It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Guitarist who played in Las Vegas changes views on gun control

page: 10
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 3 2017 @ 07:53 PM

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask
You know what pisses me friend isnt even out of the hospital from surgery yet , after being shot twice in Vegas, and people like you and others cant wait to make this political......


Prayers to your friend. How bad were the shots?

Well he was really lucky, two shots, the first hit his knee, and the second grazed the back of his head as he went down, had that first shot not dropped him, he would have taken the second round squarely in the head.....

The first one basically exploded his knee cap, but hes in good spirits, recovery will be a tough road...

Once his wife and best friend got him safe where he could be rushed to the hospital, they went back in to help others ......

Heroes they were, and its the victims and the Heroism shown that day by others that should be focused on ..........

Not tripe like this.....sorry dont mean to come off as a jerk, it just really puts me out when people do crap like this, but it says a lot about their character and what really matters to them......

posted on Oct, 3 2017 @ 08:07 PM
a reply to: DanteGaland

Not a hog. You cant hardly get a bullet through their head due to the thick skin

And im not a prisoner. Dont wanna see razor wire around my property.

But fencing aint cheap for aceeage
edit on 10/3/2017 by bigfatfurrytexan because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 3 2017 @ 08:37 PM
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

You gotta understand though, not everyone "knows someone" who was there.

They don't have anyone to check up on or anything, but they are interested and concerned about the events and want to talk to others about it. It's just a matter of inevitability that politics comes up pretty quickly.

People don't know what we should do, some people want to suggest ideas etc.

I think anyone who is sensible at least sometimes is traumatized by this event, even if they are only hearing about it and don't know anyone involved. It's truly a disaster. People everywhere were traumatized by the truck massacre in France, things like this can really get to you when you let it sink in.

We need to remember that people freak out naturally, and that the political insanity will be a big part of the types of reactions that will be commonplace. Thinking it over I feel like it's best to just understand and go easy on people right now, no one knows or wants to know how to deal with this. Like every mass killing, we just learn how we dealt with it as time passes by.

Like earlier today, in this thread I think, I responded to people's political slant with a very sarcastic and unrealistic tone, and I'd hope people realized I was being sarcastic and moody. No one teaches you "how to react when there's been a massacre", and we all just sorta react by instinct I think.

It's really depressing and upsetting in the end though, like "What has the world come to?"...
Not only is it traumatic to know that this kind of thing happened, and on such a scale, but it creates a wound on our entire society as a whole.

Really I think the only solution is to Love each other and be a lot more forgiving. That's the only justice we will ever get out of this, we just need to care about each other more and be less selfish. It won't prevent any future horrors, nothing will, but it will make it a little bit easier for the survivors to make it to the next day with a little bit of peace.

We as a people really need to turn towards compassion and sympathy and Love.

I want to apologize to everyone for my biting cynical sarcasm earlier, I was being irrational and was frustrated from the stress this whole thing has created within our collective psyche.

I Love all of you.

edit on 10/3/2017 by muzzleflash because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 3 2017 @ 08:51 PM
Question isn't is if someone needs a rifle to shoot hogs.. or a deer. The question is why is it possible for someone to get around 50 guns and 10s of thousands of rounds of ammo. Who needs that many? No one needs that many.

My ex-brother in law had so many guns.. and what did they do with them? Mostly just screwed around with them. Stopped taking my daughter over when his 11 yo son was shooting prairie dogs in a field by their house, and then was turn around with the loaded weapon in his hand.. safety off.. my daughter in the yard 10 feet away. Where I lived then, -everyone- had weapons. Lots of rifles.. bows.. handguns, even crossbows. How often were they used for actual self defense or as tools to protect their property? Very rarely.

Hunting? More often.. but usually just one rifle. During hunting season.

The rest of the time? Things to screw around with and shoot whatever they fancied.

I'm all for rights. I'm even more for common sense. There is little common sense in having more weapons than you can reasonably use, and little sense in the terrible vetting out of perspective weapon buyers. Teens can buy automatic weapons.. that makes a lot of sense huh?

posted on Oct, 3 2017 @ 09:04 PM

Funny what PTSD will do to you.

I suppose direct experience of the event had nothing to do with the change in his mindset? Seriously? PTSD? That's the best you can offer from your mind. I can hear your thoughts and thinking, the little rumblings going on inside your brain, the paranoia rising. OMG! They are going to come and take my guns, just because a bunch of people got shot by a maniac. Why should I be penalised because of that!

posted on Oct, 3 2017 @ 09:15 PM
a reply to: Southern Guardian

So he's an idiot.

There ya go.

Just check statistics and get back to me...

posted on Oct, 3 2017 @ 11:31 PM
MBTM, I hope your friend begins to recover soon and heals fast.

fleabit, "need" doesn't enter into it. The minute a government can tell citizens what they can have based solely on "need", freedom and liberty are lost.

And for the record, "automatic weapons" are an NFA item, which require the owner be at least 18, pass stringent background checks, and have a wad of cash. I doubt many "teens" have the ability to legally own an actual fully automatic weapon.

NFA firearms are the most highly regulated legally available guns.

posted on Oct, 3 2017 @ 11:33 PM
a reply to: Southern Guardian

Apparently there is supposed to be a vote this week on legalizing silencers. I wonder how many more people would've died had the gunman already had one.

posted on Oct, 3 2017 @ 11:39 PM

originally posted by: MonkeyFishFrog
a reply to: Southern Guardian

Apparently there is supposed to be a vote this week on legalizing silencers. I wonder how many more people would've died had the gunman already had one.

None, because that's not how suppressors work.

They basically turn a loud crack into a noise in the range of 90db to 125db.

The bullets are still supersonic and create a sonic boom as they travel.

