https://www.thedailybeast.com/las-vegas-killer-stephen-paddock-had-better-rifles-than-the-us-military
James LaPorta is a veteran of some small issue, and claims to have been an "intel cell leader," which I find no record of, and if he in fact was, he should keep his retarded piehole shut about it. 
He does have a steely gaze, though, which is super important.
His knowledge of the English language compares favorably with a fifth grader.  For example, his Facebook page say he is "payed," by which I think he means "paid." I certainly hope he has a day job. 

Now, the gist of this article is that the Vegas asshole had "more powerful and deadly weapons than even the military! ZOMG!"
 
(There's a "socialist veteran" page, which means "traitor page" that also claims that a bumpfire stock (see my previous entry on that) turns a carbine into a light machine gun. This is complete bullshit.)
 
I offer this:  A carbine with a bumpfire stock is about $600. A transferrable M16 that a civilian can legally buy is $25,000-$30,000. If the former were "better" than the latter, who'd buy the latter?
 
And the shooter still wouldn't have an actual belt fed weapon or anything else for support.
 
Also, his angle of fire did not lend itself to a good beaten zone. The bumpfire stocks caused repeated jams, because they do require training to use, and even then, are still less effective than either real automatic fire or properly controlled aimed fire. Yes, even with an area target.  Had the clown known what he was doing, it would have been a lot worse.
 
I'm very surprised a Marine infantry veteran doesn't know this.
 
Here's some other vets commenting on the sheer fucking dishonest idiocy of the article:


John Francis Moran Jr: "...One the rifles seen in an unofficial photograph features a “free floating barrel,” unlike an M-16 whose barrel is connected to the rest of the rifle..."
 
I am here to tell you all that military rifles do, in fact, have their barrels connected. 
 
What. A. Fucking. Clown.
~~~

Michael Prior: Love how he argued both sides. The shooter's guns are more accurate than the military's guns but he needed no skill because he was shooting at an area target. Accuracy with a firearm is the skill not the weapon.
~~~
 
John Francis Moran Jr: What. A. Fucking. Clown. 
 
"...The rifles Paddock used are so powerful and potentially prolific that he didn’t need training to inflict dozens of deaths and hundreds of injuries. What Paddock apparently lacked in experience he made up for with preparation, opportunity, and deadly accurate hardware..."
 
1) 5.56 is a small caliber round, high velocity round. Based off of a a cartridge designed to kill prairie dogs. 
 
2) he didn't need training because he was 300 feet up, overlooking a huge outdoor venue. He could have inflicted casualties by hurling bricks, or merely by shooting a lead fishing weights out of a sling shot from that position. Free float barrels, bipods, scopes etc. where unnecessary accessories in carrying out his plan as executed. 
 
3) "Preparation" buy some guns and ammo, check. Get a hotel room over looking a crowded open air venue, check. Bring a hammer, check. 
 
That was literally his plan. 
 
Paddock was not a tactical genius. He had loads of $$ and was willing to kill. The end.
~~~
 
 
Ian Brothers Wow, dude says an ACOG would be useless and needs "offset aiming". Thats the purpose of the reticle, estimate range and easily compensate for it. Guy doesn't have a clue.
 
~~~
 
Dustin Aven Well fuck now I'm even more pissed. A fucking PMI who can't even get his terminology straight. He doesn't even get free floated right. He acts like Eotechs are some arcane technology even though they ended up in Army general purpose force units when enough M68s weren't available. And OMG! he could attach a white light or laser. Well gosh you mean things SOCOM has been doing for a few decades now? Hell I had a PEQ on an M16A2 in 1998. Oh yeah and a hose clamped fucking light too. Damn this dude seems to have a little knowledge and tries to make it all sound scary.
~~~
 
Michael Z. Williamson “These days with precision rifles, a 1,000 meter shot with a AR weapon system is not hard,” Cowden said.
 
Tony Cowden, a U.S. Army Sergeant First Class special forces soldier, who formerly was on the CIA and Joint Special Operations Command mission to kill or capture Osama Bin Laden in 2001.
 
```
Either they're misquoting, or "Sgt" Cowden is a space shuttle door gunner. Again: Max range on this weapon is 600 meters. Even a match grade, custom built target rifle on an AR receiver wouldn't make such a shot "not hard," and he had nothing like that.

Jimmy boy claimed this was an "editing error." Cool story, bro. Along with the 56 others? You might want to improve your editing if you want to be a real writer some day.
 
~~~
 
Ed Dillon "Twist rate also includes weight of bullet, measured in grain." Really? If I fire bullets of different weights, the rifle will automatically adjust the rifling to match. I never knew. Those grooves look so permanent, like they're etched in steel, or something.

~~~
Jackson Beard III: We not only know this, but are taking the piss out of how he explained it.
 
A free floating barrel is still attached to the rifle, or it wouldn't work.
 
Free floating means it isn't impinged on by the fore stock or forearm.
 
~~~
 
Ian McMurtrie What the actual fuck?
 
"One the rifles seen in an unofficial photograph features a “free floating barrel,” unlike an M-16 whose barrel is connected to the rest of the rifle."
 
Like at the receiver, connected to the rest of the rifle?
 
"Inside a free-floating barrel, bullets travel without interference from micro-vibrations. "
 
... What? Does he mean "harmonics"?
 
"Additionally, Paddock mounted what appears to be a military-grade EO Tech sight to his weapon." 
 
Bad news, Scooter, but EO Tech had some ... issues. It was all over the news -- especially when they lost the military contract.
 
I have to stop reading, or I'll have a sodding aneurysm.
 
~~~
 
 
Dustin Aven: And what's with the 5.56 can go a mile and then mentioning you can shoot it to a 1000 meters? Who the hell, outside of a 'hey can I do this' situation, chooses 5.56 for a 1000 meter shot? Oh yeah no one. Anyone shooting that far chooses calibers that start with a 3 or a 5.
 
Mike: (The official max range of 5.56mm from an M4 is 600 meters for area targets. And it's irrelevant since the area target was closer than that.)
 
BTW, he looks very pretty in this article about how he tried to interfere with an existing investigation and got banned from Camp LeJeune:
 
Very pretty indeed.  I've rarely seen someone look that clean and pretty in a combat zone.
 
There's more. Much more. But I can honestly say I'm terrified this finger painter actually was able to handle a weapon in a combat zone.  
 
It does prove, however (along with the idiot in Vegas), that no massive intellect is needed to operate one.
 
Only to operate one effectively, and to write about them.

Oh, I may edit this if we find more.  There was so much retardery we couldn't even process it all.

EDIT:

This was his response when I mailed him the link:

His response:

Be sure you are sitting down.

Swallow whatever you are drinking.

"Hey son, 

Long time, no chat. Appreciate the advice, but the bullshit meter is full, so unfortunately, I can’t take anymore advice right now. Anytime you want to compare writing careers, I’m available. 

Stay out of trouble, kid. And keep those fingers flying across that keyboard of yours, you little rascal, you. 

Sincerely,

James LaPorta"

~~

Talk about a snowflake.

For the record, as of 5 Oct 2017, he has nothing on Amazon or IMDB as a "writer" or "documentary producer."

I have 20 books in print, 6 of which I believe were or are bestsellers, and four professional screen and movie credits as a technical expert.
 
Cool story, bro! Again.