Colorado shooting at batman premire

[Queequeg]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tripwire</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: zmann</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pdogsbeware</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: .308Shadow</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
HOW did this guy get in the theater? There should be metal detectors or armed security at any public place where large amounts of people flock to.</div></div>
You're kidding...right...? </div></div>

Allegedly he kicked in the exit door, towards the bottom of the theater...which means he would have entered from a different place? </div></div>

He must have been kicking on it for a good while.....

Any exit door in a theater is under fire code to open out from the inside with a panic bar. These are metal doors with metal frames and unless you drive an f250 through it, won't just "kick in".
</div></div>

And the exits are often alarmed in such facilities. The desire of theater owners to prevent back door entry to deny non-ticket buyers access from their friends is just one example.

It will become abundantly clear in short order that risk management folks will be flocking to every theater, auditorium, stadium or other venue with un-monitored exit doors to deny the possibility of these exits ever again being used for anything but emergency egress.

It is shocking in fact that such a gaping avenue of revenue loss as well as an obvious security breach was left unprovided for.

It is not merely Monday morning quarter backing. I have personally installed thousands of alarmed exit devices, Detex alarms and other audible devices on such doors. It is hardly a new concept.

 

[-Nick-]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_21147699

 

[zmann]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

Colorado University held a training drill/exercise on the same day this shooting took place. Gee where have I seen this before? lol

Well, here is one witness on how he got in through the emergency exit. Someone opened the door when they received a phone call.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=h4MW_qhAPAU#!

 

[Sean the Nailer]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: doc76251</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So in keeping with actually doing something I submit the following.

I am not a lawyer, legislator or even a para-legal which means what I say will actually make sense to the common man.

If you are a lawyer, legislator, para-legal or have experience drafting legislation cut and paste and improve upon this

The Aurora Automatic Act of 2012.

Where in

If a suspect is tried and convicted of a violent crime as defined by US Code XYZ which involved the use of a firearm (as defined by BATFE definition XYZ) the defendant will be remanded to the custody of the nearest Federal Penitentiary while awaiting the determination of the following by a Federal Circuit Court Judge:

Was the defendant in possession of a firearm?

Did the defendant use said firearm to affect the commission of the crime?

If the Federal Circuit Court Judge finds the defendant guilty of both questions the defendant will be immediately provided three options which must be answered within a 12 hour period following the determination of the Federal Circuit Court Judge.

1. Immediate execution via the currently accepted Federal standards at a Federal Penitentiary. Execution will be conducted within seven business days following the Supreme Court of the United States certification of the ruling of the Federal Circuit Court Judge.

2. Surrender of the defendant’s person to medical science as determined by XYZ for a period of not to exceed two years where in the final disposition of the defendant’s person will be execution at the two year mark following the determination for the Federal Circuit Court Judge.

3. Life in federal prison in solitary confinement with the minimum of habitability standards as defined by current law with no parole.

The defendant may choose any of the three punishments. The defendant may elect to accept immediate execution at any time.

If the defendant fails to choose a sentence the sentence of immediate execution will be carried out at a Federal Penitentiary within seven business days.

Where in
The Federal Circuit Court Judge need only review the final findings of the criminal trial and need not have the defendant present for ruling; determination will be made within 2 business days from the ruling by the criminal court.

If the Federal Circuit Court Judge is found to have ruled contrary to the evidence presented at the criminal trial the Supreme Court of the United States will remove the Federal Circuit Court Judges from the Bench and disbar that Federal Circuit Court Judge within seven business days from the Federal Circuit Court Judge’s ruling.

All cases will be reviewed by the Supreme Court on the next business day following the Federal Circuit Court Judge’s ruling and a certification of the Federal Circuit Court Judge’s finding shall be determined by a simple majority within 2 business days.

Signed: The Law Abiding Gun Owners of America

One page, no more no less, no BS, no addendum's, attachments or the naming of a post office shall be included.

Let's watch the rats squirm when you put teeth into the laws.

Cheers,

Doc
</div></div> My opinion, this post should be BRONZED!!!!!! And Doc, you've got my vote. When you runnin'?

Christian does good,,,,

 

[EricF517]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: redirt78</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EricF517</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

I have heard the oh it was dark in there, there was smoke. There is a reason I have a 120 lumen light on my P226 to go with the 20 round mag as well and another 2 15's. There always be the possibility that I did hit an innocent, but if he would have been taking fire in the beginning things would have probably been different. </div></div>

I always have my small 357 LCR at the movies and after reading this I have to ask if you really carry all that on you in the summer when you go to the theatre </div></div>

http://www.ravenconcealment.com/holsters/phantom-modular-holsters/phantom-light-compatible-holster

http://www.ravenconcealment.com/modular-...tol-mag-carrier

There is how I carry them. Usually wearing shorts, UA undershirt, and a loose T-shirt over that which is long enough to cover. I carry the raven up as high as I can get it. Only way it prints if I bend over to grab something.

