Salon: Gun Control Could Have Stopped Las Vegas Mass Shooter [Not Shown]

Charlie May (courtesy muckrack.com)

“In a society where the National Rifle Association doesn’t have its claws deep inside the pockets of Republican lawmakers, Congress could easily pass legislation that would have prevented Paddock from buying 33 guns in a single year, or a bill that would have prevented him from collecting a total of 47 guns — essentially a cache of weapons. All told, Paddock’s arsenal, 23 of which were with him in his hotel room along with unreal amounts of ammunition, gave him the opportunity to slaughter 58 people, and injure over 500 more in under 12 minutes.” – Charlie May, NRATV host: Preventing the Vegas shooter from buying 47 guns would have been “unacceptable” [via salon.com]

comments

  1. avatar Shire-man says:

    Obsessing over the number of guns somebody has is a meme. I only have two arms after all and in most cases it would be quicker to simply reload than to pick up or move to another gun not to mention much easier to travel with loaded mags than to travel with 47 different guns.

    1. avatar Gman says:

      Not at bump fire rates. Melted barrels.

      1. avatar Ollie says:

        A simple DIY water jacket would allow nearly unlimited length of firing time.
        Connected to running cold water in the bathroom would give unlimited chill time.

        Where there’s a will, there’s always a way.

      2. avatar Sian says:

        Red herring though.

        With 12 minutes he could have, instead of spraying inaccurate bumpfire into a scattering crowd, easily have fired well over 400 quickly aimed shots from one or two well-appointed scoped rifles.

        He killed 58 despite using bump stocks, not because of them.

        1. avatar Binder says:

          Oh please. The increase rate of fire is EXACTLY what you want for the opening volley into a packed crowd in the open. He was also using a 308 / 762 rifle, EXACTLY what you want when you start picking off individual targets. Also you are not going to “melt” the barrel without sending down a hell of a lot of rounds. That said a heavy barrel upper would help and far simpler that any water cooling. This is a person shooting into a crowd, not a machine gun position on a front line.

          I think it is funny how no one publishes the actual rate of fire for a bump stock. But give how even JM can’t keep up with one and his splits on an AR are .14, your are looking at around between 450-650 RPM. Full Auto M16 start around 750, but i would argue that a lower ROF is easier to control.

        2. avatar neiowa says:

          A lot of detail there Goober. Have some footnotes?

          Perhaps you can define “unreal amounts of ammunition”. How much is that? by the round, lb, ton?

        3. avatar Binder says:

          That you tube test showed 500 rounds before it got iffy, and it made it to about 850-900 rounds before it failed. This was fired in about 6 minutes.

          Also 400 aimed shots at that range in 12 min, HA HA HA HA.

        4. avatar Sian says:

          >Also 400 aimed shots at that range in 12 min, HA HA HA HA.

          33 shots per minute (with reloading) with quick sight pictures into a crowd, just pick out the closest body to your crosshairs and pull the trigger.

          Not a challenge at all, especially considering the first couple minutes can just be near mag dumps into the tighter groups before they start scattering.

        5. avatar Binder says:

          500 yard shot at 300 foot elevation change at moving targets. One hit every 2 seconds? This is not a video game Mr American Sniper. And did you just say mag dumps, well no kidding, that is what the bump stocks are for.

          And look at the after action reports, he scored 422 hits. Fuck.

        6. avatar Buck Cassidy says:

          Paddock never squeezed the first trigger in Vegas! He was dead long before the first shots were fired. Stop keeping this part of the false narrative alive. All deaths of innocents, whether attending the concert or simply walking around in Vegas, were killed by foreign nationals and mercenaries. If you disbelieve these accusations, please check and see what Saudi Arabian princes were in Vegas that night. Who rented the commercial helicopters? Who was shooting for those helicopters? Our own state actors are complicit in the cover up! How and who were able to remove phones and hard drives from Paddock’s room? They didn’t fly out the broken windows!

      3. avatar Don from CT says:

        Absolutely wrong. There are plenty of tests of full auto ARs surviving to about 1000 rounds before failure.

        So the total number of rounds fired could have been accomplished with 2 ARs.

    2. avatar MyName says:

      I’ve come to the conclusion that the reason the antis fixate on the number of guns someone has is because they see each gun as a unit of individual power and, since they are often collectivists who wish to degrade individual autonomy, each unit of individual power makes that particular opponent that much scarier – It’s the symbology of the number, not the utility of the number that scares them.

      I have observed this with antis in conversation. They’ll ask how many guns I have and if I just give a number, they recoil in proportion to how large that number is. Not a scientifically gathered sample, I’ll grant, but a pattern I’ve observed.

      Often, particularly if I give a large number, (I admit to altering the admitted/claimed number to suit the situation – sociological experimentation and all) the response will be to ask, “Why does one person need so many guns?!” The higher the number, the higher the pitch of the voice asking the question.

      I can respond with whatever reason; different guns for different uses, I’m a collector, what difference does it make I only have two hands, whatever but the number is what they tend to fixate on. They usually don’t even know enough to ask what kind of guns they are. I own several black powder guns and several .22s – these are not the kind of guns the antis claim to want to regulate – but that doesn’t matter. They see each gun, whatever it is, as a statement that I will not be controlled by them. The more guns, the stronger that statement they think.

      I, as a POTG, recognize that there are plenty of staunch advocates of individual rights and self determination that own fewer guns than I do. I also recognize that there are those who own more guns that me that do not really advocate for personal freedom. To me, the number of guns someone owns does not indicate how exactly they view rights and freedom and their willingness to fight for those things – to the antis, it does.

      1. avatar CZ Peasy says:

        That is a very interesting analysis and explains a lot.

      2. avatar Coffee Addict says:

        they also equate number of rounds with number of deaths.

        30rd magazine, 30 people shot and killed.
        .. which is why 4,000 rds of 22lr is an arsenal.

        1. avatar MyName says:

          Indeed they do. I see it as part of the same pattern. I think this is also the reason for their fixation on ‘assault weapons’ and ‘high powered’ whatever. What they are expressing when they use these terms in the hyperventilating way they do is: I perceive you as scary because you do not conform to my wishes.

          This collectivist mindset is, I think, at the root of the ‘gun debate’ and many other characteristics of the antis and the left in general. Look at the collection of socio-political traits of a representative anti. They tend to be:

          Opposed to guns – emblems of personal power and self-determination
          Engaged in identity politics – opposed to individual worth and self-determination
          Dubious of ‘flyover-state’ people/bitter clingers/deplorables – opposed to rugged individualism
          Opposed to hunting – opposed to self sufficiency
          In favor of government regulation/licensing/control of even the smallest areas of life – opposed to individuality and personal freedom

          All of these traits point to a person who wants to control as many people as possible in an effort to force them to conform. These people are essentially saying, “Be more like me, fall in line, behave in a way that makes me comfortable so I don’t have to fear you or wonder what you might do.” It’s all about control and collectivism. “You shouldn’t eat that – let’s make it illegal, you shouldn’t drink that – let’s tax it, you shouldn’t own that – let’s control it, you shouldn’t be what you are so let’s make you be like me.” That is essentially what they are saying. They even want to claim it is already established that you have no personal identity: Remember, “You didn’t build that.”

          Guns, ammo, scary black rifles, these are all sticks in the eye of those who wish for you and for me to conform to them because they remind them that they can only exert so much force over those who would not be bound.

        2. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          MyName, that’s some good analysis.

          They even want to control how we think now. Some professor in NY was pushed out for being pro-free speech. He was on Tucker Carlson last night, I think. (I don’t actually pay attention; I’m usually doing something else with the TV on). Carlson said “if these people were in charge, … I think a lot of people would die because those are authoritarian tendencies.”

          I agree with both your and Carlson’s analysis.

        3. avatar MyName says:

          Absolutely they want to control how we think – that is their holy grail. How often do they use terms like ‘common sense’ or ‘reasonable’ to describe their own positions? This is clearly an attempt to state that anyone who does not think like them has no sense and is unreasonable. If everyone who differs with them is unreasonable and irrational then there is no impediment to them dictating the terms of … anything to those unreasonable, unthinking cretins. This is why we, and by “we” I mean people who in one area or another push back, are labeled with the most vile terms they can muster.

          If they could just ‘fix’ our thinking, then they wouldn’t have to deal with us gun-totin’ barbarians.

      3. avatar California Richard says:

        When asked I respond with, “One.” It’s all I need in any given moment, and all I can effectively handle at one time. It also holds true for the person or people I may have to shoot one day.

