• 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.
AdamT said:
The point is that there is no rational reason for anyone who isn't contemplating a massacre to have a 100-round magazine.
Click to expand...

The rational reason is . . . they want to.

Tricky thing about freedom is that "I want to" is all the reason you need.
 
haymarket said:
Yes - The intentional murder rate of the USA is three times higher than that of Canada. The USA can learn much from Canada.
Click to expand...

However, the violent crime rate and rape rate in Canada is three times that in the United States.
 
AdamT said:
The point is that there is no rational reason for anyone who isn't contemplating a massacre to have a 100-round magazine, and if he had had to change magazines it would have perhaps decreased the death, injury count, or given someone a chance to rush him or fire back when he changed magazines ... even if it just takes a couple seconds.
Click to expand...

There's no rational reason for someone to be contemplating massacreing a bunch of people!
 
Furiounova said:
Guns were designed to kill. Period. Claiming a different purpose reveals guilt in denial.
Click to expand...

such a statement demonstrates a pathetic understanding of guns. Guns are designed to shoot a bullet. Many are designed purely for target use. when you post something this pathetically inaccurate it is hard to take anything you say on the subject seriously
 
Moot said:
I think he was planning on having a big shoot out with the cops aka known as "suicide by cop" but chickened out. But that doesn't explain why rigged his apartment with explosives which was probably meant to be a diversion while he went on his rampage...the sick bastard.

Suicide by cop - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

He was wearing body armor. SBC does not apply.
 
haymarket said:
I think we begin to adopt a far more sensible and mature attitude about firearms. We look at them as tools - nothing more and nothing less. We put them in their proper perspectives and quit elevating them to the level of the Holy and the Perfect.

That would be step one.
Click to expand...

obvious straw man but what would be your other steps
 
apdst said:
A helicopter pilot? Yes. Tank? Probably not.
Click to expand...

It would be dam hard to hit a cobra pilot with a semi automatic. Unless that pilot was sitting in a chair.
 
hazlnut said:
He had an assault rifle. The one man, 3 guns. That's all it took.
Click to expand...

NO he did not-he had a rifle morons call an "assault weapon"

an "assault rifle" has a selector switch
 
TurtleDude said:
such a statement demonstrates a pathetic understanding of guns. Guns are designed to shoot a bullet. Many are designed purely for target use. when you post something this pathetically inaccurate it is hard to take anything you say on the subject seriously
Click to expand...

I'm not talking about different types of guns. I'm talking about guns. They were designed with one purpose: to kill. Would it help if I said they were invented to kill?
 
TurtleDude said:
that was one of the most stupid suggestions I have ever seen on this board. It was a less than subtle way of blaming a right for those killed by criminal activities. It is based on the idiotic ASSumption that if we have no second amendment rights those people would not have died.
Click to expand...

That wasn't such a stupid suggestion some time ago when the rich started hiring bodyguards after the OWS protestors came out.

Everybody's always talking about the 2nd amendment but like all other amendments there should be a limit to it's existence.:peace
 
presluc said:
How about making it a little more difficult for disturbed and bad people to get guns?:peace
Click to expand...


generally because that facade of a reason is used to justify making it harder for honest and good people to get firearms because the people you mentioned are already banned from possessing any guns
 
TurtleDude said:
such a statement demonstrates a pathetic understanding of guns. Guns are designed to shoot a bullet. Many are designed purely for target use. when you post something this pathetically inaccurate it is hard to take anything you say on the subject seriously
Click to expand...

I just realized you are the one who said a semi-auto rifle could take out a cobra pilot....or a tank. Forgive me for not caring about your assessment.
 
Furiounova said:
Public shootings are more common than what people think because they assume if it isn't on the news it isn't happening.
Click to expand...

urban blacks killing urban blacks rarely make it on national news. so you might have a point. One hispanic guy shoots a black youth and it has its own thread on DP.
 
TurtleDude said:
urban blacks killing urban blacks rarely make it on national news. so you might have a point. One hispanic guy shoots a black youth and it has its own thread on DP.
Click to expand...

OWN thread? How about something like 500 threads?
 
Furiounova said:
I'm not talking about different types of guns. I'm talking about guns. They were designed with one purpose: to kill. Would it help if I said they were invented to kill?
Click to expand...
And you are wrong, as has been pointed out by at least four posters. "Guns are designed to kill" is worse than a generalization, it's an outright fallacy, every single firearm is designed to fire a projectile and that's it, rifles, handguns, assault rifles, full-autos, handguns, shotguns, etc. are all designed to specifically influence the flight trajectory, entrance/exit points, and other ballistic capabilities of the projectile. Not only are the TYPES different but within the TYPES different models have different designs.
 
Last edited:
jet57 said:
Allowing cops to be cops is the first place to start.
Click to expand...

how about explaining that. cops are not usually around when people get victimized. If some lady is walking down the street and there is a cop standing on the corner-chances Joe Q Rapist isn''t going to rip her skirt off in front of the constabulary.
 
Moot said:
"...According to the report, the VPC found that the number of gun deaths surpassed the number of motor vehicle deaths in ten U.S. states in 2009, the most recent year for which state-level data is available.

