Where Will Gun Control Go In Wake Of The Las Vegas Shooting?
BY Herschel Smith
7 years, 1 month ago
Some links, and then a brief assessment from me.
Nick Gillespie, bless his heart, is fighting the good fight, with a very good article at Reason arguing that now is the time for less gun control, not more. I agree.
Paul Ryan, known to us as the communist shill who hates gun rights, has said that the SHARE act is dead for the time being.
Someone named Andrea Ruth, writing at Red State, argues for more involvement of the community witch doctors we know as Psychiatrists. I suppose she wants mental health “professionals” to approve all gun purchases. Perhaps she would think differently is a mental health professional had to approve her raising a child, or driving a car.
The White House punts on suppressors, saying essentially there is no love for the SHARE act.
And Trump himself has said “we’ll be talking about gun laws.” Great. I wouldn’t be so concerned about that if I thought he held to any doctrine on anything at all.
My brief assessment. The shooter had an awful lot of guns and magazines, more than he could ever shoot in several days of being in that room. These were magazines that hold more than 30 rounds. He spent an awful lot of money on weapons, more than I find feasible in a short amount of time (like months or even several years). These were pricey weapons, not low-end guns.
Something is very wrong with this picture. I don’t like it at all, but it’s going to take time to cipher all of this. Something feels very rotten, and as if on queue, the controllers started spewing forth their gun control bullshit as soon as this happened.
AR-15s, AR-10s, high capacity magazines and slide fire (or bump fire) stocks will be the boogeyman. I expect a reassessment of slide fire stocks very soon by the ATF, or an executive order challenged by no one, that places them on the NFA list.
I expect the introduction of new gun control bills in Congress, and all it takes is the democrats and a few republicans (along with Trump), and we have a brand new assault weapons ban. Perhaps this is intended in all of this.
Times are going to get dicey for us. Hold on to your breeches. The ride is liable to get rough.
|
|
On October 4, 2017 at 7:53 am, Fred said:
Herschel,
We don’t know his timeline. We have know idea if these weren’t accumulated over years. Given his budget, no other responsibilities, and a years timeframe, just about any fairly intelligent man could do what he did. I’m not saying something isn’t amiss but what’s the quote? I’ll paraphrase; “Amateurs think of weapons, armchair generals think about strategies, winning generals think about logistics.”
What he did is doable.
But…this does seem to happen every time that fedgov is about to loosen standards or rescind a law. I do wonder how much debt he had and if any was to casinos.
On October 4, 2017 at 10:19 am, Bill Buppert said:
Herschel,
The central government will go as far as they want to.
They are only opposed to any private ownership of weapons of any type.
The 2A is a sham to protect weapons ownership. It has no teeth whatsoever. If it did, how could the 1934 NFA, 1938 FFA, the decision in US v. Miller in 1939, 1968 GCA, Nixon’s pogrom against handguns, the 1986 FOPA, Bushevik I’s ban on foreign cosmetically offensive weapons in 1989, the NICs, the AWB all the way to the conservative Scalia’s bromide about “dangerous and unusual weapons”. On and on and on.
The courts will never rule in favor of individual rights unrestricted to defend oneself. Ever.
This is not simply about guns but ALL forms of self protection. It is a double win for the government. Strip weapons of every stripe from the private square and the government has removed the primary threat to its suzerainty and can dispose of large swaths of the population at their leisure with government weapons and enforcement.
But then again, no nation in history has been better armed and made a more rapid descent into a turn-key totalitarian enterprise.
Writing and begging your rulers for rights won’t work either.
You’ll note that these shootings have been occurring with regularity whenever the suppressor bill is about to see the light of day.
Cordially,
Bill Buppert
On October 4, 2017 at 11:05 am, Pat Hines said:
The sculptor removes all marble that doesn’t look like the statue he’s carving. That’s how we’ll find out what the LV shooter had in mind. Nothing profound in that.
It’s my opinion, at this time, that the LV shooter (I try not to use his name) had all those weapons and expendables in his room to show the world how bad he could be with firearms, in order to stimulate exactly what we’re hearing from communists around the US.
I say that because if he simply wanted to kill lots of people he could have flown one of his two airplanes full of fuel into the tightly packed crowd and killed many more than he did with firearms, possibly as many as 100-200, including many burned to death. I think we can discount mere murder as his goal.
The current count of firearms at the crime scene is 23 according to the Clark county sheriff. Even if he wanted backup rifles to use when one overheated, he’d not need more than 4 or 5, perhaps 8 just to be sure. I don’t have the count of handguns, yet, but he did use a revolver to blow his brains out, so that’s one. Let’s guess and say 5 handguns, leaving 18 rifles.
Having 18 rifles in his room, most of which he never used, could only have one purpose, to fire up the Gun Confiscation Lobby. I can see no other.
On October 4, 2017 at 11:18 am, Frank Clarke said:
CT passed an AWB after Sandy Hook and got (maybe) 15% compliance. NY followed with their SAFE Act and got about 10% compliance. There’s a sweetie-pie down here in Florida making AWB noises and I expect she’ll get near-zero compliance if she’s successful. If there’s a national AWB the Democrats are toast and they know it. Expect noise, noise, and more noise, and little else.
On October 4, 2017 at 6:11 pm, Archer said:
@Bill and Pat:
The possibility of a “setup”, or a “false flag operation”, has occurred to me as well.
The facts, as we know them so far:
– A white, male loner, with a fairly large income, no known (or at least, no published) political affiliation, no criminal or mental health history, and almost no social media footprint — in essence, a near-perfect “gray man”.
– Tens of thousands of dollars of high-end AR-pattern rifles (of which he only seems to have used one), extended (in the real sense: 100 rounds) magazines, and ammunition in one place — more than he could ever hope to shoot or likely even carry in unaided and undetected — even going for maximum casualties and a long, drawn-out siege. (I for one would like to see his comings and goings on the hotel security cameras. How did he get all that hardware IN the room?)
– The surveillance cameras outside his room door, supposedly used to watch for incoming police/security personnel.
– The short duration, as compared to the amassed supplies and preparations — some sources say the shooting lasted 9-10 minutes, using only a small fraction of the available firepower, and he supposedly shot himself WELL BEFORE police closed in.
– The targeting of a Harvest Festival and country music concert, which is almost certain to be attended mostly by political conservatives and libertarians, generally in favor of gun rights.
– The timing, with the SHARE Act (which includes the Hearing Protection Act) and H.R. 38 both on the table in the U.S. House to provide not-insignificant relief to law-abiding gun owners.
Taken all together, it’s just too over-the-top. This many “nightmares” of the anti-gun crowd coming true at one time, it’s too much for coincidence, almost like something out of a Matt Bracken novel. That’s why I’m considering a false flag operation.
I’m not concluding that’s what it is, but something here — or several somethings — doesn’t pass the smell test.