      4. avatar Unrepentent Libertarian says:

        “Those who would trade essential liberty for security should be denied both.”
        Ben Franklin

        1. avatar Roymond says:

          Please get it right. What Franklin said was:

          “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

          What’s interesting is that the topic he was commenting on had to do with taxes.

        2. avatar Ragnar says:

          A little lengthier, but just as relevant:

          “Safety from external danger is the most powerful director of national conduct. Even the ardent love of liberty will, after a time, give way to its dictates. The violent destruction of life and property incident to war, the continual effort and alarm attendant on a state of continual danger, will compel nations the most attached to liberty to resort for repose and security to institutions which have a tendency to destroy their civil and political rights. To be more safe, they at length become willing to run the risk of being less free.”

          – Alexander Hamilton

      5. avatar samuraichatter says:

        Almost no one mentions the fact that in most of these shootings were dude has more than 2 weapons they are not all used. Even more so when guys have pipe bombs and machetes. But more weapons = deadlier.

      6. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

        I know a guy who was anti gun. Black guy, my boss at the time. He thought everyone with a “bunch” of guns was eagerly anticipating the race war. I let him make his point. Then I told him how many guns I had. Why so many, he asked. I had a reason for every gun. Why guns, he asked. Beautiful machines that are fun to use. Some people love cars or some other gadgets. I love guns.

        He was a knee jerk anti because, his words, people in the community (middle to upper middle class black people, especially men) don’t own guns. I think he started to come around that very moment. He later asked me to teach him and his wife about guns and how to shoot, what with the coming race war on account of Trump and all (he didn’t say that, the context did). I remind him every time I see him that I’m willing whenever they are.

        I joke with my brother that I’m going to have to insert the shouting of “race war” as part of proper shooting to tease him a bit.

      7. avatar Roymond says:

        ” They see each gun, whatever it is, as a statement that I will not be controlled by them.”

        Superb insight!

      8. Exactly. Antis think the more guns someone has, the “scarier” that person is.
        They’ve never heard the expression, “Beware of the man with only one gun, because he surely knows how to use it.” They also don’t realize that the person with 100 guns is invariably a harmless collector, while criminals tend to have only one gun.

        Unfortunately, the Las Vegas shooter was an exception to the rule, but he was a moron, too. He wasn’t even using his .308 rifles, he was using his .223 carbines (at 500 yards, very close to their maximum EFFECTIVE range), and he wasn’t aiming, he was using a bump fire stock. He could’ve killed more people with aimed fire using a bolt-action 6.5 Creedmoor or .308 rifle with a bipod and scope than with his little AR-15 carbines with bumpfire stocks using “spray and pray [to Satan]” tactics.
        (So I’m glad he’s a moron, make no mistake, I’m glad he didn’t use deadlier weapons than .223).
        Apparently he only used his .308 caliber AR-10 to try to shoot oil tanks, because he’d seen too many Hollywood movies where one shot from a rifle makes an oil tank blow up (whereas in real life, it won’t even burn unless it’s an incendiary or better yet, API round, and even then, oil will only burn, not explode. Gasoline explodes, oil just burns).

  2. avatar James says:

    You shouldn’t give Salon any attention. Even most people on the left I’ve asked admit its a joke of a news source.

    1. avatar WayneMHK says:

      Yeah, sometimes I think the only people reading Salon are “conservative” sites looking for something to write about. I wouldn’t even know Salon existed otherwise.

      1. avatar How_Terrible says:

        I honestly think that a bunch of “news” sites on both the left and right exist only because the other side reads them to get their daily does of outrage.

        1. avatar JeffInCa says:

          Well Played Sir

  3. avatar rick3 says:

    I think it’s interesting that in the original Salon article, the writer mentions the number of “school-related shootings” during January. I see that term as the new twisted phrase for gun-control advocates to use, since they can’t accurately say “school shootings”, but “school-related shootings” still carries the same schoolchild related risk factor to a reader who doesn’t know the facts. Such as counting someone shooting a pellet gun at a school bus, someone else using a schoolyard after hours to commit suicide, etc…

  4. avatar Slab Rankle says:

    If Stephen Paddock didn’t have any guns then he couldn’t have shot anyone, but then, if people like Charlie May didn’t exist (liberals), then our society wouldn’t be going down the toilet the way it is, either.

    I won’t bother detailing the many societal ills that have resulted from left wing policy. It’s a well known story.

    Let’s eradicate left wing policy and the people who promote it, then we can really have “common sense” policy, on all levels.

  5. avatar MIO says:

    Them laws won’t stop the CIA operatives but thanks for playing

  6. avatar Curtis in IL says:

    He could have killed more people by driving a truck into the crowd.

    It takes a special kind of arrested cognitive development to believe that
    1) A law would have prevented him from acquiring the killing tools he needed, or
    2) Taking away one kind of tool would render him unable to commit a heinous crime.

    1. avatar Binder says:

      Well yeah. No firearm beats 5 tons of steel moving at 45 MPH in terms of energy, short of a cannon.

      1. avatar Steve Day says:

        Tell that to the families of the 86 people who were killed in Nice, France, by a terrorist driving a box truck into a crowd of people. Not only was the total death toll higher, but the number of innocents killed per minute vastly outweighed those killed in Vegas.

        Using a truck as a weapon is 1) unregulated; 2) results in more fatalities; 3) kills people faster than a nutjob who has a “snipers perch” (the term the media used to describe Paddock’s room on a high floor 430yds away from the crowd) full of inaccurate bump-stock equipped rifles; 4) not sensational enough for the pro-“People Control” organizations or individuals to use as propaganda for exerting even more control over the populace (aka: the unwashed masses).

        1. avatar Binder says:

          I just checked, he scored 422 hits. So much for inaccurate fire, more like .556 at 500 yards kind of sucks. A 55 grain bullet doing 1200 fps can still kill you, but no one here is going to carry a hand gun like that.

          Also I hate the argument that a truck can be more effective at killing people in a crowd, well yes it is. It is ALL about the about of energy you can dump into people.

        2. avatar Sian says:

          Many of his hits were from single bullets striking multiple people in the crowd, in the first minutes.

          It is still clear to me that more deliberate fire would have easily resulted in a higher number FATALLY struck, more quickly.

        3. avatar Binder says:

          Yes, and a AR-10 would have been a better choice, better yet a belt fed light machine gun. But you are telling me that you can hit targets individual targets at the rate of 1 every 2 seconds at 500 yards with that elevation drop cold (no chance to re-zero) and dealing with any wind issues. Also you are down to 200-225 ft pounds of energy, 1/6 the muzzle, so you better have a even more impressive aim. The honest truth is the highest body count is going to be achieved with volume of fire, not aimed. This is not some 150 yard 3 gun shooting at 10 inch plates.

  7. avatar TrappedInCommiefornia says:

    Yes, because he certainly couldn’t have crashed his plane into the festival, cause that’d be illegal.

  8. avatar billy-bob says:

    What if we just passed a law against murder, it would make all these killings illegal. Oh wait, never mind.

  9. avatar Joe R. says:

    In a society where the government could imprison and kill all of the MF aholes Salon and nobody find out about it until way too late, it’s not smart for Salon (D)ouchebag tools to sh_t on their only armed defense.

  10. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

    Why would I take political advice from a hair stylists’ website?

    1. avatar mick1706 says:

      Touche.

  11. avatar former water walker says:

    I’m with Curtis. SEE: NICE, France. Or Oklahoma City 1995…

  12. avatar 2aguy says:

    Out of all of those guns he reportedly used just 2…..he could have purchased 2 guns even with a one gun a month policy. Also…he fired 2 rifles into a tightly packed crowd of over 22,000 people, firing over 1,000 rounds of ammunition and murdered 58 people. The muslim terrorist in Nice, France used a rental truck and in 5 minutes murdered 86 people….and yet there hasn’t been a call to ban renting trucks.

    1. avatar former water walker says:

      Ban Moose-lims!😩😖😏

      1. avatar mick1706 says:

        We need bigger guns to stop the trucks.

  13. avatar Jay in Florida says:

    Typical libitard thought processes .
    I ignore them.

  14. avatar GS650G says:

    We are going to need the guns when it breaks out in this country.

  15. avatar Dave F says:

    Paddock aside, by what authority would government have to make a law, against the Constitution, to prevent law abiding citizens from exercising their free right? I spent my working adult life to ensure freedom for all and not to let a few govern otherwise. Paddock was one sick individual. That does not mean by any stretch of the sensible thinking that we as free people need to be punished for his actions. Haven’t you got it yet?! No matter how many laws government passes against firearm ownership it will not stop the violence. A free armed society is not a lawless society. In fact many lives are saved when a law abiding citizen has a gun and in most cases the citizen never has to fire a shot. You all have a right to your opinions but just ask yourself do you want to live in a free society. Just to let it be known I am not a member of NRA but I do believe in a persons rights. Stay safe. Dave

  16. avatar Andrew Lias says:

    How many of these guns were bough in California again? I thought they were leading the way on this.

  17. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    That Salon article is completely divorced from reality — their “solution” requires that:

    The NRA does not exist.
    Hint: the NRA indeed DOES exist.

    Laws actually prevent criminal actions.
    Hint: laws, which are mere words on paper, do NOT prevent criminal actions.

    Determined killers who are unopposed for 12 minutes cannot kill people without firearms.
    Hint: determined killers who are unopposed for 12 minutes CAN kill a lot of people without firearms.

    Once again we see that reality is not important to gun-grabbers and their ilk. What is important is advancing whatever they view as pillars of virtue.

  18. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    Once again, someone claims that it is not possible to kill a lot of people without military-style semi-automatic rifles, lots of rifles, high rates of fire, and thousands of rounds of ammunition.

    Let me remind everyone that a similar death toll is easily achievable with two lever-action rifles and two revolvers all chambered in .44 Magnum. Commonly available lever-action rifles have 10 round magazines plus one round in the chamber. Of course commonly available revolvers have 6-round cylinders. That means a person who has two rifles and two revolvers has 34 shots without reloading. Loaded with full-power 300 grain hardcast lead bullets, each bullet could easily kill between two and three people fired into a dense crowd of 22,000 souls. That is a potential death toll between and 68 and 102 victims.

    Also note that it would be a cinch to average 1 shot per second with those firearms. Most people could shoot about once per second with a lever-action rifle and twice per second with those revolvers if they shot right and left-handed at the same time. Remember, they do not have to be aimed shots shooting into a dense crowd at point-blank range! Thus, the spree killer would have emptied his firearms in not much more than 34 seconds from the first shot.

    1. avatar Binder says:

      Do any of that from 500 yards and then you can start talking. He scored 422 hits. If is was not for the range, there would have been a hell of a lot more dead

      1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        Binder,

        Just to be clear, my alternate hypothetical scenario with lever-guns and revolvers had the attacker unleashing within a few feet of the crowd, not from 400+ yards away.

        Had the attacker let loose within a few feet of the crowd with his semi-auto rifles, I suspect the casualty count could have been higher. I could have also been lower because people would have disappeared behind cover in short order. (Shooting from on-high defeated most of the cover for the entire venue.)

        1. avatar binder says:

          If you managed to keep shooting into a country music crowd for that long without being dropped in return. much less getting that much hardware that close, I would really be impressed. Yes I know there are a million ways to kill a bunch of people. But the bump stocks are way more effective than most people are letting on and guarding a perimeter 500 yards out is a class a bitch. Also the 44 mag is still only a 1200 fps round so it is not that much energy, you are poking holes (bit ones) but not a lot of high-velocity damage.

        2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          Binder,

          All good points, especially about how much more difficult it is to keep a secure perimeter 400+ yards beyond the concert field. And yes those .44 Magnum revolvers and rifles would cause fatal wounds via the large holes that they would create rather than dumping large amounts of kinetic energy.

          For reference heavy hardcast lead bullets with large, flat meplats exiting a revolver at 1,300 fps do not expand, will penetrate a LOT of flesh, and create holes on the order of 3/4 inch in diameter until velocity slows down substantially. Those same loads coming out of a rifle would be exiting at closer to 1,500 fps, would make holes on the order of 1.1 inches in diameter, and be catastrophic to at least the first three people in line.

          (Because hardcast lead bullets do not change shape, even when they contact bone, they keep moving in a straight line without tumbling and should easily penetrate more than four feet of human flesh.)

  19. avatar HP says:

    Also Salon:

    “I’m a pedophile, not a monster”

  20. avatar troutbum5 says:

    If the brass count from the police report is accurate, he only fired 8 rounds of 7.62. Had he used it exclusively, he may well have killed twice as many with half of the rounds. . With a Garland or M1a and a pile of clips or magazines, he could have done the same thing.

