Mass Shootings

Trump on Las Vegas Shooting: "An Act of Pure Evil"

The president offered condolences, federal law enforcement assistance.

|

President Trump addresses Las Vegas Shooting
Sipa USA/Newscom

President Donald Trump addressed the nation Monday morning about the deadly mass shooting in Las Vegas that has left over 50 dead and over 400 wounded.

"We are joined together today in sadness shock and grief," said the Ppesident from the diplomatic reception room in the White House. "For the families of the victims, we are praying for you, we are here for you, and we ask God to see you through these dark moment."

The president had already issued a tweet early this morning expressing his sympathies for the victims and families of the shooting, something he called in his speech "an act of pure evil."

Reason's Eric Boehm has a roundup of things we know so far about the shooting, and the shooter, identified as 64-year-old Mesquite, Nevada, resident Stephen Paddock.

The president said very little about any federal efforts being undertaken in regard to the shooting, adding only that the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security were working closely with local law enforcement.

CNN is reporting that Attorney General Jeff Sessions met with FBI Director Christopher Wray about the shooting this morning, and issued a statement saying that he and the DOJ would "do everything in our power to get justice for you and your loved ones."

Trump took time to thank the Las Vegas Metro police, saying their rapid response "shows what true professionalism looks like."

The president will visit Las Vegas on Wednesday, where he plans to meet with local law enforcement.

The rest of Trump's speech consisted of a call for Americans to come together in the wake of the shooting.

"Our unity cannot be shattered by evil. Our bonds cannot be shattered by violence."

Vice President Mike Pence weighed in over social media, calling the shooting a "cowardly act of terror"

Nevada's two senators likewise responded to the shooting over social media. Republican Dean Heller called the shooting a "Senseless, horrifying act of violence" and offered condolences to the victims and praise to first responders. Democrat Cortez Matso said much the same, tweeting she will "continue to monitor the situation."

Failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton also issued remarks over Twitter, in which she said it was time to "put politics aside" and stand up to the National Rifle Association.

More information will come out as the investigation proceeds. Reason's Nick Gillespie has some wise words on not jumping to conclusions or politcizing a tragedy while so much is still unknown.

NEXT: Energy Secretary Rick Perry Orders Regulators to Figure Out How to Keep Renewables from Crashing the Electric Power Grid

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton also issued remarks over Twitter, in which she said it was time to “put politics” aside and stand-up to the National Rifle Association.

    Stop running for office and please go away.

    1. I was not thrilled that Trump won the election, but thrilled that Clinton lost.

      1. It’s not often that a single event embodies both bad news and amazing news.

        1. Yep. This was an opposite AvP. Whoever loses, we win.

          1. Schrodinger’s Presidential Election

    2. Or at least wait until the bodies are cold before trying to score political points. What a horrible woman.

      1. Matt Welch said she wouldn’t be as bad a president as Trump.

        1. Really? Wow.

      2. But she said we must put politics aside! Why do you want people to die, John?

        The deliberate implication, of course, is that gun grabbing isn’t a political issue, it’s just common sense civilized thinking and the only politicization of gun control comes from those who oppose it. Basically, she’s nakedly trying to push the overton window to the left.

        1. “”But she said we must put politics aside! “”

          As she is trying to make it a political issue.

          1. She literally couldn’t get through the SAME sentence without going political. We have a new record!

      3. Seriously what an awful fucking cunt. This is why you lost Democrats. You could have picked literally anyone else to beat Trump, and yet you put all your chips on the one human being who is even more despicable than he is. I even made the mistake of going to HuffPo to see what the loonies have to say, and every single comment there is echoing their dark queen’s sentiments. How fucking soulless can these people be?

    3. Seriously. There is an unhealthy obsession with Hillary among Trumplings, but she is a genuinely awful human being.

      1. So, you did you stay up late trying to come up with a witty term like Trumplings or did it just come to you as a stroke of genius? I think you owe the world some insight into how you came up with such a smart and inciteful term like that.

        1. MAGAt is far better.

          1. Trump and his supporters are the stupid unsophisticated ones. It is really not fair to expect those yokuls to compete against the kind of genius that comes up with MAGAt and Trumplngs.

      2. I can’t get mad about Trumpsters not getting over Hillary when she’s still shoved down our throats by the media all the time still, as if her opinion is relevant. The Hillary cult is still somehow just as strong as the Trump cult.

