# Gun attack at Batman film premiere in Denver



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Jul 20, 2012)

Just got home from my showing of TDKR to see this


> Many casualties have been reported after a shooting at a Batman film premiere in the US city of Denver.
> 
> Police said 30 to 40 people had been injured in the incident, Colorado state's 850 KOA radio reported.
> 
> ...



There's an updated article here: 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-18921492#FBM109024


----------



## Raidoton (Jul 20, 2012)

Where is Batman?


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Jul 20, 2012)

Raidoton said:


> Where is Batman?


----------



## dummy plug (Jul 20, 2012)

fuck cant even enjoy a Batman movie nowadays...i hope they capture the guy


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Jul 20, 2012)

Apparently a baby was shot at close range. 

If only it had the wherewithal to carry its _own_ gun, this would never have happened..


----------



## hammer (Jul 20, 2012)

bane carries no gun, bane BREAKS YOU.


smh at this man.


----------



## Zaru (Jul 20, 2012)

erictheking said:


> Apparently a baby was shot at close range.
> 
> If only it had the wherewithal to carry its _own_ gun, this would never have happened..





But seriously, what a crappy marksman. Shoots 50 people, but only 10 die. Breivik would be disappointed.


----------



## Zenith (Jul 20, 2012)

his shooting ratio is dissappointing


----------



## hammer (Jul 20, 2012)

must suck on COD


----------



## Zenith (Jul 20, 2012)

indeed

even more on battlefield

he would get murked on conquest with the pros


----------



## Raidoton (Jul 20, 2012)

And it's a good thing his aiming sucked.


----------



## Zaru (Jul 20, 2012)

hammer said:


> must suck on COD



If this happened in Germany they'd definitely blame video games once they find out he played any at all.

"Crazed gunman practiced for mass shooting with World of Warcraft"


----------



## Zenith (Jul 20, 2012)

> And it's a good thing his aiming sucked.


why do you say that

he could be the next sniper for the US army


----------



## Patchouli (Jul 20, 2012)

Link currently says at least 14 dead. Also has a guy giving a witnesses account of the incident.

Gunman seems pretty fucked up.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Jul 20, 2012)

Lt Iceman said:


> why do you say that
> 
> he could be the next sniper for the US army


When have you heard of a sniper for the army doing that poorly at shooting? Don't just make dumb-fuck comments because you don't agree with the war or some stupid shit, this has nothing to do with the war or wars at all. Sniping is different from regular shooting and shooting people isn't something very easy. Try shooting any live, moving animal and then come tell me it's simple.


----------



## Raidoton (Jul 20, 2012)

Ms. T said:


> Link currently says at least 14 dead. Also has a guy giving a witnesses account of the incident.
> 
> Gunman seems pretty fucked up.


I also heard there were two attackers. One of them is caught and 21 years old.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Jul 20, 2012)

Raidoton said:


> I also heard there were two attackers. One of them is caught and 21 years old.


When I first heard about this Molly McIsaac posted a facebook status mentioning it and that story said it was two attackers too.


----------



## Mikaveli (Jul 20, 2012)

.


----------



## Kira Yamato (Jul 20, 2012)

Reports stating 14 killed and 50 people wounded. Truly madness that a person would do something like this.


----------



## Raidoton (Jul 20, 2012)

Maybe he was mad that Batman died in the movie...

*Spoiler*: __ 



Just kidding, didn't watch it yet.


----------



## hammer (Jul 20, 2012)

Zaru said:


> If this happened in Germany they'd definitely blame video games once they find out he played any at all.
> 
> "Crazed gunman practiced for mass shooting with World of Warcraft"


WOW is the cause of all shootings


Raidoton said:


> Maybe he was mad that Batman died in the movie...
> 
> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> ...



batman never dies.


----------



## DejaEntendu (Jul 20, 2012)

Says they were tipped off to explosive devices in his apartment? Wearing a gas mask while shooting? Guy seems really stable...

Edit: Also, I heard the witness who said the baby was shot. It seems the youngest victim was six according to the local news network; must have misjudged the age in the chaos.


----------



## Spock (Jul 20, 2012)

Evidence of who it was?


----------



## Bart (Jul 20, 2012)

Raidoton, not really funny at all ...

Shouldn't really joke about what happened ;S


----------



## Tyler (Jul 20, 2012)

I feel so bad for the 14 people who lost their lives literally less than a few hours ago. Weird to imagine they were getting ready at their homes just to see a good Batman movie only to have some crazed individual snatch their lives away.


This is our world. Yay.


----------



## Bart (Jul 20, 2012)

Among the tragedy of what happened etc one of the sad thing's is that some probably didn't know how Nolan's trilogy even ended ;(


----------



## FakePeace (Jul 20, 2012)

Some men just want to watch the world burn.


----------



## hammer (Jul 20, 2012)




----------



## blackbird (Jul 20, 2012)

Was this before or after the movie?

With gas masks, smoke and guns involved, the culprit will probably lean on Bane in his defense.


----------



## Jeff (Jul 20, 2012)

Meaningless killings of innocent movie-goers; "luckily" it wasn't during the day when there would have been much more children attending.  To imagine the confusion that the smoke/bullets caused and the trauma it may bring to children who weren't even shot is sad


----------



## impersonal (Jul 20, 2012)

It's a republican conspiracy led by Rush Limbaugh.


----------



## Starrk (Jul 20, 2012)

impersonal said:


> It's a republican conspiracy led by Rush Limbaugh.



dey took our jerbs.

Seeing this story made me go to Wikipedia and read spoilers.


----------



## DejaEntendu (Jul 20, 2012)

blackbird said:


> Was this before or after the movie?
> 
> With gas masks, smoke and guns involved, the culprit will probably lean on Bane in his defense.



Fifteen minutes into the movie, apparently during a shooting scene.


----------



## Kira Yamato (Jul 20, 2012)

I'm assuming Colordao hasn't seen a mass shooting of this severity since Columbine.


----------



## stream (Jul 20, 2012)

*14 dead, 50 hurt in shooting at Dark Knight opening night*



> *14 dead, 50 hurt in shooting at Dark Knight opening night*
> 
> 
> AURORA, Colo. ? A gunman opened fire early Friday at a suburban Denver movie theater on the opening night of the latest Batman movie ?The Dark Knight Rises,? killing 14 people and injuring at least 50 others, authorities said.
> ...


So? Was the movie good or not?


----------



## Patchouli (Jul 20, 2012)

Already a thread on this.


----------



## Wilykat (Jul 20, 2012)

Ms. T said:


> Already a thread on this.


----------



## stream (Jul 20, 2012)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> When have you heard of a sniper for the army doing that poorly at shooting? Don't just make dumb-fuck comments because you don't agree with the war or some stupid shit, this has nothing to do with the war or wars at all. Sniping is different from regular shooting and shooting people isn't something very easy. Try shooting any live, moving animal and then come tell me it's simple.



Jeez, chill?
Anyway, it was a movie theater: dark, hard to see. I doubt he was aiming much either.


----------



## Bender (Jul 20, 2012)

Saw the news report on this on MSNBC 

lol wow just wow folks... -.-

First death threats then shootings.


----------



## @lk3mizt (Jul 20, 2012)

in b4 "guns dont kill people, people kill people" 

that's the daftest argument ive ever heard.


by that logic, you should allow Iran and North Korea get nuclear weapons.


----------



## hammer (Jul 20, 2012)

shut up                .


----------



## Ultra Instinct Vegito (Jul 20, 2012)

Is he getting the death penalty?


----------



## Roman (Jul 20, 2012)

Raidoton said:


> And it's a good thing his aiming sucked.



I don't think we can ever describe an event where people died as a good thing. Lucky for the people who remained, but a senseless barbarity nonetheless. My condolences go to the victims' families.



@lk3mizt said:


> in b4 "guns dont kill people, people kill people"
> 
> that's the daftest argument ive ever heard.
> 
> by that logic, you should allow Iran and North Korea get nuclear weapons.



Guns and other such weapons are tools used primarily for killing, but if no one wants to use them, the guns aren't going to kill anyone. Guns kill people precisely because other people use them.

I also don't see how this logic means we should allow countries like Iran and NK to have nuclear weapons. The fact of the matter is that while it's not the guns themselves that kill, they give a lot of the people who hold them a sense of empowerment. Again, this is not to do with the gun itself, but with the one holding it, and that's exactly the reason why I don't agree with guns and especially nukes.

I'll give you credit tho. Nice attempt to derail the thread.


----------



## Bart (Jul 20, 2012)

But like I said it's rather poignant that for those who were taken they didn't get to see how the Dark Knight Trilogy ended ;( and they would have obviously seen the Man of Steel teaser; a bit trivial but still emotional if you think about it.

But I'm expecting Nolan to comment about it soon really ;O


----------



## The CybaSnipa (Jul 20, 2012)

Youngest hurt was a 3 month old, based on the news we watched this morning.. 

EDIT: News update, apparently the 3 month old will make it and was discharged from the hospital!!!!


----------



## Ubereem (Jul 20, 2012)

So disgusted by the Psycho that killed 14 people at the opening of Batman tonight in Denver!


----------



## Harard (Jul 20, 2012)

I don't feel like going to the movies tonight.


----------



## hammer (Jul 20, 2012)

I'm going to that movie tonight T-T


----------



## Mael (Jul 20, 2012)

Light Hawk Wings said:


> Is he getting the death penalty?



I don't see much in the way of rehab or even regret, so why not make an example?


----------



## Xyloxi (Jul 20, 2012)

Mael said:


> I don't see much in the way of rehab or even regret, so why not make an example?



Does Colorado have the death penalty and if it does, is it a state that commonly uses it on criminals?


----------



## Mael (Jul 20, 2012)

Xyloxi said:


> Does Colorado have the death penalty and if it does, is it a state that commonly uses it on criminals?



Not sure about the second part but it does have capital punishment.  Of course I'd like to get a motive and thorough interrogation first, then trial by peers, then maybe a little while of misery followed by eternal oblivion.

Could care less about the whole us being "barbaric" bit too ever since that incident in Connecticut.


----------



## Zenith (Jul 20, 2012)

> When have you heard of a sniper for the army doing that poorly at shooting? Don't just make dumb-fuck comments because you don't agree with the war or some stupid shit, this has nothing to do with the war or wars at all. Sniping is different from regular shooting and shooting people isn't something very easy. Try shooting any live, moving animal and then come tell me it's simple.



let go of all that angst,it's unhealthy

and fyi,my pops's a ballistic mathematician and my gramps a general

I've tried guns,more than what the average person is allowed to

tough it's not that it matters in this discussion,but you brought it up so yeah


----------



## Mael (Jul 20, 2012)

Dipshit's ID is James Holmes, 24, of Aurora.

How he got access to all that...remind me of that so-so movie Rampage.


----------



## insi_tv (Jul 20, 2012)

apart from the killer, what the fuck are 3 month/6 year old kids doing at a midnight viewing of such a movie? parenting my ass


----------



## Jake CENA (Jul 20, 2012)

Guess the death threats were real. Damn sicko deserve a lifetime of torture for his crime.


----------



## Blitzomaru (Jul 20, 2012)

I just woke up to this. Was stationed in Aurora CO for 5 years. Still have dozens of friends who would go to a midnight screening and haven't heard back from. SO yeah, this one is close to my chest.


----------



## Petes12 (Jul 20, 2012)

insi_tv said:


> apart from the killer, what the fuck are 3 month/6 year old kids doing at a midnight viewing of such a movie? parenting my ass



is a 3 month old gonna watch the movie? dont see the big deal

also its 12 dead not 14


----------



## hadou (Jul 20, 2012)

I would be surprised if by the end of the week it was discovered that the gunman suffered from mental disorders.


----------



## drache (Jul 20, 2012)

gods  my thoughts go out to them


----------



## Wilykat (Jul 20, 2012)

Latest number from CNN: 12 dead, 38 hurt.


----------



## Taylor (Jul 20, 2012)

Who cares about the actors? Just don't shoot the innocent people.


----------



## Misha-San (Jul 20, 2012)

Wow this is awful the poor people who just wanted to see the movie. =[


----------



## davidpliskin (Jul 20, 2012)

Talk about timing, this horrible shooting takes place a week prior to the UN gun ban treaty.


----------



## insi_tv (Jul 20, 2012)

Petes12 said:


> is a 3 month old gonna watch the movie? dont see the big deal
> 
> also its 12 dead not 14



is 6 year old will watch it, the 3 month old will ruin it for everybody else.


----------



## makeoutparadise (Jul 20, 2012)

thanks for making me feel scared CBTK


----------



## Mider T (Jul 20, 2012)

Apparently the guy was dressed as Bane...I wonder how the actor who played Bane feels right now?



> The film's distributor, Warner Brothers, stated that it was deeply saddened by the shooting, and announced that it would cancel the Paris premiere of The Dark Knight Rises.[23] The marketing campaign for the movie has been suspended in Finland.



Sorry Finns and Parisians.


----------



## soulnova (Jul 20, 2012)

I have a uncle living in Denver... but I don't know in what area exactly. I really hope he was not there. 





insi_tv said:


> apart from the killer, what the fuck are 3 month/6 year old kids doing at a midnight viewing of such a movie? parenting my ass



You should have seen the 5 year old at the _Prometheus_ screening I went.


----------



## Mider T (Jul 20, 2012)

^This didn't happen in Denver.

38 people injured...Colorado is the 38th state.

Coincidence?


----------



## soulnova (Jul 20, 2012)

Mider T said:


> ^This didn't happen in Denver.
> 
> 38 people injured...Colorado is the 38th state.
> 
> Coincidence?



I see. I read a note that it was in the Denver area so I freaked out.


----------



## dream (Jul 20, 2012)

Wow, that's pretty terrible news.  I hope that the shooter is caught.


----------



## cnorwood (Jul 20, 2012)

Man colorado is having a summer of fucking madness. First all of the wild fires, then that guy kills a cop for no reason at the jazz festival, now this shit?


----------



## Mider T (Jul 20, 2012)

soulnova said:


> I see. I read a note that it was in the Denver area so I freaked out.



Yeah CTK fucked the title up, it took place in Aurora.


----------



## soulnova (Jul 20, 2012)

Mider T said:


> Yeah CTK fucked the title up, it took place in Aurora.



The first article I read wasn't this one and also mentioned Denver.


----------



## makeoutparadise (Jul 20, 2012)

Mider T said:


> ^This didn't happen in Denver.
> 
> 38 people injured...Colorado is the 38th state.
> 
> Coincidence?



Colorado is developing a bad rap 

all we're famous for is skiing, beer, and shootings,( mostly at schools) and pot


----------



## Soca (Jul 20, 2012)

browsing reddit and found this guy, he was one of the people shot in the incident [1 pic is kinda graphic]



> no one will believe me until i post the picture, but i was there and i was shot... well, grazed really. i'm doing all right just a little shook up. me and my girlfriend waited unrtil it seemed the shooting was finished so we were some of the last people out of the theatre and there was a lot of blood. i will do an AMA once i am out of the hospital.





*Spoiler*: __


----------



## Mider T (Jul 20, 2012)

So apparently that news intern that was killed had just survived the Toronto Mall shooting 2 weeks ago, she had a stroke of luck leaving the mall right before the shooting.


----------



## T7 Bateman (Jul 20, 2012)

This is sad. People can't even go to the movie. If you have a bad life then off yourself and leave everyone each alone.


----------



## TruEorFalse_21 (Jul 20, 2012)

. It seems to be he was acting on the idea that villan in the movie was portrayed as an OWS type.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jul 20, 2012)

Not doubting it, but is that a reliable site? It seems to have some loony stuff on it itself....


----------



## TruEorFalse_21 (Jul 20, 2012)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Not doubting it, but is that a reliable site? It seems to have some loony stuff on it itself....


He's a private investigator working with the FBI. If the FBI is willing to trust him I don't see why we shouldn't at this point.


----------



## santanico (Jul 20, 2012)

Crazy fucking people


----------



## Jakeirako (Jul 20, 2012)

Damn that's messed up.


----------



## Mider T (Jul 20, 2012)

IMAX                4D


----------



## Mael (Jul 20, 2012)

TruEorFalse_21 said:


> He's a private investigator working with the FBI. If the FBI is willing to trust him I don't see why we shouldn't at this point.



It would just be nice to see it on another media outlet for verification.


----------



## Eisenheim (Jul 20, 2012)

What a tragedy.


----------



## Dr. White (Jul 20, 2012)

Looks like Batman is the hero Denver needs right now.


----------



## Pilaf (Jul 20, 2012)

davidpliskin said:


> Talk about timing, this horrible shooting takes place a week prior to the UN gun ban treaty.




Because creating a black market for firearms wherein only dangerous psychopaths can get ahold of them will stop all the gun violence in the world.


----------



## Raidoton (Jul 20, 2012)

Pilaf said:


> Because creating a black market for firearms wherein only dangerous psychopaths can get ahold of them will stop all the gun violence in the world.


Did someone watch the latest video of TheAmazingAtheist?


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Jul 20, 2012)

Mider T said:


> Yeah CTK fucked the title up, it took place in Aurora.


CTK didn't fuck up anything, I took the title directly from the BBC website. See, unlike most of the sensationalist yahoos around here I don't count on flashy titles to drag people into threads.  I just take them off of the article.


----------



## davidpliskin (Jul 20, 2012)

Pilaf said:


> Because creating a black market for firearms wherein only dangerous psychopaths can get ahold of them will stop all the gun violence in the world.



Apparently that's the UN's plan, and I am sure this incident will be used as a talking point in trying to justify a gun ban.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Jul 20, 2012)

davidpliskin said:


> Apparently that's the UN's plan, and I am sure this incident will be used as a talking point in trying to justify a gun ban.


A gun ban is a bad idea and all of this makes me wonder if this is why someone did this? I mean I'm not much into conspiracy theories but this seems like just the sort of thing to get worldwide media attention and try and force a goal you've had through.


----------



## Revolution (Jul 20, 2012)

I cant believe there was a tragedy and you people are making jokes about it (like post #8 and post # 9)  

Also, I'm guessing schizophrenic for not being able to distinguish fantasy vs. reality and thinking you are a batman villian.  I see no logical explination for this besides insanity.


----------



## Sennin of Hardwork (Jul 20, 2012)

He better spent the rest of his life locked up in prison. Bastard.

My condolences to the families of the victims.


----------



## αce (Jul 20, 2012)

Don't know if posted, from reddit:


----------



## Taco (Jul 20, 2012)

This is just sad.. Totally ruined my mood this morning.

RIP to the victims. Hope bad things happen to the gunman.


----------



## josh101 (Jul 20, 2012)

The guy was wearing a gas mark, not a Bane mask. Of course media outlets are going to try tie in that shit together, but no one will know his motives unless he speaks.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (Jul 20, 2012)

Ridiculous. Obviously this guy is fucked up. Why didn't he have the decency to at least commit suicide? 

RIP


----------



## Revolution (Jul 20, 2012)

TruEorFalse_21 said:


> . It seems to be he was acting on the idea that villan in the movie was portrayed as an OWS type.



  I know.  He is still a crazy person who cannot differentiate between fantasy and reality.

Edit:  I just realized I did not take the "death threats" seriously


----------



## Eisenheim (Jul 20, 2012)

josh101 said:


> The guy was wearing a gas mark, not a Bane mask. Of course media outlets are going to try tie in that shit together, but no one will know his motives unless he speaks.



This is how the media will portray him.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Jul 20, 2012)

josh101 said:


> The guy was wearing a gas mark, not a Bane mask. Of course media outlets are going to try tie in that shit together, but no one will know his motives unless he speaks.


He was wearing the gas mask for the tear gas...


----------



## WT (Jul 20, 2012)

The death penalty was created for scum like him.


----------



## Tsukiyomi (Jul 20, 2012)

I'm just waiting for someone to say "If only someone else in the theater had a gun they could have stopped him!".  You always here that when things like this happen.  Yes, another person in a dark crowded room full of panicking people firing a weapon, that would make things much better.

It infuriates me that people think there is no middle ground on gun issues.  Gun control doesn't necessarily mean gun bans.  You can put into place more controls when shit like this happens.  When that guy shot Gabrielle Giffords he had a 30 round clip, those _used_ to be illegal and now they're not/  Why should those be allowed?  What possible legitimate need could you have for a 30 round clip?


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Jul 20, 2012)

Tsukiyomi said:


> I'm just waiting for someone to say "If only someone else in the theater had a gun they could have stopped him!".  You always here that when things like this happen.  Yes, another person in a dark crowded room full of panicking people firing a weapon, that would make things much better.
> 
> It infuriates me that people think there is no middle ground on gun issues.  Gun control doesn't necessarily mean gun bans.  You can put into place more controls when shit like this happens.  When that guy shot Gabrielle Giffords he had a 30 round clip, those _used_ to be illegal and now they're not/  Why should those be allowed?  What possible legitimate need could you have for a 30 round clip?


I went to a guy's house and him and his friend were playing with an assault rifle they had just purchased online...why would they need that?


----------



## Mael (Jul 20, 2012)

Tsukiyomi said:


> I'm just waiting for someone to say "If only someone else in the theater had a gun they could have stopped him!".  You always here that when things like this happen.  Yes, another person in a dark crowded room full of panicking people firing a weapon, that would make things much better.
> 
> It infuriates me that people think there is no middle ground on gun issues.  Gun control doesn't necessarily mean gun bans.  You can put into place more controls when shit like this happens.  When that guy shot Gabrielle Giffords he had a 30 round clip, those _used_ to be illegal and now they're not/  Why should those be allowed?  What possible legitimate need could you have for a 30 round clip?



Someone did...Texas Congressman...bona fide idiot.


----------



## josh101 (Jul 20, 2012)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> He was wearing the gas mask for the tear gas...


I know? That's why I said he was wearing a gas mark, it was kind of implies that it was for the tear gas. 

I'm just saying that it ( the shooting ) may not have anything to do with the movie, and simply be an opportunistic shooting, and the media will tie in the fact that he wears a mask to the villain bane, as they are always looking to blame violence on shit like that. 

Also it's sad that he probably got the chance to do this because of the film. A shady guy walking around in a gas mask with large bags and stuff would be out of place literally anywhere but the film premier, people probably just thought it was bad cosplay.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Jul 20, 2012)

josh101 said:


> I know? That's why I said he was wearing a gas mark, it was kind of implies that it was for the tear gas.
> 
> I'm just saying that it ( the shooting ) may not have anything to do with the movie, and simply be an opportunistic shooting, and the media will tie in the fact that he wears a mask to the villain bane, as they are always looking to blame violence on shit like that.
> 
> Also it's sad that he probably got the chance to do this because of the film. A shady guy walking around in a gas mask with large bags and stuff would be out of place literally anywhere but the film premier, people probably just thought it was bad cosplay.


I never thought about the bad cosplay angle. Expect theatres to stop the dress up shit...


----------



## Nimander (Jul 20, 2012)

Times like this it's hard to keep any faith in humanity, when a person would do this with zero compunctions and no care at all about what the consequences are.  Fuck, man.  What a shitty world we live in at times, fully of our own making as a species.


----------



## hammer (Jul 20, 2012)

maybe the mask was for his roids.


----------



## Nimander (Jul 20, 2012)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> I never thought about the bad cosplay angle. Expect theatres to stop the dress up shit...



I expect this to be the final push towards getting more strict gun control laws, something that is long fucking overdue.  The Second Amendment does need to be slightly amended, because not everyone is competent or sane enough to have the ability to deal out death with a bit of aim and a pull on a trigger.  It's ridiculous that the weapons this guy is purported to have are in any civilian's possession.


----------



## masamune1 (Jul 20, 2012)

The official death toll (according to a statement by the local chief of police) is 71 injured and 12 dead. The shooter, James Holmes, a 24 year old medical student, escaped out of the back of the theatre and fled in his car, but was quickly stopped by police who were reacting to dozens of calls about the incident, and gave himself up without a fight. Police are currently at his apartment- which is apparently loaded with booby traps.


----------



## TheCupOfBrew (Jul 20, 2012)

He died his hair red, and when confronted he said. "I am the Joker".


----------



## Stunna (Jul 20, 2012)

Ubereem said:


> So disgusted by the Psycho that killed 14 people at the opening of Batman tonight in Denver!


I'm glad you clarified. For a second I thought you were disgusted by the psycho that killed seven people at the opening of the Avengers in Charlotte.


