Month: October 2017

LE Unions Feeling the Heat from Pissed Off Members

Matt1 Comment

Capture

It has only been two days since eight law enforcement labor unions decided to partner with the San Francisco 49ers, a move that has pissed off a huge portion of those very union’s membership.  As I mentioned in my previous piece on this topic, I’ve been contacted by members of at least four of the unions that signed this agreement without the knowledge and consent of their members.  Most of the cops I have spoken to are absolutely fuming about this move.

Apparently, this is not just a local phenomenon.  According to a friend who works for the LAPD, the president of the Los Angeles Police Protective League (LAPD’s union) sent out an email to all the members attempting to explain why they did so.  Below is the entire content of the email, absent the name of the person who forwarded me the email.

 

Membership Alert: Pledge for a More Understanding and Safer America

Dear XXXXXXX,

The League joined eight other law enforcement unions and the SF 49ers in signing a Pledge for a More Understanding and Safer America. The words understanding and safer are important to virtually everything we do as police officers. As members of law enforcement, any time we are able to bring more understanding to a situation or a crisis, the higher likelihood we have for a successful outcome. And we all know that any time our union has an opportunity to make your job and the communities we serve safer, we have a moral obligation to do so.

The other police unions we have pledged to work with have excellent reputations for standing up for their members’ rights and have in their own communities dealt with their fair share of anti-police rhetoric, unfair scrutiny and some of the very same issues that we face.

We were joined in signing the pledge by the owner of the 49ers, the NYPD Sergeants Benevolent Association, San Jose Police Officers’ Association, Sacramento Police Officers Association, Deputy Sheriffs’ Association of Santa Clara County, Oakland Police Officers Association, Santa Clara Police Officers Association, Portland Police Association and the Long Beach Police Officers Association.

Here is some brief background on how this developed. 49ers owner Jed York reached out to the president of the San Jose Police Officers’ Association in an attempt to rebuild bridges with law enforcement. San Jose’s president, Paul Kelly, who has been a true ally to other police unions across the country, told him fixing the issue wouldn’t be easy. Police officers were mad. We were insulted. We were angry.

Fixing this issue requires rebuilding trust. It requires a sincere personal commitment by Mr. York. Money would not solve the issue. It would require his personal support correcting the false narrative about the American police officer being spread by anti-police individuals and organizations. There has not been one of us who has not said something along the lines of, “We have to fight back against the false narrative and lies being spread about cops.”

Up to now, the NFL, political leaders and others have left the rank-and-file beat cop out of the national conversation about policing in America. We cannot expect to influence the national dialogue about policing with no seat at the table. We can’t be expected to correct the lies and misinformation about policing in America without a platform to do so.

Jed York committed to funding that platform, funding a national public service announcement campaign and working with other NFL owners to amplify our message about policing in America. The goal of this campaign is to work to ensure that every encounter possible between a police officer and the citizens we serve be grounded in mutual respect.

As these discussions were occurring, the mass shooting in Las Vegas happened. A massacre that killed 58 people, including an officer, and injured over 500 people, including over 30 members of law enforcement. There were over 200 law enforcement personnel in attendance at that concert and their lives along with thousands of others will never be the same.

The issue of mass violence was on everyone’s minds. As law enforcement, and the 49ers as the operator of a major entertainment venue, this was an area where we could work together to make things just a little bit safer for all of us.

Remember, the pledge is for a more understanding and safer America.

We have stated continuously that we are unwavering in our support for the Second Amendment. Unwavering. We stated that at the press conference as did the other law enforcement representatives, as did Jed York. The pledge looks at addressing a few key gun accessories, not guns.

Let’s look at bump stocks

No major organization that we know of has endorsed this device. Not the NRA, not law enforcement leaders. There is a specific bill going through Congress right now that addresses bump stocks. It has bipartisan support.

Whether you feel that a bump stock, or similar device, truly turns a semi-automatic rifle into a fully automatic rifle makes a small difference. The reality is that it exponentially increases the rate of fire. It allows you to fire hundreds of rounds in a minute. This device aided the Las Vegas shooter in firing rounds into a crowded space. He used this device to fire on many of our own LAPD brothers and sisters.

