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

Furiounova said:

Okay and thanks....but personally I do not want to see him animated unless it helps us understand the why.

For right now my theory is he could not take the pressure of school and society's definition of "success" and lashed out at society indiscriminately in the same way he felt indiscriminately molded. For anyone who may misunderstand me, no I am not suggesting he was justified in any way shape translation form hint suggestion implication or foreshadowing.

Click to expand...

You make a good point. It'll be interesting to see what flows from his mouth.

Mya said:

Sure, that's you, but may be others are interested, I know I am, so...

Click to expand...

This thread is wild from gun control to "video control"....:2razz:

Meathead said:

Back to the original topic. I am relieved that this was probably not the action of a politically partisan offender. The OP and some other hacks were champing at the bit to score points by attempting to politicize the issue.

We are a deeply divided nation. There are fewer things then that would drive the wedge further.

Click to expand...

while it's sad that some people would use some broad ideological connection as a tool, for political pandering, it didn't make the coincidence between the attack, and the comments from limbo, any more compelling

jet57 said:

You make a good point. It'll be interesting to see what flows from his mouth.

Click to expand...

I have a few clients in an affluent town west of Boston that is fairly wealthy and when they had a rash of suicides among young people it was very hush hush and here is the relevant portion from the article:

"There was a feeling after this third suicide, Prabhala says, that school officials and even students wanted to “sweep it under the carpet” and move on.

With Shapiro’s death, everything changed. “You reach a point where you can’t ignore the problem anymore, and you have to say that it’s not a one-time thing. It’s a problem,” says Needham High School senior Maddie Gifford. “And so, after the fourth suicide, students wanted to see something happen. They needed a reaction from the community, the administration, someone to acknowledge and address the problem.”
Keith O'Brien :: 617.312.7194

It is my view we have not had that epiphany on the national level. There are far more public shootings than what are reported on the national level, and I'm referring specifically to social terrorism.

Connery said:

This thread is wild from gun control to "video control"....:2razz:

Click to expand...

Except I didn't advocate a five day waiting period or background check. I simply said it wasn't for me. For anyone else, have fun. Maybe it has some clues but I doubt it.

Connery said:

This thread is wild from gun control to "video control"....:2razz:

Click to expand...

I know...:shock: people tend to get so hot-headed with this topic.... can you only imagine if this wasn't a forum and we were all discussing this face to face ... each one holding a gun... well... we would have killed each other many threads ago !:shock:

AdamT said:

State Knife Carry and Blade Length Laws

Click to expand...

Anyone can still buy a knife without going through background checks,They do not need a license or permit to purchase a knife, nor do they do not need to register their knife.

Furiounova said:

I simply said it wasn't for me.

Click to expand...

No you said this...."I do not want to see him animated unless it helps us understand the why"....:yes:

Mya said:

I know...:shock: people tend to get so hot-headed with this topic.... can you only imagine if this wasn't a forum and we were all discussing this face to face ... each one holding a gun... well... we would have killed each other many threads ago !:shock:

Click to expand...

This is weird.....I misunderstood why you quoted a certain portion then simply said the video isn't for me and suddenly I'm the soup video nazi? cheers.

ThirdTerm said:

Holmes had a high-capacity ammunition magazine in the AR-15 assault rifle and he would not have had access to this type of ammunition magazine if the old federal assault weapon ban had not expired in 2004 and fully-automatic and military-style assault weapons that fire more than 10 rounds at a time such as the AR-15 assault rifle are against the law in California.

Click to expand...

BS. I had several high-capacity magazines during the "assault weapons ban". I bought several more, legally. You don't know that the "AWB" was little more than a feel-good showboat law that didn't actually "ban" much of anything.

Connery said:

No you said this...."I do not want to see him animated unless it helps us understand the why"....:yes:

Click to expand...

Do you understand that:

"I do not want..."

applies only to me? I didn't say "Nobody should watch it....."

I said help "us" understand on the assumption there would be a discussion around his stated or implied motive.

Furiounova said:

This is weird.....I misunderstood why you quoted a certain portion then simply said the video isn't for me and suddenly I'm the soup video nazi? cheers.

Click to expand...

omg... relax Furiounova ... no need to get so nervy.

ThirdTerm said:

Holmes had a high-capacity ammunition magazine in the AR-15 assault rifle and he would not have had access to this type of ammunition magazine if the old federal assault weapon ban had not expired in 2004 and fully-automatic and military-style assault weapons that fire more than 10 rounds at a time such as the AR-15 assault rifle are against the law in California.

Click to expand...