      3. Chickenhawks and Trumplings, everyone’s favorite comfort food.

    4. She’s getting to be as ridiculous of a Tweeter as Trump in her lack of self-control.

      “WE MUST PUT POLITICS ASIDE BY POLITICIZING THE 2ND AMENDMENT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE!!” ::pantsuit-wearing has-been::

      1. Trump tweets for a purpose. He does it to bait opponents into taking stupid positions and distract the media. What is Hillary’s excuse?

        1. She sees that twitter keeps her name relevant in the news.

          Notice the lefty media has an image of Trump’s tweet about the shooting and then Obama’s tweet?

          Who cares about Obama- He’s not president anymore.

    5. Put politics aside and ban country music concerts for the good of the children

      1. Instapundit had a link last week where some member of Parliment in Norway was saying that in light of Charlie Hebdo it was clear that Europe was going to have to ban speech than offended minorities. No kidding.

        So, you only think you are kidding. There are people out there who probably are saying what you are saying right now.

        1. Yeah that would be the logical next step. Many of our liberals are so stupid they don’t realize they would no longer be allowed their freedom of speech if the freedom of self defense went away

          1. This is not stupidity.

            The freedom to remind voters about how corrupt these lefty politicians are is dangerous to the politicians.

            Same thing with banning guns, as they are only a danger to politicians trying to send us to the ovens.

      2. Only ban the Nashville sound.

        1. And FLA-GA line. Please.

    6. Yes, let’s put politics aside and blame the real perpetrators, my political enemies.

    7. Hillary Clinton says we must put politics aside for the duration of the single clause in which we say “we must put politics aside.”

  2. Failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton

    I hope this is part of the updated AP Stylebook.

    1. It’s her legal name now.

      1. It’s what should eventually be written on her tombstone, if hallowed ground wouldn’t violently reject her corpse (and assuming she can actually die, which may not be possible for the Old Ones).

      2. I hope this is part of the updated AP Stylebook.

        Technically, it should be twice-failed, right?

          1. I just assumed/hoped the AP stylebook would get it meticulously correct. Failed Democratic Presidential Nominee or twice-failed Presidential Candidate, etc.

  3. “We can and must put politics aside”

    and abide by my political opinions… My completely ignorant political opinions that aren’t supported by facts.

    That woman has no morals.

  4. Telling how Senator Masto thinks it important that she “monitor” the situation, and that she thinks it even more important to tell the world. I have a vision of her desparately searching the 924 channels and youtube for comments she can tweet and react to.

  5. Wow. As much of a boor as Trump is, it was Hillary who IMMEDIATELY politicized the massacre. While I’m not surprised, she really has zero class.

  6. We must agree to compromise by everybody doing what I tell them to do.

  7. “Failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton also issued remarks over Twitter, in which she said it was time to “put politics” aside and stand-up to the National Rifle Association.”
    How is going after the organization that protects the 2nd Amendment putting politics aside?

    Oh yeah, its not.

    Hillary standing on 50 bodies, so far, giving her stump speech.

    1. Well, how else is she going to prop herself up?

  8. Let’s put politics aside for a moment while we discuss politics.

  9. I seriously doubt Hillary Clinton understands how a silencer works.

    1. I just think she is stringing together buzz words. Silencer is the buzz word of the month among gun control nuts. I don’t think she even thought. Seriously, the guy stuck a rifle out of a hotel window and mowed a bunch of people down. How can anyone see that and think “thank God he didn’t have a silencer.” That is just bizarre.

      1. Have a little respect for the Smartest Woman In The World.

      2. She knows about sniper fire too.

        I saw an article call this guy a sniper. He was NOT a sniper.

        He did what people might call laying suppressing fire on unarmed civilians.

        BTW: The news will never mention this but there is a chance that this guy chose to shoot from a high and distant location to avoid CCW or locally armed citizens killing him. Nevada is not very restrictive on people carrying pistols. This guy probably could have killed more people standing at the entrance of the festival and shoot people.

        1. “”He was NOT a sniper.””

          I thought the same thing. Sniper is about precision, one shot one kill. This guy was just shooting at a crowd.

