Las Vegas Country Festival Shooting

Just crazy and insane.......sigh....
We were getting multiple text messages (very early this AM) from family & friends living in Vegas.....prayers go out to all that were affected by this horrific act.

Hi,
 
What bothers me is that someone walked into a hotel on the Strip with an arsenal that big, and no one at the Hotel saw it, or said anything ... 
 
Something rather unusual here ... no security?

Moshkito
Hi,
 
What bothers me is that someone walked into a hotel on the Strip with an arsenal that big, and no one at the Hotel saw it, or said anything ... 
 
Something rather unusual here ... no security?

You could probably just sneak them in luggage.  It wouldn't take long and wouldn't arouse any suspicion at all carrying things in. Even if you made repeat trips out to your car throughout the day to get it all up there.  

Excellent point. I just checked and Mandalay Bay does accept small dogs (2 with maximum total weight of less than 100 pounds) and has a clear policy on Cannabis:
"Use of marijuana (weed), including but not limited to smoking, inhaling, ingesting, or using oils, lotions, or other transdermal introduction of, is prohibited at all MGM Resorts properties notwithstanding approval of recreational use in Nevada. State law prohibits use of marijuana in public places.  Use of marijuana is also prohibited in guest rooms at all MGM Resorts properties in Nevada, consistent with the discretion afforded private property owners under the State law authorizing use of recreational marijuana in non-public places." If you read that carefully, you will realize that it is use and not possession that is prohibited. Maybe the same distinction applies to guns.
 
It is notable for not having a published policy in their FAQ against fully or semi-automatic weapons or a limit on the number of rounds that can be kept in your room. Do you think two guns and twenty rounds would be reasonable? Likely such a policy would serve as a foolproof deterrence against guests intent on mass murder, as I am sure the Cannabis policy does against guests getting high. Under Nevada law a private property owner is permitted to exclude firearms from the premises, but that exclusion is not enforceable by law. So a NO GUNS sign at the front desk would have been perfectly within their right.
 
They do charge a hefty cleaning fee for smoking in non-smoking rooms. No mention is made of gun smoke, powder residue, blood or brain matter, which are therefore presumably permitted.

.

slartabartfast
Excellent point. I just checked and Mandalay Bay does accept small dogs (2 with maximum total weight of less than 100 pounds) and has a clear policy on Cannabis:
"Use of marijuana (weed), including but not limited to smoking, inhaling, ingesting, or using oils, lotions, or other transdermal introduction of, is prohibited at all MGM Resorts properties notwithstanding approval of recreational use in Nevada. State law prohibits use of marijuana in public places.  Use of marijuana is also prohibited in guest rooms at all MGM Resorts properties in Nevada, consistent with the discretion afforded private property owners under the State law authorizing use of recreational marijuana in non-public places." If you read that carefully, you will realize that it is use and not possession that is prohibited. Maybe the same distinction applies to guns.
 
It is notable for not having a published policy in their FAQ against fully or semi-automatic weapons or a limit on the number of rounds that can be kept in your room. Do you think two guns and twenty rounds would be reasonable? Likely such a policy would serve as a foolproof deterrence against guests intent on mass murder, as I am sure the Cannabis policy does against guests getting high. Under Nevada law a private property owner is permitted to exclude firearms from the premises, but that exclusion is not enforceable by law. So a NO GUNS sign at the front desk would have been perfectly within their right.
 
They do charge a hefty cleaning fee for smoking in non-smoking rooms. No mention is made of gun smoke, powder residue, blood or brain matter, which are therefore presumably permitted.

slartabartfast
Excellent point. I just checked and Mandalay Bay does accept small dogs (2 with maximum total weight of less than 100 pounds) and has a clear policy on Cannabis:
"Use of marijuana (weed), including but not limited to smoking, inhaling, ingesting, or using oils, lotions, or other transdermal introduction of, is prohibited at all MGM Resorts properties notwithstanding approval of recreational use in Nevada. State law prohibits use of marijuana in public places.  Use of marijuana is also prohibited in guest rooms at all MGM Resorts properties in Nevada, consistent with the discretion afforded private property owners under the State law authorizing use of recreational marijuana in non-public places." If you read that carefully, you will realize that it is use and not possession that is prohibited. Maybe the same distinction applies to guns.
 
It is notable for not having a published policy in their FAQ against fully or semi-automatic weapons or a limit on the number of rounds that can be kept in your room. Do you think two guns and twenty rounds would be reasonable? Likely such a policy would serve as a foolproof deterrence against guests intent on mass murder, as I am sure the Cannabis policy does against guests getting high. Under Nevada law a private property owner is permitted to exclude firearms from the premises, but that exclusion is not enforceable by law. So a NO GUNS sign at the front desk would have been perfectly within their right.
 
They do charge a hefty cleaning fee for smoking in non-smoking rooms. No mention is made of gun smoke, powder residue, blood or brain matter, which are therefore presumably permitted.

 
Please see my post about sarcasm.  However a hotel can ban guns of any kind if they want.  They can have a metal detector at the door.  Unfortunately, I think we've just entered a dystopia, or idiocracy with guns.

"To be fair, mass shootings were/are such a rare occurrence in Australia anyway that it's hard to say with any certainty whether the ban was really the reason why it hasn't yet happened again. I seem to remember someone having a damn good crack at it at a Lindt cafe in Sydney a few years ago though?
"

Hi Sharke,
2 people died in the Lindt cafe,one from a police bullet ricochet and the general consensus is that no-one would have died if the communications channels had been more effective and the response better co-ordinated.
i remember going rabbiting around 12 years old with a .22 strapped to the handlebars.
now,even though i am a farm owner i need to show good cause to own a rifle,have an absolutely spotless police record and be subject to random checks for gunsafes and ammunition storage.only police and some security are armed in public and it is an offence for anyone to carry a concealed firearm.the legislation following the Port Arthur massacre virtually banned all military style weapons and this is to me the crux-hunting deer with a M1 is hardly hunting...
everyone has an inalienable  right to defend themselves but when society condones ready access to deadly force you have to consider the tradeoff between self defence and an effective police force to protect you rather than the onus on self defence. 
unfortunately,the gun culture is intrinsic to the US and no amount of legislation will ever force people to surrender their right to bear arms-especially in an increasingly violent world.
we were lucky in that we were able to tap into the horror of Port Arthur and change our culture,particularly regarding military style weapons and ammunition but unfortunately the massacres keep coming for you so the public grow more fearful and more likely to arm themselves-a vicious circle.
not being smug here-just thankful we have reduced the likelihood of these tragedies. 
peace,brothers!!
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

webbs hill studio
Hi Sharke,
2 people died in the Lindt cafe,one from a police bullet ricochet and the general consensus is that no-one would have died if the communications channels had been more effective and the response better co-ordinated.
i remember going rabbiting around 12 years old with a .22 strapped to the handlebars.
now,even though i am a farm owner i need to show good cause to own a rifle,have an absolutely spotless police record and be subject to random checks for gunsafes and ammunition storage.only police and some security are armed in public and it is an offence for anyone to carry a concealed firearm.the legislation following the Port Arthur massacre virtually banned all military style weapons and this is to me the crux-hunting deer with a M1 is hardly hunting...
everyone has an inalienable  right to defend themselves but when society condones ready access to deadly force you have to consider the tradeoff between self defence and an effective police force to protect you rather than the onus on self defence. 
unfortunately,the gun culture is intrinsic to the US and no amount of legislation will ever force people to surrender their right to bear arms-especially in an increasingly violent world.
we were lucky in that we were able to tap into the horror of Port Arthur and change our culture,particularly regarding military style weapons and ammunition but unfortunately the massacres keep coming for you so the public grow more fearful and more likely to arm themselves-a vicious circle.
not being smug here-just thankful we have reduced the likelihood of these tragedies. 
peace,brothers!!
 
 

 
Seriously though, how many massacres had there been in Australia before Port Arthur. I would argue that even without the resulting gun control, the chances are good that you wouldn't have had many more up until now anyway. Port Arthur was a statistical anomaly. If someone wants to go out with a bang in Australia right now, they can simply rent a large truck and drive into a crowd. Nice, France, 2016: 87 people dead in just a few minutes. In fact it's probably easier to rent a truck than it is to stockpile an arsenal of hardcore weaponry. 
 