So let's say for some reason that was the case he could only find ten round clips. He could have attached two rifles together giving him in essence a twenty round clip with double the firepower. You then would have said we need laws restricting how many guns could be bought.

This is a tragic mass murder but too many people are paralyzed by emotion and fail to realize the only law that could have prevented his attack is a law saying everyone lives inside their own rock surviving on an IV and imagination. A real life stone cold IPod.

I understand people want to prevent this from happening again but proposing new gun laws is only delaying effective discovery of causation giving us a guide on prevention.

Furiounova said:

Do you understand that:

"I do not want..."

applies only to me? I didn't say "Nobody should watch it....."

I said help "us" understand on the assumption there would be a discussion around his stated or implied motive.

Click to expand...

You are judged by the plain meaning of your words on when you post....


...not your secret intent.

Connery said:

You are judged by the plain meaning of your words on when you post....

...not your secret intent.

Click to expand...

So when I said "I do not want to watch...." I should have used clear meaning words? Are you saying I should have been more clear and said:

"I do not want to watch....."

This thread is moving fast, see something worth commenting on around page 100 and go take of some business you come back and there has been 40 some more done!

I'll put my weapon expertise up against anyone in here. I'll discuss the history of modern infantry weapons with anyone.

The M16a1 was designed to KILL the enemy. Not wound, not cause 4 other guys to stop and take care of the wounded. Grunts are taught nothing stops the assault, mission first. Can I get a Who-ahh from the real salty dawgs who have earned a been there done that T-Shirt? You do your buddy better by ending the defending fire than attempting to drag his shot-up ass across the field of fire and four gathered together is a pig gunner's dream. Roger that?!

No grunt wants a weapon that wounds, the mission of the military is to KILL people and BREAK things. Leave one ounce of life in your enemy, especially one filled with hate and determination and you are signing your own death warrant. Where the M16a1 got it's wounder rep from the rear echelon types. Guys who never went toe to toe with the enemy. The M16a1 leaves some nasty looking piles of meat behind, but it killed 'em fast and furious.

I damn sure would not have carried a 'wounder'. The M16a1 is a killer. problems with it's bastard child the M4 is a whole 'nother story, but do this old grunt a favor DO NOT call that weapon an M16.

Now my modest arsenal isn't a collector's wet dream. I wouldn't own a Kimber, not even if you gifted me own, I'd sell it and get a reliable weapon. I don't have a 'target' firearm, all my target practice is to do one thing, put a bullet into a living thing to turn it into a dead thing. Every weapon I own is blooded- every one of them has killed.

Some want to pretend otherwise, but firearms are for killing things, that some have daintified the firearm to trick pony status is sad but then again we are no longer a nation of hunters and frontier tamers but urban range rambos and space gun competition shootists.

AR's are pretty bad at 'home defense' and round selection doesn't stop a 5.56 from going through drywall. it doesn't work well clearing the house and a father may wish to do just that if his child's bedroom is down the hall. Not much point to owning a rather pricey weapon if you are only concerned about saving your own skin in your own bedroom.

Anywho, if those who support the Right to Bear accuse the other side of dishonesty I'd say first clean your own damn house. Firearms have come a long way since 1776, I'd opine people have not. Our situation has, we no longer have frontiers to settle or Indians to ward off. Far more of us live packed in like sardines while as many as can move away from the city to live shoulder to shoulder out in the 'burbs.

Some do need to carry to provide some level of protection, some think they do, some think they are the sheepdogs in society. Some have no real training past some safety training, some some highly stylized competitive training.

A few, a very select few have any real combat, kill or be killed training, fewer still any practical experience with that training.

Versus a huge number of folks with no experience with firearms, sees the ugly functionality as down right demonic. (Yeah the 100 round drum is a jamming bitch but it looks vicious and has the ill informed dreading 100 rounds before reloading.) Fear of what we don't know is strong. Most Americans don't 'know' weapons, be they 'experts' who claim the M16a1 was designed to wound or a suburbia mom who only sees a black devil in a tricked out M4orgery.

presluc said:

How many guns were used in the movie in Denver to deter the shooter.

How about this for a solution either make gun control stricter or easier.
Before you look at that easier mark my try looking at some of the threatning blogs of the unemployed.eace

Click to expand...

the idiocy of your posts deepens

IT WAS A GUN FREE ZONE_law abiding citizens could not carry weapons in that theater

presluc said:

Common sense is a good phrase too bad it isn't used as often in America today.