 

[athhud]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

I've been getting a real kick out of this $20,000 arsenal. Maybe I've been spoiled by the Hide's classifieds, but I couldn't spend $20k on that junk if I had to. $10k would even require a lot of creativity and even then I probably couldn't spend that much.

 

[pinsandpitons]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: .308Shadow</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
HOW did this guy get in the theater? </div></div>

I had read that he propped open the door after leaving from inside, retrieved his sjit from the car, and went back in...

 

[dbateman]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

Yeah well there are a lot of opinions going on in here.

I see a lot of people are saying a CCW would not of stopped this not sure if it would of but if I were in that cinema I would dam well want my 38Super.

Not sure if it would stop him and not even 100% on if he were wearing armour.

I would of messed his day up anyways.

 

[.308Shadow]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

I got the Glock 19 out of the safe yesterday with LaserGenetics on it and sat down, with a wall in front of me about the distance of a movie theater.. On that wall is old baseball gear.

Did not seem that hard to hold the laser on the catchers mask..
I know there were other factors in the real situation, but it was not an impossible idea.

 

[Greg Langelius *]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

Verdugo60.

I agree with your most recent post in all aspects. It is precisely the sort of discourse I've been hoping to encourage.

I can recall when the mental health questions started appearing on handgun purchase permits (NJ), and how I wondered at the time whether it could lead to conjecture regarding possible future events being used as a means of curtailing firearms ownership.

You cannot try someone for an act they have not committed, but likely may commit.

Denying rights without due process, i.e. a competency hearing, a trial, etc., is not Constitutional. Nothing less meets my personal minimum threshhold for due process. But such rights have been already denied with far less justification under long standing current statute.

I could (and would dearly like to) agree with your reasoning if I could agree that such heinous acts can be prevented by legislation. But they cannot, and that's where I have to reluctantly base my disagreement.

The entire preventive aspect is a great way for politicians to claim they've done something effective when they have not. It guarantees that they will continue to have a perennially potent campaign issue without having to do anything that actually invalidates it. If you wonder why legislation never seems to do anything that has any real potential benefit, or serves mainly to exacerbate controversy; you need look little further.

I agree that actions taken after a conviction can be a deterrent, and I also agree that no deterrent is absolute.

I think we are looking forward to yet another demonstration of the ability of government to allow politics to overrule intelligence. Something very akin to the 18th Amendment and the Volstead Act loom in the near future. There is no assurance that we can count on a 21st Amendment to right the ship afterward. I can almost hear the score from <span style="font-style: italic">The Untouchables</span> playing in the background.

I would rather do my firearms business with a licensed dealer and have matters like product warrantees as part of the transactions, than have to consort with criminals beneath the legal radar.

Make no mistake, that business will continue regardless of legislation. Americans want and will have their firearms.

The history of Prohibition demonstrates this with little room for doubt.

It's one thing for a government to deny its people the means to intoxication.

It's quite another thing for it to deny its people the means to resist that selfsame government when it exceeds its Constitutional mandate; and you can make book that's precisely what it's fixing to do right now.

Greg

 

[ULazy2]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

Well said, and amen!

 

[treebasher]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Greg Langelius *</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Verdugo60.

I agree with your most recent post in all aspects. It is precisely the sort of discourse I've been hoping to encourage.

I can recall when the mental health questions started appearing on handgun purchase permits (NJ), and how I wondered at the time whether it could lead to conjecture regarding possible future events being used as a means of curtailing firearms ownership.

You cannot try someone for an act they have not committed, but likely may commit.

Denying rights without due process, i.e. a competency hearing, a trial, etc., is not Constitutional. Nothing less meets my personal minimum threshhold for due process. But such rights have been already denied with far less justification under long standing current statute.

I could (and would dearly like to) agree with your reasoning if I could agree that such heinous acts can be prevented by legislation. But they cannot, and that's where I have to reluctantly base my disagreement.

The entire preventive aspect is a great way for politicians to claim they've done something effective when they have not. It guarantees that they will continue to have a perennially potent campaign issue without having to do anything that actually invalidates it. If you wonder why legislation never seems to do anything that has any real potential benefit, or serves mainly to exacerbate controversy; you need look little further.

I agree that actions taken after a conviction can be a deterrent, and I also agree that no deterrent is absolute.

I think we are looking forward to yet another demonstration of the ability of government to allow politics to overrule intelligence. Something very akin to the 18th Amendment and the Volstead Act loom in the near future. There is no assurance that we can count on a 21st Amendment to right the ship afterward. I can almost hear the score from <span style="font-style: italic">The Untouchables</span> playing in the background.

I would rather do my firearms business with a licensed dealer and have matters like product warrantees as part of the transactions, than have to consort with criminals beneath the legal radar.

Make no mistake, that business will continue regardless of legislation. Americans want and will have their firearms.

The history of Prohibition demonstrates this with little room for doubt.

It's one thing for a government to deny its people the means to intoxication.

It's quite another thing for it to deny its people the means to resist that selfsame government when it exceeds its Constitutional mandate; and you can make book that's precisely what it's fixing to do right now.

Greg</div></div>

Again, Greg is spot on.

We can not as a society let ourselves be governed by "preventative" laws for the exact reasons that Greg stated above.

For instance, think of our men and women coming back from deployment. Should we deny them of the most basic right to defend themselves because they MAY be mentally unstable?

This is a road we can not go down and must be fought at every opportunity.

 

[verdugo60]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

Greg,

I can see where you are coming from as far as legislation not really stopping events like this. That has been proven when it comes to gun laws.

I am simply saying that instead of implementing more laws, I wish we would at least try to enforce the laws on the books that seem to make sense. Your point about due process is a good one, but I still struggle with someone like Cho, who was not a citizen in the US, and had serious mental health issues being able to purchase a firearm.

In the case of this particular shooter, as we have discussed he most likely would have found a way to destroy people's lives no matter what. Despite Bill O'Reilly's "brilliant" ideas on "heavy weapons" no LE agency would have been watching him, at least in a relatively free state like ours.(By the way, is anyone taking him to task for jumping from 6,000 rounds of ammo to 60,000?) What an idiot. As was aptly said before, with "friends" like him we don't need enemies.

In conclusion, this is a tragic event, but would just have been replaced with another means of destruction should any future gun laws be put in place. I pray that the families can heal, and that our nation will recognize the Goverments inept laws will not keep them safe, that only their own preparation and personal responsibility will do that. Greg I completely echo your sentiments from the last part of your post.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Greg Langelius *</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Verdugo60.

I agree with your most recent post in all aspects. It is precisely the sort of discourse I've been hoping to encourage.

I can recall when the mental health questions started appearing on handgun purchase permits (NJ), and how I wondered at the time whether it could lead to conjecture regarding possible future events being used as a means of curtailing firearms ownership.

You cannot try someone for an act they have not committed, but likely may commit.

Denying rights without due process, i.e. a competency hearing, a trial, etc., is not Constitutional. Nothing less meets my personal minimum threshhold for due process. But such rights have been already denied with far less justification under long standing current statute.

I could (and would dearly like to) agree with your reasoning if I could agree that such heinous acts can be prevented by legislation. But they cannot, and that's where I have to reluctantly base my disagreement.

The entire preventive aspect is a great way for politicians to claim they've done something effective when they have not. It guarantees that they will continue to have a perennially potent campaign issue without having to do anything that actually invalidates it. If you wonder why legislation never seems to do anything that has any real potential benefit, or serves mainly to exacerbate controversy; you need look little further.

I agree that actions taken after a conviction can be a deterrent, and I also agree that no deterrent is absolute.

I think we are looking forward to yet another demonstration of the ability of government to allow politics to overrule intelligence. Something very akin to the 18th Amendment and the Volstead Act loom in the near future. There is no assurance that we can count on a 21st Amendment to right the ship afterward. I can almost hear the score from <span style="font-style: italic">The Untouchables</span> playing in the background.

I would rather do my firearms business with a licensed dealer and have matters like product warrantees as part of the transactions, than have to consort with criminals beneath the legal radar.

Make no mistake, that business will continue regardless of legislation. Americans want and will have their firearms.

The history of Prohibition demonstrates this with little room for doubt.

It's one thing for a government to deny its people the means to intoxication.

It's quite another thing for it to deny its people the means to resist that selfsame government when it exceeds its Constitutional mandate; and you can make book that's precisely what it's fixing to do right now.

Greg </div></div>

 

[zmann]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

This is the Bear Pit, where anything goes right? Well...


