• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Gun attack at Batman film premiere in Denver [W:120]

Status
Not open for further replies.
The whining on the Right is almost as palatable as that on the Left with regards to this issue.

You're right: the theater banning guns didn't prevent the shooting. And patrons carrying guns would almost assuredly have not saved one more life (in fact, given the killer's use of smoke and gas in his attack, it's very possible that more people would have been accidentally killed by do-gooder would-be heroes before the massacre was through).

This is not a good example to base any argument around.

That is not logic. That is nonsense. This maggot shoots 71 people. Are you saying that if someone gets a bead on him, and pops as many rounds as possible, that its now 75 people shot ?

I suggest 25 total. Maybe less. Especially if the CC was ex-military of other security.
 
Last edited:
good point-the government should not execute the guy. rather the families of the dead children should be given the following

2 hours access to this guy

several crowbars, blowtorches and car batteries with jumper cables

full gubernatorial pardons for all and anything they do during that 2 hour period

after he is convicted, right?
 
Neither will sending out death squads to kill him.

The police killing him would have saved tax payers lots of money and saved the families from any further grief.

You hate the government?
I do not hate the government.

So do I. And, trust me, you don't want to give the State the authority to kill on command.

I never said anything about giving the state to kill on command. I believe the police should have claimed that he was pointing a weapon at them and then blasted his ass.
 
good point-the government should not execute the guy. rather the families of the dead children should be given the following

2 hours access to this guy

several crowbars, blowtorches and car batteries with jumper cables

full gubernatorial pardons for all and anything they do during that 2 hour period

That's... incredibly dumb as well.

Due process exists for a reason. The reason is to limit the State's authority over the accused. Your sentiments are ones I expect from some podunk socially conservative populist, not a libertarian.


That is not logic. That is nonsense. This maggot shoots 71 people. Are you saying that if someone gets a bead on him, and pops as many rounds as possible, that its now 75 people shot ?

I suggest 25 total. Maybe less. Especially if the CC was ex-military of other security.

I'm suggesting that firing on a man armed to the hilt with anti-handgun body armor will not stop him, and that firing on him in (1) a darkened theater that (2) has been filled with smoke and (3) tear gas will certainly jeporadize the lives of many more patrons than this man could ever have taken on his own.

There were military men present in the theater. They weren't able to do a thing.
 
Last edited:
The whining on the Right is almost as palatable as that on the Left with regards to this issue.

You're right: the theater banning guns didn't prevent the shooting. And patrons carrying guns would almost assuredly have not saved one more life (in fact, given the killer's use of smoke and gas in his attack, it's very possible that more people would have been accidentally killed by do-gooder would-be heroes before the massacre was through).

This is not a good example to base any argument around.

I disagree with you. If this were Texas, and if it were not legally a gun-free zone, someone(s) would have taken him out long before he got off 71 deliberate and individual shots.
 
And unfortunately, this one went with the smoke grenade. Obscures his vision a bit too, but still increases his advantage. He had the ballistic helmet, neck protector, and upper-body armor. Seemed he was ready for suicide by cop, after a shoot-out. Yet he surrendered.

With all that body armor, I'm thinking that suicide by cop was a part of the plan.
 
That is not logic. That is nonsense. This maggot shoots 71 people. Are you saying that if someone gets a bead on him, and pops as many rounds as possible, that its now 75 people shot ?

I suggest 25 total. Maybe less. Especially if the CC was ex-military of other security.

You're assuming that someone would be carrying a sufficiently powerful gun loaded with armor-piercing ammo capable of breaching this guy's full-body suit? What are the chances of that?
 
I disagree with you. If this were Texas, and if it were not legally a gun-free zone, someone(s) would have taken him out long before he got off 71 deliberate and individual shots.

The killer was wearing body armor. It's been variously reported as Kevlar and flak; the media, as always, is not good at distinguishing between types of weapons and armors used. Either way, the killer could have taken multiple body shots and remained mobile and dangerous. And the environment being what it was - smoky, dark and murky, filled with tear gas and smoke from smoke bombs - the risk of unintentional deaths would have been incredibly high.