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      Those rounds were apparently fired at the AVGAS tanks at the adjacent airport.

    2. avatar Binder says:

      Keep up that argument and they will ban them too.

    3. avatar Binder says:

      Personalty I think it is the biggest joke in the world that a M1a 10 round is OK in California, but a AR-15 is not.

  21. avatar CalGunsMD says:

    They say “a society where the National Rifle Association doesn’t have its claws deep inside the pockets of Republican lawmakers” when they really mean “a society where statist progressives have not strangled the RKBA”.

    It’s like they are ignorant to nearly a century of encroachment, infringement, denudement and obliteration of a preexisting and previously unfettered fundamental right by their ideological compatriots…..

  22. avatar Sian says:

    >Also 400 aimed shots at that range in 12 min, HA HA HA HA.

    33 shots per minute (with reloading) with quick sight pictures into a crowd, just pick out the closest body to your crosshairs and pull the trigger.

    Not a challenge at all, especially considering the first couple minutes can just be near mag dumps into the tighter groups before they start scattering.

  23. avatar William Ashbless says:

    So, pedophiles don’t like guns?

    Color me shocked!

  24. avatar EWTHeckman says:

    They’re worried about 23 guns in his room making a difference? Then I would love to see a short video of someone using slings to carry 23 guns at once; or _attempting_ to carry 23 at once. I suspect they wouldn’t even be able to move.

    It would certainly expose how ridiculous the “too many guns” idea is, in much the same way as that picture of the ridiculous number of accessories mounted on an AR does.

  25. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

    There are only two reasons that I can think of for banning someone from having a “cache” of weapons. 1. You don’t want them to sell them to criminals. This is a stupid objection, because of all the guns available, and the ease with which they can be made. 2. You don’t want citizens to be able to fight a tyrannical government.

    I think I know the progressives reason, and it ain’t number 1.

  26. avatar ironicatbest says:

    I am feeling better now. The Paddock killings opened a can of worms POTG don’t need. As predicted, Bumpfire stock controversies, and now the arsenal thing. If my memory is correct, during the Clinton administration, anything over 20 guns and 1000 rounds were considered an arsenal and a special permit to own such was required. There is noway in hell that this country can ever rid itself of firearms totally.

  27. avatar AUssie pub brawler says:

    how do you stop a HOAX from happening?

  28. avatar Dana says:

    This is a good example of “if there is a will there is a way”! We see this when terrorist who can’t get handguns or rifles use knives or vehicles. The fact of the matter is there are 258 people killed everyday in motor vehicle collisions. Why are we not pushing for car control? When driving is a privilege and not a right.

    It is my opinion that this is the real reason behind the Paddock shooting, and why authorities can’t find a motive.

    The following is a republishing of an important article written by Dan Roberts from AmmoLand.com. It reveals the real truth about mass shootings that bureaucrats and lawmakers are choosing to sweep under the rug: psychiatric drugs. If you want to know the real reason why mass shootings are taking place, this is the “inconvenient truth” the media won’t cover.

    Here’s the full article by Dan Roberts:(Ammoland.com) Nearly every mass shooting incident in the last twenty years, and multiple other instances of suicide and isolated shootings all share one thing in common, and it’s not the weapons used.

    The overwhelming evidence points to the signal largest common factor in all of these incidents is the fact that all of the perpetrators were either actively taking powerful psychotropic drugs or had been at some point in the immediate past before they committed their crimes.

    Multiple credible scientific studies going back more than a decade, as well as internal documents from certain pharmaceutical companies that suppressed the information show that SSRI drugs ( Selective Serotonin Re-Uptake Inhibitors ) have well known, but unreported side effects, including but not limited to suicide and other violent behavior. One need only Google relevant key words or phrases to see for themselves. http://www.ssristories.com is one popular site that has documented over 4500 ” Mainstream Media ” reported cases from around the World of aberrant or violent behavior by those taking these powerful drugs.

    The following list of mass shooting perpetrators and the drugs they were taking or had been taking shortly before their horrific actions was compiled and published to Facebook by John Noveske, founder and owner of Noveske Rifleworks just days before he was mysteriously killed in a single car accident. Is there a link between Noveske’s death and his “outting” of information numerous disparate parties would prefer to suppress, for a variety of reasons?