ALLEGEDLY, James' father was to appear in front of congress investigating the LIBOR fraud. He is the lead programer that created the algorythims to calculate FICO and other risk assessments.



http://www.linkedin.com/pub/robert-holmes/4/47b/24a

 

[turbo54]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

I keep reading/hearing over and over how this asshat bought/used "legal" guns.

I've also been reading he was a chronic user of marijuana.

If that is true, the guns were NOT legal, and he lied on his (can't remember the name of the document) form.

I will be arguing this point to anyone that says he had "legal guns".

 

[strat81]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: zmann</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This is the Bear Pit, where anything goes right? Well...

ALLEGEDLY, James' father was to appear in front of congress investigating the LIBOR fraud. He is the lead programer that created the algorythims to calculate FICO and other risk assessments.

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/robert-holmes/4/47b/24a</div></div>

I need to adjust my tinfoil hat.

 

[500grains]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

I would like to nominate this for Stupid Post of the Week:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: .308Shadow</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

It's unlikely that someone with a CCW weapon would have been able to stop the event.. Maybe someone would have been able to hit him where he was not covered but it's unlikely..
</div></div>

 

[High Binder]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: turbo54</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I keep reading/hearing over and over how this asshat bought/used "legal" guns.

I've also been reading he was a chronic user of marijuana.

If that is true, the guns were NOT legal, and he lied on his (can't remember the name of the document) form.

I will be arguing this point to anyone that says he had "legal guns". </div></div>

In Colorado you can be both a MJ smoker and a gun owner. A simple trip to an doctor will get ou a medical MJ card and then it's legal to posses and even grow MJ in CO.

 

[High Binder]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 500grains</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: .308Shadow</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
It's unlikely that someone with a CCW weapon would have been able to stop the event.. Maybe someone would have been able to hit him where he was not covered but it's unlikely..
</div></div>

I would like to nominate this for Stupid Post of the Week:</div></div>

Seconded. It also looks like he wasn't wearing a bullet proof vest, just one of those Cheaper Than Dirt chest rig things.

 

[500grains]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

Still illegal under federal law. Federal law trumps state law when the two conflict..

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: High Binder</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: turbo54</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I keep reading/hearing over and over how this asshat bought/used "legal" guns.

I've also been reading he was a chronic user of marijuana.

If that is true, the guns were NOT legal, and he lied on his (can't remember the name of the document) form.

I will be arguing this point to anyone that says he had "legal guns". </div></div>

In Colorado you can be both a MJ smoker and a gun owner. A simple trip to an doctor will get ou a medical MJ card and then it's legal to posses and even grow MJ in CO. </div></div>

 

[txgw]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: High Binder</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 500grains</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: .308Shadow</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
It's unlikely that someone with a CCW weapon would have been able to stop the event.. Maybe someone would have been able to hit him where he was not covered but it's unlikely..
</div></div>

I would like to nominate this for Stupid Post of the Week:</div></div>

Seconded. It also looks like he wasn't wearing a bullet proof vest, just one of those Cheaper Than Dirt chest rig things. </div></div>

http://apps.auroragov.org/newsupdates/news/InformationTimeLines_7_20_1830.htm

Press release from the Chief of Police. " He was outfitted in complete ballistic gear included a ballistic helmet, vest, shin guards, groin and throat protector. He also had a gas mask."

 

[strat81]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: txgw</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

http://apps.auroragov.org/newsupdates/news/InformationTimeLines_7_20_1830.htm

Press release from the Chief of Police. " He was outfitted in complete ballistic gear included a ballistic helmet, vest, shin guards, groin and throat protector. He also had a gas mask." </div></div>

That file is a week old and simply says "ballistic". Maybe I'm just cynical, but I don't trust accurate, straightforward information to come the police.

"Ballistic nylon" is a pretty common (overused?) term and can be found on anything from chest rigs, rifle cases, to bullet-resistant armor.

They've mentioned the makes, models, and calibers of the firearms he used, but I haven't seen any mention of the details of the vest/rig/armor he was wearing. Was it simply a mag carrier or was it Level III, or maybe something with plates?

 

[Blackrifle1]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

I find it really interesting that all the news channels discussed the fact that the shooter left the emergency door exit, propped it open and returned later after suiting up and getting armed and came back into the theater to start his massacre..............WHY are they not talking about the fact that the theater should have known the emergency door exit was open and could be a potential problem. If they had security....they could have closed the door and the shooter may not have entered the building.

 

[turbo54]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: High Binder</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: turbo54</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I keep reading/hearing over and over how this asshat bought/used "legal" guns.

I've also been reading he was a chronic user of marijuana.

If that is true, the guns were NOT legal, and he lied on his (can't remember the name of the document) form.

