• @Death_Equity@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      241 year ago

      He wasn’t a sniper, he was just firing shots indiscriminately.

      He used a “bump stock”, not a “forced reset trigger”. You don’t need a bump stock or FRT to fire at a high rate of speed, they just make it easier.

      Your valid argument is made weak by your ignorance.

      • @theyoyomaster@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        201 year ago

        He had bump stocks, the official investigation never determined whether or not he used them or if any of the rifles were illegally modified to be actual machine guns.

        • @Followupquestion@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          81 year ago

          The official investigation also never really turned up a motive, and if he was suicidal and wanted to take the maximum number of people with him, he had his own plane, so…

          • @theyoyomaster@lemmy.worldOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            151 year ago

            There’s a lot of unanswered questions, even after the investigation was completed. A FOIA request showed that the ATF was prohibited from inspecting any of the guns to check for full auto modifications. It was a deliberate choice by investigators to not determine anything pertaining to the function of any given weapon.

        • FARTYSHARTBLAST
          link
          fedilink
          41 year ago

          That seems really insane, how did they not determine that? What the fuck did they even investigate then?

          • @theyoyomaster@lemmy.worldOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            101 year ago

            The simplest and most likely answer is that they didn’t want to know. If they can say “he had bumpstocks” they had reason to ignore the fact that bumpstocks are 100% legal and ban them anyway without legislation. If they had found out that he genuinely modified them to be real machine guns, which are already banned by legislation, then they wouldn’t have their justification for going outside the law. There might be another answer but this is the one that feels the least like a conspiracy theory. It took a FOIA request for them to even admit that they were prohibited from inspecting any of the weapons used.

        • SeaJ
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          It’s pretty obvious he did but the extremely high rate of fire. You’d have to be nuts to think he brought them but decided his finger had had enough of a work out to be able to for rapidly for an extended period of time. It’s not like he needed precision since he was firing into a giant crowd

      • napalminjello
        link
        fedilink
        131 year ago

        If your reply is “well, technically…”, “Well, technically”, “yeah but, technically…” You may not have as great an argument as you think

        • Franzia
          link
          fedilink
          English
          21 year ago

          Well technically, I’d rather be informed

      • Semi-Hemi-Demigod
        link
        fedilink
        111 year ago

        Those people are still dead no matter what you call the person who pulled a trigger.

        This is the most infuriating part about talking to gun nuts.

      • @CmdrShepard
        link
        31 year ago

        Great! If you don’t need either to accomplish that then there’s no reason why a market should exist for them, right?