More than 60 injured or killed at Colorado Batman premire

BlueFox

dkg999 wrote: »

So if we are going to ban guns as a result of this type of scenario then let's also ban violent movies such as the Batman series, and violent video games. Those two had just as much of a role in this scenario happening as the guns. And the latter two have lesser constitutional protections.

I'm not to sure about that. This seems pretty clear.


Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


On the hand, was this guy a member of a well regulated militia?

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

mrbiron

I'm just waiting to see what his motive was...
While they're at it, they should go round up the parents and slap the $hit out of them as well.

Banning guns will NEVER happen.
A stop on production of violent games and movies will NEVER happen.

cnh

dkg999 wrote: »

The issue is what drove him to feel the need to commit the act(s) of violence. We fail to deal with that time after time and instead focus on the easier feel-good issues of "let's ban guns because they are bad".

Exactly! How many days has it been now? And how MUCH more has that crack reporting garnered us? Look at the headline from Yahoo today: "Shooting suspect appears dazed in court." lol What did they expect him to do? Jump up on his chair and hit them with some clever JOKER repartee? What a bunch of bozos. What happened to the "real" journalists?

It is, of course, inevitable that this should spark the usual "for and against" gun control debates. There is no end to those (with their 200+ year old constitution in tow). But there are "other" issues here: that someone needs to provide us with more "information" on!

cnh

nooshinjohn

deleted... double post.

nooshinjohn

cnh wrote: »

It is, of course, inevitable that this should spark the usual "for and against" gun control debates. There is no end to those (with their 200+ year old constitution in tow). But there are "other" issues here: that someone needs to provide us with more "information" on!

cnh

I am puzzled by this highlighted part of your statement. Are you implying that those of us the feel the Constitution should be respected and adhered to are somehow relics that cling to some dusty old document that should be studied in a history book and used for nothing else?

When it was being followed, the Constitution demonstrated that it was, by far, the best crafted document in history for both national governance and in handling the affairs of state internationally as well. I believe the Constitution to be a divinely inspired document, that if followed, allowed this nation to prosper to unimagined levels of security and wealth. Funny that about the time we started to turn our backs on our founding documents and on God, that we find ourselves in the place we are today.

Show me please, another constitution or form of governance that has done more for the freedom of man, respected the nature of man and his individual and personal relationship with their Creator, and the fact that the rights of life, liberty and the freedom to persue our own path to happiness are found within each of us and do not come from a king, queen or a dictator.

Our Constitution is directly responsible for the United States becoming the greatest nation the world has ever seen, and our failure to follow it has led to our decline. If we fail to recognize this and get back to our founding principles(and SOON), we will become just like every other third-rate Banana Republic south of the border and everywhere else.

cnh

nooshinjohn wrote: »

I believe the Constitution to be a divinely inspired document

Not interested in arguing this since I don't believe that it is. It is a historical document that has been amended many times and will continue to be modified by "men" who also wrote it. In the end this is a matter of faith. If one has it that's cool! I do respect people's religious beliefs.

cnh

PolkieMan

I like the "shooting suspect" part that they said on the news.
So, we are not sure he did it? Oh no bail, really?
They said something about not knowing if the lady sitting next to him was his mother? Well she looks to be about 35 years old? And we all saw his father in his late 50's early 60's hmmm... could be his lawyer?
I think we should not ban guns I think we should ban people with that kill people.
30 days put to death!
Look, he knows nothing is going to happen to him for a long time so why not kill some more.
He was hoping his traps would do that for him while he sat around and ate and slept on our hotel ticket which
will last for at least 5 years.

cnh wrote: »

Exactly! How many days has it been now? And how MUCH more has that crack reporting garnered us? Look at the headline from Yahoo today: "Shooting suspect appears dazed in court." lol What did they expect him to do? Jump up on his chair and hit them with some clever JOKER repartee? What a bunch of bozos. What happened to the "real" journalists?

It is, of course, inevitable that this should spark the usual "for and against" gun control debates. There is no end to those (with their 200+ year old constitution in tow). But there are "other" issues here: that someone needs to provide us with more "information" on!

cnh

Danny Tse

mrbiron wrote: »

While they're at it, they should go round up the parents and slap the $hit out of them as well.

I don't know about that. What could have his parents do to prevent the shooting? From what I gathered from the media, the guy seemed pretty normal until his rampage. He's obviously a smart guy, and from all indications, achieved quite a lot already. I'd imagine his parents are heartbroken as well from this tragedy. Of course, there might be some kind of "back story" to all that has happened. Until then, I'd put his parents down as "victims".

