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

haymarket said:

So does your theory about gun prices soaring but still easily available work in a nation like Japan?

Click to expand...

Island nations with NO mnority population groups or major gang influence have lower CRIME in all categories. People in Japan SEE and REPORT crime, unlike Chicago, where murders occur in front of many "witnesses" that saw nothing, heard nothing and spoke of nothing. Your "theory" can be tested by comparing the recreational drug use, that is banned in both the USA and Japan.

ttwtt78640 said:

Island nations with NO mnority population groups or major gang influence have lower CRIME in all categories. People in Japan SEE and REPORT crime, unlike Chicago, where murders occur in front of many "witnesses" that saw nothing, heard nothing and spoke of nothing. Your "theory" can be tested by comparing the recreational drug use, that is banned in both the USA and Japan.

Click to expand...

I don't like where you're going with the whole minority population thing; the shooter in this incident was white, after all. However, you raise a highly underrated point about the reporting of crimes. A major factor contributing to violent crime in impoverished neighborhoods is that gangs terrorize many people from taking the witness stand. Thus, the thugs have a lot of impunity. And what is the fuel for gang-related activity? Illegal drugs.

It seems to me that if we decriminalized and then regulated drugs, we could crash the drug black market, starving gangs of their power. There'd be far less desire to burglarize a home if a drug costs $50 per ounce than if it cost $1000 per ounce.

Connery said:

No firearm, no injury by firearm. It really is that simple.

Click to expand...

No cars. No injury or death by cars. It really is that simple.

ttwtt78640 said:

Island nations with NO mnority population groups or major gang influence have lower CRIME in all categories. People in Japan SEE and REPORT crime, unlike Chicago, where murders occur in front of many "witnesses" that saw nothing, heard nothing and spoke of nothing. Your "theory" can be tested by comparing the recreational drug use, that is banned in both the USA and Japan.

Click to expand...

Are you advocating we use explosives to break up continents into islands? If not, your post is nonsensical. if so, your post is still nonsensical.

Furiounova said:

No cars. No injury or death by cars. It really is that simple.

Click to expand...

If you were exclusively discussing injuries by vehicles as I was about injuries by firearms then you are correct.

Phys251 said:

I don't like where you're going with the whole minority population thing; the shooter in this incident was white, after all. However, you raise a highly underrated point about the reporting of crimes. A major factor contributing to violent crime in impoverished neighborhoods is that gangs terrorize many people from taking the witness stand. Thus, the thugs have a lot of impunity. And what is the fuel for gang-related activity? Illegal drugs.

It seems to me that if we decriminalized and then regulated drugs, we could crash the drug black market, starving gangs of their power. There'd be far less desire to burglarize a home if a drug costs $50 per ounce than if it cost $1000 per ounce.

Click to expand...

I agree that making recreational drugs, including alcohol, illegal places the criminal distribution gangs in a highly profitable, thus powerful, position. Many assert that doing this very thing with firearms is the solution to gun violence. Ignoring the rule, and focusing on the exception, does not change the rule. Minority and gang crime is STILL the real issue, yet Obama does not visit Chicago to address the NORMAL gun crime, he instead visits CO to address the rare event of a crazed lone killer, that happened to have used firearms instead of a bomb to commit mass murder. CO is, after all, a swing state and the opportunity to "care" for these victims makes political sense, whereas Chicago will vote for Obama regardless of whether he "feels their pain".

My point is that as a people we seem to ACCEPT the gun crime (and all other crime) in "urban areas" as expected, yet express SHOCK that it can happen to "normal" people in the suburbs. The race of the perp makes no difference to me, nor does the race of the victims. It is the fact that the call to "do something" comes ONLY when it happens to "nice" and "regular" people, in "nice"' and "regular" areas of the country. Much like Obama immigration policy, that seeks to enforce the law only on "the worst of the worst" and the rest of us must simply accept the presense of "nice" illegal aliens and support them "properly" with our tax money. Once you accept SOME illegal activity it is only natural that it continue to progress to push the limits, making even more of it fall into the "acceptable" crime category.