If there is something specific you are concerned about from a legislative point of view on bump stocks, we now have a seat at the table to address any unintended consequences, such as outlawing a “drop-in-trigger.” We would not have that opportunity if we were staunchly opposed to this reasonable regulation.

As a League, we have a record of defending the Second Amendment right to bear arms. Recently, we fought to ensure that our retired officers and reserves were able to carry large capacity magazines to help protect the public’s safety in the City of Los Angeles. Our commitment to the Second Amendment has not changed one bit.

Correcting the Anti-Police False Narrative

After nearly five years now of false narratives about how the American police officer does his or her job, false narratives of bias and on use of force, it’s time to address this head on.

The pledge was about going beyond politics, protests and fist pounding. It was about creating defined goals and concrete solutions to a problem we have been dealing with for years. That is, an inability to have a seat at the table and offer our perspective of what it is like policing in America. It is usually the police chiefs or police commissioners and politicians and protesters that are talking about and making decisions about policing and community relations.

That changed with the signing of this pledge. We secured half a million dollars to help with our public awareness plan that will develop, produce and disseminate a series of public service ads aimed at correcting false narratives and educating the public on what and why the police do what we do. Every dollar will go towards these ads; absolutely no money will go towards advocacy of any legislation.

The pledge states: As such, those signing this pledge will dedicate the necessary resources to strive to make every encounter between an American police officer and the citizens they serve to be grounded in mutual respect.

The pledge further states: To partner with professional sports franchise teams, corporations, faith-based and community-based organizations to produce, promote and distribute a series of public service announcements designed to improve police and community relations.

For the last five years, law enforcement unions, including our own have boycotted concerts, performers, movies, directors and products. Yet our problem persists.

We are problem solvers. The false narrative about policing will go on with or without football. What we are aiming to do is use the immense public platform of professional sports to deliver our message to the American people. We can shout until we are blue in the face that players should stand for our anthem, or we can take action to educate our citizens about who we are and what our values are. We are choosing the latter.

We have inserted ourselves into the national conversation about community-police relations in a manner that is productive. Currently, it’s a shouting match that is being had without the voice of the rank-and-file officers.

And as we move along, we will encourage the players that rather than take a knee, take a seat at the table. For those who continue to protest, without taking any real actions to provide solutions, their efforts will become minimized.

We could focus all our attention on the players. We could demand that they stand. But then what? What happens when they stand yet some still use their public cache to disparage police officers? How have we helped you while you’re on patrol?

Our pledge also now commits at least one professional sports franchise to stand up and lobby for more resources in dealing with the mentally ill. This is an issue that few care about and is constantly on the back burner but affects every officer on the street every day.

And our work does not end with the 49ers. Jed York has committed to working with us to get other sports franchises involved; to get other major organizations aligned with creating real meaningful programs aimed at bettering relations between communities and their police.

Does this all mean that we are not still offended and upset about what has been said by some athletes regarding law enforcement? Absolutely not. But we have an obligation to work through our anger and work toward improving the environment that police officers work in both today and for years to come.

We understand your anger, but we must utilize that anger and channel it into something meaningful and productive. A national campaign to educate the public about policing from the perspective of the beat cop will be meaningful and productive. This is a pledge with one NFL owner who understands, as we do, that there has been enough talking past each other, and it’s now time to start talking to each other.

We now have a seat at the table—a table we helped create.

Very truly yours,

Craig Lally
President
Los Angeles Police Protective League

In reading that, specifically this part, “We understand your anger,” it is pretty clear to me that the union leadership is feeling the heat from a very angry membership, and rightfully so.

Law Enforcement Unions Betray Their Members & Attack Gun Rights

Matt2 Comments

2571428_1280x720

It has been two days since a partnership between the 49ers and eight law enforcement labor unions was announced.  This peculiar collection of organizations all signed a “pledge for a more understanding and safer America.”   As a cop, this move absolutely baffles me.  When I got home from work the day this was announced, I filmed a video (video below) talking about it.  Here is is two days later and I am still having trouble discussing this without my blood pressure noticeably rising.

Why exactly am I so upset by this move?  Let’s examine this whole concept first, and to do that, we must look at the pledge being signed.  Here is the complete text of the pledge that was signed:

“We believe that the duty of law enforcement professionals does not end with responding to a call for service.  The duty of law enforcement must also include actively participating in bringing our nation together and working to foster a more understanding and compassionate national dialogue around community and police officer relations.”

“We believe that professional sports teams should utilize their capacity to reach millions of Americans to promote initiatives that help law enforcement professionals and the citizens they serve understand their respective experiences and listen to one another with an open mind and heart.”

“As such, those signing this pledge will dedicated the necessary resources to strive to make every encounter between an American police officer they serve to be grounded in mutual respect; to advocate for commonsense (sic) local, state and federal legislation that will contribute to the safety of all Americans, and work together to improve the national dialogue around race, policing and violence prevention.”

“The undersigned do pledge:

  1. To keep our citizens and our police officers safe, we will work with our local, state, and federal legislatures to ban “bump stocks” and any other mechanism that allows the conversion of a semi-automatic weapon into an automatic weapon; armor-piercing bullets; and gun silencers.

  2. To advocate for additional mental health services to deliver the necessary care, medication and programs to those in need.

  3. To partner with professional sports franchise teams, corporations, faith-based and community based organizations to produce, promote and distribute a series of public service announcements designed to improve police and community relations.

  4. To engage in a constructive dialogue around issues critical to improving the health and welfare of all our residents”

Since the pledge can really be split into two main topics, I will examine them one at a time. The first part of this pledge is the “more understanding” goal of the pledge.  You know, that misunderstanding that originated with a 49er player, Colin Kaepernick, when he began disrespecting the flag and the country because of his baseless, negative opinions of law enforcement.  You know, the guy who wore anti-police pig socks; the guy who donated $25k to a “charity” that honors a convicted cop killer; the guy who started a trend in the entire NFL of millionaires protesting “police brutality and racism.”  That is apparently the “misunderstanding” that we are going to deal with, the misunderstanding started by the 49ers, spurred on by the 49ers and the rest of the NFL, the misunderstanding that neither the 49ers nor the NFL have done anything to try and correct thus far, the misunderstanding that has football stadiums around the country empty on game days, the misunderstanding that has the NFL reeling from their financial losses due entirely to their complete mishandling of this whole situation.

These rich, privileged athletes, men who get paid millions to play a game, are out there spreading lies that have been created by Black Lives Matter, a very anti-police organization.  You see, most of America understands that when you point to situations like the following as a reason to protest police, you have no argument:

“In early 2016, I began paying attention to reports about the incredible number of unarmed black people being killed by the police.  The posts on social media deeply disturbed me, but one in particular brought me to tears: the killing of Alton Sterling in my hometown Baton Rouge, La. This could have happened to any of my family members who still live in the area.” 

Alton Sterling was a convicted felon who was threatening people with a gun in front of a convenience store, and when the cops contacted him, he fought the cops and was shot while reaching for the loaded handgun in his waistband.  That is absolutely not “unarmed black people being killed by the police.”

So why on earth would law enforcement labor unions partner with the very people furthering the lies perpetrated against our profession?  This makes absolutely no sense.  This is a perfect example Stockholm Syndrome.  If the 49ers had done something, anything that qualified as an apology, and then took steps to right their wrong, then I could see, at some point down the road, working with them to clear up their misunderstanding, because let me be clear, the misunderstanding is 100% on them, but that has not happened.  What has happened is that the 49ers dangled a shiny carrot (money) in front of a bunch of politically minded union presidents and they bit.  However, most of the working cops, the people on the streets doing the actual cop work are not so willing to forgive and forget, especially something as damaging as these NFL protests have been, not only to law enforcement specifically but to the entire country.

The second part of this pledge is nothing but a steaming, unfounded pile of leftist crap being used to push an anti-gun agenda, which is sadly not surprising since unions typically kiss up to liberal politicians.  But in reality, gun control is something that no law enforcement labor union should ever be involved in pushing.  We, law enforcement, are complaining about how the public perceives us.  We have a HUGE public image problem right now (thanks in part to the 49ers), and so the solution these union leaders see to that problem is to publicly call for the infringement on the rights of Americans?  To quote the great Pepper Brooks, that is a bold strategy.

