Active shooter or shooters in Vegas
I'm guessing this was meant with sarcasm?
Suppressors only lower the sound of each shot to a hearing-safe level. They do not, "silence" a shot. The shooter was not located because of the noise of the gunfire, he was located initially by muzzle flashes and, then, the fire alarm went off in his room due to all the cordite smoke in the room.
There is absolutely no way to drag suppressors into this discussion in any substantive way. Hillary's tweets talking about suppressors and the NRA's support of the SHARE Act are a disgusting politicization of this senseless tragedy.
Had the shooter had suppressors, the events would not have unfolded any worse than they did. In fact, they may have limited his fire because most will fail under a sustained high rate of fire. The problem with suppressors is limited to people's ignorance of what they do, what they don't do and how they operate. There is not one single realistic negative to the use of suppressors although there are many positives, even for non-gun folks.
According to all the reports I've heard and the statement by officials in Las Vegas earlier, it only took 20-30 minutes from the first 911 call until the door was breached. 20 minutes is the number I keep hearing but someone said 30 minutes (can't remember who) so I threw that one in.
You're sure right about the lack of specific details leading to rampant theorizing.....especially from the tin foil hat crowd.
I'll agree with your suspicion if you can explain how a 'mystery shooter' would have been able to flee the room with doors barricaded from the inside.
I don't find it that strange that somebody goes off the rails. No doubt, it's far less common than some known loser or radical pulling off a horrific event; but they don't have a monopoly on having a screw loose. Older successful white guys aren't exempt from the possibility of coming unhinged. Odds are, his education and success aided him in hiding his propensities and twisted thoughts from his family and friends. After listening to his brother in an interview, it seems his family had no clue about his proclivities. As sad, tragic and horrific as last night's events were, it'll be interesting to find out what the motives were behind these disgusting acts.
Originally posted by Encinal
View Post
Originally posted by pilar
View Post
There is absolutely no way to drag suppressors into this discussion in any substantive way. Hillary's tweets talking about suppressors and the NRA's support of the SHARE Act are a disgusting politicization of this senseless tragedy.
Had the shooter had suppressors, the events would not have unfolded any worse than they did. In fact, they may have limited his fire because most will fail under a sustained high rate of fire. The problem with suppressors is limited to people's ignorance of what they do, what they don't do and how they operate. There is not one single realistic negative to the use of suppressors although there are many positives, even for non-gun folks.
Originally posted by jerp
View Post
You're sure right about the lack of specific details leading to rampant theorizing.....especially from the tin foil hat crowd.
Originally posted by Livin'2hunt
View Post
I don't find it that strange that somebody goes off the rails. No doubt, it's far less common than some known loser or radical pulling off a horrific event; but they don't have a monopoly on having a screw loose. Older successful white guys aren't exempt from the possibility of coming unhinged. Odds are, his education and success aided him in hiding his propensities and twisted thoughts from his family and friends. After listening to his brother in an interview, it seems his family had no clue about his proclivities. As sad, tragic and horrific as last night's events were, it'll be interesting to find out what the motives were behind these disgusting acts.
Comment