ttwtt78640 said:

I agree that making recreational drugs, including alcohol, illegal places the criminal distribution gangs in a highly profitable, thus powerful, position. Many assert that doing this very thing with firearms is the solution to gun violence. Ignoring the rule, and focusing on the exception, does not change the rule. Minority and gang crime is STILL the real issue, yet Obama does not visit Chicago to address the NORMAL gun crime, he instead visits CO to address the rare event of a crazed lone killer, that happened to have used firearms instead of a bomb to commit mass murder. CO is, after all, a swing state and the opportunity to "care" for these victims makes political sense, whereas Chicago will vote for Obama regardless of whether he "feels their pain".

Click to expand...

Eh, it's politics. Either party would do that. But yeah, one can just look at the effects of Prohibition to see what can happen when drugs are banned.

My point is that as a people we seem to ACCEPT the gun crime (and all other crime) in "urban areas" as expected, yet express SHOCK that it can happen to "normal" people in the suburbs. The race of the perp makes no difference to me, nor does the race of the victims. It is the fact that the call to "do something" comes ONLY when it happens to "nice" and "regular" people, in "nice"' and "regular" areas of the country. Much like Obama immigration policy, that seeks to enforce the law only on "the worst of the worst" and the rest of us must simply accept the presense of "nice" illegal aliens and support them "properly" with our tax money. Once you accept SOME illegal activity it is only natural that it continue to progress to push the limits, making even more of it fall into the "acceptable" crime category.

Click to expand...

I definitely agree with that first sentence. What happened in Aurora was tragic, make no mistake. But when the same number of people die in ghettos, spread among several shootings, we tend to write them off as "today's murder." It's almost as if crime has to be taken to us to get our attention.

Connery said:

If you were exclusively discussing injuries by vehicles as I was about injuries by firearms then you are correct.

Click to expand...

It is not pragmatic even while tripping on acid.

KevinKohler said:

Exactly. Deal with the problem, not the symptoms.

Click to expand...

Yes, but deal with it, ffs. The pro-GC's seem to have the wrong target, the anti-GC's have their heads in the sand.

Phys251 said:

Eh, it's politics. Either party would do that. But yeah, one can just look at the effects of Prohibition to see what can happen when drugs are banned.



I definitely agree with that first sentence. What happened in Aurora was tragic, make no mistake. But when the same number of people die in ghettos, spread among several shootings, we tend to write them off as "today's murder." It's almost as if crime has to be taken to us to get our attention.

Click to expand...

Good point. Fresno CA has had 36 gun murders so far this year, according to the local news. That's where it goes, local news, ho, hum, another gang related killing in Fresno, some dude with pants hung to his knees is dead on the street, his rival gangbangers fled in a car, most likely stolen.

Someone goes into a theater and commits mass murder, and it makes national news.

Dittohead not! said:

Good point. Fresno CA has had 36 gun murders so far this year, according to the local news. That's where it goes, local news, ho, hum, another gang related killing in Fresno, some dude with pants hung to his knees is dead on the street, his rival gangbangers fled in a car, most likely stolen.

Someone goes into a theater and commits mass murder, and it makes national news.

Click to expand...

Here is revealing aspect: the majority are middle class white males and have been for over 13 straight years but people still act shocked when the shooter is a white male. What's more, white males are not profiled as criminals.

It is only the victims causing the coverage. Can we get more Holloway? (last I heard....her suspect killer is in jail for murdering another young woman)

TurtleDude said:

having actually studied "Active shooters" professionally, in almost every case, the active shooter gives up or kills himself when confronted with potentially lethal force

Click to expand...

And how does this help the innocent people that have been killed how?

Have you heard of prevenitive measures?eace

Furiounova said:

Here is revealing aspect: the majority are middle class white males and have been for over 13 straight years but people still act shocked when the shooter is a white male. What's more, white males are not profiled as criminals.

It is only the victims causing the coverage. Can we get more Holloway? (last I heard....her suspect killer is in jail for murdering another young woman)

Click to expand...

