What did you want him to do instead when they didn't even know where the bullets were coming from?
I’m with you, I really do not understand the attention this guy is getting here. He is one guy amongst 20,000 there...All that I can make of it is that people are just trying to make fun of him for not going all Rambo and getting himself killed??
He is an interesting human being. But I don’t see the point you are trying to make? Guy tried to save his own life first, like most people would, and then the rest is up for debate. He said/she said all over the article. What do you want him to do?
Was there a point I was trying to make? I just posted an article that stated the facts that I found interesting.
He is an interesting human being. But I don’t see the point you are trying to make? Guy tried to save his own life first, like most people would, and then the rest is up for debate. He said/she said all over the article. What do you want him to do?
Was there a point I was trying to make? I just posted an article that stated the facts that I found interesting.
So.....thanks for the pointless (by your own admission) post?
He is an interesting human being. But I don’t see the point you are trying to make? Guy tried to save his own life first, like most people would, and then the rest is up for debate. He said/she said all over the article. What do you want him to do?
Was there a point I was trying to make? I just posted an article that stated the facts that I found interesting.
It just seems like you and the article were making fun of a guy for running from a mass shooting? Im guessing its the "make fun of all guys with guns" thing thats been going on. But come on, he was in a mass shooting and saw people next to him get killed. Really, can we not make fun of the victims yet?
He is an interesting human being. But I don’t see the point you are trying to make? Guy tried to save his own life first, like most people would, and then the rest is up for debate. He said/she said all over the article. What do you want him to do?
Was there a point I was trying to make? I just posted an article that stated the facts that I found interesting.
There were hardly even facts besides that he was there. Just a writer that seems to have it out for the guy.
Pittsburgh 2013 Cincinnati 2014 Greenville 2016 (Raleigh 2016) Columbia 2016
“Leah Libresco is a statistician and former newswriter at FiveThirtyEight, a data journalism site. She is the author of “Arriving at Amen.”
Before I started researching gun deaths, gun-control policy used to frustrate me. I wished the National Rifle Association would stop blocking common-sense gun-control reforms such as banning assault weapons, restricting silencers, shrinking magazine sizes and all the other measures that could make guns less deadly.
Then, my colleagues and I at FiveThirtyEight spent three months analyzing all 33,000 lives ended by guns each year in the United States, and I wound up frustrated in a whole new way. We looked at what interventions might have saved those people, and the case for the policies I’d lobbied for crumbled when I examined the evidence. The best ideas left standing were narrowly tailored interventions to protect subtypes of potential victims, not broad attempts to limit the lethality of guns.
I researched the strictly tightened gun laws in Britain and Australia and concluded that they didn’t prove much about what America’s policy should be. Neither nation experienced drops in mass shootings or other gun related-crime that could be attributed to their buybacks and bans. Mass shootings were too rare in Australia for their absence after the buyback program to be clear evidence of progress. And in both Australia and Britain, the gun restrictions had an ambiguous effect on other gun-related crimes or deaths.
When I looked at the other oft-praised policies, I found out that no gun owner walks into the store to buy an “assault weapon.” It’s an invented classification that includes any semi-automatic that has two or more features, such as a bayonet mount, a rocket-propelled grenade-launcher mount, a folding stock or a pistol grip. But guns are modular, and any hobbyist can easily add these features at home, just as if they were snapping together Legos.
As for silencers — they deserve that name only in movies, where they reduce gunfire to a soft puick puick. In real life, silencers limit hearing damage for shooters but don’t make gunfire dangerously quiet. An AR-15 with a silencer is about as loud as a jackhammer. Magazine limits were a little more promising, but a practiced shooter could still change magazines so fast as to make the limit meaningless.
As my co-workers and I kept looking at the data, it seemed less and less clear that one broad gun-control restriction could make a big difference. Two-thirds of gun deaths in the United States every year are suicides. Almost no proposed restriction would make it meaningfully harder for people with guns on hand to use them. I couldn't even answer my most desperate question: If I had a friend who had guns in his home and a history of suicide attempts, was there anything I could do that would help?
However, the next-largest set of gun deaths — 1 in 5 — were young men aged 15 to 34, killed in homicides. These men were most likely to die at the hands of other young men, often related to gang loyalties or other street violence. And the last notable group of similar deaths was the 1,700 women murdered per year, usually as the result of domestic violence. Far more people were killed in these ways than in mass-shooting incidents, but few of the popularly floated policies were tailored to serve them.
By the time we published our project, I didn’t believe in many of the interventions I’d heard politicians tout. I was still anti-gun, at least from the point of view of most gun owners, and I don’t want a gun in my home, as I think the risk outweighs the benefits. But I can’t endorse policies whose only selling point is that gun owners hate them. Policies that often seem as if they were drafted by people who have encountered guns only as a figure in a briefing book or an image on the news.
Instead, I found the most hope in more narrowly tailored interventions. Potential suicide victims, women menaced by their abusive partners and kids swept up in street vendettas are all in danger from guns, but they each require different protections.
Play Video 1:54
Was the Las Vegas shooting the worst in U.S. history? It depends.
While the attack on the Las Vegas strip is the deadliest in modern American history, attacks in the 19th and 20th centuries had higher death tolls. (Victoria Walker/The Washington Post)
Older men, who make up the largest shareof gun suicides, need better access to people who could care for them and get them help. Women endangered by specific men need to be prioritized by police, who can enforce restraining orders prohibiting these men from buying and owning guns. Younger men at risk of violence need to be identified before they take a life or lose theirs and to be connected to mentors who can help them de-escalate conflicts.
Even the most data-driven practices, such as New Orleans’ plan to identify gang members for intervention based on previous arrests and weapons seizures, wind up more personal than most policies floated. The young men at risk can be identified by an algorithm, but they have to be disarmed one by one, personally — not en masse as though they were all interchangeable. A reduction in gun deaths is most likely to come from finding smaller chances for victories and expanding those solutions as much as possible. We save lives by focusing on a range of tactics to protect the different kinds of potential victims and reforming potential killers, not from sweeping bans focused on the guns themselves.”
What did you want him to do instead when they didn't even know where the bullets were coming from?
I’m with you, I really do not understand the attention this guy is getting here. He is one guy amongst 20,000 there...All that I can make of it is that people are just trying to make fun of him for not going all Rambo and getting himself killed??
I think it is just a perception thing. This guy has created an online persona that he is a Rambo type. A real hero and tough guy. So when reality hit and he tucked tail while others shielded people with their bodies, immediately helped those around them who were down, etc... it challenged this guys self-created persona. He's no superman. He had a natural urge to flee a dangerous situation, just as many of us would. He isn't the tough, badass as he likes to portray himself in his little youtube vids. Nobody has a problem with normal people who have no self-delusional hero fantasies going into self-preservation mode. I think he's only being called out because he set himself up to be.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
He is an interesting human being. But I don’t see the point you are trying to make? Guy tried to save his own life first, like most people would, and then the rest is up for debate. He said/she said all over the article. What do you want him to do?
Was there a point I was trying to make? I just posted an article that stated the facts that I found interesting.
So.....thanks for the pointless (by your own admission) post?
The post I was responding to claimed that I was trying to make a point. I shared an article with none of my words attached. Therefore I wasn't expressing a point.
If you want my opinion I will give it to you. The guy was a pretender and was exposed as one. For all the tough guy talk that we need to prepare for these mass shootings, in the end these tough guys like everyone else run and hide. Just like all the tough guys on these forums.
I'm not going to live my life in fear and paranoia, buy guns, dwell on and prepare for mass shootings. I will leave that to the gun nutters. Life is too short.
He is an interesting human being. But I don’t see the point you are trying to make? Guy tried to save his own life first, like most people would, and then the rest is up for debate. He said/she said all over the article. What do you want him to do?
Was there a point I was trying to make? I just posted an article that stated the facts that I found interesting.
So.....thanks for the pointless (by your own admission) post?
The post I was responding to claimed that I was trying to make a point. I shared an article with none of my words attached. Therefore I wasn't expressing a point.
If you want my opinion I will give it to you. The guy was a pretender and was exposed as one. For all the tough guy talk that we need to prepare for these mass shootings, in the end these tough guys like everyone else run and hide. Just like all the tough guys on these forums.
I'm not going to live my life in fear and paranoia, buy guns, dwell on and prepare for mass shootings. I will leave that to the gun nutters. Life is too short.
None of your words attached? Well, thats not true. Your exact words were "What a macho, gun-packing Instagram star did when he was caught in the Las Vegas shooting" when linking the article. You were clearly making fun of a guy who was a victim of a mass shooting. Classy.
What did you want him to do instead when they didn't even know where the bullets were coming from?
I’m with you, I really do not understand the attention this guy is getting here. He is one guy amongst 20,000 there...All that I can make of it is that people are just trying to make fun of him for not going all Rambo and getting himself killed??
I think it is just a perception thing. This guy has created an online persona that he is a Rambo type. A real hero and tough guy. So when reality hit and he tucked tail while others shielded people with their bodies, immediately helped those around them who were down, etc... it challenged this guys self-created persona. He's no superman. He had a natural urge to flee a dangerous situation, just as many of us would. He isn't the tough, badass as he likes to portray himself in his little youtube vids. Nobody has a problem with normal people who have no self-delusional hero fantasies going into self-preservation mode. I think he's only being called out because he set himself up to be.
So the guy was supposed to take a 300 yard shot at a hotel with innocent people in it?
He is an interesting human being. But I don’t see the point you are trying to make? Guy tried to save his own life first, like most people would, and then the rest is up for debate. He said/she said all over the article. What do you want him to do?
Was there a point I was trying to make? I just posted an article that stated the facts that I found interesting.
So.....thanks for the pointless (by your own admission) post?
The post I was responding to claimed that I was trying to make a point. I shared an article with none of my words attached. Therefore I wasn't expressing a point.
If you want my opinion I will give it to you. The guy was a pretender and was exposed as one. For all the tough guy talk that we need to prepare for these mass shootings, in the end these tough guys like everyone else run and hide. Just like all the tough guys on these forums.
I'm not going to live my life in fear and paranoia, buy guns, dwell on and prepare for mass shootings. I will leave that to the gun nutters. Life is too short.
Preparing is also knowing where to run and how to hide. Stupidity is standing up and flipping off the shooter...What “tough guys” are you referring to? Situational awareness has nothing to do with being “tough”...
And by the way, many, many people risked their lives and stayed at the site to attend to the wounded and get them out of harms way. Wanting no attention at all.
I've got no problem with him running for his life....but then don't say shit like this afterwards. “I don’t think it was heroic at all,” he told People of his actions. “I just wanted to do the right thing.”
Like I said, a pretender. The article I posted exposes that.
He is an interesting human being. But I don’t see the point you are trying to make? Guy tried to save his own life first, like most people would, and then the rest is up for debate. He said/she said all over the article. What do you want him to do?
Was there a point I was trying to make? I just posted an article that stated the facts that I found interesting.
So.....thanks for the pointless (by your own admission) post?
The post I was responding to claimed that I was trying to make a point. I shared an article with none of my words attached. Therefore I wasn't expressing a point.
If you want my opinion I will give it to you. The guy was a pretender and was exposed as one. For all the tough guy talk that we need to prepare for these mass shootings, in the end these tough guys like everyone else run and hide. Just like all the tough guys on these forums.
I'm not going to live my life in fear and paranoia, buy guns, dwell on and prepare for mass shootings. I will leave that to the gun nutters. Life is too short.
None of your words attached? Well, thats not true. Your exact words were "What a macho, gun-packing Instagram star did when he was caught in the Las Vegas shooting" when linking the article. You were clearly making fun of a guy who was a victim of a mass shooting. Classy.
And by the way, many, many people risked their lives and stayed at the site to attend to the wounded and get them out of harms way. Wanting no attention at all.
I've got no problem with him running for his life....but then don't say shit like this afterwards. “I don’t think it was heroic at all,” he told People of his actions. “I just wanted to do the right thing.”
Like I said, a pretender. The article I posted exposes that.
So is it too early to start making fun of the hurricane victims in PR? I'm guessing no, since that was even days before this.
He is an interesting human being. But I don’t see the point you are trying to make? Guy tried to save his own life first, like most people would, and then the rest is up for debate. He said/she said all over the article. What do you want him to do?
Was there a point I was trying to make? I just posted an article that stated the facts that I found interesting.
So.....thanks for the pointless (by your own admission) post?
The post I was responding to claimed that I was trying to make a point. I shared an article with none of my words attached. Therefore I wasn't expressing a point.
If you want my opinion I will give it to you. The guy was a pretender and was exposed as one. For all the tough guy talk that we need to prepare for these mass shootings, in the end these tough guys like everyone else run and hide. Just like all the tough guys on these forums.
I'm not going to live my life in fear and paranoia, buy guns, dwell on and prepare for mass shootings. I will leave that to the gun nutters. Life is too short.
None of your words attached? Well, thats not true. Your exact words were "What a macho, gun-packing Instagram star did when he was caught in the Las Vegas shooting" when linking the article. You were clearly making fun of a guy who was a victim of a mass shooting. Classy.
That was the headline of the article.
Classy indeed.
Here's a pro tip, next time before you comment read what it is you are commenting on.
And by the way, many, many people risked their lives and stayed at the site to attend to the wounded and get them out of harms way. Wanting no attention at all.
I've got no problem with him running for his life....but then don't say shit like this afterwards. “I don’t think it was heroic at all,” he told People of his actions. “I just wanted to do the right thing.”
Like I said, a pretender. The article I posted exposes that.
But he did go back? And he did supposedly help someone. Or do you believe he didnt? That is where all the he said - she said comes in from that article. Bad example I think
Pittsburgh 2013 Cincinnati 2014 Greenville 2016 (Raleigh 2016) Columbia 2016
What did you want him to do instead when they didn't even know where the bullets were coming from?
I’m with you, I really do not understand the attention this guy is getting here. He is one guy amongst 20,000 there...All that I can make of it is that people are just trying to make fun of him for not going all Rambo and getting himself killed??
