Colorado shooting at batman premire

[KevinTM]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Eric.D.Actor</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I'm a proud gun owner. But the fact of the matter is in most all of these tragedies guns are involved. Usually semi-automatic rifles or hand guns. Often times with high capacity mags. [....] I have a hard time understanding why someone would need or have the ability to purchase in the civilian market body armor, beta mags, etc.
</div></div>

I have a Socratic answer: for those citizens living on family land whose neighborhood is settled by gangs, given the local sheriff/DA won’t/can’t deal with them, would you counsel selling and moving to a suburb, or would you counsel being under arms (i.e.: body armor on a bedroom stand, an AR-15 in the truck, and a pistol in the belt)?

When it comes to American citizenship, there is always a debate over what it means to be a Citizen. For one group, it is the bourgeois dream (i.e., it's all about the pursuit of prosperity, and violence can certainly put a dent in the enjoyment of prosperity). For another group, it's a bundle of rights and responsibilities that includes the concept of being, in some capacity, under arms. This translates not to any one act (such as military service) so much as embracing a culture of being under arms. Such a culture implies violence, in the same way that a culture of freedom of movement implies traffic deaths.

What do you live for? What will you die for? Your life is your will and testament, how does it read?

 

[verdugo60]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

Well said Kevin! If only there are enough like us left...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: KevinTM</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Eric.D.Actor</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I'm a proud gun owner. But the fact of the matter is in most all of these tragedies guns are involved. Usually semi-automatic rifles or hand guns. Often times with high capacity mags. [....] I have a hard time understanding why someone would need or have the ability to purchase in the civilian market body armor, beta mags, etc.
</div></div>

I have a Socratic answer: for those citizens living on family land whose neighborhood is settled by gangs, given the local sheriff/DA won’t/can’t deal with them, would you counsel selling and moving to a suburb, or would you counsel being under arms (i.e.: body armor on a bedroom stand, an AR-15 in the truck, and a pistol in the belt)?

When it comes to American citizenship, there is always a debate over what it means to be a Citizen. For one group, it is the bourgeois dream (i.e., it's all about the pursuit of prosperity, and violence can certainly put a dent in the enjoyment of prosperity). For another group, it's a bundle of rights and responsibilities that includes the concept of being, in some capacity, under arms. This translates not to any one act (such as military service) so much as embracing a culture of being under arms. Such a culture implies violence, in the same way that a culture of freedom of movement implies traffic deaths.

What do you live for? What will you die for? Your life is your will and testament, how does it read?
</div></div>

 

[Jhnmdahl]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

I have to wonder, if firearms were not available for sale to the general public (as the extreme left seems to advocate), how would this incident have been different? We know he has an apartment full of chemicals and explosives - I have a hard time concluding another Murrah Federal Building-type event would be preferable. China limits gun ownership, but has had a spate of school knifings that are no less gruesome.

In short, limiting or restricting gun ownership seems most likely to simply drive people to other destructive methods, with both more destructive and similarly or less destructive options readily available.

 

[Greg Langelius *]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

I don't choose the direction of this or any other topic I join in progress. That is a joint process, all who contribute have the same potential to lead the discussion.

The presence or absence of armed civilians at this specific occurrance is actually a moot point.

The motion picture event was the subject of a uniformed and armed police presence, already there in the guise of crowd control.

It was these police who originally admitted the assailant. He then exited the theater through an emergency door, donned his paraphernalia and collected his weapons, reentering through the same door and commencing his assault.

Maybe an armed civilian could have made a difference. Whether that difference could have been beneficial or whether it could have interfered with police actions is an argument that serves only to engage in fantasy. No such civilian intervention occurred. That is the reality.

Please cease hijacking this topic. This can only serve to raise conjecture and entertain fantasy. While I can admire your keen grasp of that fantasy; I tell you simply that you are beating a dead horse here.

Give it up. If you can't; then start your own topic on your preferred subject and continue it there,

Please.

Greg

 

[vwhugger]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Eric.D.Actor</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Nimrod12</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Colorado senator calls for complete nationwide gun ban....If someone killed another guy with a hammer, would they call for a ban on hammers? Or knife ban? </div></div>

I'm a proud gun owner. But the fact of the matter is in most all of these tragedies guns are involved. Usually semi-automatic rifles or hand guns. Often times with high capacity mags. I can't recall the last time someone went on a mass rampage with a hammer, knife, or baseball bat.

You stated if someone kills "another guy with a hammer". Correct me if I’m wrong but didn’t 12 people die as well as 58 wounded. Not sure if you could go into a crowded theatre with a hammer and create that type of catastrophe. I find your analogy and argument completely off base.

