome and Jerusalem (top two sides of the diamond), and with them they brought the marriage of logic (Rome) and Judeo Christian values (Jerusalem). These two major components represent the bottom two sides of the diamond. Rome at its time was the melting pot of the world, but assimilation to a single set of moral codes did not exist. It was the wild wild west of religions, and many degrees of moral conduct were accepted/tolerated. The US was founded on, and assimilated everyone to a single set of moral values, largely based on Judeo Christian concepts.

Now, understanding that, lets get back to the discussion of people in general. Humans, by their very nature are war-like. It doesn't matter if it is a club, a rifle, or a pen. We tend to want to compete and crush our opponents. We're also very tribal. I would argue one of the points that the author misses, is that America (I think) has probably the most warrior like culture and history. It is imbued in our national psyche and identity. From our history of the revolution, to the expansion west into the frontier, to our involvement in WWI and WWII. We (I believe) assume a very warrior like attitude towards most things. I'm not saying other countries don't have similar folks, but not many have a national identity that supports that.

I would also argue that that same warrior like culture is what made the US the super power that it is today; that drive to conquer, overcome or overwhelm obstacles. Whether they be enemies, disease, the environment, the need for industrial expansion, manufacturing, etc.; it doesn't matter, the American attitude and warrior culture has constantly and consistently overcome many of the things making America hugely successful (and those ethos were once highly priased). Now of course, the challenge of a warrior culture is the propensity for it to turn inwards and devour itself with internal strife and competition. This is where the difference between Rome and US comes into play.

The Judeo Christian values that sustained the US throughout most of its history were the same values that made warriors into "civilized warriors" (so-to-speak). Much like the Japanese concept of a the warrior poet, these values constrained our society from self destruction, by putting boundaries on what is morally right, and wrong, pushing that warrior aggression into other (more acceptable) efforts, while creating the environment where concepts such as honor, compassion, integrity, and warrior prowess were praised and respected equally. Where a balance of these values were actively sought after, and respect was acknowledged for attaining those.

The way I see it, both of the two founding principles that make American great (logic and judeo christian values) have been severely eroded over the years, some by (well intention-ed) liberal progressives, some by not so well intention-ed liberal progressives, and some by technology (which I think makes it easier to stray from a solid moral foundation). Our education system (the logic side of the equation) has been corrupted by liberal progressive thinking that is often in a complete vacuum from reality. This is where a similarity with Rome resides, you have only to look at the writings of Marcus Aurelius and the debates between the Stoics and the Epicureans. Rome's liberal logic (Epicureans) shattered the single guiding principle behind their republic, unbiased logic (Stoics). They had little moral fabric built into their society to buffer these social battles, so the down fall was hastened, once one side gained enough momentum to then control the thoughts and emotions of the mob. I believe this is why their version of democracy failed/imploded; because it allowed mob rule. And when one side can control the mob...well, I think we all understand the shit storm that can be (just look at some of the third world countries today)

In the US, we have had a system where mob rule is buffered or constrained by a common set of judeo christian values/morals, as well as a governing system that counter balances population density (cities) representation with geospatial identity (states) representation (but that is another discussion). The JC values have been eroded from our government over the years, through many efforts on the liberal progressive side under the guise of the "Separation of church and state" argument. The flaw in this argument (IMHO), is the liberal assumption that people are somehow naturally moral, and that religious overtones are not needed or desired in governing the population. That (I believe) is the distinction I see between our founding fathers and the current politicians. Many (not all) of our founding fathers did not seek power, and in fact embraced the JC values of humility, selflessness, personal responsibility and duty to the community. Many values that no longer are respected, admired or espoused by our leaders, media and teachers (unless it fits their agenda).

All of these values effect the firearm related incidents we see today. Whether it be the individual conducting these senseless acts of violence, or those around them, who blindly look the other way. The issue is not the firearms, it is the values (or lack thereof) that is the core issue. This core issue of logic and values being in balance is what will determine the fall of the US. Rome fell from corruption within, mainly because it was founded primarily on the Roman/Greek philosophy of logic and citizen driven law (singular pillars, not really associated with each other). If the US falls (like Rome from internal destruction) it will be because the people themselves have failed, not because of the system itself as originally laid (which has tried to interlace the two pillars to prevent the inevitable periodic weakness that can and will happen as society ages). The people, through their well intention-ed desire to remain safe, fat, dumb and happy (not being a warrior culture, but embracing the lazy, easy way to live) will undo the system (disentangle the two pillars) to the point where it fail to govern and constrain the population (if either pillar fails, it pull down or destroy the other), and the warrior ethos will not be there in sufficient quantity to stave off the fall or regain strength for the next periodic weakness of either pillar. Factions will begin, and the mob will gain power...to the point that the system will collapse.