But hey, maybe I should take a closer look at what they are calling for before I completely dismiss their ideas.  They want to ban bump stocks, or “any other mechanism that allows the conversion of a semi-automatic weapon into an automatic weapon,” armor-piercing bullets and silencers (suppressors).  In doing so, they are claiming this is only “commonsense.”  So, since it is supposedly common sense and law enforcement unions are calling for their bans, the calls for these particular items to be banned must reasonably be based on their prevalent use in crimes, right? Well, as it turns out, not really.

One person on my FB page asked me for my reasoning for opposing banning these items.  In short, because the Second Amendment, however my opposition really requires a much more in depth explanation as I realize not everyone out there understands how firearms work.

“Bump stocks” – They have been around, commercially available for about a decade. They have sold tens of thousands of them in that time, and since they were introduced, one person has misused them criminally, ONE. They are a novelty item and they provide zero tactical advantage, which is why no serious shooter has them installed on a gun that they might need to use as a go-to defense gun. It can be argued, and I would agree, that a good shooter with a dialed in bolt action rifle and a good scope properly sighted could have done far more damage in the same time frame that the monster in Las Vegas did with his large array of AR’s.

Hell, a bump fire stock is not even necessary to bump fire a rifle. I’ve bump fired just about every semi-auto rifle I own, including a couple of WWII rifles.

“Any other mechanism that allows for the conversion of a semi-automatic weapon into an automatic weapon” – Complete and utter hyperbolic bull crap! A bump stock does absolutely NOT convert a semi-auto gun to full-auto.  If a bump fire stock actually did that, the BATF would never have approved them as non-NFA items, but they did, twice, under Obama.  The reason a bump stock is legal is that for each round that is fired, the trigger is activated manually by the user, just like any other semi-auto firearm.  Much of the legislation that is being pushed as a ban for bump stocks aim to cover “any item that increases the rate of fire of a semi-auto rifle.”  So, what exactly is the rate of fire of a semi-auto weapon?  There is no standard as it only fires as fast as the user can pull the trigger.  These laws are so ridiculously loosely worded that gun oil could be banned because a properly lubricated gun operates smoother and faster than a dry gun.  So are they going to ban gun oil?  There are countless videos that show how a rubber band can be used to assist in bump-firing a gun, or a stick, or a belt loop.  Are they going to ban all of those?

‘Armor-piercing ammo’ – So, are we talking legitimate, designed to pierce hard armor armor-piecing ammo or are we talking out our butts like most anti-gun people do? You see, the anti-gunners want to ban any ammo that will pierce soft body armor (like what I wear at work).  They throw out my profession as justification for that desire. The problem is, any full size rifle cartridge will piece soft body armor, even if it is not true ‘armor-piercing’ ammo.  If they are talking about actual armor-piercing ammunition, I know of no case where legitimate, true “armor-piercing” ammo was used.  In every case I could find when searching the internet, the ammo that is called “armor-piercing” was in fact just standard rifle ammo.  This again is a non-issue as “armor-piercing ammunition” is not being used by people to commit crimes. There is no justification for banning it.

Silencers / suppressors – Yet another non-issue. They are almost never used in crime, they don’t actually silence a gun, they merely partially suppress the sound and in most cases, hearing protection is still required even when the firearm is equipped with a suppressor, they are already an NFA item requiring a background check and a tax stamp before you can even get one. The problem is that morons and idiots see them in the movies and think that is how they work. Need I point out that movies are make believe?”

In summary, when pushing for legislation, especially legislation that infringes on the constitutionally guaranteed rights of Americans, it should be imperative that one would have solid justification for doing so.  In this instance, all of the items these traitorous union leaders and the 49ers are calling to ban, when examining the case from a logical (not emotional) point of view, there is no compelling argument to ban them.

In the last two days, ever since I first shared a news story about this incident on my Facebook page, I have been contacted by members of at least four of the eight unions that signed this pledge.  Those members told me that every cop they knew was furious that their union participated in this.  Several of them were talking about having an immediate call for the removal of their leadership because this move is completely against the views of the membership.  I can tell you, if my union had been part of this, I would be leading the call for an immediate removal of anyone involved in the decision.

This entire pledge is completely moronic, and shows just how low these union leaders will stoop to support liberal objectives just so they can try and get those same liberals to throw a few scraps to the unions.  Oddly enough, the liberals they are sucking up to are the very same liberals who are constantly, publicly attacking law enforcement.

To be quite frank, these unions signing this pledge reminds me of the Jewish Nazi collaborators from WWII, which leads me to wonder exactly what personal benefits the leaders of these unions must be getting in order to sell their membership down the drain like they have.

EDIT:  When originally writing this, I neglected to name the unions that participated in this fiasco from the start.  They included the San Jose Police Officers Association, Los Angeles Police Protective League, NYPD Sergeants Benevolent Association, Oakland Police Officers Association, Long Beach Police Officers Association, Portland Police Association, Deputy Sheriffs Association of Santa Clara County and lastly, the Sacramento Police Officers Association.

 

This is the video I filmed the day this partnership was announced.  A warning for those with sensitive dispositions, there are a few expletives in this video.

 

Big Problems in Gun Free Utopia

MattNo Comments

GunFreeUK-01

Gun control proponents in the United States love to point to the UK with their super strict gun laws as a model for the United States to emulate. The problem with that theory is that gun control does has not done what they think it has done.  The latest statistics coming out of England would seem put a bit of kink in their theory, that is if they actually cared about facts.  As reported by The Guardian, the UK is seeing a large increase in the overall crime rate, but the spike in violent crime, especially crimes involving guns, dwarfs the overall rise.  Sadly, The Guardian did not include a link to the original source of the statistics so we can only take their word that these numbers are accurate.

Speaking of those numbers, let’s take a look at some:

  • 10% rise in overall crime rate over the last 12 month period
  • 18% rise in violent crime over 12 months prior to March
  • 23% increase in gun crime in 12 months (even though guns are all but banned)
  • 26% rise in the homicide rate*

A 10% rise in the overall crime rate is concerning, but the rise in violent crime and especially the rise in the murder rate are downright scary.  Even more perplexing is the 23% increase in gun crime, “largely driven by an increase in the use of handguns,” in a country where private gun ownership is so severely controlled that it is difficult and best for the average person to own a gun at all (only shotguns and rifles) and where handguns have been banned completely.  Coincidentally, not only are handguns the type of firearm most used in crimes, here in the United States they also happen to be the type of firearm most often used in self-defense, not that that matters in the UK since using a gun in self-defense is pretty much illegal there too.

While much of the article does not talk about the different crime rates for previous years, it did include the violent crime rate increases for four consecutive 12 month periods.  According to the article, in the most recent 12 month period, the violent crime rate increased 18% (previously noted), it also rose 10% in the 12 months before that, 8% in the 12 months before that, and again rose 3% in the 12 months before that.  Those increases are over the previous 12 month period, not over the base year.  In order to get the total increase over that time frame, you have to add each increase together to get the total increase for that entire time frame.

Thus, that is a 39% increase in the violent crime rate from just five (5) years ago!  That is an insanely gigantic increase in violent crime in such a short time frame.**

Yay gun control!?!?!?

Gun control does not prevent violent crime.  Gun control does not even prevent gun crime.  Anyone who tells you otherwise is either lying or ignorant.

So, the next time someone points to England while trying to justify gun control, point them to this.

 

* I am somewhat confused by their wording when they discussed the rise in the homicide rate, which they indicate was over the last year, but they also mention a 1989 incident that took 96 lives.  According to the article further on, it appears the UK crime statistics are based on when the crime investigation is completed, not when the crime actually occurred, hence the mention of the 1989 incident as the investigation was just completed.  Who keeps statistics based on when the investigation is completed vs. when the crime was committed?  That is bizarre.

**Note: I am not a mathematician or a statistician, so if my calculations are off, please tell me what I did wrong.

Bret Daniels: Hypocrite for Sheriff

MattNo Comments

The current sheriff of Sacramento County, Scott Jones, a man who has been in national news more than once for calling attention to problems with illegal immigration, concealed carry licenses and gun laws that infringe on the Second Amendment, has announced he will not be running for reelection when his current term as Sheriff runs out.  As the names for potential candidates get thrown in the ring, one of them seems quite familiar.

Bret Daniels has run for that office a number of times in the past.  In fact, he has run against the last 3 sheriffs.  He ran against Lou Blanas in 1998 and 2002. In 2006 he ran against John McGinness and in 2010 he ran against Scott Jones.  In fact, he has run for the office with such regularity that the Sacramento News & Review wrote an article the last time he ran titled “Sheriff hopeful Bret Daniels figures fourth time’s a charm.”