        2. Are you sure? His gamer tag was sniperXD523.

    2. Of course she does. “Alexa, how does a silencer work?”….. Aside from her tweet being completely tasteless and extremely self centered, it’s like she’s a 3rd grader trying to awkwardly fit a new vocabulary word into a sentence which has no real context since the guy didn’t have a silencer to begin with.

      Since she’s supposedly such a huge GOT fan, she might as well tweeted, “thank god he didn’t have a bunch of swords made with Valyrian steel.”

      1. Since she’s supposedly such a huge GOT fan, she might as well tweeted, “thank god he didn’t have a bunch of swords made with Valyrian steel.”

        Ah, yet another reason not to watch that hackneyed piece of torture-porn.

  10. The president had already issued a tweet…

    He’s been “issuing” tweets this whole time? Maybe I should be putting more weight to them.

  11. Reminds of me Shapiro when he accused Piers Morgan of standing on the graves of the children at Sandy Hook, and he was beside himself and didn’t know what to do. He had even planned on bringing in a kid in a wheelchair who was the victim of a mass shooting, and Shapiro told him in the break ‘what you claim to not stand on kids graves and now you are standing on their wheelchairs?”

    These people have no morals. They will stand on as many dead people as they can as long as they think it will help then win politically.

  12. Also, when these fucks talk about “standing up to the NRA”, they really mean “stand up to a majority of americans” .

    The NRA is powerful not because they are some big spooky corporation, but because millions support them and they vote.

    1. Right.

      But they can’t make millions of Americans the boogey man. They know very little about weapons in general, thus the name “assault” weapon and the idea that cosmetics can make something more lethal.

  13. Some reaction I got suggesting that we should at least wait 24-28 hours before politicizing this:

    “It is not an act of god. A human chose this. By default it is already political, but add the issue of other people whose political party is willfully choosing to let the mentally ill have guns while at the same time making it harder to monitor and control the distribution of guns. Yeah, it is really goddamn political and the deaths caused by shootings in this country are the willful and conscious achievement of the Republican party and the NRA’s efforts to stop responsible gun control. ”

    “Is it politicizing because one side is pro-gun death and the other side is anti-gun death?”

    “I agree — The only sane policy concerning tragedies is to ignore the factors that may have led to them, as well as their larger implications, until we have forgotten about them.”

    “No, this is absolutely the time to politicize this. You strike fast while the iron is hot. This is tragic and emotional and the perfect time to enact steps to stop this from happening is now, when everyone is more concerned with the victims than with their lobbying, their wallets and their fucking guns. We need to approach this now or we will see this death count surpassed again and again.”

    “It should be immediately politicized. When people tell you not to politicize something, that is in itself a political statement, and that statement is “I don’t want to hear about it.”‘

    1. To summarize: “We have to do something drastic to assuage my feelings.”

      1. Some events are indicative of larger issues. Some, however, are not indicative of anything but the people involved. Sometimes people do horrible and evil things that are indicative of nothing besides their own evil. People have a hard time accepting that and go looking for larger lessons when there are none to be had.

      2. It’s all feelings. It’s not hard to use logic and comparisons to show people that controlling the distribution of firearms is impossible. There’s a thing called black markets, and they exist, and they will never go away. I seem to recall a terror attack in what, France? That was not deterred by common sense gun control.

        You could ask them when was the last time they bought illegal drugs.

        But the feelz part of the brain just thinks, if there’s even a possibility that it could reduce gun violence then it’s worth it. Because these people don’t value RKBA per se, so they don’t consider it a loss of importance. Also, virtue signalling of this sort rakes in some serious social capital from the cocktail class, so you have a bit of a positive feedback loop, where acknowledging facts would jeopardize that social capital.

      3. To summarize: “We have to do something drastic to assuage my feelings and before the next Kardashian facebook flood distracts the public.”

    2. “Willfully choosing to let the mentally ill have guns”

      You have my respect for being able to read past that part, I couldn’t.

      1. One of the most willfully maligned groups in all cultures. I’m sure this person is all for standing up for the mentally I’ll until it’s time to throw them under the bus.

        Particularly since people will be retroactively declared Mentally Ill if they don’t come up for some other reason why the shooter did this.

        1. well, it would seem to be an accurate diagnosis… clucks like a chicken and all that. the weird part will be when they argue that this person was clearly mentally ill and should have never been allowed to possess guns. they’ll pull up little chunks of history and put it in a context to suggest that it should have been obvious.

