Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-04-2019, 09:30 AM
 
1,161 posts, read 435,342 times
Reputation: 1405

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Woody01 View Post
How exactly does this happen?
Not sure if you are trolling or genuinely confused.

America profits off of the sick, it's the sole reason we don't extend our already massive socialist programs to cover medical.

America has always profited off of war. War leads to a lot of deaths.

Mass shootings, gang violence, murders lead to fear which drives up gun purchases.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-04-2019, 11:12 AM
 
19,724 posts, read 10,128,243 times
Reputation: 13091
Quote:
Originally Posted by mkpunk View Post
And yet most people don't turn it basically fully automatic with a bump stock and use high capacity clips... Want to stop mass shootings, limit magazines to five to ten and ban bump stocks. The NRA actually agrees with the bump stock.
It has been explained to you before but, a runner band or belt loop will work just like a bump stock. Smaller magazines would just be changed fast and would not slow down the shooter. You are not gong to stop crazy people. For the record, a bump stock makes shooting less accurate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2019, 11:15 AM
 
19,724 posts, read 10,128,243 times
Reputation: 13091
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnotherTouchOfWhimsy View Post
You could say that about anything.

If I go and have my wisdom teeth out and I have a heart attack and die in the dental chair, my family could become fabulously wealthy.

If I get run over by an employee-driven forklift at Home Depot, my family (or I, if I get seriously hurt but not killed) could become fabulously wealthy.

If I go to Walmart and some kid drops their sippy cup on the floor and I slip in the water and get knocked out, I could become fabulously wealthy.

And on and on and on.

The question is, who should be responsible to pay for these claims? Obviously the shooter is responsible, but I'd guess that most of the time, they are not able to pay millions of dollars. Maybe gun owners need to take out insurance policies, just like you take out insurance for a car. The cost should be minimal because as gun owners like to point out, gun incidents hardly ever happen, but when they do, the policies could pay out the damages.
So the people who don't shoot anyone should pay the victims of those who do? That makes no sense at all. Because we know that criminals won't worry about having insurance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2019, 11:24 AM
 
Location: Somewhere out there.
10,534 posts, read 6,167,855 times
Reputation: 6572
Quote:
Originally Posted by RollsRoyce1 View Post
I assume you know the answer to the obvious question "How come soldiers, marines, sailors, cops, fire fighters dont get this?" But just in case you don't, the answer is that they are not victims. They do a job that they are compensated for.

I agree. The company should not pay the victims. The country should. Until the United States has the courage to do something about these mass shootings, the blood is on OUR hands and the money should be taken from US.
Great post.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2019, 11:28 AM
 
19,724 posts, read 10,128,243 times
Reputation: 13091
99+% of gun owners will never shoot anyone. Why should they be penalized for the less than 1% who do?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2019, 11:29 AM
 
Location: Somewhere out there.
10,534 posts, read 6,167,855 times
Reputation: 6572
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJ Brazen_3133 View Post
Do the mass shooter survivors deserve millions in settlement? Is it not excessive? So you were about to be killed or you are close to someone who was. That means you can become an instant millionaire.

How come soldiers, marines, sailors, cops, fire fighters dont get this?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/las-vegas...151414010.html

The LV MGM victim families like 58 people settle for $735 million dollars. So now they are newly minted millionaires. I bet you Morgan Stanley/Raymond James etc etc financial advisors are going to be all over these people.

I can understand if you were imprisoned unjustly. You suffered for long time directly because of gubment. Its like being tortured.

But its not like MGM Grand caused the mass shooting to happen. Why they held accountable? I doubt the victims families have the financial might to fight MGM for years making any settlement worthwhile.

I find your whole perspective really strange.

Do they 'deserve' to be millionaires? Maybe not, but neither do they 'deserve' to be victims.

What I find it particularly strange - your statement the 'you can become an instant millionaire' as if that is something desirable in exchange for being part of a gun massacre. Very odd.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2019, 11:37 AM
 
Location: Florida
23,795 posts, read 13,265,578 times
Reputation: 19952
Depends on what you think a human life (yours, your mother, father, sister, brother, husband, wife) is worth, and what you think the responsibility of the venue is worth.