“Motor vehicle deaths are on the decline as the result of a successful decades-long public health-based injury prevention strategy that includes safety-related changes to vehicles and highway design,” reads an entry from the VPC website. “Meanwhile, firearms are the only consumer product not regulated by the federal government for health and safety.”

In the VPC’s report, ten states are identified as having a higher rate of gun deaths than motor vehicle deaths. The table below illustrates the statistics involving these states:

State Gun Deaths in 2009 Traffic Deaths in 2009
Alaska 104 84
Arizona 856 809
Colorado 583 565
Indiana 735 715
Michigan 1,095 977
Nevada 406 255
Oregon 417 394
Utah 260 256
Virginia 836 827
Washington 623 580

http://dlglawfirm.com/auto-accidents/gun-deaths-outnumber-traffic-deaths/


Some of those ten states (if not all) have the most lax gun control laws in the country.
Click to expand...

OK, the point is that the other 40 states (4x as many) do not have this "trend" and cars are not designed to harm ANYONE, much less more than guns and cars are a privilege not a right. These statistics do not exclude those killed RIGHTLY (legally) with guns. In how many of the car deaths was ANYONE charged with a criminal offense? The attitude that an "accident" simply happens with MOST car deaths, yet that EVERY gun death is a "tragedy" or preventable "crime" is unbelievable. If the act causing the death was a crime, then that is not within the "control" of the law, as the penalty for "misusing a gun" is peanuts compared to the penalty for the homicide.
 
Last edited:
apdst said:
I believe, that since he was armored up, he actually thought he would get away with this and live to do it again.
Click to expand...

He was dressed up like Rambo and did a fair impersonation of a tough guy when shooting sitting ducks. But when facing policemen who were equally armed he suddently realized he just had grapenuts in his underwear. Yes, he ******d out for that final fight.

All that battlewear is useless if you are nothing but a coward.
 
Furiounova said:
I'm not talking about different types of guns. I'm talking about guns. They were designed with one purpose: to kill. Would it help if I said they were invented to kill?
Click to expand...

What is your problem? Some guns were not designed to kill. (The AR-15 carried by Holmes, for example.) What do you think you're accomplishing by continuing to deny it?
 
ecofarm said:
I don't get why he bought 6k rounds. Unless he spent time at the range, he was planning on going to other theatres? Someone can only carry, like, what 1000 rounds reasonably? So what's the other 5k for, and were they in the car.
Click to expand...

yeah looks like a supreme waste of money. Maybe the Aurora Police Department will have more firearms training with all that ammo they are gonna confiscate
 
dontworrybehappy said:
I'll tell you why, oh inventor of useless drive-bys.

Because if you limit it to 20 rounds per magazine, I'll just buy more magazines. Now, what problem have you solved? Nothing. It sounds good and feels good to say it, but it prevents nothing.
Click to expand...

Hasn't it been speculated that the Aurora movie shooter had to go back to his car to reload?
 
presluc said:
Umm let's see you got a 20 year old student, looking for work who buys 3 guns amor and 2 gas canisters?

Sounds like a reed flag should have went up somewhere.

So instead of gun control being a little tighter , from now on when you go to the movies you stand in line to go through the metal detector or get frisked by security guards thanks the NRA, and some nut with a gun but legally bought and paid for, just like the nut at Virginia tech and those guns.:peace
Click to expand...

why is it the NRA's fault? You see as long as the anti gun extremists blame the NRA its going to be hard for us who are members of the NRA to see your rants as anything more than extreme anti gun psychosis
 
Moot said:
"...According to the report, the VPC found that the number of gun deaths surpassed the number of motor vehicle deaths in ten U.S. states in 2009, the most recent year for which state-level data is available.

“Motor vehicle deaths are on the decline as the result of a successful decades-long public health-based injury prevention strategy that includes safety-related changes to vehicles and highway design,” reads an entry from the VPC website. “Meanwhile, firearms are the only consumer product not regulated by the federal government for health and safety.”

In the VPC’s report, ten states are identified as having a higher rate of gun deaths than motor vehicle deaths. The table below illustrates the statistics involving these states:

State Gun Deaths in 2009 Traffic Deaths in 2009
Alaska 104 84
Arizona 856 809
Colorado 583 565
Indiana 735 715
Michigan 1,095 977
Nevada 406 255
Oregon 417 394
Utah 260 256
Virginia 836 827
Washington 623 580

Gun Deaths Outnumber Traffic Deaths in Washington, Nine Other States


Some of those ten states (if not all) have the most lax gun control laws in the country.
Click to expand...

do you know how dishonest the VPC is? its leader was fired by the brady bunch for his dishonest extremism
 
LaMidRighter said:
And you are wrong, as has been pointed out by at least four posters. "Guns are designed to kill" is worse than a generalization, it's an outright fallacy, every single firearm is designed to fire a projectile and that's it, rifles, handguns, assault rifles, full-autos, handguns, shotguns, etc. are all designed to specifically influence the flight trajectory, entrance/exit points, and other ballistic capabilities of the projectile. Not only are the TYPES different but within the TYPES different models have different designs.
Click to expand...

For the last time. I am talking about why guns were invented. Do you really want to claim the evolution of the gun had people saying:

"Hey, let's use gunpowder to fire a projectile."

"Great idea!!"

This is why gunners get laughed at because they refuse to employ basic intellectual honesty.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom