• 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 moment I heard this news on NPR this morning, I just KNEW this was gonna result in yet another attack on the 2nd amendment.

All that will happen is a spike in gun sales.
 
I did not explain the circumstances of my choices--and don't intend to--but I was referring to separate incidents.

I can't say that I would choose my child's life over the life of another. It would depend on the unique situation. I can say that I understand the consequences in a way I am certain you do not.

Absolutely. I've never been forced into such a ****ty choice...let one die to save another. I hope I never have to.

But I imagine that when the times comes, if it comes down to a stranger's life, or my daughters...Grace Kohler has the CLEAR edge.
 
All that will happen is a spike in gun sales.

If it looks like Obama might win guns will fly off the shelves. It happened in 2008 though most of us who understood things figured Obama was smart enough to remember 1994 and then there was the Heller decision. But an Obama who doesn't worry about re-election might be more prone to fulfill the promises he made to get the endorsements of all the anti gun groups in 2008
 
I just want to say, that I even thought I would be all anti-2nd amendment because of this but I'm not... I just think that had we had other procedures in place IE keeping the emergency exits AN EMERGENCY things wouldn't of gone so south. I mean, as many of you like to point out, I am in college and I still remember when if you opened a emergency exit in a movie theater the screened tv warned you that an alarm would sound. Why would the safety feature be removed? I mean you can't remove those on planes, why does it suddenly become okay to do so in a movie theater?
 
Really - no one wins from this situation. Conservatives get a stronger "carry" argument, Liberals get a stronger "more gun regulation" argument, and 14 people are dead. Lose, lose, lose.
 
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

I've always thought victims families should be able to determine sentences, subject to approval by the jury that convicted.

Probably wouldn't result in kids losing their hands for shoplifting, but could generate some creative punishments for jackasses like this one.

Might even be an actual deterrent if people understood that they might be drawn and quartered or burned alive.
 
All that will happen is a spike in gun sales.

You sure? Because my state tends to respond to these tragedies with restrictions on > 10 round magazines, adjustable stocks on guns w/ 16" barrels or less, guns without internal safeties, etc...

Gun sales tend to spike AFTER these attacks on the 2A
 
Really - no one wins from this situation. Conservatives get a stronger "carry" argument, Liberals get a stronger "more gun regulation" argument, and 14 people are dead. Lose, lose, lose.

Not so true for the circumstantial situation. Think about it, I can't shoot straight with tear gas in my eyes... Should I be doing this near or around other people, never mind 100s?

Again, I think that our current system is good on ownership of guns...
 
I just want to say, that I even thought I would be all anti-2nd amendment because of this but I'm not... I just think that had we had other procedures in place IE keeping the emergency exits AN EMERGENCY things wouldn't of gone so south. I mean, as many of you like to point out, I am in college and I still remember when if you opened a emergency exit in a movie theater the screened tv warned you that an alarm would sound. Why would the safety feature be removed? I mean you can't remove those on planes, why does it suddenly become okay to do so in a movie theater?

yeah I was thinking the same thing-no way that guy just walked back into the theater wearing a helmet carrying two big conspicuous ominous looking weapons. So he apparently snuck out the emergency exit. First of all that should have been alarmed or else joe cheapskate will open that door up after buying ONE ticket and letting his 15 fraternity buddies all sneak in for free (I was a college kid once-I know the score)

secondly if the door was propped open so he could get back in, the alarm should have been going full psycho by then with security being called because that would often signal a fire.
 
Not so true for the circumstantial situation. Think about it, I can't shoot straight with tear gas in my eyes... Should I be doing this near or around other people, never mind 100s?

Again, I think that our current system is good on ownership of guns...

In the spirit of debate, someone could have shot him before the gas really effected the whole crowd.
 
I've always thought victims families should be able to determine sentences, subject to approval by the jury that convicted.

Probably wouldn't result in kids losing their hands for shoplifting, but could generate some creative punishments for jackasses like this one.

Might even be an actual deterrent if people understood that they might be drawn and quartered or burned alive.

If the most creative term for this person you can come up with is "jackasses", I don't think I want you sentencing the worst of our criminals... BTW, punishment has proven not to be a deterrent.

Source: Crime...
 
In the spirit of debate, someone could have shot him before the gas really effected the whole crowd.

True, but given circumstances they thought at first he was apart of the thing (Not to mention body armor)
 
And a ban on wearing costumes to movies too.

I think that is silly depending on the costume. sort of hard to conceal an automatic rifle in a unitard or a cat woman bodysuit
 
Not so true for the circumstantial situation. Think about it, I can't shoot straight with tear gas in my eyes... Should I be doing this near or around other people, never mind 100s?

Again, I think that our current system is good on ownership of guns...

Most gun owners know the 3 rules of gun ownership, and wouldn't take the shot unless they were certain no one was behind their target. The trick to this is get close, and kneel down. Now the crowd isn't behind his head, the wall/ceiling is.
 
Really - no one wins from this situation. Conservatives get a stronger "carry" argument, Liberals get a stronger "more gun regulation" argument, and 14 people are dead. Lose, lose, lose.
I'm not arguing for more carry, I'm never going to accept the ideas of people who don't know much about weaponry as far as where my rights should be. I think any tactics which use the deaths of innocents to advance an agenda is repugnant and really should be re-evaluated as arguments if all that can be used is raw in the moment emotion. I am concerned about the victims and their families.
 
Most gun owners know the 3 rules of gun ownership, and wouldn't take the shot unless they were certain no one was behind their target. The trick to this is get close, and kneel down. Now the crowd isn't behind his head, the wall/ceiling is.

he was in close quarters mostly using the long guns. close from behind put gun in the neck right below the helmet pull trigger
 
yeah I was thinking the same thing-no way that guy just walked back into the theater wearing a helmet carrying two big conspicuous ominous looking weapons. So he apparently snuck out the emergency exit. First of all that should have been alarmed or else joe cheapskate will open that door up after buying ONE ticket and letting his 15 fraternity buddies all sneak in for free (I was a college kid once-I know the score)

secondly if the door was propped open so he could get back in, the alarm should have been going full psycho by then with security being called because that would often signal a fire.

He did, from what I've read, have the door propped up. Was in the theater, walked out and changed into his gear, and came back in. Let me see if I can find the link again.
 
"A San Diego woman, who identified herself as Holmes' mother, said that her gut instinct told her that her son was responsible for what has become the state's worst mass shooting since Columbine.

'You have the right person,' she told ABC. 'I need to call the police... I need to fly out to Colorado."


Now, why would she have said something like that.... were there previous signs of his mental instability after all?
 
The Norman Goldman show is doing this issue all day today. Actually he is using this event to have a discussion on gun control. This shows completely bad judgement on Norm's part. Lets have some sensitivity for the vicitims here. Sheesh. These people who work in broadcast media have ZERO instincts for journalism.I mean, you all know people with journalism degrees who work or have friends with journalism degrees who work in broadcasting and they have no judgement when it comes to news - NONE. :(:thumbdown

How do these people get hired and keep their jobs?

Do media conglomerates merely hire the dumbest people on the block?
 
Most gun owners know the 3 rules of gun ownership, and wouldn't take the shot unless they were certain no one was behind their target. The trick to this is get close, and kneel down. Now the crowd isn't behind his head, the wall/ceiling is.

Ah, thanks, I don't know and the few I do, which I ask them about, don't know about when **** hits the fan... I guess I've built that wall from them...

For instance (no names), I know someone with his/her concealed carry and he told me he can't hit a target past 30 feet and the only reason he carry's is to make his parents happy...

:\
 
And a ban on wearing costumes to movies too.

We should just ban movie theaters altogether. Along with sports stadiums. Concerts. Political rallies. Amusement parks. Marathons. Charity walks. Schools. Colleges. Libraries. Grocery stores. Shopping Malls. Yep. Let's ban all those to make sure the shooters never win again.
 
Ah, thanks, I don't know and the few I do, which I ask them about, don't know about when **** hits the fan... I guess I've built that wall from them...

For instance (no names), I know someone with his/her concealed carry and he told me he can't hit a target past 30 feet and the only reason he carry's is to make his parents happy...

:\

That someone you know terrifies me. Take him to the range, NOW! Get him started w/ 22's and work up to his carry calibur. If he can't hit a 2 inch group @ 30 feet after about 500 rounds discourage him from carrying and have him lie to his parents.

I recommend a Browning Buckmark 22/45, or Ruger Mark III 22/45. Very accurate, same grip/weight as a 1911.
 
Last edited:
I'm not arguing for more carry, I'm never going to accept the ideas of people who don't know much about weaponry as far as where my rights should be. I think any tactics which use the deaths of innocents to advance an agenda is repugnant and really should be re-evaluated as arguments if all that can be used is raw in the moment emotion. I am concerned about the victims and their families.

Any sensible poster (such as yourself) would agree. It's not a good argument, but, there are hyper partisans who will use this to push their beliefs and agenda without regard for victims and their families. That wasn't targeting all members of the political spectrums, just the hyper partisans (which I neglected to specify).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom