Las Vegas massacre.

josevolution · October 2017

PJ_Soul said:

josevolution said:

tempo_n_groove said:

goldrush said:

After the Clovis shooting in August it was reported that "This incident marked the 244th mass shooting in 2017, according to Gun Violence Archive. To put this into perspective, we are 240 days into the year. In short, the U.S. has had more mass shootings than days in 2017."

I just cannot get my head around this. How can so many people be convinced that there is no problem?

Yes there is a problem.

Why do people shoot each other so easily?

Why is killing so easy for people?

Why is this release of violence the only answer?

These are questions I'd ask and try to solve answers to.

we glorify killing in this country just start with holywood violence sells big time in this country ...

It's not Hollywood. All of the other developed countries have just as much exposure to Hollywood productions, it sells big time everywhere, yet the gun problem only exists in America.
It doesn't hurt to remember that this gun violence problem is pretty much an American man problem. I think that is a really important aspect to examine.

Funny everytime i go to movies i'd say 50% of coming atractions are about violence movies i'd say they know what sells and violence sells ..Its easier to purchase weapons here than anywhere else in the world no ..

brianlux · October 2017

PJ_Soul said:

josevolution said:

tempo_n_groove said:

goldrush said:

After the Clovis shooting in August it was reported that "This incident marked the 244th mass shooting in 2017, according to Gun Violence Archive. To put this into perspective, we are 240 days into the year. In short, the U.S. has had more mass shootings than days in 2017."

I just cannot get my head around this. How can so many people be convinced that there is no problem?

Yes there is a problem.

Why do people shoot each other so easily?

Why is killing so easy for people?

Why is this release of violence the only answer?

These are questions I'd ask and try to solve answers to.

we glorify killing in this country just start with holywood violence sells big time in this country ...

It's not Hollywood. All of the other developed countries have just as much exposure to Hollywood productions, it sells big time everywhere, yet the gun problem only exists in America.
It doesn't hurt to remember that this gun violence problem is pretty much an American man problem. I think that is a really important aspect to examine.

Yeah, but there's more to our culture than Hollywood that drives violence. And some of it is fear- we're really good at producing fear which is why so many Americans feel the need to have a whole battery of weapons. And yes, other cultures view our films and TV but they probably also see it as foreign. We don't. We see it as us, as internalized, macho bullshit tough guys and babes us.

And yes, it's mainly an American man gun thing but, believe me, it's also becoming an American woman gun thing. I live in a redneck part of California. I know plenty of women who are gun nuts. It's spreading.

PJ_Soul · October 2017

Canadians do not see your movies and TV as foreign at all, FYI.
And I was talking about the mass shooting/gun violence problem being a man problem. Women aren't doing that shit.

josevolution · October 2017

PJ_Soul said:

Canadians do not see your movies and TV at all, FYI.
And I was talking about the mass shooting/gun violence problem being a man problem. Women aren't doing that shit.

Not yet !

PJ_Soul · October 2017

josevolution said:

PJ_Soul said:

Canadians do not see your movies and TV at all, FYI.
And I was talking about the mass shooting/gun violence problem being a man problem. Women aren't doing that shit.

Not yet !

Do you think there is a reason to think women are going to evolve to be violent and aggressive? Or that society is evolving to develop those behaviours in women (generally speaking)? I don't see anything that suggests that, but I'm curious to know why you might, if you do.

mickeyrat · October 2017

brianlux said:

mickeyrat said:

brianlux said:

hedonist said:

Maybe some are just trying to take this shit in. It never even occurred to me to create a discussion about this.

Oh for sure. I meant no slight here. It's just that I was gone all day and had expected more reaction.

What a terrible sad thing. I can't imagine being in the midst of that awful chaos and for the survivors having to deal with the way that would change one's life. Very sad.

whats to discuss? seriously. it will NEVER change. NEVER.

I become more cynical with each everyday occurance. THIS is the price we continue to pay to keep believing in the bullshit brochure of this country.

It was created in violence, expanded in violence and will implode in violence.

Rome is burning......

I believe things can change based on taking it down to the lowest increment- one person. Me. Or you. Or anyone. I changed. In my case, from feeling so hopeless that I nearly did myself in to living a relatively good and (hopefully anyway!) somewhat useful life. Don't get me wrong- I'm not trying to make myself sound heroic. In the grand scheme of things, I'm very insignificant. I just mean to illustrate that each of us can change, become better people, move forward.

Ending or at least reducing violence seems like any other important subject. I understand the thought that we may very well not slow climate change/global warming in time to prevent our own extinction. We may not reduce atomic bombs in time to prevent nuclear holocaust. We may not decrease our use of antibiotics in time to prevent massive epidemics. But to me it only makes sense to try. If we don't try to change ourselves and in turn change the way society reacts then, yes, there is nothing to discuss and no point in discussing any of this. That is the ultimate in cynicism. I hope you're not that cynical, micky. You've brought too much to the table for me to believe that. Anyway, I hope I'm right about that.

satire and opinion but it rings true....

