Mass Shooting Las Vegas...

[Sparko]

And many police and military are just as unproficient in gun use.

P.S. The inclusion of this link should not be considered to imply in any way that Sparko is wrong, deficient, insane, unstable, unsanitary; or to indicate any other potential criticism, disagreement, dismissal or floccinaucinihilipilification to which you might unaccountably leap. It is merely an link to a relevant item that may be of interest.

Exhibit number 2:

Don-Knotts--C10042352.jpg

[Sparko]

So back to the topic:
=============================
Hotel tries to clarify "misinformation" over Las Vegas shooting timeline

LAS VEGAS -- The latest police timeline of the Las Vegas massacre is being questioned again -- this time by the owners of the Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino.

For the first time, MGM Resorts International is providing specific details about how the shooting went down.

Police said that six minutes passed between the time Stephen Paddock shot at the security guard and when he fired into the concert.

But MGM's statement says it "wanted to correct some of the misinformation being reported" and "we know that shots were being fired at the festival lot at the same time as, or within 40 seconds after the time Jesus Campos [Mandalay's security guard] first reported that shots were fired over the radio."

Thursday afternoon, a law enforcement source told the Associated Press the Mandalay Bay waited up to six minutes before calling police after the first shots were fired.

We still don't know when hotel staff called police but officials are expected to hold a formal press conference Friday to provide more details about the timeline.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/las-veg...dalay-bay-mgm/

[rogue06]

And many police and military are just as unproficient in gun use.

P.S. The inclusion of this link should not be considered to imply in any way that Sparko is wrong, deficient, insane, unstable, unsanitary; or to indicate any other potential criticism, disagreement, dismissal or floccinaucinihilipilification to which you might unaccountably leap. It is merely an link to a relevant item that may be of interest.

You posted this jut so you could use the word "floccinaucinihilipilification" didn't you?

[One Bad Pig]

Good, then you understand that the right to bear arms, the government not being able to infringe upon that right, had to do with the need of a militia.

I understand that you're determined to construe my words precisely in the way I do not intend them to be construed. Kindly desist.

And you also understand that the arms in question were basically muskets which the greater society didn't need protection from in the case of a mad man on the loose.

Wholly irrelevant.

[Teallaura]

And yet just yesterday you said that you are "not convinced that 'responsible gun owners' exist in the wild - never seen one"

Hence the 'if'. I already allowed that they may exist - even that they probably exist. But no, out in the woods where people are shooting, 'responsible' is NOT one of the things I've actually seen.

Talked to a bunch of them - but never seen one where it mattered.

[Teallaura]

So you need to keep your dog in a safe, so it doesn't get stolen and bite someone after being stolen?

It seems like it would be pretty easy to kill any unsuspecting person with a kitchen knife. The fact that happens so rarely is a testament to how non-murderous people are.
When you say "sheer luck" I'm guessing you had more in mind a situation in which the other person is fighting back?

And it may depend on the crime. If the thief is going to commit arson, for example, your gasoline is perhaps a better tool than your gun.

Yes, that falls under 'responsibility'. Same reason pharmacies are legally required to secure narcotics.

Frankly, if you are going to claim that gun owners are responsible people, securing the weapons against theft and accidental mishandling should not be an issue. It's not a toy - you don't leave them lying around unsecured. And no, 'having it available' is not an excuse when you are not present. If you are that concerned about home invasion, you should A) move and B) keep a weapon on your person - there's no way to know that you could make it to the drawer.

[Teallaura]

It is not really a straw man since everyone on either side knows how guns work. It is just aimed at revealing the dishonesty of most anti gun folks.

It is a straw man - it's an easy target that does not address the opponents actual argument. Gun control advocates do not argue that guns fire themselves - what's dishonest is saying that they do or implying that their concerns have nothing to do with the weapon's capabilities.

[Teallaura]

I certainly want it to be used to reverse gun restrictions. Focus on misuse of guns, not ownership of guns.

fine, but then you have no right to complain - the errors are your talking points so they are in your favor.

[Teallaura]

If a rioter/looter is killed by someone in defense of self or property it should automatically be justified.

There's a good idea - let's let people murder one another when convenient. Naw, no one could possibly misuse the situation to truly commit murder.

This is why we hold people accountable for their actions - if justified, fine; if not, then justice should be served.

[Teallaura]

If I do not keep my gun in a special safe it is still not my responsibility if someone breaks into my locked house and steals it. A gun in a safe is not available for defense of self or family.

A gun laying on your couch is not available for defense when you are not home, either. I addressed that long ago - if you are present and have control of the weapon, fine. If not, put it up where it can't be stolen easily or mishandled by those not allowed access. You have a responsibility to the rest of us to keep the weapon you are licensed for in your hands and your possession.

[Teallaura]

And I believe your letting your own experience color your perception instead of looking into the factual evidence itself. I work in maintenance, so I hear more about serious industrial accidents and know a few that might experience them than you do. People tend to overlook dangers, even when they should know better. We are also careful with our firearm storage and safety and our friends are too. The NRA is also quite into the business of firearm safety and even professionals get hurt (there’s a YouTube video of a cop accidently shooting himself during a safety demonstration). I am also no stranger to gun violence, my husband had a high school classmate killed last year in a murder suicide by her boyfriend. Is it tragedy? Sure, but I don’t find any proposed laws (beyond a total gun ban) that would have prevented her death. People do terrible things to one another and increased safety will not prevent the majority of gun deaths (only around 800 are due to accidents compared to the 32,000 yearly total gun deaths per year).

I don't care what you believe - this has been addressed. Several times.

Learn to read the context.

[Teallaura]

And many police and military are just as unproficient in gun use.

P.S. The inclusion of this link should not be considered to imply in any way that Sparko is wrong, deficient, insane, unstable, unsanitary; or to indicate any other potential criticism, disagreement, dismissal or floccinaucinihilipilification to which you might unaccountably leap. It is merely an link to a relevant item that may be of interest.

Someone used floccinaucinihilipilification in a sentence!!!!!

[Teallaura]

so if someone steals your car and kills someone, it's YOUR fault?

BTW I think there are already laws against leaving your gun out for easy access and a child were to pick it up and kill themselves or someone with it. Reckless endangerment at the very least.

Actually, yes, in certain circumstances. A kid, not your own, who manages to take your car because you left it running, has committed theft and you are very much liable. Attractive nuisance.

And yes, there are some laws on the books - I was asked how I would improve the law and gave my answer. Greater liability usually results in greater care.

[Teallaura]

You posted this jut so you could use the word "floccinaucinihilipilification" didn't you?

So? It's my favorite word!

[Teallaura]

You are responsible for your pet as long as he is under your influence and control, or should be. If someone stole your dog and your dog bit them or someone else, guess what? you are not responsible, they are.

Parallel, not analogous. And it would depend on the circumstances - if you made the theft attractive, the courts very well might allow it.