----------



## masamune1 (Jul 20, 2012)

I seriously doubt this will have any effect on gun laws- there have been far worse shootings than this. I seriously doubt he was wearing a gas mask as he went into the theatre- he probably put it on after the film started. I seriously doubt theatres will try to stop anyone dressing up at these things because of this- it is too hard a rule to enforce, and would cost them a fortune to send cinema goers away. And I seriously, seriously doubt this guy was trying to tie-in his crime to any gun law legislation or new policies the UN were considering- every time something like this happens, someone brings up the idea that the shooter was making a point about gun laws one way or the other, and they never are. 

And seriously, I know - "Why so serious?" There, its said. Move along.


----------



## impersonal (Jul 20, 2012)

TruEorFalse_21 said:


> . It seems to be he was acting on the idea that villan in the movie was portrayed as an OWS type.



It's been confirmed by some self-proclaimed private investigator called "Bill Warner" who repeatedly called black blocks anarchists "terrorists" on his blog in the past. Furthermore, that guy fails to give any evidence whatsoever as to why and how this reclusive shooter, unknown by police services (as far as we know), may have ever participated in a black bloc. He just claims it is the case. And you believe it. Because, HEY, it's on the INTERNET! It has to be true, right?


----------



## PikaCheeka (Jul 20, 2012)

hadou said:


> I would be surprised if by the end of the week it was discovered that the gunman suffered from mental disorders.



Whether he has them or not, people will say he does because they don't want to accept the fact that humans can be just that fucked up. 



impersonal said:


> It's been confirmed by this "Bill Warner" guy. And that's it.



Come now. The website has the guy's home address. Clearly it's 100%.


----------



## Air D (Jul 20, 2012)

Why does it seem like every mass-murderer or psychopath always has "neglected dementia" or lunacy of some sort?  Is it impossible that one could just be held responsible for their crimes without immediately given impunity because of insanity?  

It is a possibility that some of past assailants could be normal people who happened to snap suddenly, but in most cases, they are people who have prolonged records of devious activity.  Could this guy be some random person with a fully-complete mind who just wanted to shoot people in the movie theater?


----------



## Shinigami Perv (Jul 20, 2012)

TBH I'm not sure gun control would have had an effect here. He's a 24 year old neuroscience PHD candidate with no criminal record, I'm certain he's bright enough to acquire a gun even if they were illegal.

Hard to see how a gun law could have had any influence on an event like this.


----------



## Nimander (Jul 20, 2012)

True, unfortunately.  From all we're hearing about this guy, he had no psychological issues at all.  In fact, based on what a former high school friend of his said, he sounds a lot like me in some ways (and yes, it creeped me out some to hear someone describe an aspect of me to a "T" when describing a murderer).  

It just sounds like a guy who did it cause he wanted to do it.  Tried to get away, but when he was caught surrendered without a struggle because it would've been pointless to resist.  I think I actually know why he did it and his mindset when doing so, and in the end, it all comes down to what you believe in personally and your mindset towards the world and other people.


----------



## Tsukiyomi (Jul 20, 2012)

Shinigami Perv said:


> TBH I'm not sure gun control would have had an effect here. He's a 24 year old neuroscience PHD candidate with no criminal record, I'm certain he's bright enough to acquire a gun even if they were illegal.
> 
> Hard to see how a gun law could have had any influence on an event like this.



I'm going to wait for more specifics on this case before I comment on that but even if they would have been of no help whatsoever in _this_ instance there is no shortage of other examples where it _would_ have saved lives.  If the guy who shot Gabrielle Giffords couldn't get a 30 round clip he wouldn't have been able to hurt as many people.


----------



## impersonal (Jul 20, 2012)

Shinigami Perv said:


> TBH I'm not sure gun control would have had an effect here. He's a 24 year old neuroscience PHD candidate with no criminal record, I'm certain he's bright enough to acquire a gun even if they were illegal.
> 
> Hard to see how a gun law could have had any influence on an event like this.



It's actually quite the opposite. When guns are illegal, to obtain one you have to *know the right people*. You can't just walk around and ask _"hey man, do you know where I can get a gun?"_ until you find someone who knows. Being a 24 year old neuroscience PHD candidate with no criminal record and no friends is pretty much the worst profile ever to obtain an illegal gun.

Remember the swedish guy who killed 90 people, Anders Breivik? He went through a lot of trouble to obtain his guns. He got himself a trip to central Europe to search for weapons, and even there didn't manage to find anything... Despite being a bodybuilt extremist, instead of a semi-autistic psycho. In the end, he could only obtain his guns _legally_ in Norway, by being part of a shooting club and getting a hunting licence.

So yeah, gun laws do restrict gun availability, even if you have a lot of motivation. Gun prices go up, and obtaining a gun becomes more dangerous and impractical. To obtain a gun, you have to be motivated, patient, with some money.


----------



## TheCupOfBrew (Jul 20, 2012)

As much as  love guns this is why I wish the US had a tight grip on them.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Jul 20, 2012)

impersonal said:


> It's actually quite the opposite. When guns are illegal, to obtain one you have to *know the right people*. You can't just walk around and ask _"hey man, do you know where I can get a gun?"_ until you find someone who knows. Being a 24 year old neuroscience PHD candidate with no criminal record and no friends is pretty much the worst profile ever to obtain an illegal gun.
> 
> Remember the swedish guy who killed 90 people, Anders Breivik? He went through a lot of trouble to obtain his guns. He got himself a trip to central Europe to search for weapons, and even there didn't manage to find anything... Despite being a bodybuilt extremist, instead of a semi-autistic psycho. In the end, he could only obtain his guns _legally_ in Norway, by being part of a shooting club and getting a hunting licence.
> 
> So yeah, gun laws do restrict gun availability, even if you have a lot of motivation. Gun prices go up, and obtaining a gun becomes more dangerous and impractical. To obtain a gun, you have to be motivated, patient, with some money.



Making guns totally illegal is stupid.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (Jul 20, 2012)

impersonal said:


> It's actually quite the opposite. When guns are illegal, to obtain one you have to *know the right people*. You can't just walk around and ask _"hey man, do you know where I can get a gun?"_ until you find someone who knows. Being a 24 year old neuroscience PHD candidate with no criminal record and no friends is pretty much the worst profile ever to obtain an illegal gun.
> 
> Remember the swedish guy who killed 90 people, Anders Breivik? He went through a lot of trouble to obtain his guns. He got himself a trip to central Europe to search for weapons, and even there didn't manage to find anything... Despite being a bodybuilt extremist, instead of a semi-autistic psycho. In the end, he could only obtain his guns _legally_ in Norway, by being part of a shooting club and getting a hunting licence.
> 
> So yeah, gun laws do restrict gun availability, even if you have a lot of motivation. Gun prices go up, and obtaining a gun becomes more dangerous and impractical.



It isn't the same in America where we've enjoyed the ability to own guns, and many feel it is a constitutional right. If we banned guns tomorrow, a massive black market would be created overnight (like when we tried to ban alcohol), but to a far greater extent. We would have every guy looking to make a buck selling guns, and law enforcement unable and probably unwilling to stop it. 

The horse is out of the barn on this one. It will never ever work. This is not Sweden.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jul 20, 2012)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Making guns totally illegal is stupid.



impersonal seems to forget the pesky thing called "reality" when presenting his ideas. WTF is gun restriction going to matter to a guy like the shooter? He's not respecting the law already!


----------



## SwordKing (Jul 20, 2012)

I watched a press conference this afternoon. The Chief of Police said there is currently no official speculation on Holmes' motive.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Jul 20, 2012)

Seto Kaiba said:


> impersonal seems to forget the pesky thing called "reality" when presenting his ideas. WTF is gun restriction going to matter to a guy like the shooter? He's not respecting the law already!


Well it didn't matter in Norway, that's the point.


----------



## FleshFailures (Jul 20, 2012)

Breivik committed the massacre in Norway, not Sweden. He is Norwegian, not Swedish.


----------



## josh101 (Jul 20, 2012)

Seto Kaiba said:


> impersonal seems to forget the pesky thing called "reality" when presenting his ideas. WTF is gun restriction going to matter to a guy like the shooter? He's not respecting the law already!


Well for one, if guns are outlawed, they're expensive. A haul like he had there would cost you like 5000$ over here. I get that a guy who plans on doing this type of act will not care about money, but he has to get it somewhere. Unless he was rich, he would either have to save up money from his job, which in the time it takes to do that, might discourage him to actually go through with it, or even commit a petty crime to get that money, which could cause him to get arrested for that.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Jul 20, 2012)

josh101 said:


> Well for one, if guns are outlawed, they're expensive. A haul like he had there would cost you like 5000$ over here. I get that a guy who plans on doing this type of act will not care about money, but he has to get it somewhere. Unless he was rich, he would either have to save up money from his job, which in the time it takes to do that, might discourage him to actually go through with it, or even commit a petty crime to get that money, which could cause him to get arrested for that.



Then just make bombs out of homemade materials, place them under theater seats or carry them on your person. You act like getting guns is the only way to create a massacre, it's stupid to think that banning guns stops this kind of issue. Even without guns you can kill people. In fact this could have been worse with no guns at all. 

And banning guns or making them impossibly expensive 100% of the time is still stupid. Because there will still be criminals with guns and you've given them the go ahead to rob whoever they want because anyone following the law is unarmed with anything that equals a gun. 

Most of this whining about guns comes from Europeans fear of guns in general. You guys treat them like D&D treats them, that is to say like they're some kind of witchcraft that's completely without merit and is only allowed because they exist. 

In actuality shooting guns for sport is no different than archery, there's something to be said for hunting with a rifle or using a pistol for personal defense, especially when you're small and couldn't fend off a knife attack or a group. But you never hear anything reasonable about guns from the opposition. They treat guns like the Republicans treat pussy.


----------



## impersonal (Jul 20, 2012)

Shinigami Perv said:


> It isn't the same in America where we've enjoyed the ability to own guns, and many feel it is a constitutional right. If we banned guns tomorrow, a massive black market would be created overnight (like when we tried to ban alcohol), but to a far greater extent. We would have every guy looking to make a buck selling guns, and law enforcement unable and probably unwilling to stop it.
> 
> The horse is out of the barn on this one. It will never ever work. This is not Sweden.



Meh, banning stuff that has no self-defense purpose, or forcing a lengthy period between applying for a gun and acquiring it could be a good start... Or even be sufficient. You don't need to go all out from the start.

Also, guns are not like alcohol. It's more difficult to manufacture them by yourself. You have to somehow import them, or get them second hand in which case you won't have a steady supply. They're made of metal (=can be detected at frontiers). They don't create addiction like alcohol does. People don't buy them regularly, meaning that a "street gun dealer" would have extremely few regulars, making his business extremely risky and unstable, and making it difficult for him to reach for customers.

Anyway, this is not so important. I don't really care either way. I was just responding to your statement that this dude would have easily obtained a gun if guns were illegal; that is definitely incorrect. This guy probably wouldn't know how and where to get weed, let alone an illegal weapon.


----------



## kazuri (Jul 20, 2012)

> Also, guns are not like alcohol. It's more difficult to manufacture them by yourself.



That's not true. Actually its the opposite. Anyone can build a machine capable of shooting projectiles with deadly velocity in a couple days(or less). But it actually takes weeks/months for alcohol..


Banning guns does NOTHING to prevent things like this, if they don't have guns, they will make bombs. Or use compressed air, fire, etc etc.

Are you going to ban all stretchy things and all small pieces of metal? Because you could be just as dangerous with a slingshot.


----------



## Superstars (Jul 20, 2012)

Seto Kaiba said:


> impersonal seems to forget the pesky thing called "reality" when presenting his ideas. WTF is gun restriction going to matter to a guy like the shooter? He's not respecting the law already!



Pretty much.

This guy had no motive, he is worthy of death.


----------



## Bender (Jul 20, 2012)

The shooter has been identified


----------



## Derezzed (Jul 20, 2012)

Fucking psycho man  Can't even go to the movies nowadays and as said already I doubt making guns illegal would solve the problem but actually make it worst. 

Did they already caught the guy?


----------



## Unlosing Ranger (Jul 20, 2012)

Eli said:


> Evidence of who it was?


----------



## Bender (Jul 20, 2012)

Derezzed said:


> Fucking psycho man  Can't even go to the movies nowadays and as said already I doubt making guns illegal would solve the problem but actually make it worst.
> 
> Did they already caught the guy?



Yeah. Good riddance.

Seriously, something needs to be done about gun laws in this country. Look, I know us Americans love our guns but c'mon a line has to be drawn. Sure you want to use it to protect your daughter from that rapist boyfriend or hers or whatever. But you should have trust in your daughter's friends or your own ability to fuck his ass up. Seriously checks need to be done before giving guns to ANYONE.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (Jul 20, 2012)

impersonal said:


> I was just responding to your statement that this dude would have easily obtained a gun if guns were illegal; that is definitely incorrect. This guy probably wouldn't know how and where to get weed, let alone an illegal weapon.



Or in reality it would be just like Prohibition, and guns would be sold openly as the police fail to enforce an unenforceable law. A law they wouldn't want to enforce because they believe (like most Americans) that gun ownership is a constitutional right.


----------



## masamune1 (Jul 20, 2012)

Bender said:


> The shooter has been identified



The shooter was identified ages ago.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Jul 20, 2012)

Shinigami Perv said:


> Or in reality it would be just like Prohibition, and guns would be sold openly as the police fail to enforce an unenforceable law. A law they wouldn't want to enforce because they believe (like most Americans) that gun ownership is a constitutional right.


Or we'd waste tax dollars trying to enforce it...also it would ensure Obama  didn't get elected if it was done on his watch.


----------



## Derezzed (Jul 20, 2012)

Bender said:


> Yeah. Good riddance.
> 
> Seriously, something needs to be done about gun laws in this country. Look, I know us Americans love our guns but c'mon a line has to be drawn. Sure you want to use it to protect your daughter from that rapist boyfriend or hers or whatever. But you should have trust in your daughter's friends or your own ability to fuck his ass up. Seriously checks need to be done before giving guns to ANYONE.



Problem is where do you draw the line? It would be stupid to give it to someone who just got out of jail for example, but if you are denied to purchase one without doing anything wrong people will start bitching about their rights. 

I think after all this shit people will start buying more guns out of fear that something like this happens again. Anyways yeah good riddance, let the fucker get raped in jail.


----------



## Bender (Jul 20, 2012)

Seriously, I hope this jackass gets a severe ass beating in jail. Dude killed an innocent 14-year old girl and people who has probably never met before. 

Also according to new emerging news articles DKR fans are worried about copycat shootings.


----------



## josh101 (Jul 20, 2012)

Bender said:


> Seriously, I hope this jackass gets a severe ass beating in jail. Dude killed an innocent 14-year old girl and people who has probably never met before.
> 
> Also according to new emerging news articles DKR fans are worried about copycat shootings.


Reports also saying he shot a three month old baby at point blank range in the back. Luckily, it's still alive. 

The death penalty would be too good for this guy.


----------



## Dark Knight Spike (Jul 20, 2012)

This is such horrible news, but then again recent death threats have been making it hostile to even watch a Batman movie.

The dude is serious about trying to become a legacy like the Joker. If you let him live, you're risking the chance of him breaking out.


----------



## Bender (Jul 20, 2012)

josh101 said:


> Reports also saying he shot a three month old baby at point blank range in the back. Luckily, it's still alive.
> 
> The death penalty is too good for this guy.





























WHAT THE FUCK? 




Also yeah the death penalty is far too good for this guy. 


The whole soap shit should be brought back in prison so this ass fuck gets anally raped.


----------



## 666firebird7 (Jul 20, 2012)

Did any of you hear about the one lady. June 2nd she left a mall in Canada 3 minutes before a shooting because she had a bad feeling. She was one of the ones killed in Denver. That's some Final Destination sh*t.


----------



## soulnova (Jul 20, 2012)

I keep reading about death threats related to the movie. Can anyone tell me about them?


----------



## SaskeKun (Jul 20, 2012)

Such horrible news...


----------



## Bender (Jul 20, 2012)

When I heard that the location of the shooting was "Aurora" I thought it was IL Aurora which is like 10 min away from my house. I was kinda pissing my pants at the thought of it.


----------



## Lucciola (Jul 20, 2012)

To think that I could have been one of the victims if I hadn't volunteered to stay back in the lab until early this morning so my partner could go with his friends to the premiere... I didn't want to wake up to this... Glad that none of the people I know got hurt.


----------



## Bender (Jul 20, 2012)

Lapis Lazuli said:


> To think that I could have been one of the victims if I hadn't volunteered to stay back in the lab until early this morning so my partner could go with his friends to the premiere... I didn't want to wake up to this...



Holy shit really? 

Seriously, it's like Denver is the cosmic plaything. 5 years ago there was Tech (forget the name of college) and now this.


----------



## Raidoton (Jul 20, 2012)

soulnova said:


> I keep reading about death threats related to the movie. Can anyone tell me about them?


Do you mean this?: 

I don't think it has anything to do with the shooting.


----------



## impersonal (Jul 20, 2012)

kazuri said:


> That's not true. Actually its the opposite. Anyone can build a machine capable of shooting projectiles with deadly velocity in a couple days(or less). But it actually takes weeks/months for alcohol..


I wrote a gun, not a potato cannon or a boomstick with 50% chances to explode in your hand and zero accuracy.


kazuri said:


> Are you going to ban all stretchy things and all small pieces of metal? Because you could be just as dangerous with a slingshot.


No you can't, that's why we use guns instead of slingshots.

That being said, I'm not sure gun laws are that relevant in that case. a) it's 14 people. Gun violence kills more than that in the US everyday, so it doesn't make much sense to consider this one case as the basis for all future gun laws. 

I'm just surprised at the level of absurdity to which people will go to defend gun laws.


----------



## Arishem (Jul 20, 2012)

Sadly, as cynical as it is, the Onion has the right of it.





> WASHINGTON?Americans across the nation confirmed today that, unfortunately, due to their extreme familiarity with the type of tragedy that occurred in a Colorado movie theater last night, they sadly know exactly how the events following the horrific shooting of 12 people will unfold.
> 
> While admitting they "absolutely hate" the fact they have this knowledge, the nation's 300 million citizens told reporters they can pinpoint down to the hour when the first candlelight vigil will be held, roughly how many people will attend, how many times the county sheriff will address the media in the coming weeks, and when the town-wide memorial service will be held.
> 
> ...


----------



## Oturan (Jul 20, 2012)

I guess he's not a batman fan...


----------



## Draffut (Jul 20, 2012)

Bender said:


> Yeah. Good riddance.
> 
> Seriously, something needs to be done about gun laws in this country. Look, I know us Americans love our guns but c'mon a line has to be drawn. Sure you want to use it to protect your daughter from that rapist boyfriend or hers or whatever. But you should have trust in your daughter's friends or your own ability to fuck his ass up. Seriously checks need to be done before giving guns to ANYONE.



From what I know, the only previous run in he had with the law was a speeding ticket.  A security check wouldn't have done anything at all as far as this story is concerned.


----------



## MCTDread (Jul 20, 2012)

wow man....  what kind of society are we living in now? Hope he enjoys his straight ticket to Hell.


----------



## Terra Branford (Jul 20, 2012)

Dear Lord! :amazed And this was all done over a movie? Hopefully the shooter gets his a long punishment.  All those innocent people.  I hope those that died rest in peace and God bless their souls.

Now I don't wanna go to the theaters in case of crazy people. :sigh

*This news has destroyed the business of a lady (she doesn't live in America). Everyone on Twitter was twitting to "Aurora" tag and the lady thought they were talking about her store (also called Aurora) and everyone attacked her for it, uncaring that she had no idea what was happening in America or that she didn't do it on purpose...some people are dicks.*


----------



## Bender (Jul 20, 2012)

I seriously need to watch my shit when I go to see another viewing of the film sometime the day after tomorrow or next week.


----------



## Unlosing Ranger (Jul 20, 2012)

To go see batman or not to see batman...
Hmmmm


----------



## kazuri (Jul 20, 2012)

> I wrote a gun, not a potato cannon or a boomstick with 50% chances to explode in your hand and zero accuracy.



You win the semantics but lose the logic. And making up fake stats is always a good way to reassure yourself.



> No you can't, that's why we use guns instead of slingshots.



False. It is not only not impossible, but it is not hard to build a slingshot that can move projectiles as fast as bullets.

Not only that, but slingshots reload exponentially faster, unless youre going to try to bring up some argument about someone carrying dozens of guns and preloaded cartridges etc.


If you want to learn how wrong you are about slingshots(probably not) go check out a youtube channel called joergsprave



> I keep reading about death threats related to the movie. Can anyone tell me about them?



Was that not just the people who gave it bad reviews getting the threats, or some other?


----------



## josh101 (Jul 20, 2012)

kazuri said:


> You win the semantics but lose the logic. And making up fake stats is always a good way to reassure yourself.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


He doesn't have to try. He entered the theatre with an AR-15 assault rifle, a Remmington 12-guage shotgun and a 40-caliber Glock handgun. Show me a slingshot which can do even a tenth of the damage those guns could. Check nearly every mass shooting, they don't just simply carry around one small handgun or something. 

By the way, I get why handguns and such are easily obtainable to the public, but a fucking assault rifle? What reason does a citizen need a fucking assault rifle for? How is it legal to sell them?


----------



## Terra Branford (Jul 20, 2012)

Bender said:


> I seriously need to watch my shit when I go to see another viewing of the film sometime the day after tomorrow or next week.



You shouldn't go at all. The next time could be a group of 'em.


----------



## Mider T (Jul 20, 2012)

Unlosing Ranger said:


> To go see batman or not to see batman...
> Hmmmm



Batman isn't showing.  The Dark Knight Rises is though.


----------



## Bender (Jul 20, 2012)

@Terra Brandford

I'll be okay. 

First sign of someone coming in with that shit I'm gonna jump over the fucking seats and out the exit.


----------



## BadassPrince101 (Jul 20, 2012)

Rep Me and Ill tell you guys a funny joke


----------



## Dolohov27 (Jul 20, 2012)

People these days, cant even go to the movies in peace.


----------



## Arishem (Jul 20, 2012)

The so-called assault rifle was a completely legal, semi-automatic AR-15 that can only fire as fast as you can pull the trigger. The fact that he could acquire a 100 round drum magazine for it is where you go "What the fuck?"


----------



## Terra Branford (Jul 20, 2012)

Bender said:


> @Terra Brandford
> 
> I'll be okay.
> 
> First sign of someone coming in with that shit I'm gonna jump over the fucking seats and out the exit.



Then you should take a seat close to the exit, just to be extra safe!


----------



## Bender (Jul 20, 2012)

Terra Branford said:


> Then you should take a seat close to the exit, just to be extra safe!



Most definitely.  

I really hope WB doesn't go ahead and take the movie out of theaters in light of this horrifying incident.


----------



## Descent of the Lion (Jul 20, 2012)

This is why we can't have nice things.


----------



## Mael (Jul 20, 2012)

So according to police reports he had made himself out to be a "Joker" of sorts.


----------



## Terra Branford (Jul 20, 2012)

Bender said:


> Most definitely.
> 
> I really hope WB doesn't go ahead and take the movie out of theaters in light of this horrifying incident.



I doubt they would take the movie out of theaters. As far as the news channels show, they aren't associating the shooting to the movie, not yet at least.


----------



## Arishem (Jul 20, 2012)

The Joker doesn't have red hair.


----------



## Creme egg (Jul 20, 2012)

those poor people.


----------



## Mider T (Jul 20, 2012)

He obviously flew off the deep end, or is pretending too.


----------



## masamune1 (Jul 20, 2012)

Arishem said:


> The Joker doesn't have red hair.



He just said he was the Joker when police arrested him; the fact that he had dyed his hair has nothing to do with it.


----------



## Rashou (Jul 20, 2012)

Jeez, this is just awful. 

Despite how horrific this tragedy is, I doubt more stringent gun laws would have stopped this guy. People like this are always the worst kind of evil--they appear as normal or even upstanding citizens until they pull this crap. This guy would've gone through about a dozen chemistry courses, too, so the only thing that would have changed if guns weren't involved is the method he used to inflict terror (and it probably would have been more deadly).


----------



## creative (Jul 20, 2012)

saw this on /co/ not to long ago. I'm flipping the hell out right now. this shit isn't fair for the families who wanted to just chill the fuck out and catch a flick. meanwhile this fuck, James Holmes is probably going to get 20 or so years for co-splaying Bane and out right slaughtering innocent people for no damned reason.