The guy took an arsenal up to his room, without issue.

In this day of mass shootings and angry people, hotels -- especially Vegas hotels, should greatly up their security because that is the state of our country, unfortunately. Public places simply are not really safe any longer, so private companies are going to have to take better security precautions.

I suspect MGM can afford it, and do feel responsible.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2019, 12:32 PM
 
Location: Buckeye, AZ
38,936 posts, read 23,903,106 times
Reputation: 14125
Quote:
Originally Posted by FL IRON View Post
The standard capacity magazine for an AR chambered in .556 is 30 rounds. It is not high capacity. The standard capacity magazine for a Glock 19 is 15 rounds. It is not high capacity. I realize this is not what the shooter used in this case but standard magazine capacities are dependent on the firearm. The call for 10 round limits makes no sense and will not pass muster.
For a hunting rifle like the AR-15, or standard handgun like the Glock 19 why in God's green earth would you need anything beyond a ten round clip? My father who has hunted and owns guns that I have used for target practice don't even understand that logic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Floorist View Post
It has been explained to you before but, a runner band or belt loop will work just like a bump stock. Smaller magazines would just be changed fast and would not slow down the shooter. You are not gong to stop crazy people. For the record, a bump stock makes shooting less accurate.
For the record, accuracy isn't the point when you are looking for a body count though. He wasn't sniping for a single individual in a large crowd like you see in the movies or television, he wanted to indiscriminately maim or kill as many as he could. This too has been explained too people like you before when the deflection of bump stock accuracy is mentioned.

As for smaller magazines. It would of course be possible to load fast but unless you do it correctly, you have a case where you can easily jam the gun. Can't tell you how many times I named a single shot rifle on a Boy Scout range...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2019, 12:35 PM
 
1,066 posts, read 629,991 times
Reputation: 1297
ridiculous.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2019, 12:41 PM
 
Location: Buckeye, AZ
38,936 posts, read 23,903,106 times
Reputation: 14125
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floorist View Post
So the people who don't shoot anyone should pay the victims of those who do? That makes no sense at all. Because we know that criminals won't worry about having insurance.
Yeah because they didn't follow protocol and let it slip through the cracks. Many places changed their hotel do not disturb policy in light of this, especially in tourist destinations like Disney World, Universal and of course, Vegas. The hotel didn't think of checking the amount of cases which for a convention MIGHT be reasonable, but they would need to know an actual convention was in town to corroborate the story without setting off the BS alarm.

As a security guard for events, there is a BS alarm for stories. The NFL changed it bag policy last year to being fully clear minus the 4.5-6.5 inch wallets and clutches. No if ands or buts. I can't tell you how many "season ticket holders" still claim this year that they were let in the last time with the same bag. Unless the lapsed for the last year, they are clearly lying.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cruithne View Post
I find your whole perspective really strange.

Do they 'deserve' to be millionaires? Maybe not, but neither do they 'deserve' to be victims.

What I find it particularly strange - your statement the 'you can become an instant millionaire' as if that is something desirable in exchange for being part of a gun massacre. Very odd.
They won't be. Most go to hospital bills, doctor bills and funeral bills. Maybe some lost wages thrown in too. The actual amount that a class action suit gets over the actual physical damage is rather low.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enigma777 View Post
Depends on what you think a human life (yours, your mother, father, sister, brother, husband, wife) is worth, and what you think the responsibility of the venue is worth.

The guy took an arsenal up to his room, without issue.

In this day of mass shootings and angry people, hotels -- especially Vegas hotels, should greatly up their security because that is the state of our country, unfortunately. Public places simply are not really safe any longer, so private companies are going to have to take better security precautions.

I suspect MGM can afford it, and do feel responsible.
Yep. Sadly though people think MGM Resorts was attacked for no reason. They did, neglect. They are liable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:29 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top