          1. Because mental illness is more narrowly defined then “People who do things we don’t like without a reason we think is valid.” Or at least it should be. We’ve removed the possibility that someone is simply a piece of shit.

            1. Well… i’m probably arguing a relatively meaningless point. I have no doubt that whatever mental illness this guy has is more narrowly defined than that. But I think there’s a pretty clear line between a piece of shit who does things we don’t like without a reason we think is valid and a guy who shoots a bunch of people. The problem is that, generally, that line isn’t evident until after the fact. Or, more to the point, the fact that someone crosses that line is the proof of a mental illness.

              Either way, the spectrum of mental illness is pretty wide. And that’s where the laws about gun ownership and mental health are pretty messed up. Mental illness is fairly common. Serious (f’ed in the head, gonna shoot up the mall) mental illness is not that common. Laws that regulate gun ownership based on non-specific mental illness are not okay.

            2. Psychology is a soft pseudoscience that is politically correct.

              Mental illness is too subjective to base govt discrimination on.

              Find another metric that “mentally ill” do that is dangerous and hang on that. Something measureable and quantifiable/qualifiable, that represents real harm to others.

              Psychology is too much of an art to avoid bad actors from using discretion to misdiagnose.

              Mental illness legislation is the backdoor to circumvent rights. Once the state labels you crazy you are basically sent to Chateau D’if, true or not. The opportunity for rights abuse is astronomical.

      2. Should have called out that shitlord for his ableism.

    3. This is tragic and emotional and the perfect time to enact steps to stop this from happening is now

      I’d thank this person for acknowledging that politics are not rational debate, but I imagine they’d insist it was in other cases.

      1. That person is one sick motherfucker.

      2. This person needs to be haunted by the ghost of James Madison, explaining in spectral moans precisely why our system of politics is designed to act rationally in opposition to tragic and emotional times.

    4. You strike fast while the iron is hot.

      Spoken like a true comrade.

    5. “the deaths caused by shootings in this country are the willful and conscious achievement of the Republican party and the NRA’s efforts to stop responsible gun control”

      Yeah! Boom! How you going to respond to that!?!?!?! If only this jackass had been banned from owning a gun with a barrel shroud, everything would have been fine. It’s that damned bayonet lug that led to all this senseless slaughter. Why, oh why, couldn’t we have banned pistol grips before this happened? Clearly this would have never happened if this guy had been through a background check! This is all because the Republicans insist on giving out free machine guns to people who are checked into mental health facilities.

  14. Unbelievable that these things keep happening. Condolences to the victims and their families.

  15. I see that Hilldawg is still a raging cunt.

  16. Seems weird that we immediately wonder what the president will say in times of tragedy.

    1. Well, it’s Daddy’s job to comfort His children.

      1. It does seem unsettling to me that the President is deemed to have some moral judgement worth recognizing.

    2. That’s because the concept of limited government is dying, so we look to a symbol of our country. What’s absurd it that the Congress still has power, it just doesn’t much use it.

      1. That was a royal we: so you definitely aren’t included.

        1. Are you saying I’m not royalty? That I’m not really a princess???

      2. This is what happens with unlimited government–you don’t get an opinion.

    3. But what will the NFL say!?

  17. Vile, vile woman.

    You’ll take Neil Gorsuch and like it, bitch.

  18. Yeah, Hillary’s comment was pretty disgusting.

    Glad to see that Trump actually managed to keep it classy.

  19. http://news.trust.org/item/20171002142139-okyax

    This link is Reuters, not Russia Today. ISIS is claiming that the shooter was a recent convert to Islam and one of theirs. Maybe they are lying but I doubt it. If the guy wasn’t a covert, it will come out pretty shortly. So, I doubt ISIS is just grabbing onto a random shooting here. Maybe, but that is not their MO. I don’t recall them ever claiming responsibility for a mass shooting or attack that didn’t turn out to involve a Muslim. Chances are ISIS is telling the truth here. How would they know the guy was a Muslim if they had not been in contact with him?

    1. If that’s the case, expect this to get all kinds of fucked up (even more so than it is now).

      1. It seems more and more likely, if for no other reason than the police are being so quiet about his motive. Usually, they are only delayed in giving a motive when it is Islamic terrorism.