----------



## Mijuu (Jul 20, 2012)

"Some men just want to watch the whole world burn."


----------



## Revolution (Jul 20, 2012)

Nimander said:


> Times like this it's hard to keep any faith in humanity, when a person would do this with zero compunctions and no care at all about what the consequences are.  Fuck, man.  What a shitty world we live in at times, fully of our own making as a species.



Keep hope.  Just a few dago a man celebrated his 60th birthday by handing out money to whoever needed it.  Not all humans are scum.  There are many compassionate people out there.


----------



## Kaitou (Jul 20, 2012)

And the friend told the police he was "The Joker".

That's pretty messed up.


----------



## Mijuu (Jul 20, 2012)

a creative color said:


> saw this on /co/ not to long ago. I'm flipping the hell out right now. this shit isn't fair for the families who wanted to just chill the fuck out and catch a flick. meanwhile this fuck, James Holmes is probably going to get 20 or so years for co-splaying Bane and out right slaughtering innocent people for no damned reason.



Only 20?

Was gonna say 50 or somethin....


----------



## creative (Jul 20, 2012)

Mijuu said:


> Only 20?
> 
> Was gonna say 50 or somethin....



the number is more or less irreverent. our (USA) criminal justice system is a revolving door for god's sakes. is Colorado green lit for capital punishment or not?


----------



## Blue_Panter_Ninja (Jul 20, 2012)

a creative color said:


> saw this on /co/ not to long ago. I'm flipping the hell out right now. this shit isn't fair for the families who wanted to just chill the fuck out and catch a flick. meanwhile this fuck, James Holmes is probably going to get 20 or so years for co-splaying Bane and out right slaughtering innocent people for no damned reason.



Guy wanted to be Joker!


----------



## The Weeknd (Jul 20, 2012)

Now i'm pretty scared to go to the movie tmr on Saturday...Shootings happened earlier this month in Toronto but not about movies or shit.


----------



## EJ (Jul 20, 2012)

It's times like these I wish we didn't have the current legal system and tortured the fuck out of this sick fuck 


my emotions are deep, and I should restrain what I say. But it's the truth in which I feel.


----------



## Mintaka (Jul 20, 2012)

Flow said:


> It's times like these I wish we didn't have the  current legal system and tortured the fuck out of this sick fuck
> 
> 
> my emotions are deep, and I should restrain what I say. But it's the truth in which I feel.


Translation:  I want revenge not justice.


----------



## EJ (Jul 20, 2012)

Which is all subjective. Justice means one thing to you.

And to me as well. I just feel as though this guy should be tortured. Enough with the "THIS REVENGE WILL KILL YOU"

I honestly think sick fucks like this shouldn't live off of my taxes. Torture them, then put a bullet in their skull.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (Jul 20, 2012)

TittyNipple said:


> Now i'm pretty scared to go to the movie tmr on Saturday...Shootings happened earlier this month in Toronto but not about movies or shit.



There will never be a safer time to see a movie. People will be paranoid as hell. I'm going tonight and actually feel pretty safe, everyone will be more aware.


----------



## Arishem (Jul 20, 2012)

I think the one thing we can conclude from all these shootings is that mental health institutions must rise again in the US.


----------



## The Weeknd (Jul 20, 2012)

Shinigami Perv said:


> There will never be a safer time to see a movie. People will be paranoid as hell. I'm going tonight and actually feel pretty safe, everyone will be more aware.



I feel a bit safer now too because the news said that there is going to be more security in our theatres now.


----------



## ShiggyDiggyDoo (Jul 20, 2012)

Flow said:


> Which is all subjective. Justice means one thing to you.
> 
> And to me as well. I just feel as though this guy should be tortured. Enough with the "THIS REVENGE WILL KILL YOU"
> 
> I honestly think sick fucks like this shouldn't live off of my taxes. Torture them, then put a bullet in their skull.



You do drive a good point in the fact that taxpayers actually having to pay for this guy is nerve wrecking. 

But I think torturing him is pretty damn bad as well... We must not stoop to his level. An eye for an eye makes the world blind.


----------



## Mintaka (Jul 20, 2012)

Flow said:


> Which is all subjective. Justice means one thing to you.
> 
> And to me as well. I just feel as though this guy should be tortured. Enough with the "THIS REVENGE WILL KILL YOU"
> 
> I honestly think sick fucks like this shouldn't live off of my taxes. Torture them, then put a bullet in their skull.


  Real subjective there flow.  Are you going to tell me that torture is moral now?

This is only  going to satisfy your and others barbaric urges to see him suffer.  It's not going to bring the dead back, it's not going to make him rethink his crimes and actually feel some remorse for his victims, it's probably going to cause more controversy than anything, it's lowering ourselves to his level,  it's completely immoral,  ect ect, ect.

This is just reactionary thinking to a horrific crime.


----------



## Megaharrison (Jul 20, 2012)

Why are people afraid to go to the movies? I went this afternoon and it was fine. The shooting was a freak thing. You shouldnt let these fears control your life anywaty. If youre gonna try to avoid freak shootings you better go full howard hughes  cause it can happen anywhere and there is no way to stop it. The chances of beingin one is astronomically low, you may as well avoid ridig airplanes. My theatre was Packed and everyone was fine/ happy. Movie was the worst of the trilogy though, but still good.


----------



## impersonal (Jul 20, 2012)

Megaharrison said:


> Why are people afraid to go to the movies? I went this afternoon and it was fine. The shooting was a freak thing. You shouldnt let these fears control your life anywaty. If youre gonna try to avoid freak shootings you better go full howard hughes  cause it can happen anywhere and there is no way to stop it. The chances of beingin one is astronomically low, you may as well avoid ridig airplanes. My theatre was Packed and everyone was fine/ happy. Movie was the worst of the trilogy though, but still good.



If anything this makes me more excited about seeing the movie. The chances of getting shot are ridiculously small, BUT you nonetheless get a free extra thrill because you won't be able to not think about it. Especially during shooting scenes.


----------



## Rima (Jul 20, 2012)

This is so sad. You eagerly await to see a movie then lose your life during the movie.


----------



## kazuri (Jul 20, 2012)

I love the advice I keep seeing on tv to 'survive a theater shootings' Yea, laying down to survive is basically a coin flip. It might work great if you are the only one.. Killers mind: "Hmm, I only shot to the left, but a bunch of people in the back right are laying down without pools of blood..."



> Now i'm pretty scared to go to the movie tmr on Saturday...Shootings happened earlier this month in Toronto but not about movies or shit.



...Do you know how many people die in car accidents every year? The odds of you dying are in a car accident on the way to the theater is exponentially more likely than getting shot in one.


----------



## PikaCheeka (Jul 20, 2012)

Supposedly they are starting to pull ads and edit gun violence out of DKR trailers now.


----------



## Vermin (Jul 20, 2012)

i say that you shouldn't let this affect you going to the movies though, but to be more clear of your soundings.


Flow said:


> It's times like these I wish we didn't have the current legal system and tortured the fuck out of this sick fuck
> 
> 
> my emotions are deep, and I should restrain what I say. But it's the truth in which I feel.



i feel you man. it's things like this that make me lose my hope for humanity. but doing actions to his level would make us just as bad if not worse then him.


----------



## Linkdarkside (Jul 20, 2012)




----------



## Palpatine (Jul 20, 2012)

Can't even be safe at the movies anymore man...


----------



## drache (Jul 20, 2012)

Shinigami Perv said:


> TBH I'm not sure gun control would have had an effect here. He's a 24 year old neuroscience PHD candidate with no criminal record, I'm certain he's bright enough to acquire a gun even if they were illegal.
> 
> Hard to see how a gun law could have had any influence on an event like this.


 
I disagree though the level of control needed to achieve a meaningful result would never be agreed with in the US


----------



## Tyler (Jul 20, 2012)




----------



## EJ (Jul 20, 2012)

Mintaka said:


> Real subjective there flow.  Are you going to tell me that torture is moral now?
> 
> This is only  going to satisfy your and others barbaric urges to see him suffer.  It's not going to bring the dead back, it's not going to make him rethink his crimes and actually feel some remorse for his victims, it's probably going to cause more controversy than anything, it's lowering ourselves to his level,  it's completely immoral,  ect ect, ect.
> 
> This is just reactionary thinking to a horrific crime.



Nah, still feel the same.

I couldn't care less, I'd feel satisfied in knowing he was tortured to death.


----------



## Misha-San (Jul 20, 2012)

I don't think he has remorse for killing 12 people he knew what he was getting himself into by going into that theater and pulling two guns on the poor people.


----------



## Mael (Jul 20, 2012)

Misha-San said:


> I don't think he has remorse for killing 12 people he knew what got himself into by going into that theater and pulling two guns on the poor people.



Making the notion of rehabilitation all the more futile.


----------



## Terra Branford (Jul 20, 2012)

PikaCheeka said:


> Supposedly they are starting to pull ads and edit gun violence out of DKR trailers now.



Wat?  What will the DKR commercials consist of then? They would be boring.


----------



## Bender (Jul 20, 2012)

Apparently this guy was a nut in more than just one way (I.E. shooting up theaters for no goddamn reason):



The dude is racist, hates rap music and racist towards black people who play it.


----------



## Bender (Jul 20, 2012)

The dickhead responsible for the alleged shootings will appear in court on Monday:



Life sentence plz


----------



## Stan Lee (Jul 20, 2012)

Kaitou said:


> And the friend told the police he was "The Joker".
> 
> That's pretty messed up.



Yeah, that actually got under my skin.


----------



## EJ (Jul 20, 2012)

Bender said:


> Life sentence plz



Execution please.


----------



## Terra Branford (Jul 20, 2012)

Bender said:


> The dickhead responsible for the alleged shootings will appear in court on Monday:
> 
> 
> 
> Life sentence plz



Good. I hope he is sentenced for a long, long time.


----------



## DemonDragonJ (Jul 20, 2012)

I heard about this event earlier today, and I do find it to be a terrible tragedy, indeed. I do hope that all the people who have been affected by this event can find a sense of consolation and closure after what they have suffered.

Incidentally, I went to see _The Dark Knight Rises_ tonight (which i shall discuss in its own thread), and no such event occurred at that showing, so I am very glad to see that this was an isolated incident. It seems that the shooter perhaps was seeking to reenact scenes from that film, which is a sign that he was perhaps mentally-unstable or very violent, but I am glad that he was stopped, so that he cannot commit further actions of this nature.


----------



## Revolution (Jul 20, 2012)

Kaitou said:


> And the friend told the police he was "The Joker".
> 
> That's pretty messed up.



Seriously?  A couple of years ago a student at UCSB was acting weird and calling himself "The Joker" before he was taken to a mental ward.  He was walking around the bookstore telling people he was "going to kill comissioner Gordon".


----------



## SSGG (Jul 20, 2012)

Mider T said:


> Yeah CTK fucked the title up, it took place in Aurora.


 
Technically, citing it as taking place in Denver wasn't incorrect; Aurora is a suburb of Denver. If someone lives in "the Denver area", they could easily live in Aurora.


----------



## Hossaim (Jul 20, 2012)

Flow said:


> Execution please.



Yeah, Killing people is wrong.

We should kill people then.


----------



## Mider T (Jul 20, 2012)

"Technically" but anyone who's ever been to Aurora knows that in everything BNO it's it's own city.  



Bender said:


> Apparently this guy was a nut in more than just one way (I.E. shooting up theaters for no goddamn reason):
> 
> 
> 
> The dude is racist, hates rap music and racist towards black people who play it.



Yeah I doubt it was that serious



> ?He was talking trash because he liked rock music and country and he made a slightly racial comment about people listening to rap music,? she said.



Sounds any buzzed guy you hear actually.


----------



## EJ (Jul 20, 2012)

Hossaim said:


> Yeah, Killing people is wrong.
> 
> We should kill people then.



I disagree. We should let them live in a prison, and let them live the rest of their living off of our taxes, with some type of "Cred" for what they have done.


----------



## Mider T (Jul 20, 2012)

Mijuu said:


> "Some men just want to watch the whole world burn."



Whole wasn't in there, you should know that with a Joker avatar.  Stop adding your own words.


----------



## Stunna (Jul 20, 2012)

lol I wasn't going to say anything.


----------



## neodragzero (Jul 20, 2012)

Talk about some awful news. The biggest problem of the night for DC was just getting a little wet and finding out all you get at Lockheed Martin IMAX is a bottle of water and some poster you'll forget.


----------



## Sablés (Jul 21, 2012)

The fuck is this world coming to, can't even watch movies in peace without the fear of getting shot anymore?


----------



## Darklyre (Jul 21, 2012)

Hossaim said:


> Yeah, Killing people is wrong.
> 
> We should kill people then.



No, _murdering_ people is bad. And wrong. Killing them legally is gnodab!


----------



## SSGG (Jul 21, 2012)

Mider T said:


> "Technically" but anyone who's ever been to Aurora knows that in everything BNO it's it's own city.


 
Dude, I've been to Aurora plenty of times; I live in Colorado. The name "Aurora", however, is very generic and means nothing to those living outside the state, so it's perfectly logical to call the area "Denver". Aurora isn't the central hub of the populated area, Denver is, which is why Aurora is considered apart of it.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Jul 21, 2012)

People are already saying that this was a stunt by some outside entity to force people to sign onto that gun treaty...


----------



## Tyler (Jul 21, 2012)

SSGG said:


> Dude, I've been to Aurora plenty of times; I live in Colorado. The name "Aurora", however, is very generic and means nothing to those living outside the state, so it's perfectly logical to call the area "Denver". Aurora isn't the central hub of the populated area, Denver is, which is why Aurora is considered apart of it.



Why are you even wasting your time explaining it to him? Let him ramble.


----------



## Stan Lee (Jul 21, 2012)




----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Jul 21, 2012)

Oh nice touch with the static, You Tube. You dicks!


----------



## Shock Therapy (Jul 21, 2012)

Dude needs to be tortured and then executed for great justice


----------



## shyakugaun (Jul 21, 2012)

man .....


----------



## ImperatorMortis (Jul 21, 2012)

Wasn't Batmans parents shot outside a movie theater? 



Raidoton said:


> Where is Batman?



Apparently this article is his/her origin story.


----------



## Kaitlyn (Jul 21, 2012)

This guy not only killed people, but rigged his own home with explosives!

He is not right in the mind at all...


----------



## Bleach (Jul 21, 2012)

At least he wasn't uhh... Muslim......


----------



## Revolution (Jul 21, 2012)

Bleach said:


> At least he wasn't uhh... Muslim......



  At least, nothing!  What a stupid thing to say.  People died.  Weither he was a Muslim or not is so left field.


----------



## ImperatorMortis (Jul 21, 2012)

Bleach said:


> At least he wasn't uhh... Muslim......



.....

/10char


----------



## Bleach (Jul 21, 2012)

O_o?

Yea people died and that's all bad and whatnot but then once every media outlet is over the losses they'd be all over the guy who did this. If it was a Muslim I'm sure we'd have more people running around saying "OMG Muslim's hate batman, movies, and everything else still!"

Just saying... I mean we have 12 pages of people saying how horrible it is, which it is of course. Want me to say the same and be on my way?


----------



## UchihaItachimk (Jul 21, 2012)

Eh this is horrible still i am dying to see the movie .


----------



## Tyler (Jul 21, 2012)

UchihaItachimk said:


> Eh this is horrible still *i am dying to see the movie .*



 .


----------



## Seph (Jul 21, 2012)

At least it wasn't a Muslim.


----------



## drache (Jul 21, 2012)

UchihaItachimk said:


> Eh this is horrible still i am dying to see the movie .


 
i think you could have chosen a better turn of a phrase there bud


----------



## davidpliskin (Jul 21, 2012)

I'm not saying I know what happened, I am only questioning the timing and the suspect. 
The real reason the US has the 2nd amendment is for protection against tyranny, not for duck hunting. The drafters of the Constitution knew what happens when a government over reaches; a prime example being N. Korea. Never give up your rights. 

PS I can't remember the last time I've been to a megaplex and there was not a cop working security, than again I'm not from Colorado. My heart goes out to the families.


----------



## Bender (Jul 21, 2012)

Flow said:


> Execution please.



Execution is the easy way out for heavy offenders like this dude. Sick fucks like him deserve to rot him jail for the rest of their life.


----------



## perman07 (Jul 21, 2012)

Flow said:


> I disagree. We should let them live in a prison, and let them live the rest of their living off of our taxes, with some type of "Cred" for what they have done.


Isn't death row statistically more expensive than life in prison in America? Because of all the lawyer fees, and all the appeal processes?

Not that money should be the justification for or against death penalty..


----------



## hammer (Jul 21, 2012)

perman07 said:


> Isn't death row statistically more expensive than life in prison in America? Because of all the lawyer fees, and all the appeal processes?
> 
> Not that money should be the justification for or against death penalty..



I found studies that depending on the age group it is about the same.


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 21, 2012)

> California has spent more than $4 billion on capital punishment since it was reinstated in 1978 (about $308 million for each of the 13 executions carried out)



308 million dollars per person is not even close to "about the same"
It's preposterous. The family would be better served with 1% of  that ammount


----------



## Mael (Jul 21, 2012)

$308 million per execution?

Bullets don't cost that much...c'mon.


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 21, 2012)

death penalty is inexcusably retarded on 99% of the times, the 1% being that the criminal continues to rape and kill in jail


----------



## Seph (Jul 21, 2012)

Banhammer said:


> death penalty is inexcusably retarded on 99% of the times, the 1% being that the criminal continues to rape and kill in jail



Solitary confinement.


----------



## blackbird (Jul 21, 2012)

Classic France?

Tossup between "out of sympathy and respect" and "the terrorists win!".


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 21, 2012)

Seph said:


> Solitary confinement.



It's an option.
I'm just saying, at that point, capital punishment is no longer an inexcusably retarded rallying call for stupid rednecks and grieving beyond reason families either


----------



## Seph (Jul 21, 2012)

Banhammer said:


> It's an option.
> I'm just saying, at that point, *capital punishment is no longer an inexcusably retarded* rallying call for stupid rednecks and grieving beyond reason families either



Why kill someone when you can put them in solitary confinement?


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 21, 2012)

I'm not a sadist


----------



## Rabbit and Rose (Jul 21, 2012)

Its all over the news... like the colorado fire. Wuts going on in co. Did the max security prisoners escape yet?


----------



## Mael (Jul 21, 2012)

Sasuke_Bateman said:


> Oh dear, the colony is becoming more and more pathetic each day. I hope it may continue



Too bad Bieber wasn't one of the dead...


----------



## Rabbit and Rose (Jul 21, 2012)

I kinda feel just a bit worried theres a forum user that lives in that specific area....


----------



## drache (Jul 21, 2012)

davidpliskin said:


> I'm not saying I know what happened, I am only questioning the timing and the suspect.
> The real reason the US has the 2nd amendment is for protection against tyranny, not for duck hunting. The drafters of the Constitution knew what happens when a government over reaches; a prime example being N. Korea. Never give up your rights.
> 
> PS I can't remember the last time I've been to a megaplex and there was not a cop working security, than again I'm not from Colorado. My heart goes out to the families.



oh good gods take the tea bagger conspiracy bs to some other thread please


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Jul 21, 2012)

[YOUTUBE]PezlFNTGWv4[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## Seph (Jul 21, 2012)

Banhammer said:


> I'm not a sadist



They can be put in solitary confinement but still treated humanely like in European countries.


----------



## Bart (Jul 21, 2012)

But still I think there needs to be some change in the firearms laws and the whole NRA, and I was really surprised to hear the laws about it in Germany ;O

Has anyone else seen Jessica's twitter account? ;(


----------



## Petes12 (Jul 21, 2012)

davidpliskin said:


> I'm not saying I know what happened, I am only questioning the timing and the suspect.
> The real reason the US has the 2nd amendment is for protection against tyranny, not for duck hunting. The drafters of the Constitution knew what happens when a government over reaches; a prime example being N. Korea. Never give up your rights.
> 
> PS I can't remember the last time I've been to a megaplex and there was not a cop working security, than again I'm not from Colorado. My heart goes out to the families.



kill yourself

ps i've never seen a cop at the theater


----------



## MangekyouLollipop (Jul 21, 2012)

I just read it in the newspaper. Gosh, that's one insane guy, who is really bored.


----------



## Shaz (Jul 21, 2012)

Batman will rise and fight this bitch.


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 21, 2012)

Seph said:


> They can be put in solitary confinement but still treated humanely like in European countries.



There's a point in your life when you're just being transitioned from one coffin to a smaller one


----------



## Anarch (Jul 21, 2012)

How is it that a man enters a cinema theatre with an assault rifle , a shot gun and a glock ? In my city ( here in India ) I'm not even allowed to enter a hall with my cigarette lighter !! Has Denver never heard of metal detectors and security guards ?


----------



## hammer (Jul 21, 2012)

movie theaters with metal detectors? thats good.  our security is teens


----------



## Mael (Jul 21, 2012)

Five of the dead ID'd.

Petty Officer Third Class John Larimer, 27
Alex Sullivan, 27
Jessica Ghawi, 24
Micayla Medek, 23
Matt McQuinn, unk

Fucker killed a serviceman too...yeah honestly I can't really feel squeamish toward any harsh punishment laid on him.


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 21, 2012)

gottaa say, it's really hard not to wish there were seventeen other guns there at the moment

Silly, but still hard


----------



## Bart (Jul 21, 2012)

Mael said:


> Five of the dead ID'd.
> 
> Petty Officer Third Class John Larimer, 27
> Alex Sullivan, 27
> ...



Really sad stuff there ;(

But yeah I kinda agree with you; it's been on the news constantly over here in England.


----------



## Mael (Jul 21, 2012)

Banhammer said:


> gottaa say, it's really hard not to wish there were seventeen other guns there at the moment
> 
> Silly, but still hard



If by which to stop that "Joker" fucker then yeah.


----------



## hammer (Jul 21, 2012)

do petty officers normally carry weapons?


----------



## Mael (Jul 21, 2012)

hammer said:


> do petty officers normally carry weapons?



I don't think so...not in civilian clothing.


----------



## Andrew (Jul 21, 2012)

He claims himself to be the Joker and dyed his hair *red*. The joker has *green* hair. 

What a complete senseless and such an idiotic utter failure.

The joker also has _scars_ on his face and _mostly_ uses laugh gas as his weapon. 

This guy knows nothing about the Joker and how to be like him. He doesn't know what losing a life means and it seems to me, *he knows nothing about DC comics.*

Its a shame, what he tried doing was fucken stupid and senseless, 
no open statement of any remorse.


----------



## EvilMoogle (Jul 21, 2012)

Banhammer said:


> gottaa say, it's really hard not to wish there were seventeen other guns there at the moment
> 
> Silly, but still hard


News reports say he had a bullet proof vest on.

What's really more likely?  That the gun holders would recognize the threat, snap to attention, and pull off an expert head-shot ending hostilities in a darkened theater or that they'd accidentally hit someone else in the crossfire while trying to take down the guy?

/Edit:


> An honors student and Ph.D. candidate at a nearby college with a clean  arrest record, Holmes allegedly entered the movie auditorium wearing a  ballistics helmet, bulletproof vest, bulletproof leggings, gas mask and  gloves.  He detonated multiple smoke bombs, and then began firing at  viewers in the sold-out auditorium, police said today.




Smoke bombs, bulletproof vest, ballistics helmet, that's a daaaaaamn hard shot in a dark crowded theater.

Also assumes that the 16-slightly-slower responses choose the _right_ gunman shooting in a darkened theater to fire at.


----------



## impersonal (Jul 21, 2012)

Akatsuki said:


> He claims himself to be the Joker and dyed his hair *red*. The joker has *green* hair.
> 
> What a complete senseless and such an idiotic utter failure.
> 
> ...


He knows nothing about DC comics! Unforgivable!


----------



## Stalin (Jul 21, 2012)

He is such a narcissistic little shit.



> He knows nothing about DC comics! Unforgivable!



I think he was kidding.


----------



## Bleach (Jul 21, 2012)

Seph said:


> At least it wasn't a Muslim.



I like the way you think.


----------



## masamune1 (Jul 21, 2012)

Anarch said:


> How is it that a man enters a cinema theatre with an assault rifle , a shot gun and a glock ? In my city ( here in India ) I'm not even allowed to enter a hall with my cigarette lighter !! Has Denver never heard of metal detectors and security guards ?



1) Cinema Theatres do not have metal detectors or security guards. 