The Lindt cafe incident could have easily turned into a full scale massacre had the guy had the will to do it. 
 
Europe seems to be under a steady stream of attacks and mass killings now - despite all of the gun control and despite a lack of "gun culture." 
 
The talk of gun control after a massacre like the one in Vegas is something that's largely driven by the media to divert attention from the elephant in the room - which is that the media's sensationalist coverage of these psychopaths is what drives them to kill in the first place. After every mass killing, the media goes into overdrive publishing story after story about the killer, his motives, his beefs with the world and his manifesto. No stone is left unturned. We're treated to interviews with his relatives, his friends, his ex-lovers, his school friends, his neighbors, his co-workers. All of his grievances are aired and he's given notoriety. This is what drives these mass killings. Every one of them is a copycat killing. Studies have shown this. The Pulse Nightclub shooter stopped halfway through his spree to search Facebook for reports about the massacre. The Virginia Tech shooter stopped halfway through his spree to mail a videotape to NBC explaining his motives. The killings happen in clusters, making it almost certain that they inspire each other. And the reason why the media gives them the publicity they crave is because it generates page clicks and millions of dollars in ad revenue. 
 
The media loves mass killings - they're a form of dark entertainment which sell newspapers. They also love natural disasters, plane crashes, serial killings and everything else that fascinates and titillates a public who won't admit that they enjoy reading about stuff like this. 
 
It's just inconceivable that almost 100% of the hand wringing after massacres like this is about gun control, even as the media gears itself up for another couple of weeks of revenue generating headlines about the killer, thus setting the stage for the next killing. How can anyone claim to want an end to these killings, when they're not prepared to delve into the root cause of them? People aren't committing these atrocities as a response to the availability of guns, just as the Nice attacker didn't mow down 87 people as a response to the availability of hire trucks. Every mass killer in the US since the Columbine shooters has been turned into an anti-hero by an overexcited media, and this has created a culture of copycat killings. It's time to admit this. 
 

LaszloZoltan

Linear Phase
This is probably not the place for politics.
 
Guns will always exist.  Absolute power will have guns.  Absolute evil will have guns.  The 2nd Amendment seeks to protect the masses who are almost always, "unarmed, or disarmed."
 
Anybody politicizing this horrible tragedy should have their head examined.  My statement on the 2nd Amendment is not to politicize I'm just explaining for you the reasoning behind a Constitutional Right.

actually, anyone trying to brush aside this horrible tragedy ought to have their head examined

I'm not going to get into some political argument with you on A: when so many innocents have lost their lives, and B: a forum about music software.

You may read the article below.  Please send all comments to the editors at reason magazine.  They would love to argue with you.  I imagine they also have the time to argue with you.  Also, they actually get paid to argue with you.  Nobody is going to pay me to argue with you, and frankly, you are really not worth my time
 
http://reason.com/blog/2017/10/02/how-could-anyone-deny-the-need-for-tough
 
 

"The Didloes"
 
I think I like that.
 
Maybe this thread isn't totally teh didloes.
 
/laugh b4 ya cry, mammajammas
 
 

the thing is,guns are good-if you have ever fired a 12 guage shotgun or a .45 Magnum handgun you know what i mean-thrilling,empowering,scary and yes addictive.
it`s all about the user and after Port Arthur almost one million guns were handed in in Oz under an amnesty.
at the time the weapon of choice for young australian males,especially in rural areas to commit suicide was firearms as there so many just "lying around" so removing excess weapons had a beneficial effect with the downside being many of the  "old guns"handed in and destroyed were rare and priceless historical artifacts.
such is life and with so many,an estimated 300 million registered guns in the US,there is no easy solution and this is not a political argument it is now a philosophical one.
we have a population of 24 million,the US has 323 million.
comparing the two without the obvious ability to legislate and effectively police such disparate nations is disingenuous. 
hope i haven`t violated the TOS-i just don`t see this as a political argument.
cheers  

Has anyone heard from Rain?