        Also, he doesn’t seem to fit the profile of your typical delusional psychotic. And I honestly don’t think a lefty nut would have shot up a concert. They would have tried to kill someone political like the guy who shot up the baseball game. So if he is not a rightwing nut, not a leftwing nut and not a psychotic with some kind of fixation on the event or venue, what does that leave except Islamic nut?

        1. if for no other reason than the police are being so quiet about his motive.

          This jumped out at me as well and not just his motives but it was similar to the Omar Marteen incident. Especially with the not-person-of-interest sought.

          Just that in Texas, within minutes of the police blowing up the suspect. We had assertions and disavowing as to whether the guy was with BLM and what weapons he used. In Charlottesville (video helped) but we knew definitively before sundown which side did what despite all the intermingling and loose affiliations.

          This time, 8-12 hrs. later it seems like we’re just getting the information that’s allowed to filter out.

          1. The ISIS claim is pretty indicative. Yes, ISIS claims responsibility for any Muslim attack is seems. But, I have never seen them claim responsibility for a non Muslim attack. For example, I don’t recall ISIS claiming responsibility for the GOP baseball practice shooting. Maybe they did but I don’t remember them doing that. And there is no reason to assume this guy is a Muslim. So why is ISIS claiming them as one of theirs unless he is?

      2. Yeah, ISIS and Alt-Right were my two most feared outcomes.

        1. I can’t imagine why the Alt Right would shoot up a country music concert any more than why the Antifa creeps would.

          1. I have no reason to believe anything. Those are just my least wanted outcomes.

    2. Just more workplace violence then…

    3. DD and John are both on the Mandalay Truther train now! Don’t miss the rush people, or all the good seats will be gone!

      1. Do you doubt Reuters? What are you talking about? ISIS is claiming responsibility and that this guy was a recent convert. Do we know that is true? No. But ISIS has not to my knowledge lied about these things in past. Sure, they claim credit for most Muslim attacks but they have never to my knowledge tried to claim credit for a nonMuslim attack. So, why would they hear unless they knew the guy was a Muslim and how would they know that if they hadn’t been in contact with him?

        It is what it is. I am sorry you are too immature to handle facts that conflict with your narrative. You should work on that.

        1. Um, it’s pretty easy to ‘claim responsibility’ for something. Unless they turn up evidence that this guy is actually a convert, it’s pretty much meaningless.

      2. You should stick to parsing out every word of Trump’s boilerplate response to the attack.

    4. ISIS claims responsibility for lots of random things, so this means very little, much as you may want it to be true.


  20. like Stanley implied I’m startled that people able to profit $5278 in one month on the
    computer . Find Out More


    ?..????????????

    Trump”s New Opprunuties See Here

  21. This is, sadly, an exceptionally effective terrorist attack. 50+ people die outside from shots fired by somebody not terribly close to them? There was no way for the concert goers to protect themselves (if armed, they still would’ve been hard-pressed to do anything). A truly horrifying event. I’m curious how he managed to get so many weapons up there, but I assume there were bags and hotels/casinos aren’t there to check your bags for stuff.

    …sadly, though, that is likely to change with this.

    1. Truly horrifying. And it shows the limits of having an armed populace. Having an armed populace is great for a lot of reasons. It does not, however, solve every risk and is not particularly effective in dealing with terrorism. An armed populace just changes the methods used for terrorism. It doesn’t prevent it. People who claim that we don’t have to worry about the risks of terrorism the way Europe does because we are better armed are kidding themselves.

      1. Which is why we need to ban guns, so they can evolve to using homemade explosives and everything will be better.

        1. Yeah or running over people with dump trucks. The fact is that guns and terrorism really are not related. That comes as a shock to the people who think the solution to terrorism is banning guns and to the people who think just because we are armed terrorism is not really a threat. But sometimes life is like that.

        2. “Sure, acid attacks are up in Britian, but at least they’re not dying, just horribly disfigured for life!”