2) He didn't. He waiting until the film started, then snuck out of the emergency exist, went to his car, got geared up (gas mask, etc.) and drove it up to the door. He then threw tear gas into the cinema and stood in front of the screen. People thought it was some kind of stunt, even when he started shooting people- during a shooting scene (wonder if he'd seen the film before....). It was only when they noticed people were dying that panic started. A lot of the people he targeted were the ones running for the exit.



Akatsuki said:


> He claims himself to be the Joker and dyed his hair *red*. The joker has *green* hair.
> 
> What a complete senseless and such an idiotic utter failure.
> 
> ...



The Joker doesn't have scars on his face, except on a couple of occassions depending on the writer. The movie version does, but the movie version never uses laughing gas. The comic version has shot people hundreds of times, and killed with other weapons. And yeah, shooting a bunch of people in the middle of a Batman movie is actually something the Joker might think of doing. He'd just do it with more pizzaz. 

He never said that his hair was dyed to emulate the Joker. Even if it was, maybe he just preferred red. 

Don't be that guy. The Joker stuff is really irrelevant. And he was probably just joking.


----------



## Jαmes (Jul 21, 2012)

the guy was fucked in the head right? man that's sad.


----------



## Archangel Michael (Jul 21, 2012)

It's sad that so many people die because of this lunatic.


----------



## Andrew (Jul 21, 2012)

masamune1 said:


> The Joker doesn't have scars on his face, except on a couple of occassions depending on the writer. The movie version does, but the movie version never uses laughing gas. The comic version has shot people hundreds of times, and killed with other weapons. And yeah, shooting a bunch of people in the middle of a Batman movie is actually something the Joker might think of doing. He'd just do it with more pizzaz.
> 
> He never said that his hair was dyed to emulate the Joker. Even if it was, maybe he just preferred red.
> 
> Don't be that guy. The Joker stuff is really irrelevant. And he was probably just joking.


Before the day is over, when you look at this, multiple aspects of reasons comes to mind of why he did this. To begin with, there are a number of Joker fans out there creating joker fan shoots on YouTube, people dressed as him and doing things like taking down a cinematic  poster to gain media attention. This guy has no background of mental history, just some college experience who decided not to finish his major. Instead of doing the obvious thing and change his career (which he could have done, if that was the reason of the shooting) instead, he took an interest with *a villain, * a*n obsessed villain he turned out wanting to be * so bad, he took other *peoples lives for it.* With *this mental deranged image* of this in his mind instead, he is just another criminal who committed crimes that ruined peoples lives. In the end, he didn't accomplish anything since t*here are no real super heroes* with real professional ability to take down criminals.  *I am almost certain* He was hoping to be admitted in a mental institute so he can "escape." But there is no Arkham Asylum and instead, he ends up in a prison cell.


----------



## Xion (Jul 21, 2012)

Pilaf said:


> Because creating a black market for firearms wherein only dangerous psychopaths can get ahold of them will stop all the gun violence in the world.



Hey if it works for drugs...oh wait... 

And so wait was this another crazy conservative going on a shooting spree (i.e. Breivik sans the effort and manifesto)?


----------



## Anarch (Jul 21, 2012)

masamune1 said:


> 1) Cinema Theatres *where i am from* do not have metal detectors or security guards.



corrected for you.

They do in my city ( Kolkata , India ) . All public places where a lot of people congregate do here . I guess we learnt our lessons from our terror attacks.

One would think that after all the terror attacks on US soil , you guys would take it more seriously too.

And i'm not even going to talk about how fucked up it is that a 24 year old civilian can buy body armour or an assault rifle.


----------



## hammer (Jul 21, 2012)

buying body armor s not a problem for me the rifle is though


----------



## Xion (Jul 21, 2012)

impersonal said:


> It's actually quite the opposite. When guns are illegal, to obtain one you have to *know the right people*. You can't just walk around and ask _"hey man, do you know where I can get a gun?"_ until you find someone who knows. Being a 24 year old neuroscience PHD candidate with no criminal record and no friends is pretty much the worst profile ever to obtain an illegal gun.
> 
> Remember the swedish guy who killed 90 people, Anders Breivik? He went through a lot of trouble to obtain his guns. He got himself a trip to central Europe to search for weapons, and even there didn't manage to find anything... Despite being a bodybuilt extremist, instead of a semi-autistic psycho. In the end, he could only obtain his guns _legally_ in Norway, by being part of a shooting club and getting a hunting licence.
> 
> *So yeah, gun laws do restrict gun availability, even if you have a lot of motivation. Gun prices go up, and obtaining a gun becomes more dangerous and impractical. To obtain a gun, you have to be motivated, patient, with some money.*



This is actually very much true.

Breivik, scum of the fucking earth and with motivations completely retarded, still was a fucking smart guy, at least smart enough to be able to go through a laborious process to acquire weapons, bombs, etc. and to get fronts for those activities and plan his attacks for a number of years. And it worked like a fucking charm at the expense of the rest of society.

So yes, it's important to keep in mind that while gun control might help, it would not deter the most motivated people. But in America where there already exists so many weapons, extreme gun control measures are unlikely to dramatically have the same effect as they do in Europe and would more than likely restrict gun availability to criminal elements.



Anarch said:


> corrected for you.
> 
> They do in my city ( Kolkata , India ) . All public places where a lot of people congregate do here . I guess we learnt our lessons from our terror attacks.
> 
> ...



He went through an exit door. Lot of good a metal detector would do either way with someone that heavily armed, though cops are always at the front of movie theaters I have been at.


----------



## masamune1 (Jul 21, 2012)

Akatsuki said:


> Before the day is over, when you look at this, multiple aspects of reasons comes to mind of why he did this. To begin with, there are a number of Joker fans out there creating joker fan shoots on YouTube, people dressed as him and doing things like taking down a cinematic  poster to gain media attention. This guy has no background of mental history, just some college experience who decided not to finish his major. Instead of doing the obvious thing and change his career (which he could have done, if that was the reason of the shooting) instead, he took an interest with *a villain, * a*n obsessed villain he turned out wanting to be * so bad, he took other *peoples lives for it.* With *this mental deranged image* of this in his mind instead, he is just another criminal who committed crimes that ruined peoples lives. In the end, he didn't accomplish anything since t*here are no real super heroes* with real professional ability to take down criminals.  *I am almost certain* He was hoping to be admitted in a mental institute so he can "escape." But there is no Arkham Asylum and instead, he ends up in a prison cell.



Firstly, he was a PhD student. And apparently a brilliant one.  He did not have just "some college experience". 

Secondly, all he did was say that he was the Joker when he was caught. Don't jump to conclusions and assume that this was all about him pretending to be a comic book villain for the evulz.



Anarch said:


> corrected for you.
> 
> They do in my city ( Kolkata , India ) . All public places where a lot of people congregate do here . I guess we learnt our lessons from our terror attacks.
> 
> ...



I am not American. I'm Scottish. 

And neither America or the UK have the terrorist and "enemy next door" problem to the extent that India does. Something like this has never happened before, and is unlikely to happen again anytime soon.


----------



## Bart (Jul 21, 2012)

Statement from Christian Bale,

_"Words cannot express the horror that I feel. I cannot begin to truly understand the pain and grief of the victims and their loved ones, but my heart goes out to them."_

Statement from Gary Oldman,

_"My prayers and deepest sympathies are with the victims and their families of this horrific act."_


----------



## blackbird (Jul 21, 2012)

And one from Christopher Nolan, 

_"I would like to express our profound sorrow at the senseless tragedy that has befallen the entire Aurora community.

"I believe movies are one of the great American art forms and the shared experience of watching a story unfold on screen is an important and joyful pastime. The movie theatre is my home, and the idea that someone would violate that innocent and hopeful place in such an unbearably savage way is devastating to me." _

I would like to hear one from Morgan Freeman too, but in a video of him comfortably seated in a padded chair in front of a fireplace.


----------



## Anarch (Jul 21, 2012)

masamune1 said:


> I am not American. I'm Scottish.
> 
> And neither America or the UK have the terrorist and "enemy next door" problem to the extent that India does. Something like this has never happened before, and is unlikely to happen again anytime soon.



You're kidding me right ? Sure your terrorists may not be "next door" but both the US and England(maybe not Scotland I don't know) have had their fair share of terrorist attacks in the recent past and you're uninformed if you think this is the first time mentally unstable youth have opened fire on the general public ,in the US. It has happened quite a few times before.


----------



## Ceria (Jul 21, 2012)

I'm deeply shocked about this, i wish the police had killed him, we don't need to continue to suffer through his existence. In situations like these, what's the point of a trial?


----------



## PyropePlight (Jul 21, 2012)

*Sigh* Let's Just Be Thankful It Wasn't As Bad As It Could Have Been.


----------



## Bishop (Jul 21, 2012)

James Homes, the shooter


The way he looked during killings


----------



## Bleach (Jul 21, 2012)

He smiles too much


----------



## neodragzero (Jul 21, 2012)

Anarch said:


> And i'm not even going to talk about how fucked up it is that a 24 year old civilian can buy body armour or an assault rifle.



That's something most of the average American and politician won't be talking about unfortunately.

Guys, let's be for real as far as the dime a dozen sympathy and shock goes, this kind of of thing will happen again. Not the kind where's it's an inevitable given but the kind where people who don't do anything about it.


----------



## Gunners (Jul 21, 2012)

What a cunt.


----------



## KFC (Jul 21, 2012)

Reminds me of this.


----------



## Lucciola (Jul 21, 2012)

That theater was the one I often went to. My friend was at the event. And the shooter was from my uni. I often read the news as if it's something out of a science fiction but this is the first time I wish the police had killed that guy right then and there. 

Yesterday my friend was still talking about taking me to The Hobbit premiere in December but he just told me this morning that he’ll never go to a movie premiere again. He was safe but the person right next to him got shot. I feel really bad that I was the reason he was able to go to that premiere in the first place. I can’t even begin to imagine how the victims’ families must feel.


----------



## Mider T (Jul 21, 2012)

Petes12 said:


> ps i've never seen a cop at the theater



Do you have a bedtime?


----------



## Petes12 (Jul 21, 2012)

Mider T said:


> Do you have a bedtime?



lol. as far as i can remember our theater's never really had em? at least not that ive noticed


----------



## josh101 (Jul 21, 2012)

It's interesting to read some of the survivors stories. One 19 year old black teen took a bullet in the leg whilst covering a young mother, her four month old baby and 4 year old daughter, he managed to push them out the door and they all escaped. What was those children's father doing at this time? He had already left his four month old baby on the floor as it was crying too loudly, jumped over a balcony, escaped from the theatre and taken their car and driven off on his own. He then proposed to her afterwards... and she said yes.. 

It's hard to imagine there was a bigger coward in the theatre that day then Holmes, but we have a contender.


----------



## Savior (Jul 21, 2012)

josh101 said:


> It's interesting to read some of the survivors stories. One 19 year old black teen took a bullet in the leg whilst covering a young mother, her four month old baby and 4 year old daughter, he managed to push them out the door and they all escaped. What was those children's father doing at this time? He had already left his four month old baby on the floor as it was crying too loudly, jumped over a balcony, escaped from the theatre and taken their car and driven off on his own. He then proposed to her afterwards... and she said yes..
> 
> It's hard to imagine there was a bigger coward in the theatre that day then Holmes, but we have a contender.



She said yes.........


----------



## masamune1 (Jul 21, 2012)

Anarch said:


> You're kidding me right ? Sure your terrorists may not be "next door" but both the US and England(maybe not Scotland I don't know) have had their fair share of terrorist attacks in the recent past and you're uninformed if you think this is the first time mentally unstable youth have opened fire on the general public ,in the US. It has happened quite a few times before.



We haven't had near as many terrorist attacks to justify that level of security and shooting of this nature in America have never taken place in a cinema, crowded or otherwise. And while they are a problem in America, they are still very infrequent in the grand scheme of things, if more frequent than they should be. In both cases it would be a total waste of time and resources to devote that kind of policing. The vast majority of terrorist attacks in the UK are foiled before they get off the ground, and apart from 7/7 the ones that are actually "carried out" have been amateurish failuers (there was such an attack in Scotland- the terrorist in question got his ass kicked by a baggage handler after setting himself on fire; the baggage guy became a minor celebrity). 

We don't _need_ metal detectors or anything like that in cinemas or public places- they would do little but annoy people. And they wouldn't stop crimes like these since the shooter didn't actually bring any guns into the cinema with him- he snuck out of the emergency exist, pulled his car up to the door, and his car was where his weapons were. Even if metal detectors were at the door, they would have made no difference, especially with the loud noises on the screen.


----------



## CrazyAries (Jul 21, 2012)

I checked the YouTube video that was posted earlier in this thread and took especial note of what was said by who was presumably the attacker's mother.  "You have the right guy."



josh101 said:


> It's interesting to read some of the survivors stories. One 19 year old black teen took a bullet in the leg whilst covering a young mother, her four month old baby and 4 year old daughter, he managed to push them out the door and they all escaped. What was those children's father doing at this time? He had already left his four month old baby on the floor as it was crying too loudly, jumped over a balcony, escaped from the theatre and taken their car and driven off on his own. He then proposed to her afterwards... and she said yes..
> 
> It's hard to imagine there was a bigger coward in the theatre that day then Holmes, but we have a contender.



"Coward" does not even begin to describe the type of person who could do what that father did.  And something is wrong with any woman who would accept a proposal from such a man.  I would have said no, cursed him out, and spat in his face.  The actual fuck is up with these people?


----------



## Kazeshini (Jul 21, 2012)

Wow, who the fuck would leave their 4 month year old baby and daughter?
What a dick.


----------



## Mider T (Jul 21, 2012)

KurosakiIchigo15 said:


> Wow, who the fuck would leave their 4 month year old baby and daughter?
> What a dick.



The kind of guy who knows she'll still yes.


----------



## Mael (Jul 21, 2012)

Sasuke_Bateman said:


> An American



Not to mention Justin Bieber.


----------



## Kira Yamato (Jul 21, 2012)

josh101 said:


> It's interesting to read some of the survivors stories. One 19 year old black teen took a bullet in the leg whilst covering a young mother, her four month old baby and 4 year old daughter, he managed to push them out the door and they all escaped. What was those children's father doing at this time? He had already left his four month old baby on the floor as it was crying too loudly, jumped over a balcony, escaped from the theatre and taken their car and driven off on his own. He then proposed to her afterwards... and she said yes..
> 
> It's hard to imagine there was a bigger coward in the theatre that day then Holmes, but we have a contender.



That's a story that's too difficult to believe. I sure hope this was some major embellishment.


----------



## strongarm85 (Jul 21, 2012)

Anarch said:


> You're kidding me right ? Sure your terrorists may not be "next door" but both the US and England(maybe not Scotland I don't know) have had their fair share of terrorist attacks in the recent past and you're uninformed if you think this is the first time mentally unstable youth have opened fire on the general public ,in the US. It has happened quite a few times before.



Your also terribly miss-informed if you believe that your gun laws would actually work if they were applied to the United States.

The United States has more land mass than all of western Europe put together. We also share thousands of miles land boarders with Canada and Mexico. We have several large docking facilities where container ships unload thousands of containers every day in multiple facilities, coming from multiple places, with goods heading to every state. We also have nearly as much we do land boarder, any point of which is a possible insertion point for smuggling.

There are also millions of Americans who own guns.

Britain's anti-gun laws only work because.

1. You live on an Island.

2. Very few people in Britain owned guns in the first place.

3. There aren't nearly as many people to police.

The only thing a British style gun law would accomplish in the United States is to create yet another Black Market. The Black Market and Smuggling operations for drugs in this country already far exceeds the capabilities of the United States Government to manage it.

A person could load up a truck full of guns and drive them from California to New York, a journey width of a continent, and not once along the way would they get stopped by a customs official to check their stuff. 

Aside from that, how is the government going to take away everyone's guns in the first place? Are they going to go door to door across the country? And some of those gun owners a liable to shoot back.

And even if they could take away everyone's guns, the only way to stop people from getting new guns would be for the police to watch everyone like hawks. It would necessitate the creation of an huge and bloated police state the likes of which nobody in this country wants!


----------



## Linkdarkside (Jul 21, 2012)

*Movie Jitters: One Day Later, Colorado Shooting Survivor Takes Back the Night*



> Less than one day after he escaped the chaos and carnage of the Aurora, Colo., theater shooting, lifelong Batman fan Justin Davis was back at the movies with a sense of purpose.
> 
> Davis, 16, was accompanied by his brother and a friend to a screening of "The Dark Knight Rises" at a different Colorado movie theater.
> 
> ...



http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blo...-survivor-162047042--abc-news-topstories.html


----------



## masamune1 (Jul 21, 2012)

strongarm85 said:


> Your also terribly miss-informed if you believe that your gun laws would actually work if they were applied to the United States.
> 
> The United States has more land mass than all of western Europe put together. We also share thousands of miles land boarders with Canada and Mexico. We have several large docking facilities where container ships unload thousands of containers every day in multiple facilities, coming from multiple places, with goods heading to every state. We also have nearly as much we do land boarder, any point of which is a possible insertion point for smuggling.
> 
> ...



They aren't even talking about this. They aren't British; they are Indian. And we were talking about metal detectors and security guards, not gun laws.


----------



## Mider T (Jul 21, 2012)

It sucks for those who died, never got to finish the movie.  Now they'll have to wait in heaven or hell for a second hand review.


----------



## drache (Jul 21, 2012)

Banhammer said:


> gottaa say, it's really hard not to wish there were seventeen other guns there at the moment
> 
> Silly, but still hard


 
a coworker expressed the same idea but really this isn't the movies it had to be nuts inside that theater so all more guns would mean is a higher body count

i really am sick fo the myth of the lone gunmen


----------



## masamune1 (Jul 21, 2012)

Also, tear gas meant that other gunmen would have been kind of useless, if not more dangerous. Plus everyone thought it was a stunt at first.


----------



## drache (Jul 21, 2012)

masamune1 said:


> Also, tear gas meant that other gunmen would have been kind of useless, if not more dangerous. Plus everyone thought it was a stunt at first.


 
have they then formally identified the gas as tear gas?


----------



## Golden Witch (Jul 21, 2012)

This legit!?


----------



## Darklyre (Jul 21, 2012)

Scarlet Plague said:


> This legit!?



Quick, release Holmes and give him his guns back!


----------



## 王志鍵 (Jul 21, 2012)

We should ban all Gun-Free zones


----------



## Mider T (Jul 21, 2012)

He couldn't have just shot up the Westboro Church?


----------



## Mael (Jul 21, 2012)

Scarlet Plague said:


> This legit!?



Another reason freedom of speech needs to be regulated.


----------



## Sasuke_Bateman (Jul 21, 2012)

Scarlet Plague said:


> This legit!?


Wish I could join them. Seems like a good laugh


----------



## Mael (Jul 21, 2012)

Sasuke_Bateman said:


> Wish I could join them. Seems like a good laugh



WBC hates Bieber, btw.  Then again we all do.


----------



## Havoc (Jul 21, 2012)

Mael said:


> Another reason freedom of speech needs to be regulated.


I disagree.

Just be more lenient on the reactions to said freedom of speech.


----------



## Gaawa-chan (Jul 21, 2012)

As far as WBC goes, I'd like to see them try and get even remotely close to the service.  People have developed effective countermeasures to them.



I don't know if the info has been posted, but all the victims have been identified.  Here is their info, and pics of some of the victims:



> 8 men, 3 women, and 1 little girl
> 
> 1. Veronica Moser - 6 - Died after being shot several times in the back from the shooter as she was trying to escape with her mother who was also injured in the attack
> 
> ...


----------



## Empathy (Jul 22, 2012)

More details on the  (if it hasn't been posted yet) of the dead victims in case you wanted to learn more about them. Makes me sick.


----------



## Mider T (Jul 22, 2012)

Two people died of smoke inhalation, how the hell?


----------



## josh101 (Jul 22, 2012)

> 4. Matt McQuinn - 27 - saved his g/f from a hail of bullets by shielding her with his body
> 
> 
> 5. Joe Blunk - 22 - saved his g/f by pushing her to hide underneath the seats and was shot several times just as the gunman approached him



Props to these guys. Nice to see some bravery come out of this after that story about the father I posted earlier.


----------



## Bleach (Jul 22, 2012)

The 6 year old... shot several times... Jesus Christ.

Wasn't there a 3 month old that was shot as well? When I first heard that my thought was who the hell brings a 3 month old to a theatre.


----------



## Megaharrison (Jul 22, 2012)

Mider T said:


> Two people died of smoke inhalation, how the hell?



Prolonged exposure to heavy amounts of tear gas can be lethal (note on the prolonged and the heavy amounts), especially if it's improperly made or if the victim turns out to be allergic to the chemicals in it.


----------



## drache (Jul 22, 2012)

Megaharrison said:


> Prolonged exposure to heavy amounts of tear gas can be lethal (note on the prolonged and the heavy amounts), especially if it's improperly made or if the victim turns out to be allergic to the chemicals in it.


 
for that matter you can tinker with the tear gas easily if you make your own to make something quite more noxious


----------



## Mider T (Jul 22, 2012)

Megaharrison said:


> Prolonged exposure to heavy amounts of tear gas can be lethal (note on the prolonged and the heavy amounts), especially if it's improperly made or if the victim turns out to be allergic to the chemicals in it.



That must've been quite a bit, they were able to leave the building but they succumbed later.  I'm guessing the emergency sprinklers were heat activated?


----------



## Anarch (Jul 22, 2012)

masamune1 said:


> We haven't had near as many terrorist attacks to justify that level of security and shooting of this nature in America have never taken place in a cinema, crowded or otherwise. And while they are a problem in America, they are still very infrequent in the grand scheme of things, if more frequent than they should be. In both cases it would be a total waste of time and resources to devote that kind of policing. The vast majority of terrorist attacks in the UK are foiled before they get off the ground, and apart from 7/7 the ones that are actually "carried out" have been amateurish failuers (there was such an attack in Scotland- the terrorist in question got his ass kicked by a baggage handler after setting himself on fire; the baggage guy became a minor celebrity).



It's not like these things happen in India very often either. In fact I don't think there's ever been an instance of a civilian mass-shooting innocents over here ( unlike the US where there's been at least 3-4 major ones that I've heard about - there was one in a college somewhere i think some years ago) , nor has there ever been a terrorist attack in a cinema that i can remember.

We're still cautious after incidents like the attack in Mumbai , and idk about you but i'm glad we are. And if we can afford the extra security so can the US.

Anyway I don't know the ground situation there. Maybe statistically this is insignificant and like you said extra security would be a waste of resources.
Though from the other posts I read it seems most cinema halls do have security guards , so apparently the Americans don't agree with you.



strongarm85 said:


> Your also terribly miss-informed if you believe that your gun laws would actually work if they were applied to the United States.
> 
> The United States has more land mass than all of western Europe put together. We also share thousands of miles land boarders with Canada and Mexico. We have several large docking facilities where container ships unload thousands of containers every day in multiple facilities, coming from multiple places, with goods heading to every state. We also have nearly as much we do land boarder, any point of which is a possible insertion point for smuggling.
> 
> ...



Yeah I'm not British and I wasn't talking about guns so I didn't read the rest of your tirade.

And I'm not going to argue about gun control with an American , I've learnt from experience that it doesn't go well. If you think a 24 year old college boy legally owning an assault rifle ( not a hand gun mind you , a fucking assault rifle ) is okay , then I've nothing to say to you.


----------



## Mider T (Jul 22, 2012)

He bought it legally, wait period at all (Brady bill).  Assault rifles are usually used for hunting, not suspcious in Colorado.


----------



## Gilgamesh (Jul 22, 2012)

I just saw on the news here that his whole apartment booby-trapped with bombs and shit


----------



## Revolution (Jul 22, 2012)

Gaawa-chan, thats hard to read without getting misty-eyed


----------



## Cthulhu-versailles (Jul 22, 2012)

someone at the bar was talking about this shit tonight. i had no idea wtf they were going on about as i usually only watch the aboriginal new channels and scrummage through news i want to read online. anyway, i knew it was a white guy as soon as i was recounted about the stockade of weapons. beyond that, it seems like there's quite a few of these mass shootings  in states every year of late. shooter also can't call himself a batman fan since he probably won't get to see the new movie either.


----------



## Mider T (Jul 22, 2012)

^That's a dangerous lack of info about the world around you, need to pay more attention to world affairs.


----------



## Hunter (Jul 22, 2012)

I hope the culprit get's what's coming to him. 
In my opinion a quick death is too merciful for him.