    I leave that to the individual readers to decide. But there is most certainly a documented history of people who “knew too much” or were considered a “threat” dying under extraordinarily suspicious circumstances.

    From Katherine Smith, a Tennessee DMV worker who was somehow involved with several 9/11 hijackers obtaining Tennessee Drivers Licenses, and was later found burned to death in her car, to Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Gary Webb, who exposed a CIA Operation in the 80’s that resulted in the flooding of LA Streets with crack cocaine and was later found dead from two gunshot wounds to the head, but was officially ruled as a “suicide”, to Frank Olson, a senior research micro biologist who was working on the CIA’s mind control research program MKULTRA.

    After Olson expressed his desire to leave the program, he was with a CIA agent in a New York hotel room, and is alleged to have committed “suicide” by throwing himself off the tenth floor balcony. In 1994, Olson’s sons were successful in their efforts to have their fathers body exhumed and re examined in a second autopsy by James Starrs, Professor of Law and Forensic science at the National Law Center at George Washington University. Starr’s team concluded that the blunt force trauma to the head and injury to the chest had not occurred during the fall but most likely in the room before the fall. The evidence was called “rankly and starkly suggestive of homicide.” Based on his findings, in 1996 the Manhattan District Attorney opened a homicide investigation into Olson’s death, but was unable to find enough evidence to bring charges.

    As I said, I leave it to the individual readers to make up their own minds if Noveske suffered a similar fate. On to the list of mass shooters and the stark link to psychotropic drugs.