I will be arguing this point to anyone that says he had "legal guns". </div></div>

In Colorado you can be both a MJ smoker and a gun owner. A simple trip to an doctor will get ou a medical MJ card and then it's legal to posses and even grow MJ in CO. </div></div>

I don't see how.

I understand the State allows for "medical" marijuana, but being the Federal government doesn't (without a tax stamp they won't issue), and when you buy guns from a dealer where you fill out Federal paperwork...and are required to check the "No" box when it asks if you are an "unlawful user of...", I contend that this prick illegally purchased, and therefore illegally owned these firearms.

I suppose one could make the argument they wouldn't have been illegally purchased if he had obtained them via a FTF sale though.

 

[zmann]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Blackrifle1</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I find it really interesting that all the news channels discussed the fact that the shooter left the emergency door exit, propped it open and returned later after suiting up and getting armed and came back into the theater to start his massacre..............WHY are they not talking about the fact that the theater should have known the emergency door exit was open and could be a potential problem. If they had security....they could have closed the door and the shooter may not have entered the building. </div></div>

I think you are referring to this witness?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jUIz4yvemM

 

[Blackrifle1]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: zmann</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Blackrifle1</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I find it really interesting that all the news channels discussed the fact that the shooter left the emergency door exit, propped it open and returned later after suiting up and getting armed and came back into the theater to start his massacre..............WHY are they not talking about the fact that the theater should have known the emergency door exit was open and could be a potential problem. If they had security....they could have closed the door and the shooter may not have entered the building. </div></div>

I think you are referring to this witness?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jUIz4yvemM </div></div>

No, I was not referring to this person or even aware of this possibility. However- the theater security / manager should know there was an emergency door open. (for whatever reason, people could even sneak in without paying)

 

[500grains]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

Many people were close to the shooter and someone could have taken a face shot, IF IF IF the Batman shooter had a vest.

And even IF IF IF the Batman shooter had a kevlar vest (which he did not), a chest shot or 2 with a 9mm or up would have knocked his ass down, giving the crowd a chance to swarm him. Or giving the shooter a chance for a nice face shot.

Mass murderers usually change their plans when shot in the face.


________________

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: txgw</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: High Binder</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 500grains</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: .308Shadow</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
It's unlikely that someone with a CCW weapon would have been able to stop the event.. Maybe someone would have been able to hit him where he was not covered but it's unlikely..
</div></div>

I would like to nominate this for Stupid Post of the Week:</div></div>

Seconded. It also looks like he wasn't wearing a bullet proof vest, just one of those Cheaper Than Dirt chest rig things. </div></div>

http://apps.auroragov.org/newsupdates/news/InformationTimeLines_7_20_1830.htm

Press release from the Chief of Police. " He was outfitted in complete ballistic gear included a ballistic helmet, vest, shin guards, groin and throat protector. He also had a gas mask." </div></div>

 

[Grimm]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: .308Shadow</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
HOW did this guy get in the theater? There should be metal detectors or armed security at any public place where large amounts of people flock to.</div></div>
I'm sorry lolwhut? I mean besides the obvious police state mentality you are espousing. Who exactly do you expect to pay for security checkpoints at every theatre in America?
Ridiculous statement is ridiculous.

 

[zmann]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Grimm</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: .308Shadow</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
HOW did this guy get in the theater? There should be metal detectors or armed security at any public place where large amounts of people flock to.</div></div>
I'm sorry lolwhut? I mean besides the obvious police state mentality you are espousing. Who exactly do you expect to pay for security checkpoints at every theatre in America?
Ridiculous statement is ridiculous. </div></div>

Probably the TSA. They are already setting up in bus terminals. Not just airports anymore.

 

[IronMaidenFan]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Strykervet</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Having a CCW in the theatre would have been better. Having three or four would have been even better still. One person returning fire would draw his fire... He would probably get smoked by a guy in armor with a rifle unless he was able to get one in the head with the first shot (think about what happened to that guy at the Tacoma Mall shooting). But two or three, and he can only focus on one at a time, and then you can probably take him out. But it seems, if anyone did have a permit, they either didn't use it or left it in the car or at home, which is basically the same thing.</div></div>

Colorado's CCW statute makes it illegal to CCW onto private property if it is that property's owner's policy to ban guns. I'm sure there were CCW holders in the theater but none of them were armed.

Here in Florida there is no such provision in the CCW statute. If you carry in a Cinemark theater down here you are not breaking the law even though they have a "gun free" policy. The worst that can happen to you if you are found with a weapon is that you will be asked to leave the premises. If you don't you can be then charged with trespass.