PolkieMan

Yea I got two kids, night and day, he is a grown man.
He wanted to be noticed, he did not have any girlfriends, he was smart but strange. He knew it would be a long time before they do anything to him, he wanted to have his moment.

Danny Tse wrote: »

I don't know about that. What could have his parents do? From what I gathered from the media, the guy seemed pretty normal until his rampage. He's obviously a smart guy, and from all indications, achieved quite a lot already. I'd imagine his parents are heartbroken as well from this tragedy. Of course, there might be some kind of "back story" to all that has happened. Until then, I'd put his parents down as "victims".

tonyb

wayne3burk wrote: »

But my final point is, is: if you had lost a son or a daughter in that movie theatre, and your'e still a staunch supporter of people having the "right" to own and bear an assault rifle with a 100 round magazine, then you are plain crazy.

wayne

Hmmm....by that logic, then all airplanes should be banned too. After all, it was airplanes that flew into the twin towers. Or is it more feasable to hold those accountable who used the airplanes to kill so many ?

There's a million ways to kill mass amounts of people, you can't outlaw everything. While we are on the subject of this nutjob, I want to know when it became so important to politicize the killers beliefs. Was it so important in the past ? Did the media run to declare if Gacy, Spect, Uni-bomber were right or left ? Could it maybe just be one guy who had a mental breakdown, snapped, for god knows what reason ?

The rush by the media to lay blame on an ideology is pathetic. It more so is being used to push agenda's instead of just looking at it for what it is. If any of you listened to the talking heads lately, you know what I mean. Honestly, from my point of view anyway, the media decides whats important, what to talk about, and who to point fingers at. For instance, Chicago has become the murder capital of the country the past year, not a peep, no attention given worth speaking of. Yet the media turns a blind eye. Are those peoples lives, kids lives, not as important as those in Colorado ? We have many, many more being killed yet not a national story to be found. Draw your own conclusions. The media likes to draw attention away from the real issues which they never want to talk about as long as their guy is in the big chair. What are those issues ?

The poverty level is at the highest point since 1965
The economy isn't getting better
Unemployment is expected to stay well above current levels into 2014
The destruction of the family unit
The moral decay in our society
The attack on religion in general
A bloated ever growing government
Consumer prices
Houseing market's are still in the toilet

Maybe your affected by one....or by all of this. Is it a far stretch that if someone was affected by all, they could snap ? Not saying that's this case with this nutbag in Colorado, but you get the jist. Hard times, good times, people snap. Some are just crazy their whole life. With over 300 million people here, a few turds are bound to surface and take out some good people.

On another note, what determines the punishment for such crimes ? What does a criminal have to be afraid of ? Getting locked up for 20 years and then only having to do a third of that time while getting 3 squares a day, cable tv, sports, education, clothes, medical attention ? Yes, we are taught to be more humane, more compassionate, to these criminals. We even let them out to do their dirty deeds again. Who pushes this compassionate mentality for criminals while at the same time releases them back into the public, and teaches kids to rise up and rebel, use violence if necessary ? Ask yourself that. Who is negligent in their duty to secure our borders from the criminal element ? Who basically refuses to deport some ? Who was so quick to try and associate this crazy idiot in Colorado with the Tea Party ? Mistakenly so too. Yet is silent on the damage and violence done by OWS. Follow the trail, draw your own conclusions.

Face

cnh wrote: »

Not interested in arguing this since I don't believe that it is. It is a historical document that has been amended many times and will continue to be modified by "men" who also wrote it. In the end this is a matter of faith. If one has it that's cool! I do respect people's religious beliefs.

cnh

Not all of them were brainwashed.

Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law.

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814

nooshinjohn

Way to quote Jefferson out of context:rolleyes:...


http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/jefferson_cooper.html

mrbigbluelight

The Constitution guarantees the American citizen the right to KEEP AND BEAR ARMS
In England the people have the right to OWN arms.

The difference ? With all due respect, if you aren't aware of the difference, I would recommend that you explore the difference.
The difference is monumentally huge.

The topic of international gun rights is being debated in the UN right now. To over-simplify the issue, it's generally drifting towards a "Ok, the rest of the world guns will be banned, but we'll exempt the US and allow their citizens to OWN guns".

Again, "OWN versus "KEEP AND BEAR arms.

England's way versus Our way.

Big Brother versus Our way (not that Our way hasn't had, IMO, SERIOUS erosions in our inalienable rights).

The day only the Government (Military and Police) have access to potent firearms is the beginning of the day when Big Brother comes knocking at the door.


BTW: as John asked earlier, is PolkArmy gone ?