So, with the upcoming election drawing closer, an election that will mark the 5th time Daniels has run for Sheriff, the campaigning seems to have begun.

BretDaniels

I am friends with quite a few people who work for the Sacramento Sheriff’s Department, and as such, I get fed lots of the scuttlebutt, including a number of tidbits about Mr. Daniels.

The screen grab above is from a Facebook post made by Daniels on 10-21-17.  I find it just a bit sad that this 5 time candidate for Sheriff is grabbing onto a hashtag that was created in the Harvey Weinstein fallout, pointing to an article in the Sacramento Bee that is more than a year old, about an even older lawsuit that was dredged up by a democrat politician who Sheriff Jones was running against for a seat in the US Congress.  In pointing to that article, about the outgoing Sheriff who is not even running for the office again, Daniels makes all sorts of allegations while proclaiming to be the solution to the problem.  People I know who are familiar with Daniels find all of this particularly ironic.

While the screen grab was sent to me by one friend, a Sacramento deputy, the following is a comment made by another Sacramento deputy:

“I cannot believe he’s trying to run, yet again. He’s a f@*%ing joke.

Funny when a guy who is notoriously lazy and dishonest runs a campaign claiming to be the candidate of integrity.”

So, why would someone say that?  What dishonesty?  Well, a lot of that stems back to 2000 when Bret got fired by the very department that he wants so desperately to lead.

While Bret does publicly admit to being fired (scroll to the bottom of the first post) , he is less forthcoming about the circumstances, usually saying Lou Blanas fired him “because he ran against him.”  Since very little ever gets released publicly by most departments when they fire someone, people only know what rumors make their way around.  In this instance, I have been told by a number of people the rumor is that Bret, while out of state, convinced a cop where he was visiting to run one of Bret’s ex-girlfriends through the records system so Bret could go visit her.  The cop who did that for him thought something felt hinky about it and contacted the Sacramento Sheriff’s Department to report the contact.  When the department questioned Bret about it, he lied.  And since “he ran against me” would not remotely hold up as a justifiable firing in a civil service hearing, something that a cop in California who is being fired will get, the rumor is a much more believable reason to get fired.  That said, as I previously stated, this is just a rumor, and one that would lead to the reputation for dishonesty.

Another thing that Bret is fond of telling the public when he is running for office is that he worked for Homeland Security for a number of years.  I guess technically that is true, since TSA falls under Homeland Security.   I know a couple of people who saw Bret on a near daily basis, wearing his blue TSA uniform as he checked bags and ran the metal detectors at the Sacramento International Airport.  So, while technically he was employed by Homeland Security, it was just not in the manner that most people envision when they hear “homeland security.”

As far as the “lazy” comments go, one person I know quite well had the opportunity, or bad luck depending on your point of view, to work with Bret for two days back in 1997.  He had this to say:

“Back when I was in field training, my assigned FTO (field training officer) was off on vacation for a couple days and while he was gone, I got assigned to Bret.  We spent nearly two entire days hanging out inside Family Donuts drinking coffee and reading the newspaper.  The only time we left was when we got dispatched to a call, and even then, we waited for what seemed like 10 minutes in hopes that the call would get cancelled before we would get in the car and leave. Not exactly what you want to learn as a new guy to patrol who is eager to get out there and do cop work.”

Now, I do not live in Sacramento County and as such, I have no say in who gets elected as the sheriff there, nor do I even have any idea who the list of candidates includes.  With that said, I can tell you without a doubt who would NOT be getting my vote if I could vote in that election, and that is the guy throwing stones from inside his glass house.

Put The Tinfoil Away!

Matt1 Comment

Tin-Foil1

To steal the words of a coworker, “Put the tinfoil back in the drawer. It was an act of terrorism committed by a piece of shit – not a conspiracy conducted by a secret government agency.”

Caveat:  While it does not fit the FBI definition of a terrorist act, because there was no stated political goal, it sure fits the mold of most recent terrorist acts.  Some asshole, or group of assholes, killing and maiming as many people as they can, then offing themselves in a most cowardly fashion.