When every year or so some nut comes out with guns or a gun and kills innocent people .
One does not have to have a high IQ. to figure out there's something about selling guns to weirdos that isn't right.
So is the background checks working?
If they were this conversation wouldn't be necessary.

So is it time for the NRA to stop collecting money, stop making speeches and get off their lazy ass and do something?
Yes I would say it is.eace

Click to expand...

so what do you propose

Spock doing the vulcan "mind meld" on people who have clean records and can pass any background check to see-if in the future-they might go nuts

Mustachio said:

And what would be a legitimate purpose for owning a weapon "like that"

I checked the Smith and Wesson website and it said the weapon was for "tactical purposes"

And you're completely ignoring the issue. You and your family have a history of safely owning guns and safely using guns (I'm assuming you've owned and used them safely). Here's a guy who suddenly starts stockpiling ammunition and is calling around making suspicious calls to owners of shooting ranges. Or at least one of them. We have a system that allows any old crazy person to methodically plan and execute a deadly assault without any oversight whatsoever. He ordered them off of the internet! A felon could easily obtain anything Holmes had by simply having a friend fill out the order form. That's a horrible system. And you protect the sales of semi-automatic assault weapons for what purpose? "Tactical" purposes?

Click to expand...

If you don't know its not worth my time explaining it to you.

btw I do own an M4 with a night vision sight for "tactical reasons"

i also own a dozen more that are set up for

1) national match service rifle competition

2) IPSC/USPSA three gun competitions

3) varmint hunting

4) and I have one that is essentially the same rifle cadets,plebes and recruits are taught to shoot with. You see, every couple of years or so, one of my friends' son or daughter gets an appointment to West Point or annapolis or the USAF or goes into ROTC and I teach the kid how to shoot. the last boy I taught had never shot a firearm, he qualified Expert in both rifle and pistol at Annapolis. So I have a rifle that is set up just like what the Marine DIs use to teach those midshipmen. the only difference is its not full auto-for that I have a good friend who has a 9MM colt SMG that is pretty similar and we can shoot it at the indoor range


yeah a felon could obtain weapons by BREAKING THE LAW. a straw man purchase can get you 10 years in the federal penitentiary. In a case I am familiar with since two of my close friends were the prosecutors, a felon got a YEAR IN FEDERAL PRISON FOR EVERY SECOND HE POSSESSED A HANDGUN. some mope was being chased by the Po Po and he tossed a revolver a second mope saw him do it and another cop coming from another direction and he figured he's save his "bro" from getting tagged with a weapons charge so he picked up the gun and tried to throw it over a fence. His bad luck was the fence was a bit higher than his throw and another cop was watching the whole thing. So the cop collars the second mope, recovers the pistol that bounced right back at the mope.

the mope-according to the Po Po possessed the pistol for 15 seconds and the Federal Judge gave him 15 years as a felon in possession


Do you know (of course you don't) that gun haters have called the following "semi auto assault weapons"

1) the most popular olympic target pistol
2) the shotgun Dean Clark won the ISU World skeet title with
3) the shotgun Wayne Mays, Robert Paxton, RIcky Pope, Tito Killian and numerous others won NSSA world championships with
4) the most popular 22 rifle in the USA
5) The shotgun I have used to win 27 sporting clays tournaments with
6) the 5-6 pistols that arm 99% of the police departments in the USA
7) the National Match MIAI and the National Match AR 15


I don't really have much use for ignorant people whining about what kind of guns I own or what I should be able to buy when they have no clue about the subject

Mustachio said:

And what would be a legitimate purpose for owning a weapon "like that"

I checked the Smith and Wesson website and it said the weapon was for "tactical purposes"

And you're completely ignoring the issue. You and your family have a history of safely owning guns and safely using guns (I'm assuming you've owned and used them safely). Here's a guy who suddenly starts stockpiling ammunition and is calling around making suspicious calls to owners of shooting ranges. Or at least one of them. We have a system that allows any old crazy person to methodically plan and execute a deadly assault without any oversight whatsoever. He ordered them off of the internet! A felon could easily obtain anything Holmes had by simply having a friend fill out the order form. That's a horrible system. And you protect the sales of semi-automatic assault weapons for what purpose? "Tactical" purposes?

Click to expand...

If a quartet of armed thugs breaks into my house at night (it happens with depressing frequency, somewhere) and I have to defend my family, that is a "tactical" situation. I live out in the country and have little worries about overpenetration... I know my fields of fire. A sporting gun like a 12 gauge over-and-under double barrel that only gives me two shots, or a deer rifle that only holds three rounds, would not be a very good choice for such a situation.

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...