          1. Aggravated Mayhem is one of the more fucked up crimes.

  22. Although it is not clear at this time whether or not the shooter used a machine gun, here is a rundown of the laws regulations the ownership of fully-automatic firearms (a “machine gun”) for those who may be interested. I post this because there are tons of misconceptions about these laws:

    1. Fully automatic weapons (firearms where more than one shot is fired for each pull of the trigger, but not including shotguns or volley guns) are given the classification of “machine guns” under the 1933 National Firearms Act (NFA). After modification of the NFA per the 1968 Gun Control Act, all machine guns must be registered with the BATFE. This registration process requires the issuance of a federal tax stamp, which costs $200. At the time the NFA was originally passed, this $200 tax stamp was prohibitively expensive but since the original amount was never changed it is now relatively affordable. In 1986, the Firearm Owners Protection Act included a provision called the Hughes amendment, with prohibited civilian ownership of any machine guns manufactured or imported after the act was passed. Therefore, the market for civilian-eligible machine guns has a fixed supply of available weapons while demand for machine guns has been rising. This means that machine guns can easily cost tens of thousands of dollars. However, manufacturers and licensed firearms dealers (FFLS) can obtain a special license to manufacture, import or own machine guns. There is a separate market of machine guns that are “dealer eligible” and are less expensive that “civilian eligible” machine guns due to limited demand.

      1. There are two ways for a civilian to apply for ownership of a machine gun: individually, or using a NFA trust. Both types of applications require a tax stamp, but the application process is slightly different for a trust and the ownership rules are different. An NFA trust is a legal entity that can own the machine gun, and the trust includes a list of “responsible parties” who are the individuals that are part of the trust and can actually physically possess the machine gun. All applications to own a machine gun are submitted using a NFA Form 1, which must include information about the firearm being registered, the personal information and fingerprints of the person applying, and $200 for the non-refundable tax stamp. If a NFA trust is used, only the initial responsible trustee is required to submit personal information or fingerprints for a background check and subsequent people may be added to the trust without a background check being required. This is a new process per ATF Proposed Rule 41p, which was adopted in 2013. Previously, NFA trusts could be submitted without providing any personal information for the people listed on the trust.

        1. One the NFA Form 1 is submitted, the BATFE will perform a background check on the individual(s) included on the form and verify whether they are prohibited from owning machine gun. This a normal background check (similar to any other background check for a firearm) that looks into the legal history of the applicant (citizenship status, arrest/conviction record, whether they have been adjudicated as mentally unfit or dishonorably discharged from the military). If they are approved, the tax stamp will be issued. This approval process can take anywhere from 3-12 months depending on the backlog of applications that the BATFE is processing. Before the tax stamp is issued, it is not possible for the applicant(s) to actually physically possess the machine gun. The weapon may be purchased before the application is submitted, but it must be held at an FFL until the tax stamp is issued. After registration, there are additional restrictions on the use of the machine gun. No person who has not been granted the tax stamp may use or posses the machine gun, unless they are being directly supervised by the license holder. In addition, machine guns cannot be transported across state lines (even temporarily) unless the BATFE has been notified by the license holder using a NFA Form 4. Additionally, the license holder is subject to inspection of the machine gun at any time by the BATFE. States may also ban ownership of NFA items, including machine guns.

          1. This same process also applies to other NFA items, such as short-barreled shotguns (barrels less than 18 inches) , short-barreled rifles (barrels less than 16 inches), suppressors/silencers, destructive devices (any non-blackpowder firearm that is not a shotgun with a bore larger than 0.50″ inch) and any other weapons (AOWs).

            Therefore, if the shooter was using a machine gun then the police can simply query the serial number of the weapon he was using to see if it was registered to an individual or a trust. If the shooter was not the individual granted the tax stamp, or is not part the registered trust, then he was in illegal possession of a machine gun. Does this matter? No.

            Also, anyone who says that we don’t have any regulations on firearms in the US is ignorant and doesn’t know what they are talking about. The NFA is a tiny fraction of the laws that govern firearms in this country.

      2. With the miracle of additive manufacturing (3D printing), it is not difficult to create a receiver that is fully automatic. The receiver is the only part of the weapon that is controlled by the feds. Everything else, the barrel, firing pin, magazine and such can be purchased legally right off the internet and then assembled around the receiver.

        Basically, the feds are pissing in the wind if they think they can keep fully automatic weapons out of the hands of determined terrorists and criminals.

    2. I have fired machine guns and I just listened to the video of the shooting.

      It could be a machine gun. It could also be a semi-auto being “bump fired”. The firing was continuous but sounded ragged.