----------



## drache (Jul 22, 2012)

Anarch said:


> It's not like these things happen in India very often either. In fact I don't think there's ever been an instance of a civilian mass-shooting innocents over here ( unlike the US where there's been at least 3-4 major ones that I've heard about - there was one in a college somewhere i think some years ago) , nor has there ever been a terrorist attack in a cinema that i can remember.
> 
> We're still cautious after incidents like the attack in Mumbai , and idk about you but i'm glad we are. And if we can afford the extra security so can the US.
> 
> ...


 
bombay massacre

you should think before you type


----------



## Anarch (Jul 22, 2012)

drache said:


> bombay massacre
> 
> you should think before you type



I don't understand . Which point in my post does this prove wrong ?


----------



## Ultra Instinct Vegito (Jul 22, 2012)

josh101 said:


> It's interesting to read some of the survivors stories. One 19 year old black teen took a bullet in the leg whilst covering a young mother, her four month old baby and 4 year old daughter, he managed to push them out the door and they all escaped. What was those children's father doing at this time? He had already left his four month old baby on the floor as it was crying too loudly, jumped over a balcony, escaped from the theatre and taken their car and driven off on his own. He then proposed to her afterwards... and she said yes..
> 
> It's hard to imagine there was a bigger coward in the theatre that day then Holmes, but we have a contender.



She should have married  the one who saved her and her children.


----------



## Samehada (Jul 22, 2012)

Quick question...Do we know if this is the biggest shooting to date? I mean...domestically and non-terrorist act?


----------



## Unlosing Ranger (Jul 22, 2012)

Samehada said:


> Quick question...Do we know if this is the biggest shooting to date? I mean...domestically and non-terrorist act?



I was under the impression every shooting was a terrorist act.


----------



## drache (Jul 22, 2012)

Anarch said:


> I don't understand . Which point in my post does this prove wrong ?


 
you said you could think of a large civlian shooting in india (in addition to being a bit of a pompous jerk about those silly americans), I named one. And that was just off the top of my head. I am sure more research would show more results.

So would you like to apologize or keep eating your foot?


----------



## Anarch (Jul 22, 2012)

drache said:


> you said you could think of a large civlian shooting in india



Learn to read may be ?

I wasn't talking about terror attacks. I was talking about a civilian shooting other civilians like here in Denver. This Denver thing wasn't a terror attack. Successful Terror attacks in India were all well planned and well financed , they weren't going to be stopped by a security guard or a metal detector. I was talking about this( Denver) kind of incident, of an unstable civilian firing at random and killing innocents. I said that this sort of thing doesn't usually happen in India and if anyone tried they would be stopped by our security measures.

As far as terrorist attacks go we are one of the worst hit nations in the world. We lose people to them almost every year.
Trust me , I know that a lot better than you do.



> (in addition to being a bit of a pompous jerk about those silly americans)



Where exactly was i being pompous ? I actually said that the Americans disagree with that other poster whom I replied to , that they did understand the value of a security guard at a cinema hall.

Again, learn to read.




> So would you like to apologize or keep eating your foot?



yeah i apologize for not realizing that you were an idiot. i do now , so i will stop discussing this further with you.


----------



## SammyTehDuckie (Jul 22, 2012)

Hey. Hey guys.
*EVERY SINGLE COUNTRY IN THE HISTORY OF FOREVER, EVEN IF UNDER A DIFFERENT NAME HAS HAD THIS TYPE OF CRIME.*
Maybe not with a gun, but it's happened.
Stuff can happen anywhere, at anytime. No matter how much "protection" there is.
Like that psycho who went in the nursery stabbing children and employees.. That was in Europe right?
And that's a perfect example: Gun control wouldn't of helped that or even this what so ever. I bet he would of found something else to do it with.
Unless you can get "protections" under almost everything, hell my laptop can be a weapon.
No country is any safer then another. Because as long as we live, there is something else we can kill with, conventional or not.


----------



## Spock (Jul 22, 2012)

Samehada said:


> Quick question...Do we know if this is the biggest shooting to date? I mean...domestically and non-terrorist act?



Why pray tell, shouldn't I call this a terrorist act? It fits the criteria perfectly of a surprise attack against civilians.


----------



## neodragzero (Jul 22, 2012)

SammyTehDuckie said:


> Hey. Hey guys.
> *EVERY SINGLE COUNTRY IN THE HISTORY OF FOREVER, EVEN IF UNDER A DIFFERENT NAME HAS HAD THIS TYPE OF CRIME.*
> Maybe not with a gun, but it's happened.
> Stuff can happen anywhere, at anytime. No matter how much "protection" there is.
> ...



Statistically, the US has a higher rate of gun violence than other first world countries. 30,000 gun related deaths a year for the nation would do that. The US is the king of having shooting massacres caused by a civilian. There's talking about crime happening anywhere and there's statistics that make it clear there's a particular problem. Selling tear gas grenades and such to a civilian makes little to no sense. Good luck finding data that makes a laptop a comparative weapon to a gun at all whatsoever. So, yes, there's a relative comparison of safety where certain countries are safer than others.


----------



## hammer (Jul 22, 2012)

neodragzero said:


> Statistically, the US has a higher rate of gun violence than other first world countries. The US easily dominates with its relatively higher rate of massacres caused by a civilian. There's talking about crime happening anywhere and there's statistics that make it clear there's a particular problem. Selling tear gas grenades and such to a civilian makes little to no sense. Good luck finding statistics that make a laptop a comparative weapon to a gun at all whatsoever. So, yes, there's a relative comparison of safety where certain countries are safer than others.



what about canada their laws are almost the same


----------



## neodragzero (Jul 22, 2012)

hammer said:


> what about canada their laws are almost the same



I talked about the rate of gun violence death. Canada is still lower. I'm pretty sure that the suggestion of the two countries almost being the same is kind of impossible at the moment when Canada is easily more strict by comparison when it considers the sale of tear gas grenades, certain firearms lengths, etc. to be illegal. Add in the fact that Canada doesn't seem to delegate gun sale regulations and laws that differ on a state by state basis, whereas the US has gun law varying on a state by state basis, "almost the same" sounds like a very vague, ignorant description.


----------



## hammer (Jul 22, 2012)

im pretty sure  most of the things he used was home made.


----------



## Anarch (Jul 22, 2012)

Eli said:


> Why pray tell, shouldn't I call this a terrorist act? It fits the criteria perfectly of a surprise attack against civilians.



Terrorist attack implies an agenda. So far Holmes just seems to be a deranged person. He's a smart meticulous planner yes , but not one with an agenda , not that we know of yet anyway.


----------



## neodragzero (Jul 22, 2012)

hammer said:


> im pretty sure  most of the things he used was home made.



Bombs like the ones he set up in the booby trap usually have to be. Tear gas grenades on the other hand don't with each costing possibly as low as 16.95 off the net. So, yeah, of course most of the stuff  is home made when most of the stuff are explosives if we go by scale in material. I don't remember seeing anything about the minority material, his guns and tear gas, that happen to be the things he used to actually slaughter people, being home made. No one makes that stuff from scratch as they types of massacres go.


----------



## drache (Jul 22, 2012)

Anarch said:


> Learn to read may be ?
> 
> I wasn't talking about terror attacks. I was talking about a civilian shooting other civilians like here in Denver. This Denver thing wasn't a terror attack. Successful Terror attacks in India were all well planned and well financed , they weren't going to be stopped by a security guard or a metal detector. I was talking about this( Denver) kind of incident, of an unstable civilian firing at random and killing innocents. I said that this sort of thing doesn't usually happen in India and if anyone tried they would be stopped by our security measures.
> 
> ...



learn to think maybe? this was a terrorist act, sure he may be an individual and doesn't have an organization backing him but the goal here was to terrorize

so really you're talking about the wrong topic there

oh and fyi you might want to do your research before you make silly statements this guy spent months planning this he wasn't going to be stopped by a security and a metal detector either



Anarch said:


> Where exactly was i being pompous ? I actually said that the Americans disagree with that other poster whom I replied to , that they did understand the value of a security guard at a cinema hall.
> 
> Again, learn to read.



you mean besides acting like you know things you don't? or maybe your repeated half assed statements about america when you clearly don't have a clue?

you're right my bad 




Anarch said:


> yeah i apologize for not realizing that you were an idiot. i do now , so i will stop discussing this further with you.



if I am an idiot to you I wonder what that makes someone like you talking when you don't have a clue? At least I am intelligent enough to know when I should stop. You don't seem to have mastered this


----------



## hammer (Jul 22, 2012)

neodragzero said:


> Statistically, the US has a higher rate of gun violence than other first world countries. 30,000 gun related deaths a year for the nation would do that. The US is the king of having shooting massacres caused by a civilian. There's talking about crime happening anywhere and there's statistics that make it clear there's a particular problem. Selling tear gas grenades and such to a civilian makes little to no sense. Good luck finding data that makes a laptop a comparative weapon to a gun at all whatsoever. So, yes, there's a relative comparison of safety where certain countries are safer than others.



part of the problem is guns can be easily customized.


----------



## makeoutparadise (Jul 22, 2012)

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhnPVP23rzo[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## Kira Yamato (Jul 22, 2012)

Let's see if I have every point covered:


*Pro Gun advocates:* This would have never happened if everyone was packing heat in the movie theatre.

*Anti-Gun Advocates:* This tragedy could have been avoided if we had tighter gun control laws.


*Atheists:* This is due to the killers pro judeo christian beliefs.Actually asking some of the survivors of the shooting who had proclaimed their Christian beliefs: _where's your god now?_ 

*Religious groups:* This is due to the godless direction the country has been going in. 


I personally blame the actual shooter as far-fetch as that may seem.


----------



## Greedy master (Jul 22, 2012)

i think american laws are unfair for civilians...  imo allow them to buy nukes and chemical weapons   to be safe from any threat.


----------



## Kafuka de Vil (Jul 22, 2012)

Its unfortunate most Americans don’t feel safe enough in their own country they persist and oppose any kind of reform on owning a firearm.

Another depressing thing to note is that after shootings like this the sales of guns rises dramatically.


----------



## IchLiebe (Jul 22, 2012)

MbS said:


> Its unfortunate most Americans don?t feel safe enough in their own country they persist and oppose any kind of reform on owning a firearm.
> 
> Another depressing thing to note is that after shootings like this the sales of guns rises dramatically.



If i was in the theatre and I had a gun, I could've taken action by shooting him, thus saving lives.

Gun laws are here to protect us but at the same time serve us. We use guns from hunting to sport to murder. Just because a lone gunman wants to shoot somebody that doesn't mean that no one should be allowed a gun.

Thats like say...
5 children are in a room, they are all getting candy every 30 minutes. If Child #1 makes a mess and is being a brat, don't give him candy but give the others candy and that child will understand that to be rewarded you have to be responsible and act right, you don't take all the candy from all the kids just because 1 child didn't want to go with the program.


This guy is obviously unstable, what I don't get is why did he give up, and then tell them about his booby trapped apartment(so you can get lulz in jail). So he's obviously fucked in the head.


----------



## hammer (Jul 22, 2012)

IchLiebe said:


> If i was in the theatre and I had a gun, I could've taken action by shooting him, thus saving lives.


[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FopyRHHlt3M[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## Kafuka de Vil (Jul 22, 2012)

IchLiebe said:


> *If i was in the theatre and I had a gun, I could've taken action by shooting him, thus saving lives.*
> 
> Gun laws are here to protect us but at the same time serve us. We use guns from hunting to sport to murder. Just because a lone gunman wants to shoot somebody that doesn't mean that no one should be allowed a gun.
> 
> ...



Not this tripe again. Yeah sure, would be hero.

Did you know that in a typical year about 12,000 murders are committed in the United States with firearms: mostly handguns. Handguns are used in many other crimes as well. Approximately one million serious crimes in which a handgun is used, including homicide, rape, robbery, and assault, occur each year?

If America is willingly to trade it’s safety on an illusionary feel good factor of ‘freedom’ to bear arms, then it can expect shootings, massacre and other tragedies like this to happen.


----------



## Anarch (Jul 22, 2012)

IchLiebe said:


> If i was in the theatre and I had a gun, I could've taken action by shooting him, thus saving lives.



he was wearing full body armour , just saying


----------



## Kira Yamato (Jul 22, 2012)

Anarch said:


> he was wearing full body armour , just saying



But it's okay because purchasing a gun automatically gives you the accuracy and range of a military trained sniper who can aim for the head amidst the darkness and smoke.


----------



## NanoHaxial (Jul 22, 2012)

> Did you know there was 12,000 crimes committed in the us last year.
> 
> Did you know 8,000 of them were committed with a gun?



Lol. It'd be quite a feat to see only 12,000 crimes in the US over the course of a year.


----------



## masamune1 (Jul 22, 2012)

IchLiebe said:


> If i was in the theatre and I had a gun, I could've taken action by shooting him, thus saving lives.



No, you would have been blinded by the tear gas.


----------



## Kafuka de Vil (Jul 22, 2012)

NanoHaxial said:


> Lol. It'd be quite a feat to see only 12,000 crimes in the US over the course of a year.



Ho boy you're slow with that reply button, aren't you?.


----------



## josh101 (Jul 22, 2012)

IchLiebe said:


> If i was in the theatre and I had a gun, I could've taken action by shooting him, thus saving lives.
> 
> Gun laws are here to protect us but at the same time serve us. We use guns from hunting to sport to murder. Just because a lone gunman wants to shoot somebody that doesn't mean that no one should be allowed a gun.
> 
> ...


I'm sure you would of. You wouldn't of been disorientated from the suprise of it, the darkness of the theatre, the chaos of the running, the stinging of the tear gas and the chaos of people trying to escape and you would simply shoot him through his bullet proof protection. 

And unless that "mess" the kid makes with his candy is shoving it down the others kids throats to choke them to death, then I don't think this situation is comparable.


----------



## Bender (Jul 22, 2012)

The Dark Knight Rising star speaks on the matter



Full agreement with the "don't blame heath ledger" comment for this psycho dress up during the shooting.


----------



## kazuri (Jul 22, 2012)

> But it's okay because purchasing a gun automatically gives you the accuracy and range of a military trained sniper who can aim for the head amidst the darkness and smoke.



Because people who carry guns arent the type to practice, because aiming a gun is hard, because hitting a target thats not moving is hard, because theaters are quarter mile long, because bullet proof vests completely dissipate the kinetic energy, because no one carrying a gun has ever stopped a crime.

[YOUTUBE]1t5f5AwkkiY[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## Kira Yamato (Jul 22, 2012)

kazuri said:


> *Because people who carry guns arent the type to practice*, because aiming a gun is hard, because hitting a target thats not moving is hard, because theaters are quarter mile long, because bullet proof vests completely dissipate the kinetic energy, because no one carrying a gun has ever stopped a crime.
> 
> [YOUTUBE]1t5f5AwkkiY[/YOUTUBE]



Typically, not at the level you're expecting. My brother whose a trained sniper would face palm at such an assertion. And it's funny how you fail to mention that gas was used in a dark movie theater to further disorient the people in the movie theater and impair vision. 

But sure, throw in a completely different example.


----------



## masamune1 (Jul 22, 2012)

Anyway, back on topic, it seemed that Holmes intentionally left loud music on in his booby-trapped apartment and the door slightly ajar- and by booby traps I mean "highly sophisticated" explosives.

His neigbour went to his door to complain, but did not go in. She just phoned the police (about the noise). She feared that if she went in it might have set it off. It took the police two day to enter safely.

Which, perhaps, was the idea all along. It seemed he was going for the classic "bomb and shooting spree" tactic of Brevik and the Columbine killers (who had a bomb that didn't go off- the school being twenty miles away from Aurora).  

Youngest victim was 6 years old. The police are still dismantling explosives.



> *The man behind 'The Dark Knight Rises' tragedy believes he is 'acting in a movie', reveal prison guards and inmates.*
> 
> The world is still reeling from the atrocious midnight shooting at a screening of Christopher Nolan's new film 'The Dark Knight Rises', in which at least 12 people have been killed and 58 injured.
> 
> ...





(not sure how accurate this article is, for the record)


----------



## EvilMoogle (Jul 22, 2012)

IchLiebe said:


> If i was in the theatre and I had a gun, I could've taken action by shooting him, thus saving lives.


Let me get this straight, given:
- A dark theater
- Filling with smoke (which may be tear gas)
- Filled with panicked people running around
- An armed gunman with the element of surprise
- With bulletproof vest and helmet

You think that it is more likely that you would pull off the face-shot needed to take him down before he kills you and without hitting any of the innocent people running around?


----------



## Mael (Jul 22, 2012)

> "All the inmates were talking about killing him... Everyone was looking for an opportunity. It's all they could talk about."



Good.

/10


----------



## Bender (Jul 22, 2012)

> "All the inmates were talking about killing him... Everyone was looking for an opportunity. It's all they could talk about."



The inmate who kills him I will personally put 10-20 bucks in their canteen.


----------



## IchLiebe (Jul 22, 2012)

Kira Yamato said:


> But it's okay because purchasing a gun automatically gives you the accuracy and range of a military trained sniper who can aim for the head amidst the darkness and smoke.



Our movie theatre is never fully darkened, it is dimly lit.

DId this guy have military training? You don't need military training to be a precision marksman. People can replicate feats of great precision if they are trained right. Here in MS a lot of people can shoot fairly well due to hunting, where you got to stalk your prey, and wait on the exact moment to shoot the deer in the right spot at over 300yards with a Remington 700.

Range? what like 20 yards. LoL that isn't that far.

Body armor? Take a bullet with armor on and you will still drop, may not be fatal but you will feel it and it will hurt like hell. Tear gas isn't that big of a problem if you no what to do.

Ask your military trained Sniper brother? How hard is to hit someone 20 yards away with a .45. And ask if he's ever been shot with body armor on.

Tear Gas-DOn't even know if thats what it was can be avoided many ways; Get to higher ground(top of the theatre), Stay calm and breathe as little as possible, don't panick, or when you see the smoke coming, you can take a piece of plastic to cover your face(eyes, nose, mouth).

Ask your brother where he target most, Head, chest, stomach, legs. He will say Center body Mass, aka Chest cavity cuase most damage can be caused there with a higher percentage to hit. And even with a bullet proof vest on can cause ribs to break, internall bleeding, and lots of other non-fatal but extremely painfull injuries. But then again don't know if he was wearing soft body armor or hard body armor.

And another thing, he was just as disoriented as others where, minus the tear gas. He came in from the lobby(brightly lit) into a room that is dark. Do y'all know what happens in that case, the man is fucking blind and is just randomly shooting.


----------



## Bender (Jul 22, 2012)

@IL

No for the last time this kid did not have any military training. The U.S. Army looked through their records and never found anyone by the name James Eagan Holmes.


----------



## Mael (Jul 22, 2012)

I'm still going for my permit to carry, but I really want to take a look at the laws of MA while I do.


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 22, 2012)

I'm pretty sure if you have a fully loaded gun in a sold out theater room, you don't really need any sort of percision to kill a shit load of folk
Just squeeze friend


----------



## MasterSitsu (Jul 22, 2012)

Just how are you going to get hand guns away from criminals? If they want them they will get then illegally, all that is going to happen is guns being taken away from good people.

No thanks ill keep my gun thank you.


----------



## hammer (Jul 22, 2012)

why do all the crazies have PhDs?


----------



## EvilMoogle (Jul 22, 2012)

Police only hit their targets 20-30% of the time in a real firefight.  Police that have actual training in real firefight situations.

Normal civilians with guns in this situation would not have "saved lives."  But there's a good chance they would have hit some innocent people and actually cost lives.

If you disagree, post your qualifications.  What special anti-terrorist force are you a member of?  How many times have you been shot at?  What's your accuracy against humans?

Your accuracy at the range is totally meaningless here.  As is your accuracy with a rifle against a deer or other animal-not-shooting-back.

Real life is not a video game.


----------



## Darklyre (Jul 22, 2012)

EvilMoogle said:


> Police only hit their targets 20-30% of the time in a real firefight.  Police that have actual training in real firefight situations.



To be fair, most police never actually shoot anything beyond their required X number of rounds per month, and a sizable portion of the CC permit population could outshoot them fairly easily. The part of police training that helps is they know the proper procedures and have the knowledge that they'll have backup.


----------



## EvilMoogle (Jul 22, 2012)

Darklyre said:


> To be fair, most police never actually shoot anything beyond their required X number of rounds per month, and a sizable portion of the CC permit population could outshoot them fairly easily. The part of police training that helps is they know the proper procedures and have the knowledge that they'll have backup.


Most CC permit holders have never been shot at.

There's a wold of difference between shooting at the range and shooting at someone that's shooting back at you.

If there had been an armed citizen there, in all likelihood he would have emptied his clip in the direction of the gunman doing no damage to the man (though possibly injuring/killing some innocent people between him and the gunman).

It would take an incredibly skilled or incredibly lucky individual to really make a positive difference.


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 22, 2012)

Okay, arguments aside, if someone was shooting at me, I sure as hell would like to have had a gun

I'd run for my life all the same, but maybe I'd get some cover and shoot a couple of rounds into the ceiling to force the shooter into cover and win precious seconds to run

Or maybe I'd even get lucky on my way out


But then again, I am a notoriously sensible person.
I expect nothing but the deepest dumbassery from my fellow man.


----------



## Soca (Jul 22, 2012)

I'll just leave this here

[YOUTUBE]uGnYsNKQysw[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## EvilMoogle (Jul 22, 2012)

Banhammer said:


> Okay, arguments aside, if someone was shooting at me, I sure as hell would like to have had a gun
> 
> I'd run for my life all the same, but maybe I'd get some cover and shoot a couple of rounds into the ceiling to force the shooter into cover and win precious seconds to run
> 
> ...


Or maybe you'd just attract attention from the shooter giving him a specific target rather than random.

Or maybe you'd confuse the other CCW holder across the theater who isn't sure which armed person firing their gun randomly they should be shooting at?

In short yes there are cases where having a gun can stop a crime (or at least reduce the damage caused by some insane shooter).  _This_ was not one of those cases though.


----------



## Mael (Jul 22, 2012)

Interestingly enough...states like Vermont and New Hampshire have very little gun control but with very little incident.  It could also be the culture of the state, how law enforcement works, and the general environment.


----------



## Xion (Jul 22, 2012)

Mael said:


> Good.
> 
> /10



It's actually rather horrible.

But the fact is that American citizens, by and large, support a retributive justice system.

Third world hypocrites.


----------



## Mael (Jul 22, 2012)

Xion said:


> It's actually rather horrible.
> 
> But the fact is that American citizens, by and large, support a retributive justice system.
> 
> Third world hypocrites.



Fact of the matter is I don't care.  The courts made their decision to imprison thereby ridding ourselves of the notion the courts are vigilantes and if it should happen he meets his end via shiv, my guilt level is zero.  He got his just desserts by a different means.


----------



## Ultra Instinct Vegito (Jul 22, 2012)

What do you think the state will do to the suspect?


----------



## Mael (Jul 22, 2012)

Light Hawk Wings said:


> What do you think the state will do to the suspect?



Life sentence or death row.


----------



## hammer (Jul 22, 2012)

assuming he makes it


----------



## Bender (Jul 22, 2012)

Mael said:


> Life sentence or death row.



Life sentence! ~ Life sentence! Life sentence!


----------



## blackbird (Jul 22, 2012)

In a pillory. 
At Comic-Con.
No guards.


----------



## IchLiebe (Jul 22, 2012)

EvilMoogle said:


> Police only hit their targets 20-30% of the time in a real firefight.  Police that have actual training in real firefight situations.


 WTF, where did you get that from.





> Normal civilians with guns in this situation would not have "saved lives."  But there's a good chance they would have hit some innocent people and actually cost lives.


 Civilians with guns have stopped crime before





> If you disagree, post your qualifications.  What special anti-terrorist force are you a member of?  How many times have you been shot at?  What's your accuracy against humans?


 I disagree, Qualifications-2years preschool, 8 years of grade school 4 years of High School, Great hand to hand combatant(only person to whoop my ass was my daddy when i was 7... and I let him), Been shooting firearms of all types since I was young, have shot a .50 cal sniper multiple times. The Fuck You Up Force. Shot at... uhm... what do you consider being shot at(real gun, BB gun) anyways 3xs by a shotgun when I was 11 on a golfcart, 1 time when I fucked a guy out of drugs(disarmed), and one time I was put into a trunk and shot at then they dumped the car in a lake.