That being said, the system can recover, it was designed that way. But people have to be willing to do the work, accept the pain of correcting the system (and it will be painful to many) and re-embrace a moral foundation that has (IMHO) been lost on the last couple generations. That is how the gun problem, and the US decay will be resolved.

Mass shootings aren't the problem, they are the symptom of a much worse disease. And you can't treat the symptom and hope for it to cure the disease. You have to treat the disease; the erosion of unemotional logic (call it critical thinking), and degradation of Judeo Christian values that guide a sense of right and wrong.

At any rate, sorry for the long winded response, but I found the article interesting, if (IMHO) deeply flawed in its understanding of America...

A couple of thoughts here.

- Our system of reason and logic came from the Greeks. Socrates,Plato, Aristotle, and the like. Rome gave us a system of LAWS.

-While we speak of (Judeo) Christian values, our way of life is far from that whicn Christ taught. And Christian values, those that Christ taught, are just as far from what the Rabbi's taught. Fortunately, or unfortunately, we cant debate that here.

 

[vh20]

1. Why did he stop firing?
2. What was he doing between the time he stopped and the time the law arrived? ~1 hr

I don't think your point #2 is right. As I understand it, LE arrived outside his door 11 minutes after firing began (or 16, or something around approx). Firing inside the room stopped when they ARRIVED. They did not ENTER the room for about an hour, and there was no firing going on during this time. The explanation, as I understood it, is that he killed himself as soon as he saw them arrive, via camera, outside his room. They did not know he was dead as there was no way to distinguish that the last shot they heard was the killer committing suicide, so they took their time in figuring out what was going on inside the room (since there was no immediate pressure as there was no more firing) before breaching the door.

 

[THE SENTINEL]

Brother’s second interview.

Man is either high, under pressure that I can not relate to, within the autistic spectrum, or a nutter. Cliff notes - brother’s a whack, spews about the incomprehensibility of it all, brother was an introvert who lavished his few friends / cash no problem / makes brother seem detached / hopes that the autopsy reveals some weird tumor, suggests anyone could pop.

It’s punishing to watch, but on the verge of comedy gold too.

its all about Steve my now dead brother.He does not show any remorse for the 59 dead 500 plus wounded,what a asshole.watch the body language of this prick.

 

[Spooky68]

I don't think your point #2 is right. As I understand it, LE arrived outside his door 11 minutes after firing began (or 16, or something around approx). Firing inside the room stopped when they ARRIVED. They did not ENTER the room for about an hour, and there was no firing going on during this time. The explanation, as I understood it, is that he killed himself as soon as he saw them arrive, via camera, outside his room. They did not know he was dead as there was no way to distinguish that the last shot they heard was the killer committing suicide, so they took their time in figuring out what was going on inside the room (since there was no immediate pressure as there was no more firing) before breaching the door.

Ahhh.. I got tripped up on a small detail.....makes sense now!

 

[QuickNDirty]

I mean, how fucking weird is it that the brother in the interview was wearing a shirt for a florida arts studio whom Sara Brady chairs, and Sara Brady apparently has a fucking crisis management firm, too...

 

[Maggot]

Ahhh.. I got tripped up on a small detail.....makes sense now!

The punishment will be severe.

 

[MtnCreek]

They're getting scolded by the media.

http://metro.co.uk/2017/10/02/4chan-users-treat-las-vegas-shootings-like-a-game-6971576/

Media reports on them jerking off to the body count while the media jerks off to the body count.

 

[Veer_G]

Media reports on them jerking off to the body count while the media jerks off to the body count.

Oh, but it's porn for thee, and "art" for me, friend. Pass the Grey Poupon, would you?

 

[Flyingbullseye]

Might was well wade into this now getting home from work.

KWilson, there is no legislation that could have prevented this type of tragedy.