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/wp/2017/10/03/a-good-time-to-talk-about-gun-laws/?tid=sm_fb&utm_term=.c2d4e71f68f3

DarthMaeglin · October 2017

PJ_Soul said:

josevolution said:

PJ_Soul said:

Canadians do not see your movies and TV at all, FYI.
And I was talking about the mass shooting/gun violence problem being a man problem. Women aren't doing that shit.

Not yet !

Do you think there is a reason to think women are going to evolve to be violent and aggressive? Or that society is evolving to develop those behaviours in women (generally speaking)? I don't see anything that suggests that, but I'm curious to know why you might, if you do.

I suggest you be careful with this line of reasoning, since women are known to commit equally despicable acts (albeit on a smaller scale). Both sexes are equally capable of killing. (Not getting too specific so as not to derail the thread, but there are numerous examples out there.)

Personally I side with those saying to give it some time before delving deeply into the issues at play (at least in the larger media and so on, here on a message board (that will inevitably carry an anti-gun bias because of the demographic) is a different can of worms). Despite the cynicism in evidence here (rich for me to be making that observation, lol), I honestly don't think those asking for a pause in the gun control debate actually intend for the issues to be outright dismissed. It really is better to let the emotions settle some before taking any action, otherwise you end up with things like pitbull bans and the like.

Just another idiot's 2 cents or so (is it a nickel since we got rid of the penny?).

Go Beavers · October 2017

So from what I'm seeing, it looks like the guns were legally modified to bump shoot in order to fire at close to the rate of an automatic.

PJ_Soul · October 2017

DarthMaeglin said:

PJ_Soul said:

josevolution said:

PJ_Soul said:

Canadians do not see your movies and TV at all, FYI.
And I was talking about the mass shooting/gun violence problem being a man problem. Women aren't doing that shit.

Not yet !

Do you think there is a reason to think women are going to evolve to be violent and aggressive? Or that society is evolving to develop those behaviours in women (generally speaking)? I don't see anything that suggests that, but I'm curious to know why you might, if you do.

I suggest you be careful with this line of reasoning, since women are known to commit equally despicable acts (albeit on a smaller scale). Both sexes are equally capable of killing. (Not getting too specific so as not to derail the thread, but there are numerous examples out there.)

Personally I side with those saying to give it some time before delving deeply into the issues at play (at least in the larger media and so on, here on a message board (that will inevitably carry an anti-gun bias because of the demographic) is a different can of worms). Despite the cynicism in evidence here (rich for me to be making that observation, lol), I honestly don't think those asking for a pause in the gun control debate actually intend for the issues to be outright dismissed. It really is better to let the emotions settle some before taking any action, otherwise you end up with things like pitbull bans and the like.

Just another idiot's 2 cents or so (is it a nickel since we got rid of the penny?).

I'm just thinking stats. I never said it was impossible and that it NEVER happened. I'm not an idiot. I know there are exceptions. But come on, the facts are clear. You know as well as I do that gun violence is really a male problem. I mean, 98% of mass murders are committed by men dude. It is really not possible to pretend it's not a male issue.

I am perfectly cool with people (aside from politicians) who want to give it time before politicizing. That is completely their right, and perhaps what they need to do to deal at all. What I am not cool with is people trying to stop others from discussing it or politicizing it, or telling others that doing so is somehow morally wrong. Especially politicians. (not saying you are doing that btw - I'm just talking generally).

josevolution · October 2017

PJ_Soul said:

josevolution said:

PJ_Soul said:

Canadians do not see your movies and TV at all, FYI.
And I was talking about the mass shooting/gun violence problem being a man problem. Women aren't doing that shit.

Not yet !

Do you think there is a reason to think women are going to evolve to be violent and aggressive? Or that society is evolving to develop those behaviours in women (generally speaking)? I don't see anything that suggests that, but I'm curious to know why you might, if you do.

I think we've seen major changes as to how women have progressed on the violent scale but this is all my own opinion i have nothing to back it up just my perception , if i was to point to one aspect i'd say take a look at MMA FIGHTING ....

mickeyrat · October 2017

Go Beavers said:

So from what I'm seeing, it looks like the guns were legally modified to bump shoot in order to fire at close to the rate of an automatic.

loophole......

DarthMaeglin · October 2017

PJ_Soul said:

DarthMaeglin said:

PJ_Soul said:

josevolution said:

PJ_Soul said:

Canadians do not see your movies and TV at all, FYI.
And I was talking about the mass shooting/gun violence problem being a man problem. Women aren't doing that shit.

Not yet !

Do you think there is a reason to think women are going to evolve to be violent and aggressive? Or that society is evolving to develop those behaviours in women (generally speaking)? I don't see anything that suggests that, but I'm curious to know why you might, if you do.

I suggest you be careful with this line of reasoning, since women are known to commit equally despicable acts (albeit on a smaller scale). Both sexes are equally capable of killing. (Not getting too specific so as not to derail the thread, but there are numerous examples out there.)

Personally I side with those saying to give it some time before delving deeply into the issues at play (at least in the larger media and so on, here on a message board (that will inevitably carry an anti-gun bias because of the demographic) is a different can of worms). Despite the cynicism in evidence here (rich for me to be making that observation, lol), I honestly don't think those asking for a pause in the gun control debate actually intend for the issues to be outright dismissed. It really is better to let the emotions settle some before taking any action, otherwise you end up with things like pitbull bans and the like.

Just another idiot's 2 cents or so (is it a nickel since we got rid of the penny?).

I'm just thinking stats. I never said it was impossible and that it NEVER happened. I'm not an idiot. I know there are exceptions. But come on, the facts are clear. You know as well as I do that gun violence is really a male problem. I mean, 98% of mass murders are committed by men dude. It is really not possible to pretend it's not a male issue.

I am perfectly cool with people (aside from politicians) who want to give it time before politicizing. That is completely their right, and perhaps what they need to do to deal at all. What I am not cool with is people trying to stop others from discussing it or politicizing it, or telling others that doing so is somehow morally wrong. Especially politicians. (not saying you are doing that btw - I'm just talking generally).

As I see it (stats be damned, I suppose, which I accept will invalidate some of what I'm saying to some), it's not a male/female issue, it's a people problem. Simplifying it to an issue of gender isn't going to get us closer to a solution, I feel. As mentioned above, much of this stems from the freedoms that are so dear south of the border, with so much history on this issue with no easy solutions in sight.

I do need to say I am thankful to be living in a country that has much stricter gun controls, with far fewer incidents like this (but they have happened).

PJ_Soul · October 2017

I 100% agree that it's a people problem... women have a role to play in how males are socialized and how they deal with aggression.

drakeheuer14 · October 2017

HesCalledDyer said:

drakeheuer14 said:

I wish they wouldn’t give out the persons name. I get that we have a right to know, but it just gives them the extra attention they may have wanted. Society shouldn’t give them that glory to be known for doing such a horiffic thing. It probably really affects the lives of those closely related too by giving out the name. The brother is already being harassed by the news.

They absolutely should give out the person's name and plaster his stupid fucking face all over the news. Because if they didn't, Trump would have every fucking moron who voted for him convinced via twitter that it was done by ISIS, a black man, or "an illegal."

The brother is already being harassed? Whoop-de-do. People are fucking dead.

All I said was hold back the name. Plastering his stupid fucking face all over the news and letting all of the characteristics be known is all fine with me.

Go Beavers · October 2017

Male violence certainly has to be looked at when looking for solutions. The emotional state of the shooter certainly plays a role in their decision, and speaking generally, male anger and dispair takes the form of outward destruction, and females tend to internalize it manifesting in self-destruction.

HughFreakingDillon · October 2017

DarthMaeglin said:

PJ_Soul said:

josevolution said:

PJ_Soul said:

Canadians do not see your movies and TV at all, FYI.
And I was talking about the mass shooting/gun violence problem being a man problem. Women aren't doing that shit.

Not yet !

Do you think there is a reason to think women are going to evolve to be violent and aggressive? Or that society is evolving to develop those behaviours in women (generally speaking)? I don't see anything that suggests that, but I'm curious to know why you might, if you do.

I suggest you be careful with this line of reasoning, since women are known to commit equally despicable acts (albeit on a smaller scale). Both sexes are equally capable of killing. (Not getting too specific so as not to derail the thread, but there are numerous examples out there.)

Personally I side with those saying to give it some time before delving deeply into the issues at play (at least in the larger media and so on, here on a message board (that will inevitably carry an anti-gun bias because of the demographic) is a different can of worms). Despite the cynicism in evidence here (rich for me to be making that observation, lol), I honestly don't think those asking for a pause in the gun control debate actually intend for the issues to be outright dismissed. It really is better to let the emotions settle some before taking any action, otherwise you end up with things like pitbull bans and the like.

Just another idiot's 2 cents or so (is it a nickel since we got rid of the penny?).

with women being roughly 50% of the population, and committing maybe 1% of the same atrocities, if that, i'd say it's perfect reasoning. are there some males that fall on the female spectrum in their behaviours? sure, just as there are some females who fall on the male spectrum of behaviours. let's not kid ourselves.

males are the aggressors of our species and commit almost all violent crime. that is indisputable.

brianlux · October 2017

A very strange thing happened tonight. My wife and I just want to get our minds off all the crazy stuff going on for a little while so we popped in one of our Kojak DVDs. We were on the second to last episode from season 5, first aired in March, 1978. The episode is called "Sixty Miles to Hell", one we had never seen before.

The opening titles run and then the first scene starts right off with a night-time view of an elongated "v" shaped hotel in Las Vegas. There are lights all around from other hotels and casinos save for one dark, rectangular area somewhat in front of and to the right of the hotel- certainly large enough to be a playing field or out-door venue.

I am almost 100% percent certain that opening scene shot would look like this today (only a bit lower and closer in), in daylight.