Accuracy against Humans- No, I will not disclose that information because that would mean that I have shot somebody, and due to statue of limitations I will be silent on that topic. Never missed an animal.





> Your accuracy at the range is totally meaningless here.  As is your accuracy with a rifle against a deer or other animal-not-shooting-back.


 I don't go to a range, I live in motherfn MS, i got a back yard. Was those civilians shooting back? So his accuracy should be thrown out of the window since they wasn't shooting back.


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 22, 2012)

EvilMoogle said:


> Or maybe you'd just attract attention from the shooter giving him a specific target rather than random.


It's easy to speak from the comfort of my own home, but I'm assuming the need to force him?to react fire seemed at the time to trump the chance of passing through unnoticed
My first priority is above all others, to get the fuck ooooooooooooout


> Or maybe you'd confuse the other CCW holder across the theater who isn't sure which armed person firing their gun randomly they should be shooting at?


When I say "lucky" I do include "finding the guy I know for sure is the one shooting people in a position where I know I can shoot him more quickly than he can shoot me, or that I can get away safely.

A lot of if's but mind you, I see myself as no hero or elite fighter with something to prove.

Is it likely to ever happen? No. But I'm just saying if you told me, someone is about to shoot this room, do you want to go in with or without a gun, I'd probably choose "with"

Then again, I'm not considering a great number of friends or family out in a movie with me which I will invariably feel the self sacrificing need to protect


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 22, 2012)

Marcelle.B said:


> I'll just leave this here
> 
> [YOUTUBE]uGnYsNKQysw[/YOUTUBE]



what kind of jackass brings a 4 month old to see Nolan's Batman

White trash


----------



## Unlosing Ranger (Jul 22, 2012)

Mael said:


> Life sentence or death row.



Exile or death.


----------



## EvilMoogle (Jul 22, 2012)

Banhammer said:


> It's easy to speak from the comfort of my own home, but I'm assuming the need to force him?to react fire seemed at the time to trump the chance of passing through unnoticed


Assuming the insane man wearing body armor is going to bother to look for cover.



Banhammer said:


> My first priority is above all others, to get the fuck ooooooooooooout


That's the rational choice.  I can understand wanting to have a gun in this situation, but actually using it?  In this particular case it would do more harm than good.



Banhammer said:


> When I say "lucky" I do include "finding the guy I know for sure is the one shooting people in a position where I know I can shoot him more quickly than he can shoot me, or that I can get away safely.
> 
> A lot of if's but mind you, I see myself as no hero or elite fighter with something to prove.


That's the thing, in a situation like this you start with a split-second decision.

From what you said above you would fire off a shot in the air, then fire at him as you tried to exit.

Your first shot would do nothing other than alert him that someone else has a gun.  Which would probably prompt him to fire off in your direction.  While he likely wouldn't see you to hit you it might get some people near you killed.

It would also alert everyone near you that you have a gun, how many of them would say "shit there's two gunmen" and run panicked away from you (thus making the paniced rush for the exit that much more confused).  Worse (for you) if there's a "hero" near you he might decide to grapple with you to try and neutralize you as a threat.  Which would probably end with you having to shoot  him or him shooting you.

In order to have a chance of being successful you'd need the CCW holder to make a series of quick assessments:
- Recognize the shooter as a threat (in the confusion of the theater this is harder than you might expect).
- Find a place to engage the shooter that's free from the chaos of people milling around (depending on the theater's layout getting to the high part of the theater might help but this would also require you to rush against the flow of traffic which I imagine would be hard when dealing with a panicked populace)
- Engage the shooter, and hit him (much harder than most people in live conditions)
- Realize the hit to the shooter didn't drop him because of his armor.
- Take cover from the shooter's counter attack (or hope to get lucky and not get hit)
- Pull off the very hard face shot against a live target.

And all of this would have to be done quickly.

While personally I'd like to think I'm the sort of bad-ass that could pull all of this off without any problem, the reality is unless you've had military or police training for situations like this you probably won't.

Most people given the chance to fight back will respond in the direct manner, drawing their weapon and unloading it in the general direction of the shooter.  Which for most people will result in extra dead bodies of people trying to flee the theater.


----------



## Toby (Jul 22, 2012)

I just think the right to carry a firearm is stupid because, as far as I can tell, it causes more trouble than it is worth. 

As pointed out, if you have a shootout in a dark room like a cinema, a citizen's army isn't going to be able to do shit. The guns should therefore never even enter that room to begin with.

That however is at conflict with the right to bear arms to begin with. And then the discussion begins: Where do we draw the line, and why there? Why not stop carrying guns altogether? Perhaps we could just convince people to stop carrying guns in dark rooms? Oh well derp then maybe the right to bear arms stops when you're on an evening flight? It goes on into the dumbest fucking discussions ever, and ignores the issue of human security - which is the very most important reason to carry weapons in the first place.

I get that some people value this right more than their fellow human beings yet I find it disappointing to read how every single time there is one person willing to justify this with fear of a specific group, be it government, foreigners, police or whatever. If you're society is in that situation to begin with, the society needs to mend the social relations. If it's just you, then see a professional. Don't expose the rest of mankind to your need for steel.


----------



## Mael (Jul 22, 2012)

Toby said:


> I just think the right to carry a firearm is stupid because, as far as I can tell, it causes more trouble than it is worth.
> 
> As pointed out, if you have a shootout in a dark room like a cinema, a citizen's army isn't going to be able to do shit. The guns should therefore never even enter that room to begin with.
> 
> ...



To counter though, those who truly seek it will get it and there will be far more of those defenseless.  Trust in law enforcement is healthy but responsiveness is another.  I don't think any healthy-minded person wanted the theater armed to the teeth, but the last thing we needed was a Brievik with complete invulnerability.  I don't believe completely disarming a populace is wise because they're no more than lambs...but I believe more in the right with very controlled and regimented measures.


----------



## drache (Jul 22, 2012)

Mael said:


> To counter though, those who truly seek it will get it and there will be far more of those defenseless.  Trust in law enforcement is healthy but responsiveness is another.  I don't think any healthy-minded person wanted the theater armed to the teeth, but the last thing we needed was a Brievik with complete invulnerability.  I don't believe completely disarming a populace is wise because they're no more than lambs...but I believe more in the right with very controlled and regimented measures.



Perhaps but the UK has proved you can dramatically cut down on gun violence.

The fact is though Americans have been fed a steady stream of bullshit about the myth of the lone gunman from John Wayne to the action movies of the 80s and so on that people are convinced that they can make a difference.

A coworker of mine and me got into this and he actually said that he wished there were 30 more guns there. I tried to point out that there was smoke, gas, confusion, the sound effects from the movie but he persisted in this belief that more guns is the solution. 

I tried pointing out that there has never been a situation where an armed civilian actually made a difference.

It doesn't matter to the American public the myth persists and because of this tragedies like this will continue.


----------



## Kaitou (Jul 22, 2012)

Banhammer said:


> what kind of jackass brings a 4 month old to see Nolan's Batman
> 
> White trash



I think the real stupidity lies on who the hell brings a BABY that SHOULD be sleeping at midnight to a movie theater?


----------



## soulnova (Jul 22, 2012)

Marcelle.B said:


> I'll just leave this here
> 
> [YOUTUBE]uGnYsNKQysw[/YOUTUBE]




He left her with the baby and the other child and ran off.

After the crisis, he proposed to her.

She said yes.


----------



## Yachiru (Jul 22, 2012)

soulnova said:


> He left her with the baby and the other child and ran off.
> 
> After the crisis, he proposed to her.
> 
> She said yes.


----------



## IchLiebe (Jul 22, 2012)

@Toby about the citzen army.

You have heard of Jesse James right? Well when him and in posse was robbing a bank, 1 dude comes in and says "Billybob(nickname) we got a get going, trouble boilin over out here" Frank James "Its a fucking army"

Guess what happened, the townfolk didn't like their bank getting robbed so they stopped it, Jesse, Frank, and 1 dude was the only ones to get away out of 9-10 people. And he didn't do nothing else for a while, well until he got fed up with people thinking he was a coward and that he was ultimately defeated and scared.

Guns don't kill people, people kill people. I can kill someone just as easy with my bare hands, a knife, a wire, a stick, any fucking thing can be used as a weapon. 

If people get mad at each other, just fight with your hands, can't neither one of you go to jail unless you both go, and one must press charges or the cops see you fighting(then the state can press charges)


----------



## Lord Genome (Jul 22, 2012)

might have been posted, but im not going through 20 pages lol

westboro baptist church though


----------



## Gaawa-chan (Jul 22, 2012)

IchLiebe said:


> I can kill someone *just as easy* with my bare hands, a knife, a wire, a stick, any fucking thing



Sure you can. 




> The man behind 'The Dark Knight Rises' tragedy believes he is 'acting in a movie', reveal prison guards and inmates.



Lying. sack. of. shit.  He's just trying to get off lighter.


----------



## Mider T (Jul 22, 2012)

So 2 more people died?


----------



## Bender (Jul 23, 2012)

Fuck the trial feed the man to the prison lions.   

Shit, I can see this crazy fuck spitting all over the courtroom tomorrow.


----------



## neodragzero (Jul 23, 2012)

IchLiebe said:


> Guess what happened, the townfolk didn't like their bank getting robbed so they stopped it, Jesse, Frank, and 1 dude was the only ones to get away out of 9-10 people. And he didn't do nothing else for a while, well until he got fed up with people thinking he was a coward and that he was ultimately defeated and scared.



Everyone, here's an example of fallacy based thinking that a single story somehow shows a comprehensive picture rather than statistics and given likelihoods. A single story somewhat suggesting that what could be a relative civilian arms race somehow is okay. Imagine how successful a bunch of people will be against someone in body armor, armed with tear gas and body armor who had the jump on them in the first place. Then I guess there'll be the argument that maybe the so-called good samaritans should be allowed to have access to that level of weaponry and body armor. Dear folks, that is what we call an arms race that will not help things.


> Guns don't kill people, people kill people. I can kill someone just as easy with my bare hands, a knife, a wire, a stick, any fucking thing can be used as a weapon.


Yeah, your hands are comparable to a weapon that can kill multiple people in seconds. Sure. Good luck successfully doing comparable damage to what that guy did with your bare hands, a knife, a wire, or a stick. False equivalence is never new.


----------



## Bender (Jul 23, 2012)

Also as said pages before, I still don't think carrying guns would matter if this ^ (not the meaning of the word "respect".) had body armor, tear gas, and a helmet. Amongst all that commotion you're fucked no matter what. It's either:

(A You may hit an innocent person who is running throughout the chaos

(B You hit him but the bullet won't penetrate since he has all that shit covering him

Running is the only thing that could be done in that situation.


----------



## neodragzero (Jul 23, 2012)

Yeah, it's interesting how anyone suggesting that a gun carrier could of been some action hero to save the day doesn't understand we don't live in the world of "Last Action Hero."


----------



## SammyTehDuckie (Jul 23, 2012)

neodragzero said:


> Statistically, the US has a higher rate of gun violence than other first world countries. 30,000 gun related deaths a year for the nation would do that. The US is the king of having shooting massacres caused by a civilian. There's talking about crime happening anywhere and there's statistics that make it clear there's a particular problem. Selling tear gas grenades and such to a civilian makes little to no sense. Good luck finding data that makes a laptop a comparative weapon to a gun at all whatsoever. So, yes, there's a relative comparison of safety where certain countries are safer than others.



While I don't agree or disagree with gun control, everyone seems to be avoiding the problem here.

We'll take two major issues here, US gun crime and UK knife crime, both of these topics have made news in their country, even if they aren't about the same thing. You say 30,00 gun related crimes? I'm assuming it's an estimate, so I'm going to use nothing but rounded estimates to be fair.

There are apx. 600,000,000 people in the USA.
There are apx. 60,000,000 people in the UK.

30,000 gun crimes
And to give the UK an edge, it's lowest 2010/2011 estimate of 5,000 of knife crime, and that's just hospital visits.

We are talking a 540,000,000 population differences. But only a 25,000 person differences in crimes? Maybe we should be more concerned about UK knife crimes eh?

Also, in 2009 a woman was killed with a laptop. I believe I read the very article on this board as a matter of fact.

My point: Maybe we should invest more in mental hospital and anger management then gun control....? Perhaps if people didn't want to hurt each other the crime rate would go down. OH GOD NO, NOT THAT. 




Kira Yamato said:


> Let's see if I have every point covered:
> 
> 
> *Pro Gun advocates:* This would have never happened if everyone was packing heat in the movie theatre.
> ...



My point, exactly.


----------



## drache (Jul 23, 2012)

IchLiebe said:


> @Toby about the citzen army.
> 
> You have heard of Jesse James right? Well when him and in posse was robbing a bank, 1 dude comes in and says "Billybob(nickname) we got a get going, trouble boilin over out here" Frank James "Its a fucking army"
> 
> Guess what happened, the townfolk didn't like their bank getting robbed so they stopped it, Jesse, Frank, and 1 dude was the only ones to get away out of 9-10 people. And he didn't do nothing else for a while, well until he got fed up with people thinking he was a coward and that he was ultimately defeated and scared.



right and the other part you are glossing over in your testorone haze is that there were no police in those days sport. But please keep on thinking that a story proves somethings



IchLiebe said:


> Guns don't kill people, people kill people. I can kill someone just as easy with my bare hands, a knife, a wire, a stick, any fucking thing can be used as a weapon.





sure you can tough guy I bet you also have a 4th degree blackbelt and have studied kung fu since you were 3.



IchLiebe said:


> If people get mad at each other, just fight with your hands, can't neither one of you go to jail unless you both go, and one must press charges or the cops see you fighting(then the state can press charges)



and thus we complete a massive lack of understanding about law, even 'fighting with your hands' can get you sent to jail. Even if you both are fighting.


----------



## Bleach (Jul 23, 2012)

SammyTehDuckie said:


> There are apx. 600,000,000 people in the USA.
> There are apx. 60,000,000 people in the UK.



Uhhh cut that number in half..

Around 311 million in USA.

Just thought I'd correct that...


----------



## josh101 (Jul 23, 2012)

SammyTehDuckie said:


> While I don't agree or disagree with gun control, everyone seems to be avoiding the problem here.
> 
> We'll take two major issues here, US gun crime and UK knife crime, both of these topics have made news in their country, even if they aren't about the same thing. You say 30,00 gun related crimes? I'm assuming it's an estimate, so I'm going to use nothing but rounded estimates to be fair.
> 
> ...


Smh. You're comparing gun homicides to knife CRIME. In reality, there is over 500,000+ gun crimes a year in the US. 

Let's look at the mortality rate of those statistics. Reportedly, in 2010, there were around 9,000 mortalities caused by guns in the US whilst only 200 deaths in the UK caused by knifes. There are only approximately 300,000,000 people in the USA. That means, you have a population of *five times* ours, yet a death count nearly *45 times* ours.


----------



## Greedy master (Jul 23, 2012)

full body armor seems interesting  maybe it has to become a norm in society , a gun doesnt guaranteed your survival  especially if you get caught on surprise or you are unsure if you have to take action fast , some people arent even trained to use guns ,  armors and helmets is the only chance for civilians against terrorism.


----------



## SammyTehDuckie (Jul 23, 2012)

josh101 said:


> Smh. You're comparing gun homicides to knife CRIME. In reality, there is over 500,000+ gun crimes a year in the US.
> 
> Let's look at the mortality rate of those statistics. Reportedly, in 2010, there were around 9,000 mortalities caused by guns in the US whilst only 200 deaths in the UK caused by knifes. There are only approximately 300,000,000 people in the USA. That means, you have a population of *five times* ours, yet a death count nearly *45 times* ours.



Ok, you have a point.
So what you are saying is....
If we honestly restrict guns, the same way we restrict drugs mind you, instead of giving each and every person enough mental attention, this will cut down enough crime?
Let's use your logic in this argument.
Let's compare knife crime, shall we? Since I can't seem to find anything relating to actual united states death.
Fact: The USA has a population 5 times the UK.
360,000 knife crime incidents in the United States in 2009
5,000 in the United Kingdom. *Reminder: That is their lowest in 2010/11*
_*That's over 60 times yours.*_
Perhaps we should have knife control too? 
My point is, guns are not the problem.
_VIOLENCE IS._
Why are the people so violent?
_*Financial and mental problems.*
_
Help the people, prevent the crime.
Or we can just control everything till everyone kills each other with paper.


----------



## neodragzero (Jul 23, 2012)

SammyTehDuckie said:


> While I don't agree or disagree with gun control, everyone seems to be avoiding the problem here.
> 
> We'll take two major issues here, US gun crime and UK knife crime, both of these topics have made news in their country, even if they aren't about the same thing. You say 30,00 gun related crimes? I'm assuming it's an estimate, so I'm going to use nothing but rounded estimates to be fair.



I actually put down there's been around 30,000 DEATHS caused by guns.


> There are apx. 600,000,000 people in the USA.
> There are apx. 60,000,000 people in the UK.
> 
> 30,000 gun crimes
> ...



You're comparing 30,000 deaths to 5,000 general knife crimes that are recorded through hospital visits, as in people coming in to get medical help rather than fatalities?

Also, how exactly is this a fair comparison as weapon usage goes where one is considerably more lethal than the other? Come back when the UK has an issue of singular incidents in multiple fatalities with a knife alone. You're making an equivalency fallacy. Especially when the discussion about a particular US issue in the states is once again a domestic concern that of course needs to be focused upon. Suggesting that a different type of crime in the UK deserves more focus when the discussion is about a US domestic issue is kind of a weird joke.


> Also, in 2009 a woman was killed with a laptop. I believe I read the very article on this board as a matter of fact.


Again, false equivalence. Talking about a single woman being killed by a laptop in a thread discussing multiple homicides in one event that involved tear gas grenades, heavy fire weaponry, and body armor is just plain asinine.


> My point: Maybe we should invest more in mental hospital and anger management then gun control....? Perhaps if people didn't want to hurt each other the crime rate would go down. OH GOD NO, NOT THAT.



Actually, that in itself isn't a good point either. I'm not suggesting alone that there should be a ban of material to civilians who could never have a reasonable reason to have such equipment as tear gas grenades, particular forms of firearms, body armor, etc. It's a step in the right direction though.

It seems that a better correlation with increased gun violence is supposedly the matter of economics in terms of issues in wage loss, unemployment, etc that correlate with an overall increase in crime. Suggesting that the focus should simply be on mental hospitals and anger management shows a severely narrow view on the subject when they aren't really proven to be proper correlations. It's simply more blatant that economic social issues and a considerable lack of care about providing a certain level of weaponry to the populace carry more weight of concern and necessity in focus to this particular incident. I will add that gun control hasn't really proven to be a key correlation with gun violence but it's not a great sign when Arizona for instance is above the national average.


SammyTehDuckie said:


> Ok, you have a point.
> So what you are saying is....
> If we honestly restrict guns, the same way we restrict drugs mind you, instead of giving each and every person enough mental attention, this will cut down enough crime?



No, he didn't say that at all. Lay off the strawman fallacy.


> Let's use your logic in this argument.
> Let's compare knife crime, shall we? Since I can't seem to find anything relating to actual united states death.
> Fact: The USA has a population 5 times the UK.
> 360,000 knife crime incidents in the United States in 2009
> ...



It seems more like you enjoy putting words into the mouths of others as you made a bad comparison only to forcefully make up a comparison to suit your argument that wasn't stated in a fashion that's to be considered with merit.



> My point is, guns are not the problem.
> _VIOLENCE IS._
> Why are the people so violent?
> _*Financial and mental problems.*
> ...



And once again, no one is simply saying guns are the problem. You're dumbing down a reasonable argument about limitations on how much material and in what fashion considerably non-civilian weaponry can be sold. It's not being argued as the sole place of concern on the issue but it's still a necessary part of the conversation.

Also, although the usual key correlation is that of economic issues and the resultant level of crime, not all cases are based on the individual themselves being in a position of extreme economic hardship while it's still disingenuous to explicitly suggest that crime can only be focused upon in the area of psychology and financial hardship. Proper progressive police enforcement, drug decriminalization of at least marijuana, etc. all also carry over into having an affect on levels of criminal activity.


----------



## SammyTehDuckie (Jul 23, 2012)

neodragzero said:


> You're comparing 30,000 deaths to 5,000 general knife crimes that are recorded through hospital visits, as in people coming in to get medical help rather than fatalities?
> 
> Also, how exactly is this a fair comparison as weapon usage goes where one is considerably more lethal than the other? Come back when the UK has an issue of singular incidents in multiple fatalities with a knife alone. You're making an equivalency fallacy. Especially when the discussion about a particular US issue in the states is once again a domestic concern that of course needs to be focused upon.


I was comparing two very high crime problems in two different countries. UK knife crime is a huge problem, ask the 200 people who died by knives alone.



> Suggesting that a different type of crime in the UK deserves more focus when the discussion is about a US domestic issue is kind of a weird joke.


It was a joke, but sarcasm can be hard to read over the Internet. I apologize.




> Again, false equivalence. Talking about a single woman being killed by a laptop in a thread discussing multiple homicides in one event that involved tear gas grenades, heavy fire weaponry, and body armor is just plain asinine.


This was in response to the original person I was talking to, which made sense. Outside the conversation it doesn't make sense. Please read my first post.




> Actually, that in itself isn't a good point either. I'm not suggesting alone that there should be a ban of material to civilians who could never have a reasonable reason to have such equipment as tear gas grenades, particular forms of firearms, body armor, etc. It's a step in the right direction though.


Is a mental check up every once a year so hard? You know, treated like a regular doctor check up?  And one thing about this country is, if you have enough money, you can get anything. Illegal or not.



> It seems that a better correlation with increased gun violence is supposedly the matter of economics in terms of issues in wage loss, unemployment, etc that correlate with an overall increase in crime. Suggesting that the focus should simply be on mental hospitals and anger management shows a severely narrow view on the subject when they aren't really proven to be proper correlations. It's simply more blatant that economic social issues and a considerable lack of care about providing a certain level of weaponry to the populace carry more weight of concern and necessity in focus to this particular incident. I will add that gun control hasn't really proven to be a key correlation with gun violence but it's not a great sign when Arizona for instance is above the national average.


What does financial have to do with this? I don't think this young man shot up a movie theater for money. 
 All joking aside, I do agree with you that financial plays a good role too.
Shall I remind you how the war on drugs is going? Since there's apparently drug control too? 



> No, he didn't say that at all. Lay off the strawman fallacy.


He hasn't said yet that he agrees with me what so ever, so I'm assuming he disagrees and thinks that gun control will solve all crime problems.




> It seems more like you enjoy putting words into the mouths of others as you made a bad comparison only to forcefully make up a comparison to suit your argument that wasn't stated in a fashion that's to be considered with merit.


And you enjoy jumping in without knowing the full story. 
I made my point very clear in my first post, it was short and sweet to the point.





> And once again, no one is simply saying guns are the problem. You're dumbing down a reasonable argument about limitations on how much material and in what fashion considerably non-civilian weaponry can be sold. It's not being argued as the sole place of concern on the issue but it's still a necessary part of the conversation.


Are you _blind?!_ Have you seen this whole thread?



> Also, although the usual key correlation is that of economic issues and the resultant level of crime, not all cases are based on the individual themselves being in a position of extreme economic hardship while it's still disingenuous to explicitly suggest that crime can only be focused upon in the area of psychology and financial hardship. Proper progressive police enforcement, drug decriminalization of at least marijuana, etc. all also carry over into having an affect on levels of criminal activity.


They are key, and my two points alone would make crime go much lower. The points you suggested would help too, I'm not saying that financial and mental help would be the only two options, I'm saying it's much better options then gun control.


----------



## neodragzero (Jul 23, 2012)

SammyTehDuckie said:


> I was comparing two very high crime problems in two different countries. UK knife crime is a huge problem, ask the 200 people who died by knives alone.


You're comparing two high crime problems that work on different dynamics and severity. We're talking about an America domestic issue and what needs to be discussed about said issue. So, yeah, UK knife crime is a weird red herring.


> It was a joke, but sarcasm can be hard to read over the Internet. I apologize.


You misunderstand. I know it's a joke. It's quite simply a weird one with no real bite to it.


> This was in response to the original person I was talking to, which made sense. Outside the conversation it doesn't make sense. Please read my first post.