Again, I support concealed carry. But this is the dumbest possible argument anyone can make for it.
 
No, he was prepared for one, or two armed persons in the audience.

Do you honestly believe that life is like a John Woo movie, where anyone with fingers enough to fire a Glock carries one in the waistbands of their pants?
 
I'm suggesting that firing on a man armed to the hilt with anti-handgun body armor will not stop him, and that firing on him in (1) a darkened theater that (2) has been filled with smoke and (3) tear gas will certainly jeporadize the lives of many more patrons than this man could ever have taken on his own.

There were military men present in the theater. They weren't able to do a thing.

Hey. You are not ex military apparently.

As for 'being filled with smoke", it goes both ways. If the perp can see to shoot, then trust that you can see to shoot back.

As for 'gas", while the mask helps him to breath in a plain smokey room, there is no confirmation that it was "gas". I have watched the videos, and no one is coming out of the theater as if gassed. All comments were "harder to breath", which would be caused by a regular smoke grenade. No one says eyes stinging. Were it gas, you'd have seen it just with the folks at the front of the theater. I have been gassed a dozen times. Had my nose run off my chin.

His guns were legal purchase. Signal smokes are easily purchased. But CS type of grenades ... no f'ing way.

Even so, someone near him, with a handgun, who escaped the initial shots, and likely beside him, or now behind him, can certainly do damage. There were many places to aim that would have disabled him and taken him down. Likely from less than 10' range.

Your posts pretend to speak with knowledge on this subject. But I see no knowledge. I see uninformed speculation, to the point of ignorance.
 
Last edited:
My dad doesn't hot-rod, but this is exactly why I ask him not to ride his Harley on the highway leading to our house. The speed limit is set at 70, but most people go 80 or more. If something happened that caused him to lose control there's no way in hell he'd survive it short of a miracle. I totally understand the thrill of biking, but it isn't worth death, IMO.
Actually I love bikes. Harley's... and especially vintage Indians. Bikes are as safe as the rider, just as cars are/not. BTW, this was in a city and the speed limit was 30. He was doing approx double that. Whether it was intentional or due to poor shifting, he was doing a wheelie. It was a street bike, and when he came down he went into a high speed wobble that ejected him off the bike. I tend to think it was unintentional, but I heard him before I saw him, and when I did see him he was already on the back tire, not very high up. I think he lifted not meaning to, then backed off the throttle... He came down and went into a wicked wobble and off the bike he went. All of that is such a haze to me. watching him skim across the pavement and smack into my car, I am stopped waiting for him to get up for a couple seconds until I realized he is probably hurt bad and get out to check on him. That's when it all comes clear to see my tire sitting on his chest and throat.
 
This isn't about a pedophile. This is about a guy who went into a theater and shot up a bunch of people.

Oh okay, so a pedophile is not that bad. :doh

Who gives a **** what his motives are.Knowing his motives will not prevent any future shootings.Nor will knowing his motives bring any of his victims back to life. Knowing his motives won't even make his victims feel better. The police ****ed up by not putting as bullet in his head and their **** up will cost tax payers millions of dollars and cause more grief for the victims and their families.

This is one of the most uncivilized comments I have read in weeks. Not, one of the most uncivilized comments I've read on DP in weeks. One of the most uncivilized I've read ANYWHERE.

Thank GOD the police didn't listen to this patently absurd device. More than anything, Aurora deserves answers. And with the shooter alive, we may yet get those answers.
 
Do you honestly believe that life is like a John Woo movie, where anyone with fingers enough to fire a Glock carries one in the waistbands of their pants?

If the gun is small enough, it's carried in a pocket. Haven't you seen those little .22's?
 
Well there has been death threats against the director, and threats because of the whole "Bane/Bain" issue..

Seriously? I never heard that.
 
It's still a stigma to carry a gun, I know. Yes, it's concealed. No one sees it, but friends and family still have something to say about carrying.
Furthermore, the theater did not allow concealed weapons on their premises. That explains why no one shot back. CCW holders are law abiding citizens and honor posted signs ...because it's the law. They can lose their permit and go to jail if they do otherwise.
Theater Shooting Proves Signs Do Not Prevent Massacre

Wait! Was the theater a gun-free zone??
 
Hey. You are not ex military apparently.

As for 'being filled with smoke", it goes both ways. If the perp can see to shoot, then trust that you can see to shoot back.

As for 'gas", while the mask helps him to breath in a plain smokey room, there is no confirmation that it was "gas". I have watched the videos, and no one is coming out of the theater as if gassed. All comments werre "hard ot breath". No one says eyes stinging. Were it gas, you'd have seen it just with teh folks at teh front of the theater. I have been gassed a dozen times. Had my nose run off my chin.

Even so, someone near him, with a handgun, who escaped the initial shots, and likely beside him, or now behind him, can certainly do damage. There were many places to aim that would have disabled him and taken him down.

YOu posts pretend to speak with knowledge on this subject. But I see no knowledge. I see uninformed speculation, to the point of ignorance.

The "perp" isn't worrying about hitting bystanders...on the contrary that's his GOAL. Those shooting at the perp are doing so to minimize casualties and need to hit the specific person.

So the pope doesn't need clear line of sight, he doesn't care who he hits, he's just looking to hit someone. Those shooting at him are wanting to hit someone specific, and sauce vision and site is more important
 
Hey. You are not ex military apparently.

As for 'being filled with smoke", it goes both ways. If the perp can see to shoot, then trust that you can see to shoot back.

The perp knows where you're at. While you were lost in the film, enjoying the sight of Batman engaging in fisticuffs with the bad guys, the perpetrator was eyeing the entrances and the exits. He was taking stock of how many people were sitting in each row. He was taking a head count. He was watching you.

You're not going to do a Goddamn thing to him.

As for 'gas", while the mask helps him to breath in a plain smokey room, there is no confirmation that it was "gas". I have watched the videos, and no one is coming out of the theater as if gassed. All comments werre "hard ot breath". No one says eyes stinging. Were it gas, you'd have seen it just with teh folks at teh front of the theater. I have been gassed a dozen times. Had my nose run off my chin.

That's funny, since the patrons who were interviewed on CNN reported that they dropped to the ground to avoid the gunfire only to get a face full of tear gas. The killer had a one-two plan of attack. He was smart.

Even so, someone near him, with a handgun, who escaped the initial shots, and likely beside him, or now behind him, can certainly do damage. There were many places to aim that would have disabled him and taken him down.

In other words, you want this to be a scene out of Walker, Texas Ranger. Real life doesn't work that way.
 
So the pope doesn't need clear line of sight, he doesn't care who he hits, he's just looking to hit someone. Those shooting at him are wanting to hit someone specific, and sauce vision and site is more important

I had no idea the Pope was so bloodthirsty. ;)
 
From the Washington Post:

A neuroscience faculty member, who declined to be identified because of privacy concerns, described Holmes as “very quiet, strangely quiet in class,” and said he seemed “socially off.” Although Holmes got weak scores on the comprehensive exams last semester, the educator said, the school’s staff wasn’t going to toss him out. Instead, they planned to give him remedial instruction and perhaps put him on academic probation.

...Michael Welner, a forensic psychiatrist who, as chairman of the Forensic Panel of New York City, has studied and testified about mass shootings, said these cases invariably feature a person who is highly paranoid, resents the broader community and decides to kill out of a desire to achieve notoriety.

“Some are so paranoid that they’re psychotic. Others are paranoid in a generally resentful way but have no significant psychiatric illness. But you have to hate everyone in order to kill anyone,” Welner said.

“The threshold that the mass shooter crosses is one in which he decides that his righteous indignation and entitlement to destroy is more important than the life of any random person that he might kill.”

James Eagan Holmes held in Colorado shooting - The Washington Post
 
You're assuming that someone would be carrying a sufficiently powerful gun loaded with armor-piercing ammo capable of breaching this guy's full-body suit? What are the chances of that?

A shot to the groin, hip or face or throat would work--I have a vest in my home-and none of those areas are protected by it


you don't know much about this subject do you?
 
It's a weird place to go on a killing spree... I wonder why he picked a cinema and Batman of all movies
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom