Post: #51

I'm reading at least 50 dead now?!?!?! No way this was just one shooter. Over 200 injured.

Post: #52

(10-02-2017 05:47 AM)LEMONed IScream Wrote:  I'm reading at least 50 dead now?!?!?! No way this was just one shooter. Over 200 injured.

After watching this video, I'd be shocked if there isn't over 100+ dead.

Post: #53

It could be single shooter with a belt-fed auto or multiple drum mags. The gun was either full auto or bump fire modified. Could have been other shooters, but it could also be just the two types of guns I just mentioned above with a single shooter.

Post: #54

(10-02-2017 05:47 AM)LEMONed IScream Wrote:  I'm reading at least 50 dead now?!?!?! No way this was just one shooter. Over 200 injured.

Sadly, it reminds me of what I've been writing on the "Bataclan terror attack" thread here:
Nowadays, if you are caught in a terror attack, do NOT lay low on the ground without moving. Flee, run for your life, or, if you physically can and are close enough, jump on the attacker... but just don't wait on the ground, because, terrorists and crazy killers will come for you (and atrociously torture you if they catch you alive, as happened in the Bataclan), or keep shooting at you on the ground.

So once again, sissy MSM are wrong: they advise people under attack to stay on the ground and just wait it over. Bad, and cowardly advice!

Like, for instance: yesterday in Marseille, France, an illegal North African migrant cut the throat of 2 women, at the train station. His rampage was stopped when a passerby (reported to be a woman, much respect!) jumped on him and beat him on the head... Then the police intervened and shot the undocumented islamist dead.
So my point is, people under attack in the West cannot stay passive, they have either to fight back, or escape by running fast. But, nothing of this "stay on the ground, don't move" shit.

Fight or run, just don't stay put and passive.

Post: #55

(10-02-2017 06:05 AM)Going strong Wrote:  

(10-02-2017 05:47 AM)LEMONed IScream Wrote:  I'm reading at least 50 dead now?!?!?! No way this was just one shooter. Over 200 injured.

Sadly, it reminds me of what I've been writing on the "Bataclan terror attack" thread here:
Nowadays, if you are caught in a terror attack, do NOT lay low on the ground without moving. Flee, run for your life, or, if you physically can and are close enough, jump on the attacker... but just don't wait on the ground, because, terrorists and crazy killers will come for you (and atrociously torture you if they catch you alive, as happened in the Bataclan), or keep shooting at you on the ground.

So once again, sissy MSM are wrong: they advise people under attack to stay on the ground and just wait it over. Bad, and cowardly advice!

Like, for instance: yesterday in Marseille, France, an illegal North African migrant cut the throat of 2 women, at the train station. His rampage was stopped when a passerby (reported to be a woman, much respect!) jumped on him and beat him on the head... Then the police intervened and shot the undocumented islamist dead.
So my point is, people under attack in the West cannot stay passive, they have either to fight back, or escape by running fast. But, nothing of this "stay on the ground, don't move" shit.

Fight or run, just don't stay put and passive.

Average police response time to an active shooter is about 12 minutes according to Police Magazine. Response time is generally not the time required to end the threat as most active shooters either kill themselves or will stall with the police in a shootout confrontation.

The laying low methodology only really works with gang-bangers/psycho's who have an immediate target(usually opposition), and those types generally know that a shooting brings police, so they generally run within a minute of letting off shots. An active shooter generally wants to do as much damage possible, and laying down makes it easier for them(the shooter).

Post: #56

Seems woman of interest is Aussie of Indonesian descent

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/wor...a29c8b8cc6


"Marilou Danley, the woman wanted by police in connection with the Las Vegas shooting is Australian.

The Australian understands that she was the girlfriend of the dead shooter Stephen Paddock. Ms Danley is understood to have shared a house in Las Vegas with Mr Paddock.

She holds an Australian passport and is possibly of Indonesian decent."

Post: #57

Hearing on radio this is the biggest mass shooting in US history. Sad.

Post: #58

Has the white male terrorist been caught?

Post: #59

Shooter confirmed as Stephen Paddock. Already killed by the police.

Post: #60

(10-02-2017 06:19 AM)mikado Wrote:  Has the white male terrorist been caught?

You have some nerve just a day after another muslim attack in France.

Post: #61

This white male surely has only that in common with the vast majority of the forum. This seems to have been some gamma loser anti-gun-yet-gun-shooter boomer having a rampage.

Post: #62

(10-02-2017 06:29 AM)nomadbrah Wrote:  

(10-02-2017 06:19 AM)mikado Wrote:  Has the white male terrorist been caught?

You have some nerve just a day after another muslim attack in France.

Not only that, but terrorism must always be accompanied by a ideological, political, or religious motive. Otherwise, it's not terrorism.

Post: #63

What's your issue? Both are terrorists, and I equally wish them hell on earth and afterlife.
I think this Guy had political motives according To the type of crowd he shoot, and his heavily leftist views

Post: #64

Hate to say it guys, and God be with the victims, but if it's one shooter with this many casualties the shooter will obviously be white.

Post: #65

I'm not going all tin foil hat, but I'm listening to XM radio, the Robin Meade show...

They are talking to a LOT of people that seem to not only know what happened, but are (imo) incredibly descriptive and ridiculously calm.
Since I've been listening, three people have told the reporter on site that "this isn't my blood, this is from someone next to me that was shot".

I won't throw my false flag up yet, but the above just strikes me as weird.

Post: #66

Post: #67

A question for those who know:

Has any banning of assault and heavy weapons been carried in the recent places where there has been US terrorist attacks?
I want To know how the previous goverment narrative has worked.

Post: #68

Dan Blizerian running from the event after seeing a girl get shot in the head :

https://www.instagram.com/p/BZvbv8DFrFg/

Post: #69

(10-02-2017 06:47 AM)Sam Malone Wrote:  I'm not going all tin foil hat, but I'm listening to XM radio, the Robin Meade show...

They are talking to a LOT of people that seem to not only know what happened, but are (imo) incredibly descriptive and ridiculously calm.
Since I've been listening, three people have told the reporter on site that "this isn't my blood, this is from someone next to me that was shot".

I won't throw my false flag up yet, but the above just strikes me as weird.

It doesn't strike me as weird, at all.

A reporter isn't going to talk to an obviously distraught individual, which means the reporter is selecting for a calm, collected person. And you don't draw scientific conclusions from biased samples.

Post: #70

(10-02-2017 06:51 AM)mikado Wrote:  A question for those who know:

Has any banning of assault and heavy weapons been carried in the recent places where there has been US terrorist attacks?
I want To know how the previous goverment narrative has worked.

Post: #71

(10-02-2017 06:55 AM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

(10-02-2017 06:51 AM)mikado Wrote:  A question for those who know:

Has any banning of assault and heavy weapons been carried in the recent places where there has been US terrorist attacks?
I want To know how the previous goverment narrative has worked.

A reminder that the Nice, France terrorist truck attack killed 84 or 86 people depending on source.

Post: #72

There are a ton of loopholes to that law (or features, depending your viewpoint). I'm not saying that we SHOULD make it harder to aquire fully automatic assualt rifles, but the idea that laws couldn't make it much harder is absurd.

Post: #73

(10-02-2017 07:07 AM)Repo Wrote:  There are a ton of loopholes to that law (or features, depending your viewpoint). I'm not saying that we SHOULD make it harder to aquire fully automatic assualt rifles, but the idea that laws couldn't make it much harder is absurd.

Except, prohibition never works.
They smuggle hard narcotics into prisons after-all...

Post: #74

He's a white male in his 60's. His name is Stephen Paddock

Post: #75

(10-02-2017 07:13 AM)wooshv Wrote:  He's white male in his 60's. His name is Stephen Paddock

You can't post in the political thread until you have 250 posts.