37
   

Mass Shooting At Denver Batman Movie Premiere

 
 
Ticomaya
 
  2  
Reply Sat 21 Jul, 2012 01:01 pm
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:
Oh yeah, and I forgot, Tico: armored shooter walking up aisle (tho he apparently didn't) is unaffected by guy shooting him, kills him, and continues shooting innocents.

That could happen ... doesn't mean it would happen.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  2  
Reply Sat 21 Jul, 2012 01:01 pm
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:

re Hawk:
We can't afford the murder rate we already have, is what we can't afford.


http://media.reason.com/mc/_external/2012_07/murder-rate-trend-1900-2010.jpg?h=474&w=600

Really? The trend looks pretty good to me
MontereyJack
 
  2  
Reply Sat 21 Jul, 2012 01:02 pm
Compare us to other countries (not to mention, we were doing better fifty years ago)(well before the current insane pro-chaos gun laws were passed, David).
\And I sincerely doubt anywhere in the education system did anyone suggest shooting up theaters was a good idea, hawk. Gonna have to look elsewhere.
BillRM
 
  0  
Reply Sat 21 Jul, 2012 01:04 pm
@hawkeye10,
Do not confused the man with facts just as it is unfair to point out to Firefly that in the so call rape culture we are at a 33 years low in reported rapes until the database was fool with at least.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Jul, 2012 01:07 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

Do not confused the man with facts just as it is unfair to point out to Firefly that in the so call rape culture we are at a 33 years low in reported rapes until the database was fool with at least.


Absolutely, we cant have facts around when one is trying to gin up a panic in the pursuit of a political agenda.

Where was my head at?
MontereyJack
 
  2  
Reply Sat 21 Jul, 2012 01:15 pm
So you're suggesting the current murder rate is acceptable because it's lower than it was, or the current rape rate also? Sick.
BillRM
 
  0  
Reply Sat 21 Jul, 2012 01:16 pm
@hawkeye10,
I almost wish somehow the crazy idea of disarming all the citizens would pass and become law as it would be one hell of a means to get rid of what had become a government of and for the special interests and the hell with the middle and lower classes.

The arm citizens outnumber the police by a factor of 50 or more and annoying them to that point would not be wise to say the least.

Pass a law and then try to enforce that law...........

As President Jackson once said the SC had rule that the states can not move the Indian tribes to West of the Mississippi now my question is how many troops do they had to enforce that ruling.
MontereyJack
 
  2  
Reply Sat 21 Jul, 2012 01:17 pm
Tico, I agree, it could happen another way. However I think the probabilities here are on the side of the worst happening not the best. And one thing that is indisputable, however you compute the probabilities. Massacres like the theater are going to continue to occur. And the continued proliferation of guns is not going to stop them.
MontereyJack
 
  2  
Reply Sat 21 Jul, 2012 01:18 pm
Great example, Bill, brag about genocide.
parados
 
  3  
Reply Sat 21 Jul, 2012 01:19 pm
@Ticomaya,
People in the adjoining theaters were also shot when bullets passed through the walls.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  0  
Reply Sat 21 Jul, 2012 01:23 pm
@MontereyJack,
My my your logic is wonderful we are at a low for both murders and report rapes going back many many decades and the tend is downward but we should upturn the whole society due to the murders and rapes that is still happening.

Sorry you are trying to use the murder rate as an excuse to disarm the citizens and it is a damn poor excuse by the figures.

Not that the citizens will allow themselves to be disarm.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  0  
Reply Sat 21 Jul, 2012 01:26 pm
@MontereyJack,
An the lack of firearm would just means that the others means that in fact work better will be used.
firefly
 
  2  
Reply Sat 21 Jul, 2012 01:28 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:
I almost wish somehow the crazy idea of disarming all the citizens would pass and become law as it would be one hell of a means to get rid of what had become a government of and for the special interests


Oh I agree with you about that, the main special interest group in this case being the NRA.
BillRM
 
  0  
Reply Sat 21 Jul, 2012 01:29 pm
@MontereyJack,
Quote:
Bill, brag about genocide.


An what race or religion group is being wipe out that I had brag about?

Footnote I am going to see the movie this Sunday and I will be arm just in case and somehow I do not think I will be the only arm movie goer.
BillRM
 
  0  
Reply Sat 21 Jul, 2012 01:36 pm
@firefly,
I should check but off hands I would guess that the NRA membership that I am not a member of outnumber the total police forces of the nation by millions all by itself.

Yes four millions or roughly four times the national total police force.

Of course there are a lot of overlap between the police members and the NRA.

What to bet who will be gone if it ever come to it Firefly?
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Jul, 2012 01:37 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

Footnote I am going to see the movie this Sunday and I will be armed just in case and somehow I do not think I will be the only armed movie goer.