I think it is just a perception thing. This guy has created an online persona that he is a Rambo type. A real hero and tough guy. So when reality hit and he tucked tail while others shielded people with their bodies, immediately helped those around them who were down, etc... it challenged this guys self-created persona. He's no superman. He had a natural urge to flee a dangerous situation, just as many of us would. He isn't the tough, badass as he likes to portray himself in his little youtube vids. Nobody has a problem with normal people who have no self-delusional hero fantasies going into self-preservation mode. I think he's only being called out because he set himself up to be.
So basically you are saying that he was a semi-celebrity that is pulling attention away from the true heroes of the moment? I get accused of pulling the conversation away from the “real issue” of gun control and by encouraging people to be vigilant now we are talking about some dumbass that few had ever even heard about before this week?
He is an interesting human being. But I don’t see the point you are trying to make? Guy tried to save his own life first, like most people would, and then the rest is up for debate. He said/she said all over the article. What do you want him to do?
Was there a point I was trying to make? I just posted an article that stated the facts that I found interesting.
So.....thanks for the pointless (by your own admission) post?
The post I was responding to claimed that I was trying to make a point. I shared an article with none of my words attached. Therefore I wasn't expressing a point.
If you want my opinion I will give it to you. The guy was a pretender and was exposed as one. For all the tough guy talk that we need to prepare for these mass shootings, in the end these tough guys like everyone else run and hide. Just like all the tough guys on these forums.
I'm not going to live my life in fear and paranoia, buy guns, dwell on and prepare for mass shootings. I will leave that to the gun nutters. Life is too short.
he wasn't armed at the time. he claims he went back and got his gun and returned to the scene. whether that's true or not is irrelevant. anyone, Rambo himself, wouldn't stand up with arms open asking to "come and shoot me". that's asinine.
anyone with a brain would run to safety. navy seals included. unless we believe they'd be able to somehow McGyver a gun out of a plastic cup and some string.
“Leah Libresco is a statistician and former newswriter at FiveThirtyEight, a data journalism site. She is the author of “Arriving at Amen.”
Before I started researching gun deaths, gun-control policy used to frustrate me. I wished the National Rifle Association would stop blocking common-sense gun-control reforms such as banning assault weapons, restricting silencers, shrinking magazine sizes and all the other measures that could make guns less deadly.
Then, my colleagues and I at FiveThirtyEight spent three months analyzing all 33,000 lives ended by guns each year in the United States, and I wound up frustrated in a whole new way. We looked at what interventions might have saved those people, and the case for the policies I’d lobbied for crumbled when I examined the evidence. The best ideas left standing were narrowly tailored interventions to protect subtypes of potential victims, not broad attempts to limit the lethality of guns.
I researched the strictly tightened gun laws in Britain and Australia and concluded that they didn’t prove much about what America’s policy should be. Neither nation experienced drops in mass shootings or other gun related-crime that could be attributed to their buybacks and bans. Mass shootings were too rare in Australia for their absence after the buyback program to be clear evidence of progress. And in both Australia and Britain, the gun restrictions had an ambiguous effect on other gun-related crimes or deaths.
When I looked at the other oft-praised policies, I found out that no gun owner walks into the store to buy an “assault weapon.” It’s an invented classification that includes any semi-automatic that has two or more features, such as a bayonet mount, a rocket-propelled grenade-launcher mount, a folding stock or a pistol grip. But guns are modular, and any hobbyist can easily add these features at home, just as if they were snapping together Legos.
As for silencers — they deserve that name only in movies, where they reduce gunfire to a soft puick puick. In real life, silencers limit hearing damage for shooters but don’t make gunfire dangerously quiet. An AR-15 with a silencer is about as loud as a jackhammer. Magazine limits were a little more promising, but a practiced shooter could still change magazines so fast as to make the limit meaningless.
As my co-workers and I kept looking at the data, it seemed less and less clear that one broad gun-control restriction could make a big difference. Two-thirds of gun deaths in the United States every year are suicides. Almost no proposed restriction would make it meaningfully harder for people with guns on hand to use them. I couldn't even answer my most desperate question: If I had a friend who had guns in his home and a history of suicide attempts, was there anything I could do that would help?
However, the next-largest set of gun deaths — 1 in 5 — were young men aged 15 to 34, killed in homicides. These men were most likely to die at the hands of other young men, often related to gang loyalties or other street violence. And the last notable group of similar deaths was the 1,700 women murdered per year, usually as the result of domestic violence. Far more people were killed in these ways than in mass-shooting incidents, but few of the popularly floated policies were tailored to serve them.