I love my .260 and my .308. But, I have a hard time understanding why someone would need or have the ability to purchase in the civilian market body armor, beta mags, etc.
</div></div>

Thank God he didn't dream up using gasoline and a few door wedges to use to block the exits.

 

[turbo54]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

To continue along those lines:

Obviously, the "no guns allowed" rule of that theatre didn't prevent a gun from being brought into the theatre, and being used in the commission of a crime there.

Rules don't generally stop people from doing things they want, and are motivated to do.

As an aside, I wonder why cars aren't used as weapons more often. You could destroy a lot of people in a hurry with a 4000lb missile going 75mph.

There's no shortage of non-firearm weapons out there.

 

[JWV]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

Just found out a girl I went to high school with was actually watching the movie when the shots started going off. She wasn't hurt luckily but said several bullets hit around 10 feet from where she was sitting.

 

[Jhnmdahl]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

Anything done in response to this, including potential changes in law restricting gun ownership or increasing concealed carry rights, will almost certainly be based on someone's "it might have turned out different, if only..." logic. I don't see how having such discussions in this thread is at all inappropriate, but rather is the most likely direction it could have taken.

 

[verdugo60]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Greg Langelius *</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I don't choose the direction of this or any other topic I join in progress. That is a joint process, all who contribute have the same potential to lead the discussion.

The presence or absence of armed civilians at this specific occurrance is actually a moot point.

The motion picture event was the subject of a uniformed and armed police presence, already there in the guise of crowd control.

It was these police who originally admitted the assailant. He then exited the theater through an emergency door, donned his paraphernalia and collected his weapons, reentering through the same door and commencing his assault.

Maybe an armed civilian could have made a difference. Whether that difference could have been beneficial or whether it could have interfered with police actions is an argument that serves only to engage in fantasy. No such civilian intervention occurred. That is the reality.

Please cease hijacking this topic. This can only serve to raise conjecture and entertain fantasy, While I can admire your keen grasp of that fantasy; I tell you simply that you are beating a dead horse here.

Give it up. If you can't; then start your own topic on your preferred subject and continue it there,

Please.

Greg </div></div>

It is not a moot point.It is not fantasy to conjecture on achieving a more positive outcome than 71 people shot. Get off your high horse. There is nothing to give up, it's a valid part of the discussion. The police presence and response was great, but someone armed and inside the kill zone from the start could possibly have altered the outcome for the good. As for gun legislation, this is one of the most valid arguments we could make: Guns weren't allowed in the theater per the policy of the business. Maybe they should have been. That is my point pertaining to the arguments around gun control that are sure to arise. Do you disagree with that point? I honestly cannot understand why you consider it a derailment when it is obviously valid. Non-gun owners are actually bringing it up, so I am just baffled by your attitude.

 

[Minx]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

Semi Related. A victim of the shooting was there with his girlfriend and two small children. He set down his son, ran out, drove off and left them for dead. Coward doesnt' cover it.

http://news.yahoo.com/couple-colo-theate...topstories.html

 

[Polytrauma]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

"The presence or absence of armed civilians at this specific occurrance is actually a moot point."Greg Langelius

I couldn't disagree more strongly!

"The motion picture event was the subject of a uniformed and armed police presence, already there in the guise of crowd control." Greg Langelius

Incorrect, Police Chief stated during the press conference, police are on movie theater detail during weekends, ie. Friday, Saturday, and Sunday. As this happened on a Thursday night Friday morning they were not present during the onset of the rampage.

The police chief also stated that there was an on going operation in the vicinity with extra LEO on duty (I believe 25 was the stated number) and that is why the rapid response time of 90 seconds was able to occur. Again, this is from the chief of police.

 

[Bushmaster7]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

Anyone who opens up on unarmed innocents like this is a coward, further evidenced by his rigging his apartment to take out even more innocent people and then surrendering rather than having the courage to take his own life. The misuse of guns are a symptom of the problem, and those in positions of authority in this country are only too willing to attack the symptom rather than the cause which is a culture of extreme violence whose authors financially support them in office. Until that all pervasive culture of violence glamorized in countless movies, TV shows and video games is addressed, this will continue. I worked in Ireland for nearly a year where both guns and even most knives are banned, so instead they kill each other with hatchets and screw drivers, albeit not in a mass way as evidenced in this case.

 

[Powder_Burns]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

Somehow I don't think video games, tv shows, and movies were the problem with this sick individual,

 

[turbo54]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Minx</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Semi Related. A victim of the shooting was there with his girlfriend and two small children. He set down his son, ran out, drove off and left them for dead. Coward doesnt' cover it.

http://news.yahoo.com/couple-colo-theate...topstories.html </div></div>

I'm not surprised that deadbeats who would bring an infant and 4 year old child to a midnight Batman movie would also ditch their children and GTFO when a madman started to shoot up the place.

 

[rero360]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: verdugo60</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
It is not a moot point.It is not fantasy to conjecture on achieving a more positive outcome than 71 people shot. Get off your high horse. There is nothing to give up, it's a valid part of the discussion. The police presence and response was great, but someone armed and inside the kill zone from the start could possibly have altered the outcome for the good. As for gun legislation, this is one of the most valid arguments we could make: Guns weren't allowed in the theater per the policy of the business. Maybe they should have been. That is my point pertaining to the arguments around gun control that are sure to arise. Do you disagree with that point? I honestly cannot understand why you consider it a derailment when it is obviously valid. Non-gun owners are actually bringing it up, so I am just baffled by your attitude. </div></div>

I think what Greg is trying to convey is that it is indeed moot, nothing can be done to change the outcome, those people are dead and injured regardless of any changes to policy or laws that happen.

Now, when the time comes to start the discussion regarding what changes should be made so that something like this does not happen again, or at the very least, not to the extent, then your comments are valid. However, I do agree with Greg in that no amount of preventative laws will completely prevent something like this from happening, and yes we need to make changes to lessen the damage other sick individuals can cause, but this is not the time for that.

Information is still being collected, the event is still raw and fresh in everyone's minds. I think as a society we would be best suited to wait until everything is known before making any policy or law change considerations.

Now is the time to collect data, mourn the dead and comfort the wounded and grieving.

 

[Bushmaster7]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Powder Burns</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Somehow I don't think video games, tv shows, and movies were the problem with this sick individual, </div></div>

Sick yes; but interesting conclusion since this demented murderer committed his crimes not only in a movie theater but also self identified as a demented movie villain, the Joker? Also what role did mind altering drugs have on him? Don't know, still a lot of investigating to do as to the causes of an incident like this beyond him being just a sick individual or looking only at the symptoms. That was my whole point. regards.

 

[zmann]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

Look at the eerie similarities between the two crazy shooters in their mugshots. Disregard the "mind-controlled" wording, I'm not throwing MKULTRA or anything like that into this thread.

http://musicians4freedom.com/2012/07/mass-shooting-at-batman-screening-in-aurora-colorado/


FBI Warned of this back in May...

 

[allwheeldriven]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Bushmaster7</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Powder Burns</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Somehow I don't think video games, tv shows, and movies were the problem with this sick individual, </div></div>

Sick yes; but interesting conclusion since this demented murderer committed his crimes not only in a movie theater but also self identified as a demented movie villain, the Joker? Also what role did mind altering drugs have on him? Don't know, still a lot of investigating to do as to the causes of an incident like this beyond him being just a sick individual or looking only at the symptoms. That was my whole point. regards.</div></div>
I'd say it's kind of the only conclusion when you consider how many millions, if not billions, of people have seen the Batman movies and not done anything like this. A 1 in a billion chance some dickhead does something crazy after watching something doesn't shift the blame to whatever was watched.
IMHO anyway.
This guy would have done some stupid shit regardless of what he watched. Plenty of people do dumb shit because of religion just like plenty of people do good.
Just depends on the person.

 

[Mead]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Greg Langelius *</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think this event may help illuminate the futility of approaching this problem from a preventive aspect. No preventive laws were broken. No preventive laws could have been enacted without direct and universal contravention of the Second Amendment.

IMHO the only effective deterrent to firearms abuse in committing violence is a clear and credible expectation of severe punishment. That deterrent is by no means clear and credible these days. I also seriously doubt that even this would be an effective deterrent to a deranged zealot.

The culpable issue is one of abuse, and not of possession.

Very simply, such horrors are part of the price one pays to live in a free society. Many believe it is an unnecessary and unreasonable price. They are probably the same people who do not believe in individual responsibility for one's own actions. I am not among them.

Those who hold fears above freedoms are the ones who will be the most vociferous and unswerving in their attacks on private firearms possession. Until one understands this and girds to address such unseeing, unhearing zealots, one will make no headway. You cannot convince those who will not listen. You cannot demonstrate reality to those whose eyes are wide shut.

There are too many problems inherent within the system to be confident that a reliable remedy could be contrived in a useful timeframe. Legislatures are not the places where these solutions will originate. It is the Courtrooms that will enact a solution, if their inhabitants possess the stones to make a meaningful difference.

Meanwhile legislators gull the electorate with tens of thousands of ordinances intended to preclude gun violence. If that approach was going to have credible traction, it would have had unquestionable, substantive success by now.

In essence, ours is an approach akin to combatting vehicular speed violations by lowering the speed limit. Sounds plausible to some of our more shallow thinkers, but does nothing productive in reality.