So I guess the answer to my question about your theory being applied to Japan is NO - it does not apply there. Now lets look at your excu... er ... 'reasons why it does not apply there.

Japan has minorities. Japan has gangs. Japan even has organized crime.

And what is your point about minorities anyway? Canada may be one of the most diverse nations in the world and they have 1/3 of the murder we have here.

Is there some magical property about the fact that it is an island and its borders are water on all sides rather than land and water like ours is? I have never heard that before. Please do elaborate on that interesting theory if you could.

notquiteright said:

I
Now my modest arsenal isn't a collector's wet dream. I wouldn't own a Kimber, not even if you gifted me own, I'd sell it and get a reliable weapon. I don't have a 'target' firearm, all my target practice is to do one thing, put a bullet into a living thing to turn it into a dead thing. Every weapon I own is blooded- every one of them has killed.


.

Click to expand...

Let me see if I understand this

1) if you killed people while in the military, I kind of suspect you weren't allowed to keep those military issued weapons unless you served so long ago that weapon in question was a Garand. Honorably discharged vets were not allowed to keep the M16 weapon you are so fond of and even the 1968 ATF amnesty registrations did not allow that

2) or you killed people as a civilian-interesting


as someone who knows the weapons laws inside and out I'd like an explanation of this.

My nephew just returned from his third combat tour in the current hot spot-two in Iraq in the Rangers, last one in Afghanistan and "Parts near" in the SF, he cannot keep the M4 he whacked more than a few Taliban with over there.

TurtleDude said:

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

Click to expand...

There is no true war on drugs. It is a PR title that poorly describes what is at best a half-assed effort and at worst is a fully assed effort.

The last true war we had was World War II. We had a total mobilization of the American society and winning the war was a daily effort involving the American people. Try to imagine Nazi operatives handing out literature on a New York City corner in 1943 and tell me how long they would last. Now compare that wartime environment with the "war on drugs" today.

There is no war on drugs.

haymarket said:

So I guess the answer to my question about your theory being applied to Japan is NO - it does not apply there. Now lets look at your excu... er ... 'reasons why it does not apply there.

Japan has minorities. Japan has gangs. Japan even has organized crime.

And what is your point about minorities anyway? Canada may be one of the most diverse nations in the world and they have 1/3 of the murder we have here.

Is there some magical property about the fact that it is an island and its borders are water on all sides rather than land and water like ours is? I have never heard that before. Please do elaborate on that interesting theory if you could.

Click to expand...

Japan is such an utterly different culture that you are comparing apples to orange juice. Or more like orange flavored Tang.

Organized crime in Japan is very very different from in America. They operate by a pretty specific set of rules. One of these little known rules is that "junior men" take the fall if the police demand someone to prosecute for some crime that drew too much public attention. The Yakuza is practically a part of the establishment by tradition, albeit one of low status.

Their street gangs are pretty wimpy by American standards too.

The police have far more lattitude of action that American police do, and their conviction rate is over 90%. Basically they don't arrest you until they're pretty sure you're guilty (or at least that you're a suitable fall guy for the crime) then you are EXPECTED to confess.... and they have few compunctions about putting severe pressure on you to do so, things some of our more sensitive members might deem "torture".

Japanese are group-oriented and have far more respect for established order, hierarchies, and rules both written and unwritten than Americans. They take their social responsibilities and civic duty far more seriously than we do. They do indeed see and report crime like crazy, and the police are fanatical about keeping order and prosecuting SOMEONE for almost any serious crime that becomes public knowlege.

An island nation, like Japan, has a lot easier time preventing smuggling than a nation with land borders too.

It is just such an entirely different culture, society, government and legal system that you might as well be comparing us with Martians.

TurtleDude said:

Let me see if I understand this

1) if you killed people while in the military, I kind of suspect you weren't allowed to keep those military issued weapons unless you served so long ago that weapon in question was a Garand. Honorably discharged vets were not allowed to keep the M16 weapon you are so fond of and even the 1968 ATF amnesty registrations did not allow that

2) or you killed people as a civilian-interesting


as someone who knows the weapons laws inside and out I'd like an explanation of this.

My nephew just returned from his third combat tour in the current hot spot-two in Iraq in the Rangers, last one in Afghanistan and "Parts near" in the SF, he cannot keep the M4 he whacked more than a few Taliban with over there.

Click to expand...

He probably meant he'd killed animals with them, for the most part if not entirely.

OTOH I know a sniper who has some intresting "trophy weapons" taken off men he'd shot and killed... how he got them back to the States I wouldn't know and didn't ask.