Actually that isn't correct. It is well known to criminal profilers and most educated cops that the vast majority of serial killers and mass murderers are white males, typically between 20-35 yo.

presluc said:

And how does this help the innocent people that have been killed how?

Have you heard of prevenitive measures?eace

Click to expand...

The sooner armed force arrives, the fewer people killed. Armed citizen on the scene > cops on the way.

AdamT said:

Would your opinion of Mr. Freeman's performance change if you knew that he recently contributed $1 million to Obama's superPAC?

Click to expand...

I have to say, that I have no idea what that has to do with Morgan Freeman's abilities in front of camera. Jon Voight for instance, is in my view a very very good actor; particulalry since he's gotten older and ahs been playing that "old gruff tough guy" character, but he's about as right-wing as they get: and hideously so!

I think you're trying to mix apples and oranges here.

hazlnut said:

"Control gun owners" for what purpose?

You're now trying to defend and further articulate an idiotic statement... with more idiocy.


I guess you think you're making a valid point.

You're not.

Click to expand...

I will edify you on this

its simple

in the 1960s the dems controlled congress, senate, and the White House. But crime became a weakness for the dems and the black race riots gave Nixon and other Republicans an opening to attack a liberal supreme court, and liberal dems who didn't seem much interested in doing much about the rising crime rates

so the dems came up with a strategy using the assassination of JFK first and later the Robert Kennedy and Dr. King killings. They started using GUN CONTROL as a SHIELD against the GOP attacks. By adopting GUN control the dems could claim they were tough on crime without upsetting a big bloc of their constituents. The Gun Control Act of 1968 was their crowning Jewel is this effort


up to then, the NRA was mainly a group that trained police, hosted competitions and other such things. But many members of the NRA were able to see the dem strategy for what it was-a political ploy that had no real basis in public safety but rather a strategy that the dems were using to defend against the soft on crime GOP attacks

so the NRA and other gun groups objected publicly and loudly. They pointed out the real motivation of the dems

MORE IMPORTANTLY, the NRA and other shooting organizations got organized and political. They started lobbying and supporting pro gun candidates


this really pissed the dems off. The anti gun dems-those in the big cities where crime was out of control-realized what a formidable foe they had created with their attempt to ward off Nixon's attacks. Dem gun control schemes were introduced to harass gun owners and gun groups. How do we know this? because if you listened to the debate on the Clinton Gun ban, most of the supporters whined about the NRA rather than criminals.

The AWB and other proposals by turds like Chuck Schummer were nothing more than attempted payback against the NRA

and its fun watching people who have no clue on this issue whine about what I know.

This is my kind of "gun control"; after observing Mr. Holmes behavior a Gun Club owner rejected Holmes' application to join. This speaks to the heart the issue in this situation, whether someone observed and detected aberrant behavior and did something proactive about it. The issues in this thread concerning Mr. Holmes have nothing to do with gun control rather mental heath, conduct and responsibility to act.


"Aurora shooting suspect James Holmes applied to join a Colorado gun range but never became a member after the owner became concerned over his "bizarre" message and behavior. Holmes said he was not a user of illegal drugs or a convicted felon, so Rotkovich followed up by calling Holmes' apartment to invite him to a mandatory orientation the following week. Rotkovich got Holmes' answering machine and says "it was bizarre -- guttural, freakish at best." Rotkovich left two other messages but eventually told his staff to watch for Holmes at the July 1 orientation and not to accept him into the club."

Shooting suspect gun club membership rejected - Boston.com

Connery said:

I was addressing your attitude toward other posters which, when you are challenged on an issue, is deplorable.

Indeed, individual freedoms and public safety are two bedrock principals interwoven in American life, some feel there is a nexus between the two and are even contingent upon one. For example, “the rate of firearm deaths among children under age 15 is almost 12 times higher in the United States than in 25 other industrialized countries combined.” (see National Education Association - Health Information Network, Children and Gun Violence).

Further, “each year, more than 20,000 children and youth under age 20 are killed or injured by firearms in the United States. The lethality of guns, as well as their easy accessibility to young people, are key reasons why firearms are the second leading cause of death among young people ages 10 to 19. Only motor vehicle accidents claim more young lives.” (see http://www.princeton.edu/futureofchildren/publications/docs/12_02_ExecSummary.pdf)

Should someone hold the view that public safety and individual freedoms are interconnected they have a every good reason to draw that conclusion and every right to express that position.

Click to expand...

I have no use for people who try to infringe on our freedoms-especially ignorant-or worse-dishonest posters. and what I say is the truth. Politicians who push for more gun controls are not motivated by public safety. quoting a dem party organ like the NEA is worthless. MOst of those deaths are due to the war on drugs that the left seems to want to expand to include guns.

haymarket said:

As a self professed 'libertarian' do you not support easing of drug laws and restrictions allowing the individual to make those decisions about usage?

Click to expand...

Of course I do, I studied history and saw what happened during prohibition. End the war on drugs and 80% of the intentional deaths with firearms will go away

AdamT said:

Do you think we would have more or less dope, crack, blow and speed if they weren't illegal? No difference you think?

Click to expand...

we'd have a lot less violence. we could use the BILLIONS we waste on law enforcement, incarceration and prosecution to treat those who cannot handle drugs responsibly. and we'd have a lot less deaths

Dittohead not! said:

Good point. Fresno CA has had 36 gun murders so far this year, according to the local news. That's where it goes, local news, ho, hum, another gang related killing in Fresno, some dude with pants hung to his knees is dead on the street, his rival gangbangers fled in a car, most likely stolen.

Someone goes into a theater and commits mass murder, and it makes national news.

Click to expand...

I look at it this way though, gang members should expect death at any time, they are engaged in a lifestyle that involves killing and being killed. It's not even IMO the same statistic as innocents who bought tickets to be entertained at a movie, kids mostly who are either working or going to school etc. but mainly trying to be good citizens. I really do wish there were seperate statistics to differentiate so that we could see the extent of innocents killed versus criminals.

haymarket said:

Perhaps we need a national discussion in this nation as to what constitutes "arms" as in "the right to keep and bear arms"?

Yeah - I know - now is not the time and neither is later the right time.

Click to expand...

Ah, my friend you like me want equal rights to discuss what is wrong and how to fix it , but like it or not there is a bit of a pattern going on here

We ask for Alternative fuel some time ago but oil companies are into politics still talking about alternative fuel.

We ask for more jobs for the American people but big business and special interest are into politics outsourcing is still increacing.

We ask for better gun control after the gun killings in Columbine, after Virginia Tech , after Arizona, after a 6 yr old got shot in Flint each time the NRA made a speech and from what I hear gives a large campaign fund for some political party .

Bottom line; once more somebody with a gun kills people , every question is about the killer except how he got three guns and all of that ammunition?eace

Goshin said:

Actually that isn't correct. It is well known to criminal profilers and most educated cops that the vast majority of serial killers and mass murderers are white males, typically between 20-35 yo.

Click to expand...

What was telling was the year range proferred, it's ALWAYS been white males 20-35 from a middle class background that are most likely to fit the serial killer/mass murderer profile. The Texas shooter, the Pearl Mississippi school shooter, the Amish school killer, Ted Bundy, Henry Lee Lucas, and on, and on.

presluc said:

And how does this help the innocent people that have been killed how?

Have you heard of prevenitive measures?eace

Click to expand...

the only thing that works to decrease the numbers of innocents killed by active shooters are armed individuals able to quickly challenge the active shooter

thus GUN FREE ZONES have been the sites for almost EVERY active shooter case going back years from Charles Whitman Jr, to the guy in the McDonalds (Huber) in California, to Patrick Purdy at a Stockton School, to that guy at Luby's in Texas before Texas had CCW permits. Many of them were schools as well

Goshin said:

Actually that isn't correct. It is well known to criminal profilers and most educated cops that the vast majority of serial killers and mass murderers are white males, typically between 20-35 yo.

Click to expand...

I'm talking about the general public.