I have no proven answers, but I have some clear ideas about what has already proven to be inconclusive and ineffective.

Greg </div></div>

At times my youth and exuberance does not agree with your approach, but this is spot on. Bravo.

 

[Shooter McGavin]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

I believe as this goes on we will see that there was warning signs that he had lost some of his marbles. One thing that made me think this is I heard is mother said she believe the police had them right guy, her son.

 

[doc76251]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

I’m not going to enter into the debate of what might have been gun control, CCW, yada yad yada

I’m looking as is my habit a bit more clinically than some.

I was in the front yard pulling weeds this morning (mindless other than chasing down roots) and rolling this around my head.

The thought that kept coming back to me was this didn’t fit with most “normal” mass murders kept creeping into my head. I’ve not followed this in detail but you can’t get away from it either if you turn on a TV.

So here is my thunk…

This was well planned and thought out. I know Duhh! But what does it tell us?

This guy wanted to live.

He pre-staged his entry.
He selected weapons and the order in which to use them to affect his own safety.
He popped CS or smoke and dropped it into his own vicinity to push people away. Had he wanted max casualties he would have tossed 2 or 3 long and forced people toward him.
Shotgun first (room broom if you will, to clear the area around him) and dropped it when empty;
Followed by a rifle (penetration and distance to keep folks away) no word on if he changed magazines.
With a pistol on the back end ( I guess for Oh shit’s) not known if he fired it.

He was wearing body armor and a gas mask. Body armor because he figured someone might have a hand gun and know how to use it (CCW) and gas mask because he knew he was dropping his smoke/CS close.

He did not follow the crowd to inflict more death/wounding in the larger theater. Witnesses say he made one lap around the theater room and left, shooting the whole way. Presence of mind, ammo conservation, deliberate use of ### amount of ammo?

He walked back to his car and was apprehended w/o incident. No gun fight with LEO in the parking lot no running, just gave up?

He pre-planned a mass murder, wore protective equipment to ensure he survived and then with all that he didn’t engage the LEO to ensure his getaway or commit suicide by Cop. Why?

Out of ammo? Dunno, doubt it based on prior planning.

Respect for the law? The above would preclude that but there may be something there.

He wanted to be caught alive? This part is interesting.

What do we know about him? Not much.

Young PhD student that was in the process of or had dropped out of a Neuro Biology doctorate program. Pretty smart guy, wide open road but something made him quit. What would cause a man with obvious skills and abilities to drop out of a program where you can’t be wrong because most everything has not been studied?

Did he drop a gear because he played too much X-Box COD, read too many vampire/zombie books or watched too many shoot em’ up flicks? Maybe, I doubt it.

Estranged girlfriend/lover/professor/student/rival was in the movie theater? No sign of that (yet).

Gang affiliation/initiation? Doubt it.

Did “God/Devil/other” call him? Maybe, Son of Sam / Jim Jones comes to mind.

Was he just a real whack job that read too many Batman comics and didn’t like the way the story ended or how the Joker was treated? Maybe.

Now here is where I make a jump of conjecture.

What if he was conducting an experiment?

Think about it.

Did he believe that a person would induce a physical / biological / chemical change after conducting something that would be considered by most all to be horrific?

Did he think a diagnosis could be made with those changes that could be clinically determined or tested for?

Did he think he was smarter than his professors and the rules which prevented him from proving what he knew/thought?

Add a little college liberalism “Sometimes the few must be sacrificed for the greater good.” or however that quote goes.

Experiment:
A closed / controlled environment. (Movie theater)
Planned event to achieve an outcome. (Good choice in tools, variables and safety covered to ensure his safety)
Limited variable and amount of application. (Dumped the shot gun, shot the rifle/pistol and didn’t reserve any for a getaway/shoot out, no need he had to survive.)

He did not engage LEO when confronted after the fact although he certainly had more firepower capability than a single uniformed officer had.

He performed the act but had to survive to evaluate his own reaction because HE was the experiment that the halls of academia would not let him conduct. He knew if caught that he would be subject to all the tests and experiments of modern science to figure out why he did it by the best in the country/world. As the experiment he knew he could not evaluate himself but who better than all the science that the US government could bring to bear.

Final bits.

He knew that he would never go into general population in a prison.

Federal offenses trump State offenses so he would be under Federal rules which do not have the death penalty.

His brain would be picked apart by the best of the best and he would be forever immortal in the science because he was a living experiment.

I wonder: Where he planned to go after the event because rigging his apartment to burn was simply a matter to erase his past and conflicting information that might compromise the experiment.

Just crap that came to my mind while pulling weeds.

Carry on.

Cheers,

Doc

 

[athhud]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

Doc,

After hearing the little bit that I have, my mind has wandered down the same path. If your hypothesis is not extremely close to reality, I will be quite surprised. Today's education system and work place is not at all conducive to a growing mind. Me thinks curiosity had much to do with these events and that his mind could not be satisfied in typical lab conditions. I have also pondered the thought that this is not isolated to one person.... Doesn't seem to be a very thorough experiment if only one trial is observed and there is no clearly defined controls or variables. Of course I may be making a mistake by assuming that any logic whatsoever was written into such a study.

 

[hrfunk]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

As a law enforcement firearms instructor who trains officers to respond effectively to this type of incident, i always feel like I've failed on some level when an event like this occurs. This even when it takes place on some other part of the country (which this one did). In an effort to conduct the best training I possibly can, I study these events intently to glean any useful information from them. In all that research, I've reached a couple of simple conclusions.

First, there is the "why." countless hours of broadcast time, and mountains of paper, will be devoted to this question in the coming days. All sorts of ideas will be pondered: video games, viloent movies, accessibility of firearms will all be analyzed ad nauseum. My take on the "why" is this: there are evil people in the world. They have always been here and they always will. By definition, such individuals perpetrate evil acts on other members of society.

My other simple truth is this: the only effective countermeasure for an armed bad guy intent on committing an evil act is at a certain location an armed good guy who's already there. It matters not whether the good guy is employed by some level of government.

HRF

 

[UKDslayer]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: NMMX</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jake6547</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I just don't understand, I would give up everything to be able to help these Innocent people. Why can't fu*ked up people like this just blow there brains out and leave everybody else out of it. </div></div>

I agree. Individuals like this are just plain psychotic. No right minded person harms innocent people like this.. </div></div>

Just to clarify - this guy was not a med.student, he was a PhD student in neuroscience - probably he was more intelligent than most meds student.

But he had a pathology - and just like the shooter of Gabby Giffords in Arizona, the parents knew there was a problem. Parents want to protect their child even at the potential cost of major tragedies, and that's a problem. There needs to be a culpability and liability on the parent, or anyone that knows someone is seriously sociopathic to get them on a NCIS "no buy" list. Send the parents that knew to prison, along with anyone else that allowed this to happen by not warning authorities - that's the kind of legislation we need in response to shootings like this. Yes, there will be a rare case in which someone hides their pathology well-enough that no one has a clue, but more often than not there is someone close to the sociopath who knew of the potential...

As far as the gun control argument, if guns weren't accessible this guy IS/WAS smart enough to make a WMD such as a biological "bomb". I would bet anyone that a top neuroscience department like were he was studying DOES use neurotoxin agents in studies all the time without raising an eyebrow; these toxins are used to figure out both normal and abnormal physiology -I think tetrodotoxin studies gave us understanding of basic nerve impulse/conduction pathways. His school said he was "in the process of withdrawing" - maybe they had concerns or a clue that he was a potential time-bomb.

 

[Queequeg]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

Excellent posts! Thank you. Sure seems like more than the garden variety sociopath.

 

[matthias]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

Has anyone on the gun control side of things gotten upset by fast and furious? where the feds made sure to get guns to the bad guys and one american and over one hundred Mexicans were killed?

how do they expect tougher laws to fix things here when the atf sends the very items they want controlled to the bad guys?

there is nothing that could prevent this. not tougher laws or better screenings.
the level of training that would help a person in the theater stop what he was doing is lacking. how many american could have actually stopped him %wise? and what are the chances they would be in that theater?

this is an honest question not aimed at armchair commandos. think hard about your friends and if they could really handle this situation? If they or you have been "proven" in a high stress situation? how many are really ready to deal with something like this?

not trying to start anything just what is running through my head

 

[athhud]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

I don't see how Mexicans have anything to do with Batman, but my thought on the whole shoot the bad guy deal is this: If I were to eliminate the threat, that is great. If not, I'd do everything that I could to negatively impact his efficiency in hitting targets. I would think that having bullets whiz by one's face or hitting their vest would interfere with them shooting at fish in a barrel.

 

[Turk]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

Doc,
Since when is there no death penalty for a Federal case? Perhaps someone should've informed Timothy Mcveigh's attorneys?

 

[sgtsmmiii]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire



"I'm still not sure that I think just your average Concealed Carrier could have done much in this situation. I know everyone here can shoot the wings off a fly at 1000 with a .380(just kidding this is the internet after all). However I've watched quite a few people shoot/qualify that are licensed to carry concealed that couldn't shoot very well in broad daylight at the range. Now you add in the stress that the theater is dark, tear gas/smoke, people are screaming, he's wearing body armor, and he's shooting a long gun, I would bet that 90%+ of CCW holders could not make that shot and just end up getting them self or a loved one killed. Now I know that I am going to get flamed for this but just looking at things logically. I carry everywhere I go because I am LE, and yes I would have done whatever I could to stop him AFTER I made sure that my family was safe. Personally my family comes first."