Also, even thought the topic may have strayed slightly into a gray area :redface:, it has been rather civil so far even though it is a hot button topic.
Thanks to Polk for allowing it.

nooshinjohn

mrbigbluelight wrote: »

The Constitution guarantees the American citizen the right to KEEP AND BEAR ARMS
In England the people have the right to OWN arms.

The difference ? With all due respect, if you aren't aware of the difference, I would recommend that you explore the difference.
The difference is monumentally huge.

The topic of international gun rights is being debated in the UN right now. To over-simplify the issue, it's generally drifting towards a "Ok, the rest of the world guns will be banned, but we'll exempt the US and allow their citizens to OWN guns".

Again, "OWN versus "KEEP AND BEAR arms.

England's way versus Our way.

Big Brother versus Our way (not that Our way hasn't had, IMO, SERIOUS erosions in our inalienable rights).

The day only the Government (Military and Police) have access to potent firearms is the beginning of the day when Big Brother comes knocking at the door.


BTW: as John asked earlier, is PolkArmy gone ?

Also, even thought the topic may have strayed slightly into a gray area :redface:, it has been rather civil so far even though it is a hot button topic.
Thanks to Polk for allowing it.

A big +1 to all of the above, includiung the big thanks to the folks at CP allowing us to have this conversation.

maximillian

Thanks, exalted512, for that video. I had watched it once before.

As the video in exalted512's post points out... clip size doesn't matter because changing clips can take less than a second for a trained person. So an AR15 can fire 50-60 rounds a minute, and if changing 10 round clips could fire 30-40 rounds a minute. That isn't a big difference in this case.

Gotta wonder if there is a little bit of irony in the 100 clip mag issue. The shooter's AR15 gun jammed. If he had multiple clips he may have tried another one and possibly have unjammed the gun. But with the single clip he didn't bother. Wonder if the 100 mag clip actually saved some lives.

nooshinjohn

maximillian wrote: »

Gotta wonder if there is a little bit of irony in the 100 clip mag issue. The shooter's AR15 gun jammed. If he had multiple clips he may have tried another one and possibly have unjammed the gun. But with the single clip he didn't bother. Wonder if the 100 mag clip actually saved some lives.

Investigators believe so, but facts never matter in cases like this.

nooshinjohn

Yes. Instant 10 year prison term if you are caught or seen with one. Plus $10,000 reward for the person who turned you in. I bet you'd turn in all your guns asap.

If I saw my neighbor with one i'd turn him and next week i'd be spending 10 grand on new stereo gear!

And if I were a criminal, I would get rich quick taking 10k at gunpoint from everyone foolish enough to follow your lead. It saddens me to see that we have begun to put a pricetag of our liberties... There is no amount of money we should be willing to accept for our freedoms, lest we sell ourselve into slavery. Those that would sacrifice any of them for any price deserve the tyrany that follows.

wayne3burk

tonyb wrote: »

Hmmm....by that logic, then all airplanes should be banned too. After all, it was airplanes that flew into the twin towers. Or is it more feasable to hold those accountable who used the airplanes to kill so many ?

There's a million ways to kill mass amounts of people, you can't outlaw everything.

Cars are made for transporting 7 or less people from point A to point B. Yes you can drive a car into a crowd of people.

Planes are made to transport people and material from point A to point B. Yes, with a box cutter or a gun you can hi-jack a plane and fly it into a movie theater.

Tire Irons are made for jacking up a car. Yes, you can bash someones head in with it.

Assault weapons are made to kill the maximum number of enemy combatants in the shortest amount of time. Not to transport people or goods from point A to point B, not to jack up a car, not for digging a ditch, not for fileting a fish. They are simply a military weapon intended for military combat, or a weapon suitable only for mass murder. If you want to do target practice get nintendo's duck hunter.

This crazy **** was able to walk out of a BassPro shop with the instrument necessary to kill and wound 70 people. No questions asked.

Don't tell me he could have gone to the local dynamite show and bought enough dynamite to strap to his chest with the corresponding blasting caps, or walked to the local C-4 shop and got the plastique explosives and detonating devices to do the same.

Why do you people want to make it so easy for someone like this to commit mass murder?

You should all be outraged that people hide behind the 4th amendment to justify owning weapons intended for only one thing and one thing only.

I support your right to own a handgun and even to have a permit for conceal carry, your right to own hunting rifles, etc. They have a traditional useful and justifiable purpose in our society. But I also have to point out to you that purpose of society is to provide for the protection and the common good of it's citizens, and we failed in Aurora to do just that.

mrbigbluelight

Mr Sal, I'd have to disagree with you on the "Turn in the Neighbor" thing. There's enough surveillance going on in this country as it is ("To Protect the Children !") that we don't need to go further and enlist battalions of amateur sleuths looking to make a buck, truth be damned.