What? You stated:


SammyTehDuckie said:


> While I don't agree or disagree with gun control, everyone seems to be avoiding the problem here.
> 
> We'll take two major issues here, US gun crime and UK knife crime, both of these topics have made news in their country, even if they aren't about the same thing. You say 30,00 gun related crimes? I'm assuming it's an estimate, so I'm going to use nothing but rounded estimates to be fair.
> 
> ...



In direct response to my post () actually. How exactly are you responding to someone else if you're quoting me as you utterly are making a response to me? You're not making any sense here.


> Is a mental check up every once a year so hard? You know, treated like a regular doctor check up?  And one thing about this country is, if you have enough money, you can get anything. Illegal or not.


It's not enough of a correlation factor. Especially when so many of these massacre cases aren't concluded with finding the suspect mentally incapable of being prosecuted.


> What does finical have to do with this? I don't think this young man shot up a movie theater for money.


It's a good thing my post has this little quote:


> Also, although the usual key correlation is that of economic issues and the resultant level of crime,* not all cases are based on the individual themselves being in a position of extreme economic hardship* while it's still disingenuous to explicitly suggest that crime can only be focused upon in the area of psychology and financial hardship. Proper progressive police enforcement, drug decriminalization of at least marijuana, etc.





> All joking aside, I do agree with you that financial plays a good role too.
> Shall I remind you how the war on drugs is going? Since there's apparently drug control too?



False equivalence of tear gas grenades, heavy fire weaponry, and body armor to drug usage. One is an issue of weaponry and violence while the other is explicitly a public health concern that unfortunately has been somewhat militarized . I'm not suggesting a full ban on guns. Guns and drugs are not the same in too many dynamics.


> He hasn't said yet that he agrees with me what so ever, so I'm assuming he disagrees and thinks that gun control will solve all crime problems.


He doesn't disagree with your faulty comparison. That's about all I see in the quote you're injecting words into.


> And you enjoy jumping in without knowing the full story.
> I made my point very clear in my first post, it was short and sweet to the point.


No, it's pretty obvious that when you're still making up a strawman fallacy when someone simply disagreed with you on a comparison rather than suggesting a form of logic that condones your comparison of knife crime in two countries.


> They are key, and my two points alone would make crime go much lower. The points you suggested would help too, I'm not saying that financial and mental help would be the only two options, I'm saying it's much better options then gun control.



You're suggestion of greater mental health screenings isn't really useful when there's not much of a proven correlation while the issue of economics alone isn't enough nor is it that simple. Are you really arguing that it's reasonable that a person can buy tear gas grenades and other material that only law enforcement could ever have to a reason to possess?


----------



## SammyTehDuckie (Jul 23, 2012)

neodragzero said:


> You're comparing two high crime problems that work on different dynamics and severity. We're talking about an America domestic issue and what needs to be discussed about said issue. So, yeah, UK knife crime is a weird red herring.


I can't explain it to you if you don't look at the actual issue. You're acting like I'm comparing two countries in a "who's better" contest.  I'm taking two MAJOR issues that other people brought up. Stop acting like I brought it up out of no where! I'm Anti-American for crying out loud!



> You misunderstand. I know it's a joke. It's quite simply a weird one with no real bite to it.


Well, I was just being sarcastic. Not trying to make people gasp for air laughing.  Still, whatever problem you have against it sorry?



> How exactly are you responding to someone else if you're quoting me as you utterly are making a response to me? You're not making any sense here.


My fault entirely! I apologize.




> It's not enough of a correlation factor. Especially when so many of these massacre cases aren't concluded with finding the suspect mentally incapable of being prosecuted.


So, what you are saying is, this young gentleman, didn't need any kind of mental attention at all? To me he sounds like a typical sociopath! You don't think a little extra doctor attention would of prevented this?



> It's a good thing my post has this little quote:


Once again, a poor joke on my part I assume.





> False equivalence of tear gas grenades, heavy fire weaponry, and body armor to drug usage. One is an issue of weaponry and violence while the other is explicitly a public health concern that unfortunately has been somewhat militarized . I'm not suggesting a full ban on guns. Guns and drugs are not the same in too many dynamics.


They are not alike yet. Make them illegal and they will be right next to the crack.



> He doesn't disagree with your faulty comparison. That's about all I see in the quote you're injecting words into.


If you're sure then.



> No, it's pretty obvious that when you're still making up a strawman fallacy when someone simply disagreed with you on a comparison rather than suggesting a form of logic that condones your comparison of knife crime in two countries.


What is wrong with giving a better comparision when someone asks for it?




> You're suggestion of greater mental health screenings isn't really useful when there's not much of a proven correlation while the issue of economics alone isn't enough nor is it that simple. Are you really arguing that it's reasonable that a person can buy tear gas grenades and other material that only law enforcement could ever have to a reason to possess?


Are you saying a ban on it will really stop it? How many times do I have to bring up drugs? Lots of people do them despite the fact they are "illegal." Possibly a bit less of a problem? Yes! Would it still be a huge problem? ABSOLUTELY! I think if we don't give them a reason to kill, they won't go looking. And I *NEVER EVER EVER * said it was simply. It's a hard a long process considering our financial state, but it would still bring results.


----------



## Kaitou (Jul 23, 2012)

Bender said:


> Fuck the trial feed the man to the prison lions.
> 
> Shit, I can see this crazy fuck spitting all over the courtroom tomorrow.



Thanks for the article...it seems it's about to get real. o.o


----------



## IchLiebe (Jul 23, 2012)

neodragzero said:


> Everyone, here's an example of fallacy based thinking that a single story somehow shows a comprehensive picture rather than statistics and given likelihoods. A single story somewhat suggesting that what could be a relative civilian arms race somehow is okay. Imagine how successful a bunch of people will be against someone in body armor, armed with tear gas and body armor who had the jump on them in the first place. Then I guess there'll be the argument that maybe the so-called good samaritans should be allowed to have access to that level of weaponry and body armor. Dear folks, that is what we call an arms race that will not help things.


 First of all, we don't know if it was tear gas or smoke, I keep hearing different things. And again don't know if its soft body or hard body armor, and body armor is 100% guaranteed, bullets can still go straight through them if the armor is not cared for properly. Well a bunch of people was successfull at putting down one of the most dangerous and experienced(more than this dude) and about forced Jesse and Frank James into retirement so your point is moot. If a citizen had a gun he could've taken action that prevented more killings.





> Yeah, your hands are comparable to a weapon that can kill multiple people in seconds. Sure. Good luck successfully doing comparable damage to what that guy did with your bare hands, a knife, a wire, or a stick. False equivalence is never new.


I never said I could kill such an amount of people in such an amount of time. I said as easy as. He also had element of suprise, anyone with the element of suprise is at a huge advangtage already.

Bare Hands- Snap neck, brain stem, and countless other places.
A knife- Need I explain, there is over 14 spots that are easily accessible to slash/stab with a knife.
A wire- Choke him while it cuts their throat.
A stick- Break their back.

Granted may not be easier than a gun, but there are ways to kill people w/o a gun that is quick, easy, efficient.


----------



## drache (Jul 23, 2012)

IchLiebe said:


> First of all, we don't know if it was tear gas or smoke, I keep hearing different things. And again don't know if its soft body or hard body armor, and body armor is 100% guaranteed, bullets can still go straight through them if the armor is not cared for properly. Well a bunch of people was successfull at putting down one of the most dangerous and experienced(more than this dude) and about forced Jesse and Frank James into retirement so your point is moot. If a citizen had a gun he could've taken action that prevented more killings.I never said I could kill such an amount of people in such an amount of time. I said as easy as. He also had element of suprise, anyone with the element of suprise is at a huge advangtage already.



it has been referred to as a noxious or irratating gas and unless you got either AP rounds (which generally are illegal if not tightly controlled) or some huge caliber you're not going though even 'soft' bodyarm with a hand gun

But please keep digging



IchLiebe said:


> Bare Hands- Snap neck, brain stem, and countless other places.
> A knife- Need I explain, there is over 14 spots that are easily accessible to slash/stab with a knife.
> A wire- Choke him while it cuts their throat.
> A stick- Break their back.
> ...





Sorry but breaking someone's back with a stick is not easy and even with an actual hardened staff it's the last thing you're going to do as odds are you'll still damage the staff if not break it (depending on what type of staff it actually is)

People that actually know what the hell they are talking about know generally what you are aiming for with a staff.


And by the by the brain stem can not be severed itself not with your hands as it's inside the skull. In fact why snapping someone's neck (which is not as easy as you make it sound) is so deadly because that action severs the connection to the brain stem.


----------



## Anarch (Jul 23, 2012)

I used to watch Die Hard or Rambo and go like "wow one man couldn't do this shit !!"

Then I read some of the posts in this thread. Some of you guys are born warriors. I can't imagine why I haven't seen more of you on TV.


----------



## hammer (Jul 23, 2012)

I think some of my brain cells died


----------



## Huey Freeman (Jul 23, 2012)

Here is a pic of him in court. 

The news article link is broken .



edit



> By M. Alex Johnson, NBC News
> Updated at 12:56 p.m. ET: James Eagan Holmes appeared in court for the first time Monday after he was arrested last week in the deaths of 12 people in a mass shooting at a sold-out movie theater in Aurora, Colo.
> M. Alex Johnson is a reporter for NBC News. Follow him on Twitter and Facebook.
> Arapahoe County District Judge William Sylvester determined that there was probable cause to continue the case, telling Holmes he was accused of having killed 12 people and wounded 58 others early Friday in a crowded theater was showing the premiere of the new Batman movie, "The Dark Knight Rises."
> ...


----------



## Tony Lou (Jul 23, 2012)

This kind of shit happens because the access to guns is far too easy.


----------



## Tsukiyomi (Jul 23, 2012)

Toby said:


> I just think the right to carry a firearm is stupid because, as far as I can tell, it causes more trouble than it is worth.



I support peoples right to have guns in their homes for protection but I can't fathom why anyone should need to be carrying one around with them everything they go.

I think the whole right to carry a firearm debate raises an interesting question, if people have a right to carry a gun does that mean they have a right to carry everything below a gun?  Knives are far less dangerous than guns, if I can walk around with a gun with a 30 round magazine then can I walk anywhere I want strapped with dozens of knives and carry a sword on my back?  I doubt most of those gun advocates would get behind that but its the same basic principle.


----------



## IchLiebe (Jul 23, 2012)

drache said:


> it has been referred to as a noxious or irratating gas and unless you got either AP rounds (which generally are illegal if not tightly controlled) or some huge caliber you're not going though even 'soft' bodyarm with a hand gun
> 
> But please keep digging


A 45 will hurt body armor not get through it. But what I said was if its not cared for properly and depending on age and wear and tear, it has a much higher chance of going through. 

Noxious/Irritating =/= Tear gas, that 2 effect of tear gas yes but not just that. Tear gas will fuck you up if you panick and start breathing heavily and youll notice its effects fairly quickly.




> Sorry but breaking someone's back with a stick is not easy and even with an actual hardened staff it's the last thing you're going to do as odds are you'll still damage the staff if not break it (depending on what type of staff it actually is)
> 
> People that actually know what the hell they are talking about know generally what you are aiming for with a staff.


 Yea because my friend didn't get his back broke when someone came up behind him and hit em with a stick, I must've been on acid or shrooms when I was 11.
A staff? WhoTF carries a hardened staff around lol. Its called a wooden baseball bat. Of which you going for the kill hit in the head, ribs, back.


> And by the by the brain stem can not be severed itself not with your hands as it's inside the skull. In fact why snapping someone's neck (which is not as easy as you make it sound) is so deadly because that action severs the connection to the brain stem.



You hit someone in the back of the head in the right spot hard enough you will kill them.

Have you snapped something neck, aka Deer, human, dog(done 2xs when being attackd) Ok then.

No it severs the connection but also more and you've got to do it right.


----------



## hammer (Jul 23, 2012)

MY BRAIN               .


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 23, 2012)

not that I'm against guns ownership, but right now people in terrorist watch list can buy guns

Seriously, we have to have months of classes to issue drivers license, but you can buy this crap at fucking Wallmart?
Really?


----------



## EvilMoogle (Jul 23, 2012)

Tsukiyomi said:


> I think the whole right to carry a firearm debate raises an interesting question, if people have a right to carry a gun does that mean they have a right to carry everything below a gun?  Knives are far less dangerous than guns, if I can walk around with a gun with a 30 round magazine then can I walk anywhere I want strapped with dozens of knives and carry a sword on my back?  I doubt most of those gun advocates would get behind that but its the same basic principle.



This is a bit tangential but it totally depends on the state.

Some states have laws prohibiting carrying knives over certain lengths irregardless of their laws on gun ownership (where a sword is loosely defined as a knife).  Likewise I've heard of states where one can be registered to carry a concealed firearm but a crossbow is completely illegal to own.

But as a counterpoint in Iowa the concealed carry permit applies to any weapon a civilian can legally own, so yes here you could walk around strapped with knives and a sword (legally, you'll probably get some odd looks though).

I would think from a Constitutional standpoint it would come down to debating the definition of "arms" which I would think would reasonably extend to knives/swords/similar personal weapons.  You may be hard pressed getting a legal team together to fight for that in court though.


----------



## josh101 (Jul 23, 2012)

SammyTehDuckie said:


> Ok, you have a point.
> So what you are saying is....
> If we honestly restrict guns, the same way we restrict drugs mind you, instead of giving each and every person enough mental attention, this will cut down enough crime?


No, my point was correcting faulty statistics.



SammyTehDuckie said:


> Let's use your logic in this argument.
> Let's compare knife crime, shall we? Since I can't seem to find anything relating to actual united states death.
> Fact: The USA has a population 5 times the UK.
> 360,000 knife crime incidents in the United States in 2009
> ...


There was no "my logic", I was just posting statistics, not making a point.

Also, there were not 5,000 knife crimes in the UK then. There were about 25,000-30,000 violent knife crimes in that period in the UK. That's just violent crimes.



IchLiebe said:


> Noxious/Irritating =/= Tear gas, that 2 effect of tear gas yes but not just that. Tear gas will fuck you up if you panick and start breathing heavily and youll notice its effects fairly quickly.


Fuck you up like.... death? Two people have died of smoke inhalation after the incident, normal smoke bombs wouldn't do that, they are generally quiet safe. It was tear gas.


----------



## Andrew (Jul 23, 2012)

If it was me in that court room, I would leap over the podium and let him have it in the face. Not the police unit  nor Batman could hold me back for that very moment.


----------



## Bender (Jul 23, 2012)

IchLiebe said:


> Bare Hands- Snap neck, brain stem, and countless other places.
> A knife- Need I explain, there is over 14 spots that are easily accessible to slash/stab with a knife.
> A wire- Choke him while it cuts their throat.
> A stick- Break their back.
> ...



[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztVMib1T4T4&feature=related[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## Talon. (Jul 23, 2012)

its sad that people are already blaming the gay community and lack of religion in schools.

no, he was a (well-coordinated) madman with a bunch of guns and body armor.

nothing more, nothing less. i hope he rots in prison.


----------



## drache (Jul 23, 2012)

Tsukiyomi said:


> I support peoples right to have guns in their homes for protection but I can't fathom why anyone should need to be carrying one around with them everything they go.
> 
> I think the whole right to carry a firearm debate raises an interesting question, if people have a right to carry a gun does that mean they have a right to carry everything below a gun?  Knives are far less dangerous than guns, if I can walk around with a gun with a 30 round magazine then can I walk anywhere I want strapped with dozens of knives and carry a sword on my back?  I doubt most of those gun advocates would get behind that but its the same basic principle.



I will have to remember that for next time



IchLiebe said:


> A 45 will hurt body armor not get through it. But what I said was if its not cared for properly and depending on age and wear and tear, it has a much higher chance of going through.
> 
> Noxious/Irritating =/= Tear gas, that 2 effect of tear gas yes but not just that. Tear gas will fuck you up if you panick and start breathing heavily and youll notice its effects fairly quickly.



huh? neither of those paragraphs make sense.





IchLiebe said:


> Yea because my friend didn't get his back broke when someone came up behind him and hit em with a stick, I must've been on acid or shrooms when I was 11.
> A staff? WhoTF carries a hardened staff around lol. Its called a wooden baseball bat. Of which you going for the kill hit in the head, ribs, back.
> 
> 
> ...



I think I am just going to ignore the rest of this chuck norris as this thread isn't about correcting your macho misconceptions

believe what you want



hammer said:


> MY BRAIN               .




i hear an ice pick will solve your problems


----------



## neodragzero (Jul 23, 2012)

IchLiebe said:


> First of all, we don't know if it was tear gas or smoke, I keep hearing different things.


Two deaths through smoke inhalation. Witnesses describing the presence of noxious gas. The shooter was wearing a gas mask. Where do you think it came from?


> And again don't know if its soft body or hard body armor, and body armor is 100% guaranteed, bullets can still go straight through them if the armor is not cared for properly.


And once again, you seem to argue a magical optimism rather than the matter of greater likelihood that someone without body armor and less weaponry will somehow just get lucky. As probability goes, no.


> Well a bunch of people was successfull at putting down one of the most dangerous and experienced(more than this dude) and about forced Jesse and Frank James into retirement so your point is moot.


And once again, you're trying to talk of a story as if it's somehow a show of a statistical given rather than an outlier that still isn't comparable to what was done at the movie theater. My point isn't moot when said point is based on greater likelihoods rather than glamorizing weak outliers.


> Bare Hands- Snap neck, brain stem, and countless other places.
> A knife- Need I explain, there is over 14 spots that are easily accessible to slash/stab with a knife.
> A wire- Choke him while it cuts their throat.
> A stick- Break their back.
> ...



And once again, equivalence fallacy where you aren't harming 70 people with said options that you've mentioned. Suggesting an "easy as" is still making a faulty comparison that suggests at all they're similar in efficiency. They're not. There's a civilian reason for having bare hands, a knife, a wire, and a stick. There's no civilian reason for having tear gas grenades, heavy fire weaponry and ammo that can harm 70 people in 90 seconds, and body armor along with a gas mask. So, please bugger off the weak strawman fallacy you've got there where little things like numbers and probability clearly aren't considered at all whatsoever.


----------



## Bender (Jul 23, 2012)

In Ichiliebe mind: 

Us > Ours 

if put in that exact situation.   You are such an e-gangster homie.  It's too bad an incident similar to the one in Denver, Aurora hasn't occurred in the theater by your house so you could demonstrate these so-called macho skills that show how different you are in comparison to the people in that theater.


----------



## Zabuza (Jul 23, 2012)

Just read that 3 guys died protecting their girlfriends in this disaster.
I just want to express my respect for those men.


----------



## soulnova (Jul 23, 2012)

Zabuza said:


> Just read that 3 guys died protecting their girlfriends in this disaster.
> I just want to express my respect for those men.







> Jon Blunk had served in the Navy and was planning to re-enlist. On Friday, the 26-year-old took his girlfriend, Jansen Young, to see the "Dark Knight" -- when the assault began, Young says he saved her life. "Jon just took a bullet for me," Young said in an interview on "Today". "He knew and threw me on the ground, and was like, 'We have to get down and stay down.'"
> 
> While Holmes walked up and down the aisles shooting, Young says her boyfriend was a constant presence, pushing her further under the seats and out of the line of fire. Finally, as the shots slowed, *she crawled out and attempted to pull up Blunk by the shoulder, but he didn't move.*
> 
> ...



 

Respect for these men is all I have.


----------



## neverlandvictim (Jul 23, 2012)

EvilMoogle said:


> This is a bit tangential but it totally depends on the state.
> 
> Some states have laws prohibiting carrying knives over certain lengths irregardless of their laws on gun ownership (where a sword is loosely defined as a knife).  Likewise I've heard of states where one can be registered to carry a concealed firearm but a crossbow is completely illegal to own.
> 
> ...



 Why's a crossbow illegal? It's silent but that's about it.


----------



## Terra Branford (Jul 23, 2012)

^ (damn, okay, a post higher than this one) Those men are righteous. God bless their souls and may they rest in peace.


----------



## cnorwood (Jul 23, 2012)

Man i just watched about 2 mins of the WBC thanking God for this shooting, and saying he sent the gunman. I dont remember Jesus speaking about being an attention whore, and using his name to condem everyone else.


----------



## Kaitou (Jul 23, 2012)

cnorwood said:


> Man i just watched about 2 mins of the WBC thanking God for this shooting, and saying he sent the gunman. I dont remember Jesus speaking about being an attention whore, and using his name to condem everyone else.



Daaamn....why must people to involve Religion with everything? 

What else they were saying?


----------



## Terra Branford (Jul 23, 2012)

cnorwood said:


> Man i just watched about 2 mins of the WBC thanking God for this shooting, and saying he sent the gunman. I dont remember Jesus speaking about being an attention whore, and using his name to condem everyone else.



Oh Lord, not WBC again.


----------



## cnorwood (Jul 23, 2012)

heres the link to the video.


----------



## Rashou (Jul 23, 2012)

cnorwood said:


> heres the link to the video.



 What. The. Actual. Fuck?!!!


----------



## Kaitou (Jul 23, 2012)

^Someone needs to shoot that dude.


----------



## Maerala (Jul 23, 2012)

The Westboro Baptist Church has also thanked God for 9/11 and Columbine in the past. They twist every national tragedy and try to make it seem as though they happen because America has incurred God's oh so fearsome wrath. Terrible people. I hear Shirley Phelps-Roper is actually banned from Great Britain.


----------



## Bender (Jul 23, 2012)

cnorwood said:


> heres the link to the video.





Dear god... WBC

Shut... THE FUCK UP


----------



## Terra Branford (Jul 23, 2012)

cnorwood said:


> heres the link to the video.



Ugh. WBC is just....  Why can't we just send them all off to an island where they can't be seen or heard of? :sigh

And the comments. People actually thinks the majority of religious people think this way?


----------



## soulnova (Jul 23, 2012)

I couldn't watch 30 seconds of that bullshit.


----------



## Draffut (Jul 24, 2012)

josh101 said:


> Smh. You're comparing gun homicides to knife CRIME. In reality, there is over 500,000+ gun crimes a year in the US.
> 
> Let's look at the mortality rate of those statistics. Reportedly, in 2010, there were around 9,000 mortalities caused by guns in the US whilst only 200 deaths in the UK caused by knifes. There are only approximately 300,000,000 people in the USA. That means, you have a population of *five times* ours, yet a death count nearly *45 times* ours.



My state, New Hampshire, has extremely lax gun control laws in general, and we also have one of the lowest gun murder rates in the US.



13 total murders in 2012, 5 of which were gun related.  I do not personally own a gun at this time, but I've used them before and have no problem with them.  If I wanted to purchase one I don't see why I shouldn't be able to because someone, somewhere, did bad things with one.


----------



## Wesker (Jul 24, 2012)

Tsukiyomi said:


> I support peoples right to have guns in their homes for protection but *I can't fathom why anyone should need to be carrying one around with them everything they go.
> *
> I think the whole right to carry a firearm debate raises an interesting question, if people have a right to carry a gun does that mean they have a right to carry everything below a gun?  Knives are far less dangerous than guns, if I can walk around with a gun with a 30 round magazine then can I walk anywhere I want strapped with dozens of knives and carry a sword on my back?  I doubt most of those gun advocates would get behind that but its the same basic principle.



For protection. Not everyone can live in a nice low crime area, people should have the means to protect themselves from criminals.


----------



## Kaitlyn (Jul 24, 2012)

That video just sent all my rage feels into my ears and eyes. I could only listen to a minute of it, and he has 5 more minutes of bullshit to say? Fuck you WBC.


----------



## drache (Jul 24, 2012)

Wesker said:


> For protection. Not everyone can live in a nice low crime area, people should have the means to protect themselves from criminals.



just how many times has concealed carry done that? just how many times has a civilian pulled a gun and saved themselves or others?

I am betting you can not answer that question and yet will persist in this delusion.


----------



## JellyButter (Jul 24, 2012)




----------



## Mist Puppet (Jul 24, 2012)

cnorwood said:


> heres the link to the video.





The fact that he probably believes every single word that he spewed out of that wretched mouth is the most disgusting part of it all.


----------



## Maerala (Jul 24, 2012)

Kaitlyn said:


> That video just sent all my rage feels into my ears and eyes. I could only listen to a minute of it, and he has 5 more minutes of bullshit to say? Fuck you WBC.



Much of the rest was him just quoting crap scripture about obeying God and how bad things happen in America because we don't. You didn't miss anything, aside from a brain hemorrhage. WBC always manages to turn things into a wrathful god punishing a rebellious nation.


