Which is why there are over 500 wounded with a tenth that number of kills. A lot depends on the ammunition used - wing someone with a soft nosed bullet and they'll die relatively quickly from blood loss. Kill shots are still relatively easy when you have 10,000 plus in a relatively small area, you don't even have to aim at anyone in particular. Fire at roughly head height, you'll hit someone in the head or upper chest if your shot goes between the heads and hits whoever is behind them. That's still a fatal wound, just not instantaneous. Incidentally, I used to pot rabbits with head shots from about 200 metres with a .22. No scope. Some people are just good shots.
Shooting rabbits at, basically, 200-yards with a .22 LR? With open sites? Bullcrap. Maybe a lucky shot or two, bullet is too light and slow to guarantee any accuracy at that range. (Although I've shot groundhogs at 1,000-yards with a .22; a 220 Swift with a 30-power scope; even taken a couple with a .22 pistol at 250-yards: a bolt-action, single-shot Remington XP-100 chambered for .221 Fireball). Try that story with someone who hasn't been there and doesn't know any better.
And no, a soft-nosed bullet doesn't necessarily lead to rapid blood loss. They're my last pick for a guaranteed kill. My personal favorite for hunting is the hollow point, maximum hydrostatic shock on impact with almost guaranteed rapid bleed-out if that shock doesn't put the animal down immediately; NEVER had a whitetail move from where that 150-grain hollow-point struck them, except for the force slamming them against the nearest tree. Same when shooting groundhogs with that 308 Winchester. Groundhogs and other small game responded the same way to the 44-grain hollow points from my favorite .22, without the drama of being thrown against the tree, most times, but at much closer range, of course.
But back to the travesty in Vegas. We STILL don't know what firearm(s) and ammo were being used by the perp, or perps. And we don't know for how long the shooting continued (at least I haven't heard any times). It's really hard to guess at what might have really happened until that info (and a LOT more) is available.
Bullcrap be damned, I used to hit mynahs in the head with an air rifle (pellet gun) at more than 50m - you can't get much closer than that without spooking them. It's doable, you just have to allow for drop, and not shoot when it's windy. I'm not stupid enough to attempt a moving target at anything other than point blank.
The interview with the attacker's brother already indicated there were "no warning signs". Not even family members can necessarily tell when someone is about to carry out an attack like this. But we will hear more.
I don't know how to stop this. There are many factors, but we can't necessarily prevent someone from "snapping" and doing something like this. It's always preceded by "warning signs". Sometimes it is and some of these shootings do seem preventable, but this one so far is looking like it wasn't.
That said, I will never accept this as the "new normal". There's always a way to fight. It doesn't mean we can prevent every mass shooting, but there are things that can be done regarding mental health treatment, and yes, whether we like it or not, gun control. Doesn't mean that's specifically relevant to this particular shooting, but it could be relevant to others.
When several close family members of Congress dies in one of these attacks. Congress isn't directly affected and therefore will move slowly if at all on gun control.
This post was edited by Zack at October 2, 2017 7:36 PM MDT
Members of Congress were recently attacked and one is still recovering from his gunshot(s).
In the subject case, this nut had explosives in his home. If his guns disappeared he would/could have used the explosives. A bomb may have killed more.
To start talking about the evil inanimate gun every time this happens just doesn't ever get more persuasive.
Americans have a constitutional right to own guns. This guy who did this horrible thing in Vegas also had a stock of explosives in his home. If he hadn't have had the guns, it would have been a bomb I guess. Either way, taking rights away from Americans is not the way to proceed and starting that conversation is well, excuse me.......yawwwwnnnnnnnn
Actually there have been a few mass shootings "down under" since that firearms ban. Plus all the other devious methods used to commit mass murders since that gun ban went into effect. Murders like the Snowtown Murders, the Childers Palace Backpackers Hostel Fire (what a horrible way to die, rather take a bullet to the brain), the Monash University Shootings (in 2002, but only two people were offed so it probably doesn't count in your mind), The Churchill Fire (burned to death, again . . .), the Lin Family Murders, the Hectorville Siege/Shootings, the Quaker Hill Nursing Home Fire, the Hunt Family Murders (by gunfire), the Sydney Siege, the Cairns Child killings, the Port Lincoln Murder/Suicide, the 2016 Home Hill stabbings, the gassing of a Sydney family about a year ago and the Melbourne car attack last January.
Yep. I'd say that you Aussies have it well under control (not).
"A mass shooting is defined as having four or more fatalities, not including gang killings or slayings that involve the death of multiple family members." Christensen, Jen (August 28, 2015). Why the US has the most mass shootings. CNN.
By thst definition, there haven't been any in Australia since Port Arthur.
Salt and Red Pepper 