I think that if we merely look to the south of us (way south), Australia, we can see an example of the elimination of private gun ownership to be a dismal/disastrous failure.
Aussies were "mandated" to turn in their guns and they did. Kind of.

Law abiding citizens did. Bad guys didn't.

There's a ton of stuff on the internet regarding this, but I'll quote one statistic that may, IMO, tell the tale:

ARMED ROBBERIES ARE UP 40 %.

ARMED.

Lots of other rather saddening statistic, too (home invasions up, elderly attacks up, etc). And these aren't statistics generated by organizations that a reasonable person may feel has a dog in the fight like the NRA.
Nope. These are stats from the Aussie authorities themselves.

I rather enjoy my right to be stupid and shoot myself in the foot by accident. Better that than having the Powers That Be tell me what's right for me.

halo71

Lasareath wrote: »

Yes. Instant 10 year prison term if you are caught or seen with one. Plus $10,000 reward for the person who turned you in. I bet you'd turn in all your guns asap.

If I saw my neighbor with one i'd turn him and next week i'd be spending 10 grand on new stereo gear!

lol....Well that is THE solution! It's so simple yet brilliant! It will end all our problems! Got any ideas about solving unemployment? :rolleyes:

Lasareath wrote: »

I don't own a gun, I own a Bat and a Knife and for some reason I don't feel like a slave. The good part if I go crazy and run into a movie theater with my bat or knife I'm not going to be able to kill too many people before security or other movie watchers jump me.

My 10K would be in the bank, so good luck getting my 10K with your gun!

Ahhh watch it now. They'll be wanting to ban bats and knives next!



EDIT: And I was gonna bring up the Austrailia thing with gun bans but Mr.BBL beat me to it. Those statistics show what would happen here. Yall still think thats the way to go?? lol

halo71

Lasareath wrote: »

Yes, Vote for Obama. I did 4 years ago and I went from $XX dollars a year to $****

Or the unemployed can be given the jobs of collecting and destroying all the guns. :razz:

I see you are fishing now. That was funny though.

Polkersince85

" Democracy is two wolves and a well armed chicken discussing what to have for dinner." Ben Franklin

I could go down the food and cleaner isle at Walmart and make a concoction that could take out a lot more people than Holmes did. It's not the method folks, it's the people doing this stuff. One out of 312,000,000+

tonyb

wayne3burk wrote: »

Assault weapons are made to kill the maximum number of enemy combatants in the shortest amount of time. But I also have to point out to you that purpose of society is to provide for the protection and the common good of it's citizens, and we failed in Aurora to do just that.

Yes they are....and the whole purpose of the 2nd amendment is to be able to protect yourself from an over bearing government, should that ever happen....cough...cough. Should the people be limited to single shot rifles while a supposed enemy has fully automatic ones ?

There is a certain level of protection any society can provide, it never was or never will be absolute. Society didn't fail anyone here, one person failed, from what I can tell so far anyway. Nobody wants to make it easy for people to commit mass murder, and if you want to have that argument we can say if you let everyone cary a gun, you may even prevent a few. Restrictive gun laws does nothing but take guns out of the hands of the good people wanting to defend themselves and puts the guns in the hands of the bad guys. That fact is displayed everywhere you have very restrictive gun laws. But it's not about that now is it ?

If society's purpose was for the common good of the people, why take away a means of defense ? Why trust someone else for your security ? You have to take responsability for you and your families security, thats the bottom line. Does someone else come and lock your front door before you go to bed ? Would you trust someone else to do that ? Obviously no....but out in public, the police can't be everywhere all the time so the burden of safety falls on your shoulders, always, at home or out in public. By telling me I can't carry a gun, you just took away a main defense while out in public. So much for the common good eh ?

Ever see a story of people getting robbed with a baseball bat ? Killed with one ? No....because they all have guns. Please don't shoot me, wait right there while I call the police. The only phone call made will be to the funeral home for you. Will the media jump up and down over all the murders of defenseless citizens ? Nope.....your buying into the media hype on this Colorado thing. What say we wait for more details to come out instead of jumping on the ban guns bandwaggon from the git go.

txcoastal1

Simple gun's don't kill people....people kill people

Holmes could have sprayed buckshot and pistol rounds and killed and injured just as many and as quickly. Dropped bath tub explosives and so on...just like most of the hanes crimes the individuals are better than average in intelligence and they will use any means necessary to carry out their mission....should we outlaw gun powder because he bundled it up as explosives...Boom there goes New Years and 4th of July

Don't let 1 bad apple spoil the bunch

mrbigbluelight

wayne3burk wrote: »

This crazy **** was able to walk out of a BassPro shop with the instrument necessary to kill and wound 70 people. No questions asked.