Wha+ if +here is a sign reading "No Guns Allowed."
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Jul, 2012 01:48 pm
@Ticomaya,
There would be no problem if the ticket sellers would just require those carrying assault rifles into movie theaters to buy a separate seat for their weapons.
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Jul, 2012 01:49 pm
Quote:
There are whole swaths of gun owners who don’t use their guns in a criminal way. But many of the people who use guns to commit murder are also law-abiding until they’re not. (Holmes’s only previous brush with the law seems to have been a 2011 traffic summons.) We shouldn’t simply wait for the bodies to fall to separate the wheat from the chaff.

One step in the right direction would be to reinstate the assault weapons ban. Even coming from a gun culture, I cannot rationalize the sale of assault weapons to everyday citizens. (The Washington Post reported that Holmes had a shotgun, two pistols and an AR-15 assault rifle, all legally purchased.)

But this will be an uphill battle because the National Rifle Association has been extremely effective at promoting its agenda and sowing fears that gun rights are in jeopardy even when they are not...

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/21/opinion/blow-mourning-and-mulling.html?hp

Quote:
In our country, the mass shootings come so frequently that most of them go by virtually unnoticed. Did you catch the one last week in Tuscaloosa? Seventeen people at a bar, hit by a gunman with an assault weapon.

People from most other parts of the industrialized world find the American proliferation of guns shocking, but, really, they have no idea. Even most Americans don’t know that Congress has, in recent years, refused to consider laws that would ban the sale of assault weapons capable of firing 100 bullets without reloading, and declined to allow the attorney general to restrict people on the terrorist watch list from purchasing weapons.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/21/opinion/guns-and-the-slog.html?hp
OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Reply Sat 21 Jul, 2012 01:55 pm
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:
I keep thinking about David's version of utopia, where everyone is armed,
RESTORING the status quo ante, as of the early 1900s




MontereyJack wrote:
and what happens in the theater under those circumstances. Let's call the original madman with the guns X, and the "good guys" who are armed A,B,C, etc. X comes in with his multiple guns, throws an apparent smoke grenade, and starts shooting. When the audience realizes it's not a special effect, A knowing he's a good guy, pulls his gun and fires somewhere in the general direction of X, whom he can't see very clearly if at all.
No; that 's an ineffably stupid thing to do.
U don't discharge a gun without knowing where the target is.





MontereyJack wrote:
Now I've seen calculations that trained soldiers in battle actually hit something
no more than 1 time in a hundred,
"Calculations" huh?
How many times did Lee H. Oswald hit his target (MOVING target??)
Did anyone tell him about the "calculations" Jack ??




MontereyJack wrote:
and all these guys are almost totally untrained, certainly untrained under combat conditions,
so A's shot more likely hits someone innocent.
There is no reason to discharge your gun,
if u don't know what your target is.
What u wrote makes no sense.




MontereyJack wrote:
B, knowing he's a good guy, but having no knowledge of who else is, sees A's muzzle flash,
thinks he's a bad guy and aims at him, probably hitting someone else, if anyone.
There was a kid, looked maybe 12,
who said that the killer was 3 feet from him,
pointing the gun in his face; (but he was unarmed).
Your scenario is grossly inconsistent with known fact.





MontereyJack wrote:
C, knowing he's a good guy, but assuming the other shooters are in league, pulls his gun and fires at A's or B's muzzle flash, or maybe at X in the smoke. In seconds there's a murderous crossfire among all the "good guys" firing at all the other "good guys" wwhom they assume are bad guys because they're shooting, and X, amidst people running and screaming, trying to get away and hit by all those other 99 shots that go nowhere near the shooters. The carnage is even worse.
During the history of this Republic, has this EVER happened,
outside of your imagination??





MontereyJack wrote:
The ONLY thing that works is taking the guns away.
There is NO jurisdiction for that, because America is a FREE COUNTRY.
U forgot that, Jack.
Additionally, if people were robbed of their guns
thay 'd just get more guns; MAKE them, if it came to that.
Have u seen fabrication on the motorcycle show, American Chopper,
or on American Guns, or making them on Sons of Guns. Guns r simple machines.
Guns were made by hand, before the birth of Christopher Columbus.
Its easier n faster to make them now, with electric tools
and extant engineering plans. No problem.
When the police rob people of their marijuana,
thay just get more of it. When the police robbed people
of their alcohol in the 1920s, thay just got more of it.
Accordingly what u said does NOT make sense.





David
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Jul, 2012 03:17 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Given David that the arm citizens outnumbers the nation total police force by over fifty times why the hell should we allow our guns to be taken away to begin with?

The last time arm citizens went to talk to congress the congress decamp and got out of town in a hurry and that congress had military founding fathers in it not the sad congress that we got now.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Information About Denver, CO. Wanted - Discussion by Aldistar
Maryjane - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Car Services to Airport? - Discussion by Steve Spencer
Expressmens Union Denver, Colo - Question by deegeez
So, do you think this is demonic? - Discussion by ossobuco
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 12/23/2024 at 12:13:34