I would have to agree.

 

[doc76251]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Turk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Doc,
Since when is there no death penalty for a Federal case? Perhaps someone should've informed Timothy Mcveigh's attorneys? </div></div>
You will note in the McVeigh case he was sentenced to death for the murder of eight Federal Officers. The state of Oklahoma did not prosecute the 160 civilian deaths. Unless there happens to be a Federal Officer among the 12 dead ?!?! We will see what will happen with this one. The McVeigh case may actually become part of the defense now that you mention it as a reason to prevent the Fed from prosecuting the death sentence.

Cheers,

Doc

 

[Turk]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/federal-executions-1927-2003

 

[mexicanmatch]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

I feel so empty inside knowing some idiot killed so many people and wounded many more. I will not get into the in and out's of this massacre. I feel better praying to the Creator and asking him to be with the families and friends of all those who were there. To me prayer is powerful and we all have it in us to do so. MM

 

[Greg Langelius *]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

Enough of this pissing match stuff.

I had hoped we could employ ths topic to engage the central question in a proactive and productive response to a searing tragedy. Clearly a faction here thinks it's instead a challenge to assert their hobbyhorse issues and argue points of fact about the event itself.

If my facts are wrong, they're wrong; I'm just going by what several sources I trust have said, and seriously, the newsies are having a field day. Any of us could be wrong on the facts. The newsies do sometimes jerk us all around.

I will not encourage further dispute.

Consider this:

This is a public forum, and a lot of otherwise uncommitted folks come here looking for our thoughts on such tragedies, to see if folks like us can be trusted to exercise those very rights we so fervently wish to defend. Wringing hands and lamented losses just aren't going to cut it anymore. These folks want to see valid proposals, and they have a right to.

I'd like to think we project an image of insight and serenity, a willing openness to join in a search for a good resolution to many valid and troubling issues.

I see that, some, and I see other things. Among them is a desire to get teachy about dogged preparedness to repel threats that are usually not yet present, and may never be. That, honestly, smacks of paranoia. It portrays at least some of us gun owners with chips on our shoulders.

Were I a seeker of wisdom, with a neutral opinion about gun control, this would not be reassuring.

I do not dispute that preparedness is good, and I do believe it has its place on this forum. I just think it would be more productive as part of another, separate topic. I don't want to argue the subject here further and I tell you clear and plain, that if it continues, I'll be throwing the troll flag, for whatever that may still be worth around here.

Consider this:

Preparation can be misconstrued as premeditation. Written one way, the same thing can be read completely differently. I would sure hate for anything any of us had said here to come back to haunt them when sitting in a witness box.

Consider this:

We <span style="font-style: italic">could</span> be using this topic as a work space where proactive and constructive talking points in favor of an effective and equitible solution to the gun violence issue can be better dealt with, and in a manner that neither penalizes the innocent and responsible gun owner for the excesses of sociopaths, nor terminates the centuries old legacy of the American marksman.

We can either seek to widen the dispute, or to narrow the differences. We can start working on what we, as law abiding and responsible gun owners, can live with, and what we can't. We can refuse to let ourselves get bogged down arguing side issues.

But will we?

I don't get to answer <span style="font-style: italic">that</span> question.

You do.

Greg

 

[Greg Langelius *]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

I'll go first.

I think we can agree that a preemptive, preventive approach to gun control as a means of curtailing gun violence has not, does not, and will not work.

What can legislative mandates do that can plausibly have a positive impact on the roles of guns in acts of gratuitous violence?

Do crimes of this kind and magnitude reaquire their own area of law?

Does the average law abiding and responsible gun owner contribute to, or bear a reaponsibility, in such crimes>

Do laws control guns, or do they control people? Which is preferable? Can either even be reasonably expected to have an effective and equitible outcome?

Are calls for 'reasonable gun control' actually either? If not, then what are they?

What are the implications of gun control that reach beyond the initial issues of gratuitous gun violence?

Do other agendas camouflage themselves beneath its more visible surface?

Is it reasonable to pile the burdens of these measures on the backs of law abiding and responsible gun owners?

Is it reasonable to pile the burdens of these measures on the backs of law enforcement?

Are the courts a better place to deal with these matters than legislatures?

Are the courts performing effectively and acceptibly regarding these matters?

Does anybody in the legislative branch even know what the 18th Amendment and the Volstead Act did to this country? Do any of those folks seriously believe repeating that part of our history, only now with guns, can be a productive measure?

