Death

[angrychair]

Have you seen an overhead of the scene, meaning hotel and concert area and the distances and angles and that it was dark?

A single person, a 64 year old retiree, with no military or police training, managed to maintain sustained fire, from multiple weapons, at that distance and in the dark and killed and injured that many people? It drips “conspiracy theory” and challenges credibility. Not saying it isn’t what it appears to be only it is going to be over-analyzed to death.

Why, yes, it’s possible that it was a single shooter but if so than it is the most significant indictment of just how deadly modern firearms are. That any single untrained retiree can kill and injure hundreds is mind boggling. If so than how can there be any other conclusion than to address the weapons as it obviously doesn’t matter who is pulling the trigger.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

1. I'm really unclear on how aiming an automatic weapon at a group of thousands of people

packed into a small area and unable to exit quickly, then spraying at will, killing dozens and injuring hundreds, challenges credibility.

[angrychair]

5. Which goes to my second point

I’m not offering up any conspiracy theory, just acknowledging that it will be questioned ad nausuem.

I am more inclined to my second paragraph and the significance of how easy it is to use modern firearms to cause such significant chaos and death even from an untrained and elderly person.

[HAB911]

20. I hear Alex Jones is on it!

Link to tweet

[Weekend Warrior]

2. I believe a lot of the injuries are secondary to the gun shots.

With the number of people, it could have been done with a blindfold for a period of time.

"It drips “conspiracy theory”"

Considering you are going conspiracy at this point, I imagine everything drips conspiracy. The most impressive conspiracy theories are often from those who immediately make them after an event. Those in on the game early. The true and passionate conspiracy theorists.

[angrychair]

6. Please see my second point

I’m not offering up any conspiracy theory, just acknowledging that it will be questioned ad nausuem.

I am more inclined to my second paragraph and the significance of how easy it is to use modern firearms to cause such significant chaos and death even from an untrained and elderly person.

[Weekend Warrior]

9. "I'm not offering up any conspiracy theory"

"A single person, a 64 year old retiree, with no military or police training, managed to maintain sustained fire, from multiple weapons, at that distance and in the dark and killed and injured that many people?"

[angrychair]

10. Not a conspiracy theory

Those are the facts of the case. That it will be questioned and analyzed and questioned should not be in doubt because it will.

[Weekend Warrior]

22. There are some really dim people out there.

People who say 911 was an inside job and there were multiple shooters when jfk was assisanated.

There is no stoping them.

[RhodeIslandOne]

11. I think the point he's making (unclearly)

Is that yes, it's possible with the power of the firearms that are legally available today. It's the conspiracy nuts who are going to downplay that.

[Weekend Warrior]

21. Ive never thought about getting out ahead of nuts. Nt

[snooper2]

3. I count at least five or six assumptions you are making in this OP

But, please continue

[angrychair]

7. Which are?

That it was a 64 yr old retiree? Because he was.

Untrained? They interviewed his brother and the police news conference that offered no military or LEO experience.

I’m out of ideas.

What assumptions?

[Tommy_Carcetti]

4. Guns remain the most efficient and accessible killing machine today.

Sure you can kill with other things, like cars and knives and bombs. And those things have killed many people over the years.

But killing with cars and knives require temporal proximity to the victim.

Bombs require delicate assembly and frequently fail.

Guns, on the other hand, allow the perpetrator to remain at a distance while carrying out the deadly act. A simple pull of the trigger from yards away will change or end someone's life forever. And the more powerful the gun, the easier it is to amass a higher body count with little effort.

[angrychair]

8. Thank you for focusing on my main point

And not dwelling on the lead up.

[Dreamer Tatum]

12. Going to hazard a wild guess that the venue was lit

and that he wasn't too discriminating in his targets.

Also going to hazard a guess that many bullets hit more than one person, and many hit nothing.

It was fish in a barrel. Sickening, but true.

[angrychair]

14. My assumption as well

But still not as easy as it sounds.
A great deal must be made of the recoil recovery and accuracy and deadliness at that distance for those weapons.
To be clear, we don’t even know what they were but they easily did their job, even in the hands of someone that received no professional training or significant experience in their use.

No more a clearer argument for “It’s the weapons, not the shooter”

The guns killed.

No guns, no deaths.

[hack89]

13. It is reported that he was a hunter

at least he had an Alaskan hunting license. Don't assume he was not familiar with guns.

[angrychair]

15. I know hunters

Being a hunter and/or having a hunting license does not make you familiar with weapons and more importantly, does not translate to being good at shooting a weapon.

While I admittedly might be making an educated assumption, so are you.

[hack89]

16. I know hunters too.

many of them are serious about their guns.

[angrychair]

17. I dont disagree

That being said, to be fair, we don’t which category he was.

That being said there is no need for the use of automatic weapons in hunting and using a 30-06 to elk hunt doesn’t make you an expert on the use of automatic weapons.

[hack89]

18. An automatic weapon shooting at a crowd of 20k will kill a bunch of people

regardless of the skill of the gunner.

[angrychair]

19. Exactly

The point I was making in my second paragraph:

“If so than how can there be any other conclusion than to address the weapons as it obviously doesn’t matter who is pulling the trigger.”

[WillowTree]

23. I'm going to guess that you're fairly young.

What significance is the fact that the man was retired? That he was 64 years old doesn't automatically equate to him being some frail old geezer. I've known men who were noticeably robust well into their seventies. And the fact that he apparently didn't have a law enforcement or military background doesn't necessarily mean that he was "untrained" as you keep saying. Fact is, there's an awful lot we don't yet know about the shooter.

Insofar as the dark and distance are concerned, I doubt he was aiming much. From the recordings I've heard, he was using some kind of an automatic or semi-automatic firearm and it wouldn't be far fetched to think that he was spraying the crowd (estimated to be around 30,000) with gunfire. And it went on for several minutes. Thus, the terrible number of killed and injured doesn't surprise me in the least.