By the time we published our project, I didn’t believe in many of the interventions I’d heard politicians tout. I was still anti-gun, at least from the point of view of most gun owners, and I don’t want a gun in my home, as I think the risk outweighs the benefits. But I can’t endorse policies whose only selling point is that gun owners hate them. Policies that often seem as if they were drafted by people who have encountered guns only as a figure in a briefing book or an image on the news.
Instead, I found the most hope in more narrowly tailored interventions. Potential suicide victims, women menaced by their abusive partners and kids swept up in street vendettas are all in danger from guns, but they each require different protections.
Play Video 1:54
Was the Las Vegas shooting the worst in U.S. history? It depends.
While the attack on the Las Vegas strip is the deadliest in modern American history, attacks in the 19th and 20th centuries had higher death tolls. (Victoria Walker/The Washington Post)
Older men, who make up the largest shareof gun suicides, need better access to people who could care for them and get them help. Women endangered by specific men need to be prioritized by police, who can enforce restraining orders prohibiting these men from buying and owning guns. Younger men at risk of violence need to be identified before they take a life or lose theirs and to be connected to mentors who can help them de-escalate conflicts.
Even the most data-driven practices, such as New Orleans’ plan to identify gang members for intervention based on previous arrests and weapons seizures, wind up more personal than most policies floated. The young men at risk can be identified by an algorithm, but they have to be disarmed one by one, personally — not en masse as though they were all interchangeable. A reduction in gun deaths is most likely to come from finding smaller chances for victories and expanding those solutions as much as possible. We save lives by focusing on a range of tactics to protect the different kinds of potential victims and reforming potential killers, not from sweeping bans focused on the guns themselves.”
I came across this article earlier but hadn't had chance to read it. Thanks for posting.
He is an interesting human being. But I don’t see the point you are trying to make? Guy tried to save his own life first, like most people would, and then the rest is up for debate. He said/she said all over the article. What do you want him to do?
Was there a point I was trying to make? I just posted an article that stated the facts that I found interesting.
So.....thanks for the pointless (by your own admission) post?
The post I was responding to claimed that I was trying to make a point. I shared an article with none of my words attached. Therefore I wasn't expressing a point.
If you want my opinion I will give it to you. The guy was a pretender and was exposed as one. For all the tough guy talk that we need to prepare for these mass shootings, in the end these tough guys like everyone else run and hide. Just like all the tough guys on these forums.
I'm not going to live my life in fear and paranoia, buy guns, dwell on and prepare for mass shootings. I will leave that to the gun nutters. Life is too short.
None of your words attached? Well, thats not true. Your exact words were "What a macho, gun-packing Instagram star did when he was caught in the Las Vegas shooting" when linking the article. You were clearly making fun of a guy who was a victim of a mass shooting. Classy.
that was the title of the article, not his words.
I overlooked that was the title. But doesn't change my opinion, to repeat the title and link it is clearly implying he agrees with the article. How is it acceptable to blame Trump Supporters for this or any and all republicans. Then go on and make fun of a victim for not fighting back during this massacre? I truly just don't get the thoughts behind many on the anti-gun side after events like this. You make fun of him for having guns, then you make fun of him for not shooting back when you don't even know where the shots are coming from? Can't have it both ways.
He is an interesting human being. But I don’t see the point you are trying to make? Guy tried to save his own life first, like most people would, and then the rest is up for debate. He said/she said all over the article. What do you want him to do?
Was there a point I was trying to make? I just posted an article that stated the facts that I found interesting.
So.....thanks for the pointless (by your own admission) post?
The post I was responding to claimed that I was trying to make a point. I shared an article with none of my words attached. Therefore I wasn't expressing a point.
If you want my opinion I will give it to you. The guy was a pretender and was exposed as one. For all the tough guy talk that we need to prepare for these mass shootings, in the end these tough guys like everyone else run and hide. Just like all the tough guys on these forums.
I'm not going to live my life in fear and paranoia, buy guns, dwell on and prepare for mass shootings. I will leave that to the gun nutters. Life is too short.
None of your words attached? Well, thats not true. Your exact words were "What a macho, gun-packing Instagram star did when he was caught in the Las Vegas shooting" when linking the article. You were clearly making fun of a guy who was a victim of a mass shooting. Classy.
that was the title of the article, not his words.
I overlooked that was the title. But doesn't change my opinion, to repeat the title and link it is clearly implying he agrees with the article. How is it acceptable to blame Trump Supporters for this or any and all republicans. Then go on and make fun of a victim for not fighting back during this massacre? I truly just don't get the thoughts behind many on the anti-gun side after events like this. You make fun of him for having guns, then you make fun of him for not shooting back when you don't even know where the shots are coming from? Can't have it both ways.
He is an interesting human being. But I don’t see the point you are trying to make? Guy tried to save his own life first, like most people would, and then the rest is up for debate. He said/she said all over the article. What do you want him to do?