    Eric Harris age 17 (first on Zoloft then Luvox) and Dylan Klebold aged 18 (Columbine school shooting in Littleton, Colorado), killed 12 students and 1 teacher, and wounded 23 others, before killing themselves. Klebold’s medical records have never been made available to the public.
    Jeff Weise, age 16, had been prescribed 60 mg/day of Prozac (three times the average starting dose for adults!) when he shot his grandfather, his grandfather’s girlfriend and many fellow students at Red Lake, Minnesota. He then shot himself. 10 dead, 12 wounded.
    Cory Baadsgaard, age 16, Wahluke (Washington state) High School, was on Paxil (which caused him to have hallucinations) when he took a rifle to his high school and held 23 classmates hostage. He has no memory of the event.
    Chris Fetters, age 13, killed his favorite aunt while taking Prozac.
    Christopher Pittman, age 12, murdered both his grandparents while taking Zoloft.
    Mathew Miller, age 13, hung himself in his bedroom closet after taking Zoloft for 6 days.
    Kip Kinkel, age 15, (on Prozac and Ritalin) shot his parents while they slept then went to school and opened fire killing 2 classmates and injuring 22 shortly after beginning Prozac treatment.
    Luke Woodham, age 16 (Prozac) killed his mother and then killed two students, wounding six others.
    A boy in Pocatello, ID (Zoloft) in 1998 had a Zoloft-induced seizure that caused an armed stand off at his school.
    Michael Carneal (Ritalin), age 14, opened fire on students at a high school prayer meeting in West Paducah, Kentucky. Three teenagers were killed, five others were wounded..
    A young man in Huntsville, Alabama (Ritalin) went psychotic chopping up his parents with an ax and also killing one sibling and almost murdering another.
    Andrew Golden, age 11, (Ritalin) and Mitchell Johnson, aged 14, (Ritalin) shot 15 people, killing four students, one teacher, and wounding 10 others.
    TJ Solomon, age 15, (Ritalin) high school student in Conyers, Georgia opened fire on and wounded six of his class mates.
    Rod Mathews, age 14, (Ritalin) beat a classmate to death with a bat.
    James Wilson, age 19, (various psychiatric drugs) from Breenwood, South Carolina, took a .22 caliber revolver into an elementary school killing two young girls, and wounding seven other children and two teachers.
    Elizabeth Bush, age 13, (Paxil) was responsible for a school shooting in Pennsylvania
    Jason Hoffman (Effexor and Celexa) – school shooting in El Cajon, California
    Jarred Viktor, age 15, (Paxil), after five days on Paxil he stabbed his grandmother 61 times.
    Chris Shanahan, age 15 (Paxil) in Rigby, ID who out of the blue killed a woman.
    Jeff Franklin (Prozac and Ritalin), Huntsville, AL, killed his parents as they came home from work using a sledge hammer, hatchet, butcher knife and mechanic’s file, then attacked his younger brothers and sister.
    Neal Furrow (Prozac) in LA Jewish school shooting reported to have been court-ordered to be on Prozac along with several other medications.
    Kevin Rider, age 14, was withdrawing from Prozac when he died from a gunshot wound to his head. Initially it was ruled a suicide, but two years later, the investigation into his death was opened as a possible homicide. The prime suspect, also age 14, had been taking Zoloft and other SSRI antidepressants.
    Alex Kim, age 13, hung himself shortly after his Lexapro prescription had been doubled.
    Diane Routhier was prescribed Welbutrin for gallstone problems. Six days later, after suffering many adverse effects of the drug, she shot herself.
    Billy Willkomm, an accomplished wrestler and a University of Florida student, was prescribed Prozac at the age of 17. His family found him dead of suicide – hanging from a tall ladder at the family’s Gulf Shore Boulevard home in July 2002.
    Kara Jaye Anne Fuller-Otter, age 12, was on Paxil when she hung herself from a hook in her closet. Kara’s parents said “…. the damn doctor wouldn’t take her off it and I asked him to when we went in on the second visit. I told him I thought she was having some sort of reaction to Paxil…”)
    Gareth Christian, Vancouver, age 18, was on Paxil when he committed suicide in 2002, (Gareth’s father could not accept his son’s death and killed himself.)
    Julie Woodward, age 17, was on Zoloft when she hung herself in her family’s detached garage.
    Matthew Miller was 13 when he saw a psychiatrist because he was having difficulty at school. The psychiatrist gave him samples of Zoloft. Seven days later his mother found him dead, hanging by a belt from a laundry hook in his closet.
    Kurt Danysh, age 18, and on Prozac, killed his father with a shotgun. He is now behind prison bars, and writes letters, trying to warn the world that SSRI drugs can kill.
    Woody __, age 37, committed suicide while in his 5th week of taking Zoloft. Shortly before his death his physician suggested doubling the dose of the drug. He had seen his physician only for insomnia. He had never been depressed, nor did he have any history of any mental illness symptoms.
    A boy from Houston, age 10, shot and killed his father after his Prozac dosage was increased.
    Hammad Memon, age 15, shot and killed a fellow middle school student. He had been diagnosed with ADHD and depression and was taking Zoloft and “other drugs for the conditions.”
    Matti Saari, a 22-year-old culinary student, shot and killed 9 students and a teacher, and wounded another student, before killing himself. Saari was taking an SSRI and a benzodiazapine.
    Steven Kazmierczak, age 27, shot and killed five people and wounded 21 others before killing himself in a Northern Illinois University auditorium. According to his girlfriend, he had recently been taking Prozac, Xanax and Ambien. Toxicology results showed that he still had trace amounts of Xanax in his system.
    Finnish gunman Pekka-Eric Auvinen, age 18, had been taking antidepressants before he killed eight people and wounded a dozen more at Jokela High School – then he committed suicide.
    Asa Coon from Cleveland, age 14, shot and wounded four before taking his own life. Court records show Coon was on Trazodone.
    Jon Romano, age 16, on medication for depression, fired a shotgun at a teacher in his New York high school.
    Missing from list… 3 of 4 known to have taken these same meds….

    What drugs was Jared Lee Loughner on, age 21…… killed 6 people and injuring 14 others in Tuscon, Az?
    What drugs was James Eagan Holmes on, age 24….. killed 12 people and injuring 59 others in Aurora Colorado?
    What drugs was Jacob Tyler Roberts on, age 22, killed 2 injured 1, Clackamas Or?
    What drugs was Adam Peter Lanza on, age 20, Killed 26 and wounded 2 in Newtown Ct?
    Those focusing on further firearms bans or magazine restrictions are clearly focusing on the wrong issue and asking the wrong questions, either as a deliberate attempt to hide these links, or out of complete and utter ignorance.

    Don’t let them! Force our elected “representatives” and the media to cast a harsh spotlight on this issue. Don’t stop hounding them until they do.

  29. avatar Fred says:

    After ONE GUN, what does it matter. Or do you know how to shoot more than one rifle at a time?

    NO, I’m wrong, if he had 100 rifles, the entire city would have been killed. Obviously.

  30. avatar zebra dun says:

    Why not just enact murder control and make it illegal to kill people.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email