At what point does the Consitution actually have a bearing here? It it reasonable to contemplate changes at the Constitutional level? If that is done, what does our America, everyone's America, become?

Let's chew on these sorts of question for awhile.

Greg

 

[Queequeg]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Greg Langelius *</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'll go first.

I think we can agree that a preemptive, preventive approach to gun control as a means of curtailing gun violence has not, does not, and will not work.

What can legislative mandates do that can plausibly have a positive impact on the roles of guns in acts of gratuitous violence?

Do laws control guns, or do they control people? Which is preferable? Can either even be reasonably expected to have an effective and equitible outcome?

Are calls for 'reasonable gun control' actually either? If not, then what are they?

Is it reasonable to pile the burdens of these measures on the backs of law abiding and responsible gun owners? Is it reasonable to pile the burden of these measures on the backs of law enforcement?

Are the courts performing effectively and acceptibly regarding these matters?

Are the courts a better place to deal with these matters than legislatures?

Does anybody in the legislative branch even know what the 18th Amendment and the Volstead Act did to this country? Do any of those folks seriously believe repeating that part of our history, only now with guns, can be a productive measure?

At what point does the Consitution actually have a bearing here? It it reasonable to contemplate changes at the Constitutional level? If that is done, what does our America, everyone's America, become?

Let's chew on these sorts of question for awhile.

Greg </div></div>

This is where I was going in my post, above. Though mine was less well structured.

Anyone who thinks there is not a problem with insane, nihilistic or agenda driven assholes seeking to kill and maim large numbers of innocent people, using highly efficient weapons, is deluding themselves. It only needs to happen once to put recreational-law abiding shooters on the defensive.

It's happened twice just this past week.

 

[Greg Langelius *]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

Please note that I have been editing/restructuring the above post on the fly.

 

[Greg Langelius *]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

Insanity? Zeal? Conditioning?

 

[Greg Langelius *]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

The antis' are going with their 'Business as usual" response this time.

I think they've gone to that well once too often as of now.

They've been playing that card for decades. How much have they helped us doing it? How much have they helped themselves?

If the people in general aren't tired enough of that crap to throw it back in their teeth this time, then this country is done for and the system is broken.

I'm willing to give the system this one more time to get America's house in order.

But that's it.

We have an election coming up. That's our Ace to play.

Beyond that, I don't know, and I really don't want to know.

But I do intend to land on my feet wherever this goes.

Greg

 

[Tengu]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

Greg

"Optimism and pessimism are infectios and they spread more quickly from the head downward than in any other direction."
-Dwight D. Eisenhower

 

[UKDslayer]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

Greg: I was suggesting a change in legislation that could be important to prevent these tragedies. Guarantee this wouldn't happen again? No. Maybe cause some individuals to lose 2A rights without "just" cause? Yes. But should be considered. We need to go back to "it was the shooter, not the gun, that killed those innocents" and how do we address the issue of the shooter before it happens. Again, in this particular case, this guy could have put together a WMD/biological warfare scenario easily.

Doc - on your experiment theory, I thought that scenario has well. Having seen the politics and frustrations of academia of medical research and dedicating two years of my life to "bench research" - there is a heck of a lot of work, and little to no glory. This was a guaranteed way to get in the history books - not to mention the attention serial killers get. Research centers compete to get the brain of the Manson's & Dahmer's (and Manson isn't even dead yet).


I'm going to an a comment on the CCW/armchair commando issue: How many of you REALLY think you could make a headshot in those circumstances at a moving target? I remember a match at RO where the target was moving and NOT shooting back at you - there were only 2 or 3 shooters out of 60 that did this really well...out of 60 shooters that shoot alot and most have had formal training.

If you were in close distance - chances are you would aim center of mass - even with hits your mag would probably be empty before you realized he was wearing armour. Chance of a head shot by error/stress - small but there. So throw in a odds of being wounded in a fashion that didn't keep you from strong side shooting - would bullets back at this guy have had an affect? Probably yes, certainly a distraction - although potentially guaranteeing yourself his attention. He WAS expecting to be shot at - hence the armour, but I don't think anyone, regardless of their pathology (exception maybe crack or PCP), isn't going to react to being shot at. How many of us just doing simunitions notices the physiological response? Heck I remember my first time in a shoothouse with uni-directional live fire and cardboard targets causing palpitations.

Back to the potential distraction from a CCW - a good example (and minimally publicized of course) of this was the Tyler Texas courthouse shootings several years ago. In that case, the assailant only had handguns, but still a CCW got off enough shots to keep the assailant "occupied". The CCW shooter unfortunately did perish, but he was credited with both "buying significant time" for police to activate as well as distracted the shooter towards himself and away from other potential victims.