Was there a point I was trying to make? I just posted an article that stated the facts that I found interesting.
So.....thanks for the pointless (by your own admission) post?
The post I was responding to claimed that I was trying to make a point. I shared an article with none of my words attached. Therefore I wasn't expressing a point.
If you want my opinion I will give it to you. The guy was a pretender and was exposed as one. For all the tough guy talk that we need to prepare for these mass shootings, in the end these tough guys like everyone else run and hide. Just like all the tough guys on these forums.
I'm not going to live my life in fear and paranoia, buy guns, dwell on and prepare for mass shootings. I will leave that to the gun nutters. Life is too short.
he wasn't armed at the time. he claims he went back and got his gun and returned to the scene. whether that's true or not is irrelevant. anyone, Rambo himself, wouldn't stand up with arms open asking to "come and shoot me". that's asinine.
anyone with a brain would run to safety. navy seals included. unless we believe they'd be able to somehow McGyver a gun out of a plastic cup and some string.
Again. Many didn't run. They stayed and saved lives.
And again, I don't blame him for running....just don't pretend you're some hero when you aren't.
What did you want him to do instead when they didn't even know where the bullets were coming from?
I’m with you, I really do not understand the attention this guy is getting here. He is one guy amongst 20,000 there...All that I can make of it is that people are just trying to make fun of him for not going all Rambo and getting himself killed??
I think it is just a perception thing. This guy has created an online persona that he is a Rambo type. A real hero and tough guy. So when reality hit and he tucked tail while others shielded people with their bodies, immediately helped those around them who were down, etc... it challenged this guys self-created persona. He's no superman. He had a natural urge to flee a dangerous situation, just as many of us would. He isn't the tough, badass as he likes to portray himself in his little youtube vids. Nobody has a problem with normal people who have no self-delusional hero fantasies going into self-preservation mode. I think he's only being called out because he set himself up to be.
So basically you are saying that he was a semi-celebrity that is pulling attention away from the true heroes of the moment? I get accused of pulling the conversation away from the “real issue” of gun control and by encouraging people to be vigilant now we are talking about some dumbass that few had ever even heard about before this week?
That's about right from my point of view. A semi-celebrity glory seeker who didn't live up to his own, self-created persona. I didn't bring him up. I don't care about him at all. If he helped people, then he gets a virtual pat on the back from me. But he didn't live up to his own billing. I'm not looking for him to go Rambo into the casino and single-handedly take out the shooter. I just figured he'd help a few of his fallen concert-goers before he ran. Like I said, I don't fault him for running per se. I fault him for being a douchenozzle in the months and years before this mass shooting. But he really is inconsequential, and the discussion about him is pretty tangential to the real stories of heroism in the midst of chaos. Regular, everyday people with no Rambo complex, putting the lives of loved ones, friends, and complete strangers above their own need for safety.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
He is an interesting human being. But I don’t see the point you are trying to make? Guy tried to save his own life first, like most people would, and then the rest is up for debate. He said/she said all over the article. What do you want him to do?
Was there a point I was trying to make? I just posted an article that stated the facts that I found interesting.
So.....thanks for the pointless (by your own admission) post?
The post I was responding to claimed that I was trying to make a point. I shared an article with none of my words attached. Therefore I wasn't expressing a point.
If you want my opinion I will give it to you. The guy was a pretender and was exposed as one. For all the tough guy talk that we need to prepare for these mass shootings, in the end these tough guys like everyone else run and hide. Just like all the tough guys on these forums.
I'm not going to live my life in fear and paranoia, buy guns, dwell on and prepare for mass shootings. I will leave that to the gun nutters. Life is too short.
he wasn't armed at the time. he claims he went back and got his gun and returned to the scene. whether that's true or not is irrelevant. anyone, Rambo himself, wouldn't stand up with arms open asking to "come and shoot me". that's asinine.
anyone with a brain would run to safety. navy seals included. unless we believe they'd be able to somehow McGyver a gun out of a plastic cup and some string.
Again. Many didn't run. They stayed and saved lives.
And again, I don't blame him for running....just don't pretend you're some hero when you aren't.
Why is this so hard to understand?
There is no proof of this though. He says he did go back and there is no one to say otherwise. And a witness said they saw him help someone, did they not?
Pittsburgh 2013 Cincinnati 2014 Greenville 2016 (Raleigh 2016) Columbia 2016
All those guns and all that (supposed) navy seal training did squat for him. He ran like everyone else. Prepare as much as you like, against guns like these, when your number is up, it's up.
All those guns and all that (supposed) navy seal training did squat for him. He ran like everyone else. Prepare as much as you like, against guns like these, when your number is up, it's up.
Some gun nutters should take note....
So you would rather he stay armed with some of those crazy guns he has?
Pittsburgh 2013 Cincinnati 2014 Greenville 2016 (Raleigh 2016) Columbia 2016
He is an interesting human being. But I don’t see the point you are trying to make? Guy tried to save his own life first, like most people would, and then the rest is up for debate. He said/she said all over the article. What do you want him to do?
Was there a point I was trying to make? I just posted an article that stated the facts that I found interesting.
So.....thanks for the pointless (by your own admission) post?
The post I was responding to claimed that I was trying to make a point. I shared an article with none of my words attached. Therefore I wasn't expressing a point.
If you want my opinion I will give it to you. The guy was a pretender and was exposed as one. For all the tough guy talk that we need to prepare for these mass shootings, in the end these tough guys like everyone else run and hide. Just like all the tough guys on these forums.
I'm not going to live my life in fear and paranoia, buy guns, dwell on and prepare for mass shootings. I will leave that to the gun nutters. Life is too short.
he wasn't armed at the time. he claims he went back and got his gun and returned to the scene. whether that's true or not is irrelevant. anyone, Rambo himself, wouldn't stand up with arms open asking to "come and shoot me". that's asinine.
anyone with a brain would run to safety. navy seals included. unless we believe they'd be able to somehow McGyver a gun out of a plastic cup and some string.
Again. Many didn't run. They stayed and saved lives.
And again, I don't blame him for running....just don't pretend you're some hero when you aren't.
Why is this so hard to understand?
There is no proof of this though. He says he did go back and there is no one to say otherwise. And a witness said they saw him help someone, did they not?
No proof of what? He made video of himself running from the scene. And said he ran away. What more proof do you want?
What did you want him to do instead when they didn't even know where the bullets were coming from?
I’m with you, I really do not understand the attention this guy is getting here. He is one guy amongst 20,000 there...All that I can make of it is that people are just trying to make fun of him for not going all Rambo and getting himself killed??
I think it is just a perception thing. This guy has created an online persona that he is a Rambo type. A real hero and tough guy. So when reality hit and he tucked tail while others shielded people with their bodies, immediately helped those around them who were down, etc... it challenged this guys self-created persona. He's no superman. He had a natural urge to flee a dangerous situation, just as many of us would. He isn't the tough, badass as he likes to portray himself in his little youtube vids. Nobody has a problem with normal people who have no self-delusional hero fantasies going into self-preservation mode. I think he's only being called out because he set himself up to be.
So the guy was supposed to take a 300 yard shot at a hotel with innocent people in it?
Nah, I wouldn't expect anyone including trained law enforcement or military snipers to attempt any sort of shot from that distance and angle in that kind of tense situation with so may bystanders around. Anyone doing so would have been reckless, and endangering the lives of innocents. My only issue with this guy is that perception doesn't seem to match reality, but that is to be expected in the Internet age. He was just a scared dude like the rest of us would be in the same situation.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
Comments
Im guessing its the "make fun of all guys with guns" thing thats been going on. But come on, he was in a mass shooting and saw people next to him get killed. Really, can we not make fun of the victims yet?
Cincinnati 2014
Greenville 2016
(Raleigh 2016)
Columbia 2016
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/i-used-to-think-gun-control-was-the-answer-my-research-told-me-otherwise/2017/10/03/d33edca6-a851-11e7-92d1-58c702d2d975_story
“Leah Libresco is a statistician and former newswriter at FiveThirtyEight, a data journalism site. She is the author of “Arriving at Amen.”
Before I started researching gun deaths, gun-control policy used to frustrate me. I wished the National Rifle Association would stop blocking common-sense gun-control reforms such as banning assault weapons, restricting silencers, shrinking magazine sizes and all the other measures that could make guns less deadly.
Then, my colleagues and I at FiveThirtyEight spent three months analyzing all 33,000 lives ended by guns each year in the United States, and I wound up frustrated in a whole new way. We looked at what interventions might have saved those people, and the case for the policies I’d lobbied for crumbled when I examined the evidence. The best ideas left standing were narrowly tailored interventions to protect subtypes of potential victims, not broad attempts to limit the lethality of guns.
I researched the strictly tightened gun laws in Britain and Australia and concluded that they didn’t prove much about what America’s policy should be. Neither nation experienced drops in mass shootings or other gun related-crime that could be attributed to their buybacks and bans. Mass shootings were too rare in Australia for their absence after the buyback program to be clear evidence of progress. And in both Australia and Britain, the gun restrictions had an ambiguous effect on other gun-related crimes or deaths.
When I looked at the other oft-praised policies, I found out that no gun owner walks into the store to buy an “assault weapon.” It’s an invented classification that includes any semi-automatic that has two or more features, such as a bayonet mount, a rocket-propelled grenade-launcher mount, a folding stock or a pistol grip. But guns are modular, and any hobbyist can easily add these features at home, just as if they were snapping together Legos.