Actually a Federal Form 4473 must be filled out, a government ID, and a Federal affidavit that says the person is eligible to purchase the firearm.
AND an NICS (National Instant Background Check System).
So questions are asked, and backgrounds are checked. BATF takes this stuff seriously. A lie can be punished by 5 year sentence.

Why do you people want to make it so easy for someone like this to commit mass murder?

Nobody wants that.

You should all be outraged that people hide behind the 4th amendment to justify owning weapons intended for only one thing and one thing only.

Nobody is hiding behind the 2nd Amendment. Rather, IMO, people are defending one of the rights enshrined to us in the Constitution/Bill of Rights.
A deranged person misused/abused this right to cause great harm and death to many people. That is a tragedy.
But I choose not to give up one of my guaranteed Constitutional rights because of the acts of a deranged person.

The 1st Amendment gives us the Freedom of Speech, Press, Religion, and Petition.
In the late 60's, at the height of anti-war protests, it wasn't unusual to see some folks burning the American Flag. Some were arrested and, long story short, flag burning was declared a form of free speech and Constitutionally protected.
So more flags were burned, this time legally.
My dad was a medic in WWII and saw some real nasty stuff. Real nasty. Never talked about it, but I'll just say Heurtgen Forest. I mention that because when there was news coverage of anti-war protests that showed flag burning, he'd be about 1 micron away from going thermonuclear (justifiable, IMO). But I mentioned to him one time that soldiers didn't die just for the best of this country, but also for the worst. And that's what makes America great. And that it has to be a great country that allows this to happen, to allow people to be idiots. Here, you have the right to be a dumbass. In other countries you'd be shot or arrested. But not here. This is America.

So I stand behind the 2nd. I stand behind the 1st. I stand behind all of them.

I would offer the opinion that the Powers That Be don't agree with me regarding the 4th, 5th, 6th Amendments. These amendments have been gutted, savaged, ripped apart, drug through the mud all in the name of good sounding things:
"Patriot Act". "National Defense Act". And so forth. All in the name of "Protecting Us" !

You're correct in saying that the original writers never envisioned the kind of firepower that would be available to the average citizen. But they never envisioned an America where the "authorities" would be able to knock in your door without a warrant, take you to a foreign country, deny you access to a lawyer or judge to learn what you were being detained for, and if declared to be a terrorist by the Executive Branch, be allowed to be executed.

A reasonable person could say, "Well, they could, but they would never do that !".
If they can, they will.
Our forefathers who had excellent foresight, IMO, wrote a system that made "could" into "can't".

Our forefathers wrote the 2nd Amendment, IMO, not so that we could protect ourselves from the British but possibly from our own government.
As "Pogo" said, "We have met the enemy, and he is us".

BTW, Wayne, I thank you for offering your views and opinions.

Conradicles

In complete respect for the families and friends of this tragedy, I think we should get this thread back on track. Put yourself in their shoes.

tonyb

Conradicles wrote: »

In complete respect for the families and friends of this tragedy, I think we should get this thread back on track. Put yourself in their shoes.

I dunno man, I think it is well on track. I'm sure the families and friends of the victims are wondering the same things we are discussing, searching for reasons why someone would do this and who's to blame.

If anyone could figure out why these nutjobs wake up one morning and decide to snuff out alot of people, I'd be interested in hearing that reason. Prayers go out to all touched by this.

Polkersince85

"By calling attention to a well-regulated militia for the security of the Nation, and the right of each citizen to keep and bear arms, our founding fathers recognized the essentially civilian nature of our economy. Although it is extremely unlikely that the fear of governmental tyranny, which gave rise to the 2nd amendment, will ever be a major danger to our Nation, the amendment still remains an important declaration of our basic military-civilian relationship, in which every citizen must be ready to participate in the defense of his country. For that reason I believe the 2nd Amendment will always be important."

John F. Kennedy


I honestly believe that he would still defend this statement, because he understood the citizens' rights of self-defense and duty to defend the nation were greater than himself.

Dennis Gardner

I haven't seen the new Batman flick yet, but if I do, I will invite this old man to see it with me.....http://www.wcsh6.com/news/watercooler/article/207892/108/Caught-on-Camera-Fla-internet-cafe-shooting