You mentioned the number of firearm deaths in this country this year, 11,500, but you didn't mention that the majority of them are from suicide rather than crime. Self related accidents are well in there too but come in as a close third. The problem with stating statistics especially after situations like this is peoples emotions get all worked up and they run on feelings or what they are told on TV rather than looking deeper themselves.

Take this country and gun shootings (by crime) alone. If you only take just 1 demographic out of the equation, gun related crime become more a statistical anomaly in a country than what is perceived as the norm from an outside perspective. If you really wanted to go deeper into that demographic you could look into the voting persuasion of nearly all the mass shooters in modern US history and you'd see a trend. If it helps the law abiding gun owner and even NFA (suppressors, full auto ect) owners have such a small to no gun related crime that its pointless to argue adding anymore laws are even pushing for stricter ones in a country of 350 million people. Even without taking our certain guilty demographic out of the gun death equation the chances of getting shot in this country are far smaller than getting beat, stabbed or otherwise here, Europe or even in your country.

No one ever wishes this type of situation to happen, not even the hated NRA. Its part of the world we live in. Some people just suck and have dark intentions. Unfortunately these things also get sensationalized to the point that it almost seems as if its normal, which is really isn't.

 

[Mike_Honcho]

its all about Steve my now dead brother.He does not show any remorse for the 59 dead 500 plus wounded,what a asshole.watch the body language of this prick.

He said everyone could come spit on his grave if it made people feel better.....

 

[QuickNDirty]

I mean, really, how fucking weird is this shit?

http://flightaware.com/resources/registration/N5343M
https://twitter.com/MikeTokes/status/915618593726898177

 

[kabarNC]

I mean, really, how fucking weird is this shit?

http://flightaware.com/resources/registration/N5343M
https://twitter.com/MikeTokes/status/915618593726898177

May explain why he might've been hesitant to use the plane idea then no?

 

[Maggot]

I mean, really, how fucking weird is this shit?

http://flightaware.com/resources/registration/N5343M
https://twitter.com/MikeTokes/status/915618593726898177

Doesnt quite add up. If the cops were there in 11 minutes, where did ISIS go? Ill have to put on my Alcoa hat.

 

[Veer_G]

May explain why he might've been hesitant to use the plane idea then no?

The Twitter link had a bit indicating that the brother seemed to be on the verge of saying that Paddock was an arms dealer?

What I'm not getting is the disconnect between the brother's original position that Paddock wasn't a "gun person," and then the latter revelations that he apparently was.

This thing is a messy, messy mess, and the clean-up is going to leave some shit that won't buff out.

 

[Threadcutter308]

Well, I'm just going to tune in to the alphabet soup MSM tonight for the straight skinny and all the up to date facts..........

 

[Bigjake83]

Well, I've now confirmed that I have lost two of my Brothers I served with in Japan and San Diego along with one of my best friends fathers who he just now found among the unidentified...

 

[Maggot]

Well, I've now confirmed that I have lost two of my Brothers I served with in Japan and San Diego along with one of my best friends fathers who he just now found among the unidentified...

Condolences, brother.

 

[Bigjake83]

Does an accountant get his dick sucked every time he does your taxes? Does a chef get a parade every time he cooks dinner?

I applaud first responders and the difficult job they do day in and day out. No doubt it's a very honorable profession.

I just don't commend those for doing what's in their job description. They signed up for it.

And yeah, I'm a Marine, was in Iraq and all that jazz. And you know what? Whoopadedoo!!!! Don't need no thanks or pat on the backs.
Save that bullshit for the fobbit's.

You really are up a repugnant Fucking Cunt...

 

[MtnCreek]

Really sorry to hear that. I know that don't count for much, but still wanted you to know that.

 

[QuickNDirty]

Well, I've now confirmed that I have lost two of my Brothers I served with in Japan and San Diego along with one of my best friends fathers who he just now found among the unidentified...

Damn...

 

[Bigjake83]

You didn't actually make a point with your childish insult, but I digress, I just pity you guys the next time it happens.

Listen up Poofter.... I live half my Tim in Brisbane and the other half here stateside, don't come on here and compare what Laws have in place now, you had a massive shooting in Tasmania that's spurred the ban on Firearms you guys have today but you never had the concept that we do here in the states of protecting ourselves against corrupt government and in our own home.