Real life is not a movie. Suppressors don't magically make a gun whisper quiet.

posted on Oct, 3 2017 @ 11:45 PM
a reply to: cynicalheathen

Not true. A concert averages 120 db which means without the suppressor/silencer the rifle shots were louder than the concert and could be heard over the sound of music. If a suppresssor/silencer reduces it to 90 db then you're less likely to notice the noise or assume it was pyrotechnic sounds like some of the concert goers first thought.

posted on Oct, 3 2017 @ 11:56 PM
a reply to: MonkeyFishFrog

At the distance the crowd was fired upon, it wouldn't have made a difference. The rounds got there well before the report. Add to that the confusion of the crowd, echoes from gunshots, and the noise of the stampede.

The gunman was firing from an elevated position for minutes on end, spray and pray style.

A silencer wouldn't have increased the body count. Once the first person realized they were being fired upon ( keep in mind the bullets would've likely still been supersonic ) the end result would be the same.

posted on Oct, 3 2017 @ 11:59 PM
a reply to: cynicalheathen

Not necessarily. Concerts are chaotic. You could hear the shots over the music, they stopped playing, started again and the shots started again. Those first shots would've hit people but you couldn't hear any screaming in the videos yet. If it weren't for the loudness of the shots the band might have even thought any panic in the crowd were just people getting rowdy at a show and kept playing.

posted on Oct, 4 2017 @ 03:29 AM

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
Some people are getting a wake up call about about guns in the wake of the recent Vegas shootings.

A guitarist who played during the Las Vegas music festival where the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history took place Sunday night said he was “wrong” about his support for the Second Amendment.

Caleb Keeter, guitarist for the Josh Abbott Band, said on Twitter Monday he’s been a supporter of the Second Amendment for his “entire life.”

“Until the events of last night,” Keeter said. “I cannot express how wrong I was. We actually have members of our crew with [concealed handgun licenses], and legal firearms on the bus. They were useless.”

Let the statement above sink in for a moment.

These mass shootings are occurring more frequently with each event becoming worse and worse. Not too long before this one we had Virginia which made held the former record. Conneticut? California? It never ends. The Trump administration and others argue that now's the time not to have a debate on gun violence. Now IS THE TIME to have that debate. If not now, there will never be that time. Gun nuts want to sweep this issue under the rug but it's not going away. Caleb has woken up and over time more will wake up. Something needs to be done.

Hiding behind the founders and the 2nd amendment, back to a time where guns were a fraction responsive to your standard hand gun today, isn't going to do it anymore.

Hiding behind the argument that guns are the only answer against other guns isn't going to do it anymore.

By far the worst in the developing world. The UK, Germany, Japan and Australia see nothing in comparison to this mess. Want to talk about bigger populations? India, China? How do the stats compare for mass civilian shootings? We look terrible against them in terms on gun violence.

You know what I found funny as well? That the Trump administration had the nerve to argue that now's not the time to debate gun violence, it's the time to grieve and respond. Yet Trump never bothered to do this for Puerto Rico. Right after the hurricane, the 'lazy' talk comes out.

Like it or not. The push for gun control is not going away.
Yup...We need some gun control, like they have in


posted on Oct, 4 2017 @ 05:10 AM
a reply to: elysiumfire

I dont think i can even reply to this. You are obviously not my "brain", and do not know what PTSD is.

posted on Oct, 4 2017 @ 05:15 AM

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Shamrock6

When do you need badly need an AR?

Well you need 10 ARs to kill pigs you know and also to defend yourself. I mean these weapons are doing real good defending innocent people from mass shootings.


posted on Oct, 4 2017 @ 05:31 AM
a reply to: Southern Guardian

False premise.

There is almost nothing that can be done to defend an unexpected attack by a gunman who has an elevated shooting position.

Once the shooting starts, the best thing to do is retreat to cover, determine where the threat is, and press the fight.

No gun is going to prevent the original attack.

See, this is where those who are anti-gun lose the rest of the audience. Spouting nonsense about people needing 10 ARs to shoot pigs.

posted on Oct, 4 2017 @ 05:34 AM

originally posted by: cynicalheathen

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: cynicalheathen

But not everybody that gets a DUI case is some hardliner boozing careless psycho. Drink .001% too much beer on too empty a stomach and that gets you drug thru the ringer as if you're a hardened criminal sociopath.

Absolutely they're not. People make mistakes. That's why I specified repeated and habitual

Surely someone will learn their lesson after the 3rd or so time, correct?

I expect that in most states habitual DUI get felonies, which means no guns for them anyways, meaning to even bring it up if its only " repeated and habitual" is redundant and is only going to derail.

Unless handing over the FedGov never ending increments of POWER is just the ultimate dream then carry on.

posted on Oct, 4 2017 @ 05:47 AM

originally posted by: Southern Guardian

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Shamrock6

When do you need badly need an AR?

Well you need 10 ARs to kill pigs you know and also to defend yourself. I mean these weapons are doing real good defending innocent people from mass shootings.


Wow you're a real class act....

Do you have any actual humanity left or are you just ALL political

posted on Oct, 4 2017 @ 05:54 AM
a reply to: Southern Guardian

People collect things. Males, females, and I'd imagine even trans individuals do too unless theyre just totally obsessed with the mirror or some sort of pathology like that.

Some people collect Beanie Babies, or baseball cards, or computer files, or antiques, or comic books, or VHS tapes, or Hallmark knick knacks... and some people collect guns.

Who the hell are you to get up in gun collectors shia'ite for enjoying guns and having the 'Collector Gene'??

edit on 4-10-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 4 2017 @ 06:58 AM
a reply to: Southern Guardian

So when we give up our guns, the government is going to get rid of theirs too, right?
edit on 4-10-2017 by HeadCrunchMcRockGroin because: (no reason given)

top topics

<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in