 

[Guest]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

Why do folks do what they do?
(1)Can't make it within the rules someone else set's up, an re-bell's with, drugs, alcohol, weapon of choice.
If you can't make it by others rules, get out of that system, change that system, or re-locate, but don't keep electing that same system, over an over.

If elected I would have dismemberment, stations, we could use the removed parts, hearts, eyes, ect.
For those convicted of lesser than murder, we would just take a Kidney, eye, skin, or anything else we need to stock the body part bank for those who need them. All this after we render the felon unable to add to the population, should they ever be released.

 

[Greg Langelius *]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

Organleggers?

Tengu;

I get your meaning, but I'm not clear how it applies.

 

[wyosniper]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

Is it just me, but i seen this coming hours after it happened. The anti-gun people chance to try to take away are rights. I can see the assualt weapon and magizine issues blowing up now its on the radio and tv. I just hope it doesnt affect us normal US gun loving and shooting people. It takes on sick, messed up person to mess it all up for everyone.

 

[Greg Langelius *]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

UKD;

If I'm looking at the right post, I'm getting that we should consider legislating so we can prosecute parents for bad parenting.

Honestly I'm not really sure I'd want to go there. I'm not at all comfortable with legislators getting involved in determining what's good and bad parenting. That's an enormous can of worms.

Yes, I think parents bear blame here. I'm just not sure how to define the culpability, or what productive role courts and government could play here.

We may be falling into the same trap as our opponents. We look to goverment to salve our needs and our consciences. We can try that, in fact we've been trying that a lot, and for a long time.

I think that's a categorical mistake. I think that mistake is at the foundation of all that's right and wrong with these issues.

I will say this. Somebody had damned well better got on the soapbox calling parents to task for this stuff. Too damned many 'parents' are looking for excuses when they should be looking in their mirrors. I don't really give a damn who get their tighties in a knot when somebody tells them they're being consumate asses. This is where political correctness had led us.

Greg

 

[Guest]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

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

Tengu;

I get your meaning, but I'm not clear how it applies. </div></div>
For murder,...
Monitor 1 has photos or videos of the victim with family, pets, and friends.
Monitor 2 has the courts finding an jury verdict,
Monitor 3 has the harvesting.
Monitor 4 has the story an life events of the intended organ recipient.

All other organ removable/harvesting would be based upon the crime. Folks can live w/o eyes, kidneys, sex organs, hands, feet, ears, teeth, ect. The crime would dictate how many of what/each that would be taken at one time. Steal with a pin or by force (none weapon)the total amount harvested would equate to one or both hands and a eye or two. As the crimes worst-en, well you know.

Some would still weight the table against their actions, their choice. My money says most would rethink their way's. Either way it's a win-win for everyone except those making money off of crime.
Much talk about this, but who other than the shooter is the blame. I suggest everyone look into the mirror, as we the voting public, has allowed this to happen. Easy choices are made by children,... and not every voter is an adult either.

 

[Greg Langelius *]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

Organlegging

 

[Guest]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

Many were advocating this method in the early 50's,...I believe if it had been put into place back then, we would not be seeing the events of today. Then again back then, molesting teachers were found in ditches, reports indicated they fell and hit their heads. Then along came the bleeding hearts an lawyers,...

 

[Greg Langelius *]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

Larry Niven has already considered the subject in great detail.

I don't blame the lawyers. I blame the judges not throwing out the lawsuits for being frivolous. That's where political correctness grows teeth.

 

[sharac]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

Great idea and if simple things can get distorted and corrupted i'm sure your system of organ harvesting will be corruption/degeneracy/personal misuse free right....


Thing is people a society is a system and in a system what might be black/white idea turns into shades of grey and quite frankly WTF is INNOCENT?? We are all (to certain degree) guilty of something may it be simply tolerating evil or being evil fact remains noone bar the kids who are unable to provide for themselves are guilty of having society in a shitter. And even innocence means nothing in this world as there are plenty (as is evident) who pass/enact judgment on others simply because they can.

You want to fix stuff? Start fixing people and that won't happen with laws...

 

[Switchblade]

Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire

Heard last night:
"Oh my God, I would kill to see the new Batman movie! I hear it's to die for!"
Yes, I laughed..it was too funny.

Guns and Gun Owners are the Red Herring to teh issue as are magazines, clips, ammunition etc. The fact that a lone individual broke down and commited a crime is the problem. Society has no real solution for this and to make a blanket opressive law or other oppressive institutionlized concept would violate our constitution.
Many will call for more gun laws. Many will tell them how they are ignorant. Many will look at the issue of the individual and all who do will have no real valid solution to this problem.
We are human. We fail. As such, when this type of failure comes out, only a well armed population can stop it from becoming a larger event than would be possible