San Diego Housing Market News and Analysis

Are private owners taking matters into their own hands really better? Do you really want hotel staff rooting and pawing through your bags (or x-raying them) whenever you check into a hotel? How about body scanners or magnetometer gates like in an airport? Every. Bloody. Time. You go out for a drink or a show, come back and have to stand in line and deal with that nonsense?

How would that even work in smaller hotels or motels with multiple entrances? What about landlords? If you rent a condo in a high-rise, should you be subject to a search whenever you walk into your own home with grocery bags?

That would end up basically being a privately-run police state. Or we could just make it more difficult for nutters to buy powerful weapons.

Plenty of states make getting a license a PiTA, and their laws pass the 2A test. No need to change the Constitution, just pass stricter licensing laws for the more powerful weapons.

Well, maybe private initiatives will bring about economies of scale and innovation.

Of maybe the burden and liability of security will degrade profit so much that the business community will want gun control.

Why bother expending political capital on this issue? Let capitalism take care of it for us once and for all.

Amazon should suport the NRA.
If people go out less, Amazon can sell more.

I'd prefer not to have economies of scale and innovation in invading my privacy. Better to not make military weapons easily available, so there's less need for security and invasion of privacy.

Guns mean freedom. I’m willing to give the NRA the benefit of the doubt. Let’s normalize gun carry like any accessory. No invasion of privacy because the right to carry would be protected by law.

Potential shooters would not dare because the good guys with guns will respond to save lives.

Six-shooter in a hip holster vs some nutter with a machine gun. Really likely.

We'd also need to normalize bulletproof leisure suits, night vision goggles (you could incorporate them into a Google-Glass type appliance), and flak fedoras for the Good Guys with Guns(tm) to win...

But hey, the US fashion industry could make a killing off of this.

It's like crowd sourcing of gun owners for protection.

Sean Hannity had an answer. He's a trained gun owner. He said, talking to himself in the third person: Wouldn't you want a trained Hannity so you have a chance?

Millions of Sean Hannitys would of course equate to a safer world. Free protection from economies of scale of gun owners. The private markets are so wonderful!

I would rather entrust my life to an army of drones hooked up to a shotspotter system than an army of Sean hannitys likely to shoot the first person who doesn't look American enough.

Shotspotter is publicly tradeable btw,SSTI, buyer beware : )

And some kid shoots off fireworks and gets blown up by drones?

Did you the swarm of 1000 synchronized drones the Chinese flew for mid autumn festival? Pretty cool. The drones will be easily fitted with munition.

The Chinese are now exporting military drones and undercutting the US in price/performance value.

From what I know there was no way to prevent the Mandalay Bay shooting, and that is true for most of the mass shootings I've heard of. Even if people were armed at the concert they would not have been able to stop the shooting, in fact people in rooms around him would have probably been killed accidently. A platoon of armed drones, maybe, like in Bladerunner 2049. We need to stop looking to the government to solve everything and just accept that life sometimes sucks. I'm honestly glad that he shot himself and saved tax payers the additional cost of court and incarceration, think of it as instant justice/punishment. I do think this will affect people going to Vegas, even before this all happened I had decided I don't want to go to Vegas. No more cheap rooms/buffets/table limits too high for my blood.

I love the first one of these, beer AND guns: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/guns-ads...

Why, if guns were so widely available in the 1950s (and at other times) didn't we have the problems we do now?

They don't have to shoot deadly munitions, just anything you can think of that would slow down a shooter.

I'm with FlyerInHi, gun controls don't work. Let's encourage gun ownership. We could make guns as easy to buy as an iphone.

Maybe make guns a fashion accessory with different colored guns to match your new clothing.

Maybe we should teach gun ownership in grade schools and high schools. Kids need to know how to defend themselves.

Let the market sort it all out.

You can say gun control don't work but the flip side of Vegas was that gun proliferation as a defense didn't work either. Open carry, legal automatic weapons - none of that resulted in a single bullet going the other way. Internet tough guy Bilzerian could not even squeeze off a shot http://www.denverpost.com/2017/10/03/las...

Poor cops are going to get killed standing around trying to figure out who the bad guys are.

gun deaths per state

gun ownership % per state

Looks like guns are dangerous. Who'da thought? :-)

No no.... don't you remember guns don't kill people, people kill people. Certain states just have really dangerous people. LOL

Love it!

I've always wondered how an active shooter situation at a gun show would play out.

If it did happen and it spiraled into a mass group suicide, It would be difficult for me not to laugh about it.

Prior to 1950,.. and even earlier, there was a greater percentage of people living on a farm, farms were smaller. You had to butcher your own meat, pluck and dress your own turkey - etc. Now everything is so neat and packaged without any thought of what went into it.

Death itself was closer - more personal. Our old lived with us, often in the house of one of the siblings. You would see the process and result of death. It wasn't so sterilized and sanitized.

The other thing that happened is that kids used to have low powered BB guns - before they grew up and got real ones. The stupid would learn by non-fatal injury that the thing was not to be pointed/waved around mindlessly. (Some BB guns now have almost as much power as a short cartridge .22 cal)

They couldn't tell where the shots were coming from - and therefore what/who to hide behind. Loud sounds echo between the buildings like crazy. The shot against the sniper would have required a good rifle w/ scope ie M24 Marine sniper rifle - because you would not want to hit anyone in adjoining rooms. It is good that no one tried to return fire with a handgun. Not many people carry around rifles. Vegas Police were pretty quick, but SWAT was slow. Distance between shooter and target was approx 1300 feet - about 1/4 mile.

I heard that the shooter wanted to buy tracer rounds. That would have actually worked against the guy because tracers leave a 'trace' from shooter to impact that is visible at almost any angle.

Most people I know who are proficient with firearms, don't go around making a lot of noise. I like the quote about Bilzerian:

“Um, they got one of the guys,” he says, no gun in sight, all fury gone from his voice. “I’m headed back. I don’t think there’s much I can do.”

So he went home, leaving fans to wonder if one of Instagram’s most formidable stars was something different in real life.

I also have doubts about his claim to; "“Trying to go grab a gun,” he says in the clip. “I’m f– headed back. … Saw a girl get shot in the face right next to me, her f– brains hanging out.”" A 5.56 which it looks like he was using, usually does not 'blow out' or 'blow off' parts of bodies. The shell is just a little longer than a .22 cal, which is just a little larger than a BB (0.177 cal).

http://www.businessinsider.com/where-ame...

can't zoom in from the original post.

I didn't include the text that went along with the diagram (they eluded to the map stats being related to each state's gun restrictions) because I didn't think there was enough evidence that the two were related.

OCRenter's diagram shows there indeed may be other reasons for the map stats. They may be all related (ie, low gun ownership may mean the residents are more open to gun restrictions, low gun ownership means less weapons may mean less weapon deaths, tighter restrictions may mean less weapon deaths, or some combination of these) but that would take somebody to study it in depth to determine.

I don't have that kind of time. :-)

I don’t love guns - not a gun owner, etc. But I think events like this make people believe guns are the problem. As indicated in my post above, guns used to be widely available and we didn’t see this type of shooting.

Guns are not the problem. Lack of regulation that allows someone to buy and own 40+ weapons and endless ammo is the problem.

If cars need to be registered, if dogs need to be registered, then why not guns?

I know that my gun investment have done better than my Real
Estate investments. Not much into guns, but my brothers said buy buy buy, so I just went along with their advice.
Problem is that there’s no cash flow, no leverage and I won’t realize profit ‘til I sell.

How can you be sure? People used to be able to buy most of what is available now through mail order or at sporting goods stores, and there weren't problems like Steven Paddock. How do you know that more regulations won't increase criminal activity in terms of stealing firearms or trafficking in illegal firearms?
As I've said a couple of times - I am not a gun enthusiast. But, I think everyone wants to believe that these sorts of tragedies can be prevented with more gun control. Exaggerating to make a point: I'm sure there is a lot of gun control in North Korea - that doesn't make it a great place to live.