With that said, can we please stop with all the idiotic conspiracy theories? Please?  This shit is getting out of hand.  I want to address the theories I have seen thus far as best I can.  Most of these revolve around a supposed second shooter.

Video
There is a video floating around which claims to be definitive proof of a second shooter.  It is shot out the driver’s window of a car leaving the Mandalay Bay main entrance.  Here is that video.

There are a number of problems with this video, in terms of being proof of a second shooter.

  • First, the flashing light flashes at a constant rate, and is flashing before the gunfire starts (normal since sound travels slower than light) but it continues flashing at the same exact rate when the shots stop for a short break, and then keeps flashing until the shots resume.
  • Second, and most importantly, there were no windows broken out of the hotel that low. Unless these conspirators have some sort of magic bullets that can travel through glass without breaking it, this video proves nothing.

Natural News
A website named Natural News post an article very early yesterday morning titled “Five things that just don’t add up about the Las Vegas mass shooting.”  This article was clearly written by someone who knows nothing about firearms, firearm laws and has never investigated a shooting first hand.  I’m going to point to each of their five things and explain why they are wrong.

  • “Dozens of concert-goers reported the presence of multiple shooters” – Really? No shit?  Out of 20,000+ people at a single scene, dozens reported seeing something different from everyone else?  Anyone who has ever been involved in investigating a shooting will tell you that it is completely normal for people to see and hear different things, that is why we get statements from as many witnesses as possible.  At a shooting with 10 people present, you will likely get multiple people who saw it and tell you exactly what happened (if they are cooperative that is) and you will have other people whose minds automatically fill in missing blanks by making up things.  It is a normal human reaction in a situation like that.  Your brain tries to fill the gaps and you are completely unaware that it is even happening.  To you, it seems like that is really what you saw.  But hey, don’t take my word for it.  Here is an expert on the subject saying the same thing.
  • “Who warned concert-goers they were ‘all going to die’ a full 45 minutes before the shooting started?” – Wait, a crazy person running around the Las Vegas strip telling people they are all going to die? Have you ever been to Las Vegas?  I go to Vegas every January for SHOT Show and I have had at least one person say something similar to me on every single trip there.  The strip is host to a large collection of crazies and druggies who do and say stupid crap all the time.
  • “The weapon you hear on videos was FULL AUTO, which is almost impossible to acquire through legal means” – Complete bullshit! I will just give them the full-auto aspect (even though I am hearing  rumors they were not).  Full-auto weapons are completely legal in Nevada, they are just highly regulated and very expensive.  The suspect in this case is rumored to have been very well off financially and had no serious criminal record, meaning he could have easily purchased legal full-auto weapons.  Besides that, it is relatively simple to convert any semi-auto rifle to full-auto if you know what you are doing.  Again, since the suspect had money, he could easily have paid someone to illegally convert them, or he could have purchased illegal full-auto guns.
  • “Why were the exits blocked, trapping victims like rats in a maze?” – Every single concert venue I have ever attended has had limited exit routes. That is absolutely normal.  When something like this happens, and you have 20,000+ people trying to get out of a few exits, it creates a huge bottleneck.  If this truly was some sort of conspiracy, and they were blocking exits, why would they not have blocked all of them?
  • “Why did the shooter have as many as 10 firearms in his room?” – Uh, because he was prepared? He actually had 16 weapons, not 10 (correction: last update from LVMPD said 23).  Anyone familiar with firearms knows that you can only fire so many rounds rapidly through a weapon before they start getting very hot, to the point that things melt or light on fire.  If you don’t believe me, go to YouTube and search for “rifle meltdown” and you will find plenty of videos of that very thing occurring.  Also, anyone familiar with firearms knows that sometimes malfunctions occur and it is easier to grab another gun than it is to stop and clear a malfunction.  The fact that he had multiple guns just means he was prepared.

Seriously people, these conspiracy theories serve no positive purpose, and they are generally created by people who are not firing on all cylinders.  If you don’t believe me, try perusing the Facebook page that posted the video I included above.  How’s about we all sit back, let the investigation get completed and then, and only then, if you have some wild theory about something, let’s talk about it.  In the meantime, how about we let the families and friends of those lost or injured mourn in relative peace, without throwing all this conspiracy theory bullshit around.