As for silencers — they deserve that name only in movies, where they reduce gunfire to a soft puick puick. In real life, silencers limit hearing damage for shooters but don’t make gunfire dangerously quiet. An AR-15 with a silencer is about as loud as a jackhammer. Magazine limits were a little more promising, but a practiced shooter could still change magazines so fast as to make the limit meaningless.
As my co-workers and I kept looking at the data, it seemed less and less clear that one broad gun-control restriction could make a big difference. Two-thirds of gun deaths in the United States every year are suicides. Almost no proposed restriction would make it meaningfully harder for people with guns on hand to use them. I couldn't even answer my most desperate question: If I had a friend who had guns in his home and a history of suicide attempts, was there anything I could do that would help?
However, the next-largest set of gun deaths — 1 in 5 — were young men aged 15 to 34, killed in homicides. These men were most likely to die at the hands of other young men, often related to gang loyalties or other street violence. And the last notable group of similar deaths was the 1,700 women murdered per year, usually as the result of domestic violence. Far more people were killed in these ways than in mass-shooting incidents, but few of the popularly floated policies were tailored to serve them.
By the time we published our project, I didn’t believe in many of the interventions I’d heard politicians tout. I was still anti-gun, at least from the point of view of most gun owners, and I don’t want a gun in my home, as I think the risk outweighs the benefits. But I can’t endorse policies whose only selling point is that gun owners hate them. Policies that often seem as if they were drafted by people who have encountered guns only as a figure in a briefing book or an image on the news.
Instead, I found the most hope in more narrowly tailored interventions. Potential suicide victims, women menaced by their abusive partners and kids swept up in street vendettas are all in danger from guns, but they each require different protections.
Older men, who make up the largest shareof gun suicides, need better access to people who could care for them and get them help. Women endangered by specific men need to be prioritized by police, who can enforce restraining orders prohibiting these men from buying and owning guns. Younger men at risk of violence need to be identified before they take a life or lose theirs and to be connected to mentors who can help them de-escalate conflicts.
Even the most data-driven practices, such as New Orleans’ plan to identify gang members for intervention based on previous arrests and weapons seizures, wind up more personal than most policies floated. The young men at risk can be identified by an algorithm, but they have to be disarmed one by one, personally — not en masse as though they were all interchangeable. A reduction in gun deaths is most likely to come from finding smaller chances for victories and expanding those solutions as much as possible. We save lives by focusing on a range of tactics to protect the different kinds of potential victims and reforming potential killers, not from sweeping bans focused on the guns themselves.”
If you want my opinion I will give it to you. The guy was a pretender and was exposed as one. For all the tough guy talk that we need to prepare for these mass shootings, in the end these tough guys like everyone else run and hide. Just like all the tough guys on these forums.
I'm not going to live my life in fear and paranoia, buy guns, dwell on and prepare for mass shootings. I will leave that to the gun nutters. Life is too short.
Your exact words were "What a macho, gun-packing Instagram star did when he was caught in the Las Vegas shooting" when linking the article.
You were clearly making fun of a guy who was a victim of a mass shooting. Classy.
I've got no problem with him running for his life....but then don't say shit like this afterwards. “I don’t think it was heroic at all,” he told People of his actions. “I just wanted to do the right thing.”
Like I said, a pretender. The article I posted exposes that.
www.headstonesband.com
Drunk asshat.
Classy indeed.
Here's a pro tip, next time before you comment read what it is you are commenting on.
Cincinnati 2014
Greenville 2016
(Raleigh 2016)
Columbia 2016
So basically you are saying that he was a semi-celebrity that is pulling attention away from the true heroes of the moment? I get accused of pulling the conversation away from the “real issue” of gun control and by encouraging people to be vigilant now we are talking about some dumbass that few had ever even heard about before this week?
anyone with a brain would run to safety. navy seals included. unless we believe they'd be able to somehow McGyver a gun out of a plastic cup and some string.
www.headstonesband.com
Columbus-2003
Cincinnati-2006
Columbus-2010
Wrigley-2013
Cincinnati-2014
Lexington-2016
Wrigley 1 & 2-2018
I truly just don't get the thoughts behind many on the anti-gun side after events like this. You make fun of him for having guns, then you make fun of him for not shooting back when you don't even know where the shots are coming from? Can't have it both ways.
www.headstonesband.com
And again, I don't blame him for running....just don't pretend you're some hero when you aren't.
Why is this so hard to understand?
There is no proof of this though. He says he did go back and there is no one to say otherwise. And a witness said they saw him help someone, did they not?
Cincinnati 2014
Greenville 2016
(Raleigh 2016)
Columbia 2016
Some gun nutters should take note....
Cincinnati 2014
Greenville 2016
(Raleigh 2016)
Columbia 2016