  23. Let’s put politics aside, and bring in politics.

  24. http://dailycaller.com/2017/10…..site-share

    CBS legal exec, “No Sympathy for victims in Las Vegas because they were mostly Trump fans”. Wow. People never disappoint do they?

    1. Haha. I wonder if he is someone who also maligns that we are such a divided nation nowadays.

    2. Apparently a Columbia Law School degree is just as useless as one from Columbia Journalism School.

  25. “Hillary Clinton ? @HillaryClinton
    Replying to @HillaryClinton
    The crowd fled at the sound of gunshots.

    Imagine the deaths if the shooter had a silencer, which the NRA wants to make easier to get.”

    What a birdbrain.

    You cannot silence supersonic rifle fire.

    1. Hey, Hill-Dog knows about sniper fire.

      Bosnia- never forget!

    2. From what I read, an effective flash suppressor is what this freak was missing.

  26. A flashback to the savior Obama:

    Obama: Mass shootings are ‘something we should politicize’

    Quote:
    President Obama on Thursday made an impassioned case that gun violence is “something we should politicize” following a mass shooting at a community college in Oregon.

    Obama chided opponents of gun control legislation, including those who argue the country needs more guns to prevent mass shootings. And he urged proponents of stricter gun laws to vote for political candidates who share their views.

    “Each time this happens, I’m going to bring this up,” Obama said. “Each time this happens, I am going to say we can actually do something about it.”

    In a veiled jab at the NRA, Obama asked American gun owners to consider “whether your views are properly being represented by the organization that suggests it is speaking for you.”

    1. In a veiled jab at the NRA, Obama asked American gun owners to consider “whether your views are properly being represented by the organization that suggests it is speaking for you.”

      If you mean the NRA and GOA then, yes.

      That was easy.

      1. Eh, I’m not sure the NRA supports my views. They always seem to do stuff I consider too weak.

        1. Even the NRA does not publicly support removing ALL gun restrictions, including but not limited to: background checks, government tags for machine guns and silencers, restrictions on purchases based on prior criminal history, restrictions on explosives, restrictions on importing military hardware, requiring serial numbers on guns, etc.

          I advocate that the 2nd Amendment provides zero authority for government to have any restrictions on weapons.

    1. useless in sport, except for the sport of using them

      The same could be said of basketballs.

      1. I love how these people act like hunting rifles are somehow not deadly. How exactly do you ban guns but not for hunting? What would be the point?

        1. You’d think less states would ban Bow hunting if they wanted people to use less guns.

          1. Rambo II hardest hit!

    2. Leftist agendas are under fire these days, so they must quickly get out the narrative that guns=bad.

      I want to know who pays for these garbage periodicals anymore?

      You have to live in a leftist bubble to give money to the New Yorker.

    3. Gun control acts on gun violence the way antibiotics act on infections?imperfectly but with massive efficacy.

      Yeah, just look at states with draconian gun laws. You never see gun violence in Chicago, DC, Camden/Newark/Trenton NJ…

    4. the truth that gun control has slipped down the agenda of even anti-violence liberals

      Who the fuck does this simpering twat think he’s kidding? His tribe would be more than happy to line up every single one of their ideological opponents and shoot them in the head if they thought it would gain the Democrats another 10 seats in the Senate.

      1. Tony readily agrees.

    5. It is interesting that he compares gun ownership to infectious disease.

      1. To be fair, gun ownership does keep these blood sucking parasite politicians at bay.

  27. “Fuck you and fuck off” is what I would twit @ Clinton if I did such things.

  28. RE: Trump on Las Vegas Shooting: “An Act of Pure Evil”

    I’m sure Mr. Paddock had nothing to do with ISIS.

  29. While it is true that Ms. Clinton doesn’t have a clue about that of which she speaks, at least she is not our president.

  30. Somehow the term “warmest condolences” sounds off. Can’t really think of how I would have phrased it, but that one just doesn’t seem right. And the term “senseless violence”; would you prefer violence that made sense? Like lashing Empress Hillary with a Singapore cane?

    Hillary’s comment is unsurprising; the Liberal motto is “never waste a good tragedy”.

  31. Trump on Las Vegas Shooting: “An Act of Pure Evil” – Hit & Run : Reason.comis the best post by imo for pc Please visit imo app imo app snaptube for pc snaptube app

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.