----------



## Tony Lou (Jul 24, 2012)

Since guns are loved too much to be kept away from the common citizen through a ban, could there be some restrictions pretty please? So assholes of that kind won't get their hands on it as easily.

But ideally, guns should remain in the hands of trained professionals only. Police officers and so forth.


----------



## Wesker (Jul 24, 2012)

drache said:


> just how many times has concealed carry done that? just how many times has a civilian pulled a gun and saved themselves or others?
> 
> I am betting you can not answer that question and yet will persist in this delusion.



The statistics vary depending on what year and source you use. But most of the statistics I've seen are in the 10 to hundreds of thousands or even more cases of using a firearm for self defense each year.


----------



## drache (Jul 24, 2012)

Wesker said:


> The statistics vary depending on what year and source you use. But most of the statistics I've seen are in the 10 to hundreds of thousands or even more cases of using a firearm for self defense each year.



afi and american firearms are not objective and therefore have a vested interest in showing only that which validates thier world view

and Keck's study while interesting is first dated and second doesn't show anything about what happens just that guns are used.

My assertation is still stands as you've not offered anything


----------



## Wesker (Jul 24, 2012)

drache said:


> afi and american firearms are not objective and therefore have a vested interest in showing only that which validates thier world view
> 
> and Keck's study while interesting is first dated and second doesn't show anything about what happens just that guns are used.
> 
> My assertation is still stands as you've not offered anything



This is an article critical of kleck, it mentions a more conservative estimate done by the ncvs which placed the number at 108,000. While that survey is also dated, I don't think that number would have changed too drastically since then. Even if that number changed to half the defensive uses in recent years (just an example) it would still be a significant number.


----------



## SammyTehDuckie (Jul 24, 2012)

cnorwood said:


> heres the link to the video.



Can we all just agree to let the shooter open fire on them?


----------



## josh101 (Jul 24, 2012)

Cardboard Jewsuke said:


> My state, New Hampshire, has extremely lax gun control laws in general, and we also have one of the lowest gun murder rates in the US.
> 
> 
> 
> 13 total murders in 2012, 5 of which were gun related.  I do not personally own a gun at this time, but I've used them before and have no problem with them.  If I wanted to purchase one I don't see why I shouldn't be able to because someone, somewhere, did bad things with one.


I don't know why you're quoting me. I guess you are posting statistics and my post did that too, but I'm sure there's other posts where that sort of information will be more useful as I haven't stated my opinions on gun laws, just posted statistics.

As for that, 5 does seem very low, but so is New Hampshires population. Currently, five deaths a year still gives you a mortality rate above the UK.


----------



## Illairen (Jul 24, 2012)

Westboro what? Crazy guys. 

Why don`t you just ban religious organisations which violate your constitution?


----------



## Bender (Jul 24, 2012)

Fuck you spider-man


----------



## creative (Jul 24, 2012)

Illairen said:


> Westboro what? Crazy guys.
> 
> Why don`t you just ban religious organisations which violate your constitution?



because even though freedom of speech technically doesn't exist in america, it still exist....in america.


----------



## hammer (Jul 24, 2012)

Am I bad for laughing at the spider-man pic?


----------



## Crowned Clown (Jul 24, 2012)

Pretty sure you are, but I am pretty sure that makes me bad too.


----------



## Bender (Jul 24, 2012)

hammer said:


> Am I bad for laughing at the spider-man pic?



Nah, I kinda laughed too.  But still dick move by Spidey.


----------



## MasterSitsu (Jul 24, 2012)

When you put a ban on something it doesn't stop people from getting it, criminals don't care about going threw the proper channels to get a gun they will get it anyway. All this does is stop citizens from defending themselves. 

This murderer also riged with aparment with gasoline are we going to stop people from buying that too?


----------



## impersonal (Jul 24, 2012)

MasterSitsu said:


> *When you put a ban on something it doesn't stop people from getting it*, criminals don't care about going threw the proper channels to get a gun they will get it anyway. All this does is stop citizens from defending themselves.
> 
> This murderer also riged with aparment with gasoline are we going to stop people from buying that too?



Yes it does... How many americans here have ever tasted the bliss of kinder eggs?  Banning things works... To some extent.

For guns, in the US, it seems the consensus is that a total ban would be of no effect, but a partial ban (on some weapons) could be useful.


----------



## Wesker (Jul 24, 2012)

impersonal said:


> Yes it does... How many americans here have ever tasted the bliss of kinder eggs?  Banning things works... To some extent.
> 
> For guns, in the US, it seems the consensus is that a total ban would be of no effect, but a partial ban (on some weapons) could be useful.



There is already a fairly effective ban on automatic weapons, the ones civilians can obtain have to be registered and the registry was closed in 1986 so unless you have an ffl (as a firearm manufacturer/seller) the only way to obtain a full auto weapon is to buy one that was already registered, which is costly and fairly rare to find. And items such as silencers, short barreled rifles, short barreled shotguns and destructive devices are regulated.


----------



## Kid (Jul 24, 2012)

Seriously I better not see him somewhere , I would torture him dead, that mtherfcuker


----------



## DremolitoX (Jul 24, 2012)

>someone who breaks a law against killing people would arbitrarily obey gun laws

You gun control people are freaking stupid.


----------



## Crowned Clown (Jul 24, 2012)

Bale has been visiting victims separate from WB.


----------



## davidpliskin (Jul 24, 2012)

The  redhead "patsy" looks drugged out of his mind during his first court appearance.


----------



## drache (Jul 24, 2012)

Wesker said:


> There is already a fairly effective ban on automatic weapons, the ones civilians can obtain have to be registered and the registry was closed in 1986 so unless you have an ffl (as a firearm manufacturer/seller) the only way to obtain a full auto weapon is to buy one that was already registered, which is costly and fairly rare to find. And items such as silencers, short barreled rifles, short barreled shotguns and destructive devices are regulated.



but apparently not single shot assault weapons


----------



## josh101 (Jul 24, 2012)

DremolitoX said:


> >someone who breaks a law against killing people would arbitrarily obey gun laws
> 
> You gun control people are freaking stupid.


It's not about whether he would break the law to buy the guns or not that people are arguing could of stopped him, it's the fact that if they were illegal, they would be much harder, and more dangerous to obtain.


----------



## creative (Jul 25, 2012)

impersonal said:


> Yes it does... How many americans here have ever tasted the bliss of kinder eggs?  Banning things works... To some extent.
> 
> For guns, in the US, it seems the consensus is that a total ban would be of no effect, but a partial ban (on some weapons) could be useful.



Alcohol, smoking and gambling was banned in america back in the day. the streets were so much safer back then. .


----------



## drache (Jul 25, 2012)

a creative color said:


> Alcohol, smoking and gambling was banned in america back in the day. the streets were so much safer back then. .



nice strawman


----------



## Bender (Jul 25, 2012)

James Holmes wants to know how The Dark Knight Rises ends





Also the psychopath sent a note prior to the attack




On knowing how the movie ended: you should've stuck around before going off and shooting you psychotic dumb fuck.


----------



## Biohazard Magellan (Jul 25, 2012)

It's times like this that I wish the U.S. had a torture sentnce.


----------



## The World (Jul 25, 2012)

josh101 said:


> It's not about whether he would break the law to buy the guns or not that people are arguing could of stopped him, it's the fact that if they were illegal, they would be much harder, and more dangerous to obtain.



What about all the times having a gun saved people?


----------



## The World (Jul 25, 2012)

KidKid said:


> Seriously I better not see him somewhere , I would torture him dead, that mtherfcuker



He definitely looks like a lunatic. He should still be tried as a sane person though, because he so meticulously planned it.


----------



## MasterSitsu (Jul 25, 2012)

Do you think criminals care if they are dangerous to obtain. These bad people already live a dangerous life.


----------



## Jeff (Jul 25, 2012)

I haven't been following the case as well as I wanted to, but have they already done a psychiatric examination on him yet?

With all this talk about "why didn't they realize he had a problem?" it's sounding like he's set to plead insanity/mentally unfit to stand trial and get away with a life sentence in a psychiatric hospital.


----------



## Fourangers (Jul 25, 2012)

*sigh*

Rest in peace.


----------



## drache (Jul 25, 2012)

The World said:


> What about all the times having a gun saved people?


 
and which times would those be?


----------



## Griever (Jul 25, 2012)

drache said:


> and which times would those be?



Go to you search engine and type: "armed citizen saves cop" I don't really know why you even have to ask this question though....


----------



## drache (Jul 25, 2012)

Griever said:


> Go to you search engine and type: "armed citizen saves cop" I don't really know why you even have to ask this question though....


 
no it's his argument (and yours I guess) so do your own work don't push it off onto others because you're lazy or can't back up what you say


----------



## SAFFF (Jul 25, 2012)

The judge will see through him mailing that package of illustrations as a way to get out of life in prison and spend it in a mental institution instead. I don't think he can get out of it. He's going to spend his life behind bars unless he suicides in there or before then.


----------



## Hiko Seijurou (Jul 25, 2012)

Jeff said:


> With all this talk about "why didn't they realize he had a problem?" it's sounding like he's set to plead insanity/mentally unfit to stand trial and get away with a life sentence in a psychiatric hospital.


Would that be much better, though?


----------



## Griever (Jul 26, 2012)

drache said:


> no it's his argument (and yours I guess) so do your own work don't push it off onto others because you're lazy or can't back up what you say



The lazy one would be you, but whatever. 


*Spoiler*: __ 



[YOUTUBE]k_Yqk-6KKM8[/YOUTUBE]

[YOUTUBE]tiiQQP4-Ijw[/YOUTUBE]

[YOUTUBE]UjmUv4cyZq8[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## neodragzero (Jul 26, 2012)

Griever said:


> The lazy one would be you, but whatever.
> 
> 
> *Spoiler*: __
> ...



If you be so kind, what's the point of this?


----------



## Griever (Jul 26, 2012)

neodragzero said:


> If you be so kind, what's the point of this?



He asked "which times guns have saved lives" i gave him a couple examples. Granted i originally wanted to post different articles that i had read in the past, sadly though i can't find them now on any site that would not be instantly slammed as bias


----------



## neodragzero (Jul 26, 2012)

Griever said:


> He asked "which times guns have saved lives" i gave him a couple examples. Granted i originally wanted to post different articles that i had read in the past, sadly though i can't find them now on any site that would not be instantly slammed as bias



I see. If that's really what he asked, it's a somewhat limited, vague question. It would of helped if the question included the matter of how these citizen hero moments compare to the likelihood of gun related homicide and crime in general or how these citizen heroes likely weren't faced with someone that got the jump on them decked out with body armor and heavier firepower which is usually a given with people like the recent shooter.

But I'm getting ahead of myself there. What would you say is your opinion on the matter of limiting the availability of tear gas grenades,, military rifles, etc?


----------



## josh101 (Jul 26, 2012)

Griever said:


> The lazy one would be you, but whatever.
> 
> 
> *Spoiler*: __
> ...


Sorry but how exactly is this video of a life being saved? It's the exact opposite, a life was taken. Sure, he was committing a crime, but doesn't mean he should die for it. 

A few single cases in a country where 10,000's die every year by guns doesn't show much as well, by the way.


----------



## Griever (Jul 26, 2012)

neodragzero said:


> But I'm getting ahead of myself there. What would you say is your opinion on the matter of limiting the availability of tear gas grenades,, military rifles, etc?



I'm very Pro-gun and i don't have any problem with citizens owning assault rifles, hell i have an AK-47 myself. I don't believe that it's legal status effects crime in anyway what-so-ever, you take away the right to legally obtain assault rifles then the only ones that are really effected by this is the law abiding citizen considering that criminals do now obey the law.

A for tear gas.... I really don't know how i feel about that, i can't really see any valid reason why someone would need tear gas. 




josh101 said:


> Sorry but how exactly is this video of a life being saved? It's the exact opposite, a life was taken. Sure, he was committing a crime, but doesn't mean he should die for it.



And how is it they do now deserve what they get?, They forcibly break into your home showing they have absolutely no respect for your well being or for the law. They may or may not be armed but that's not really chance i'd be willing to take if there where kids in the house. 

I don't hear many complaints when a clearly violent suspect is shot by police but when citizens are faced with a violent intruder, oh fuck.

I mean i might just be crazy, but i am not in the habit of putting the lives of criminals who seek to victimize the common person to line they're own pockets (or for whatever reason they may have) over the lives of the law abiding citizen who are the target of victimization. But then again i'm apparently just crazy.  

also did you not watch the third video?. 



> A few single cases in a country where 10,000's die every year by guns doesn't show much as well, by the way.



You mean a few single cases that i myself got around to posting?....   



> * Guns are used 2.5 million times a year in self-defense. Law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times every year—or about 6,850 times a day.(1) This means that each year, firearms are used more than 80 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives.(2)
> 
> * Even anti-gun Clinton researchers concede that guns are used 1.5 million times annually for self-defense. According to the Clinton Justice Department, there are as many as 1.5 million cases of self-defense with a firearm every year. The National Institute of Justice published this figure in 1997 as part of "Guns in America"—a study which was authored by noted anti-gun criminologists Philip Cook and Jens Ludwig.(3)
> 
> ...





You can take it for what's it's worth.


----------



## neodragzero (Jul 26, 2012)

Griever said:


> I'm very Pro-gun and i don't have any problem with citizens owning assault rifles, hell i have an AK-47 myself. I don't believe that it's legal status effects crime in anyway what-so-ever, you take away the right to legally obtain assault rifles then the only ones that are really effected by this is the law abiding citizen considering that criminals do now obey the law.
> 
> 
> A for tear gas.... I really don't know how i feel about that, i can't really see any valid reason why someone would need tear gas.


That's the thing, both types of weaponry aren't really needed by civilians. I don't see how an AK-47 for instance is at all necessary for self defense much less hunting. There's never really a case where you need that much firepower for the likely situation of a single or two assailants. The last thing we need, I feel, is a civilian arms race where somehow it's consider reasonable to have a weapon that can kill dozens of people in seconds. How often do criminals in the US even have AK-47s and such to begin with?


----------



## Griever (Jul 26, 2012)

neodragzero said:


> That's the thing, both types of weaponry aren't really needed by civilians. I don't see how an AK-47 for instance is at all necessary for self defense much less hunting. There's never really a case where you need that much firepower for the likely situation of a single or two assailants. The last thing we need, I feel, is a civilian arms race where somehow it's consider reasonable to have a weapon that can kill dozens of people in seconds.



We don't really need TV's either but we love them because they are entertaining, it's the same thing with assault rifles; of course TV's aren't nearly as dangerous as assault rifles (i'm not comparing them in that aspect obviously.) Take myself for example, a couple times a year a couple friends and i take my AK-47 to an open field (with no one around for miles) and set up targets in front of a small hill or dirt mound. other than that it never leaves my house, i don't think there is any problem with that kind of use. 

Tear gas is a different story because i can't even see how someone could use it for simple enjoyment throwing a tear gas grenade wouldn't really be that entertaining unless said person is a sadist.  




> How often do criminals in the US even have AK-47s and such to begin with?



they don't use them that often to my knowledge, criminals tend to prefer guns that are easily concealable. 




> *Assault weapons and offenders*
> In the 1991 BJS Survey of State Inmates, about 8% of the inmates reported that they had owned a military-type weapon, such as an Uzi, AK-47, AR-15, or M-16. Less than 1% said that they carried such a weapon when they committed the incident for which they were incarcerated. A Virginia inmate survey conducted between November 1992 and May 1993 found similar results: About 10% of the adult inmates reported that they had ever possessed an assault rifle, but none had carried it at the scene of a crime.
> 
> Two studies indicate higher proportions of juvenile offenders reporting possession and use of assault rifles. The Virginia inmate survey also covered 192 juvenile offenders. About 20% reported that they had possessed an assault rifle and 1% said that they had carried it at the scene of a crime. In 1991, Sheley and Wright surveyed 835 serious juvenile offenders incarcerated in 6 facilities in 4 States. In the Sheley and Wright study, 35% of the juvenile inmates reported that they had owned a military-style automatic or semi-automatic rifle just prior to confinement.


----------



## neodragzero (Jul 26, 2012)

Griever said:


> We don't really need TV's either but we love them because they are entertaining,


Gonna cut you off there. You're making the "guns don't kill people, people do" argument that only deals with half the equation of the issue. TVs are meant to be watched. What exactly are heavy fire military weapons meant to do? You can't equate to the purpose of two technological devices and the result of said devices.

You can also use an AK-47 as a replacement for a walking stick, dig out dirt, etc. It does't change the fact that certain choices as far as original design are still more likely in practice rather than the benevolent one you're attempting to attach to it.

You don't need an AK-47 to shoot some targets in the backyard. Especially when I doubt you ever suggest that the point of target practice with an AK-47 or worse is meant to be carried out in real life as overkill reactions to assault go.


> they use them that often to my knowledge, criminals tend to prefer guns that are easily concealable.


...You're suggesting that an AK-47 is more easily and likely to be a concealable weapon than the numerous smaller, easier to get handguns? Really?

Especially this link you provided:

...puts the usage of heavy fire military weapons at a severe minority? That's besides the fact you're relying upon a survey from 1991 based on inmate testimony as we discuss the matter of wholesale massacre cases such as the recent Batman shooting.


----------



## Griever (Jul 26, 2012)

neodragzero said:


> Gonna cut you off there. You're making the "guns don't kill people, people do" argument that only deals with half the equation of the issue. TVs are meant to be watched. What exactly are heavy fire military weapons meant to do? You can't equate to the purpose of two technological devices and the result of said devices.



They are meant to kill, i won't argue that fact they are military weapons, what you decide to do with them is a different story. that is what i'm tryingto get across, not everyone who owns an assault rifle is out to kill people. 



> You can also use an AK-47 as a replacement for a walking stick, dig out dirt, etc. It does't change the fact that certain choices as far as original design are still more likely in practice rather than the benevolent one you're attempting to attach to it.



Considering the fact that there are so many things in this world that are common place that _can_ be turned into terrible weapons that can take out multiple people at once, assault rifles don't really seem unequally dangerous to me. 

I know it's become a clesha but, you got people who are hell bent to kill they're going to find a way. 



> You don't need an AK-47 to shoot some targets in the backyard. Especially when I doubt you ever suggest that the point of target practice with an AK-47 or worse is meant to be carried out in real life as overkill reactions to assault go.



No you don't _need_ one, but... Why not?, How many people do you think would like to get there hands on military grade weapons just to play with them?, it's like a kid in a candy shop.

Life is short man, you like assault rifles?, get an assault rifle, enjoy it.  



> ...You're suggesting that an AK-47 is more easily and likely to be a concealable weapon than the numerous smaller, easier to get handguns? Really?



This confused me at first, so i went back to my post, typo on my part sorry. 



> they *don't* use them that often to my knowledge, criminals tend to prefer guns that are easily concealable.



 whoops. 



> Especially this link you provided:
> 
> 
> ...puts the usage of heavy fire military weapons at a severe minority? That's besides the fact you're relying upon a survey from 1991 based on inmate testimony as we discuss the matter of wholesale massacre cases such as the recent Batman shooting.



Well you used the word 'criminal' in a broader term. 

But cases like the one here are rare in any first world country.


----------



## hammer (Jul 26, 2012)

what the fuck why do you have an ak 47


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 26, 2012)

Only fucktards sociopaths and overcompensating wusses would feel the need to hoard assault rifles whilst in a functioning society

With that said they should still have the right to them

But you know, the same way you don't issue a license for incomptent people to drive, you don't fucking issue a weapons license to people without background checks, frequent examinations to their weapons and weapon skills, and some fucking goddamned firing lessons from a fucking goddamned professional


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 26, 2012)

I mean sure, maybe we should let rich people start buying tanks and shit, right?


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 26, 2012)

I mean, it's fun right?
And stealth jets too

Oh and a nuke while you're at it

I almost orgasm when I nuke something to pieces.


----------



## Rashou (Jul 26, 2012)

Griever said:


> No you don't _need_ one, but... Why not?, How many people do you think would like to get there hands on military grade weapons just to play with them?, it's like a kid in a candy shop.
> 
> Life is short man, you like assault rifles?, get an assault rifle, enjoy it.


I can understand that some people enjoy using guns for recreation, but why is it so important to have regular, home access to weapons of this type? Why not just limit access to secure shooting ranges and have people engage in any recreational shooting there? I mean, what if one of your friends decided they wanted to rob a bank and so they figured out where you kept your assault rifle and stole it?


----------



## Griever (Jul 26, 2012)

hammer said:


> what the fuck why do you have an ak 47



I assume that was directed at me.

The AK-47 was my dads who gave it to me a couple years back for my birthday. that and i like it.


----------



## neodragzero (Jul 26, 2012)

Griever said:


> I assume that was directed at me.
> 
> The AK-47 was my dads who gave it to me a couple years back for my birthday. that and i like it.



Reading your post had this come to mind:


----------



## drache (Jul 26, 2012)

Griever said:


> The lazy one would be you, but whatever.


----------



## Bungee Gum (Jul 26, 2012)

Civilians need all that stuff and more when La Revolucion comes a marchin'


----------



## kazuri (Jul 26, 2012)

^^Or any other number of huge natural disasters that the average person refuses to believe could happen.


----------



## drache (Jul 26, 2012)

kazuri said:


> ^^Or any other number of huge natural disasters that the average person refuses to believe could happen.


 
right because teh zombie disater is a really pressing concern


----------



## EvilMoogle (Jul 26, 2012)

link shows "rampage killers" in the Americas.

104 of them occur in the U.S. (go us, I guess).
We'll look at the 70 of them that occur within the last 50 years

27 committed suicide (before arrest)
34 were arrested
7 were killed by the police.
1 was never identified (escaped capture)

*1* was killed by civilian witnesses.

So, in the last 50 years in the US one time private gun owners shortened a killing spree.

According to  between 2000 and 2005 a child died every 3 days due to gun accidents within the home.  Assuming that number is roughly consistent for the last 50 years that means just over *6000 kids* have died due to gun related accidents in the home during that time.


----------



## Griever (Jul 26, 2012)

drache said:


> no you see *you* make the claim *you* support that's how it works



Then work on your wording.



> and okay so you have a handful of examples but this is hardly statistics (which was what I was after)


 
You have a shitty way of expressing what it is you want, just for future reference. 



> well I think you're an idiot



I'm crushed. 



> and using a baised site is not very convincing



Did the "take it for what it's worth" part escape your understanding?. 



> Civilians have absolutely no fucking reason to own high cap mags, assault rifles, body armor or tear gas. You would think after all the shooting tragedies that would pentrate your thick skull



I disagree, the people who commit these tragedies are 100% fucking insane, make it harder to get guns, that'll fix it /sarcasm


----------



## drache (Jul 26, 2012)

EvilMoogle said:


> link shows "rampage killers" in the Americas.
> 
> 104 of them occur in the U.S. (go us, I guess).
> We'll look at the 70 of them that occur within the last 50 years
> ...


 
^ I am so stealing this



Griever said:


> Then work on your wording.


 
and you work on your comprehensio




Griever said:


> You have a shitty way of expressing what it is you want, just for future reference.


 
or maybe your ability to understand is shitty




Griever said:


> I'm crushed.


 
I should care?



Griever said:


> Did the "take it for what it's worth" part escape your understanding?.


 
right because we should all believe you because you have 'statistics' from a site that wants to be right showing it's right.

Do you understand what a conflict of interest is? How about objective research?



Griever said:


> I disagree, the people who commit these tragedies are 100% fucking insane, make it harder to get guns, that'll fix it /sarcasm


 
Many countries take a hardler line on guns in fact a harder line then I'd support and the instances of gun related crime is almost nonexistent.

Proving that you should think then talk.


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 26, 2012)

EvilMoogle said:


> Assuming the insane man wearing body armor is going to bother to look for cover.
> 
> 
> That's the rational choice.  I can understand wanting to have a gun in this situation, but actually using it?  In this particular case it would do more harm than good.
> ...



you make a decent enough point
Not an easy one, but God there has got to be a better solution to that situation other than run like a herd of sheep and hope your brains don't get splattered all over your friends


----------



## EvilMoogle (Jul 26, 2012)

Banhammer said:


> you make a decent enough point
> Not an easy one, but God there has got to be a better solution to that situation other than run like a herd of sheep and hope your brains don't get splattered all over your friends



IIRC there were two military people amongst the dead.  Both died helping to aid/organize escape.

Apparently that's what they thought was the best thing to do at the time.

As for saving yourself, in this particular case it's mostly random luck.  Most of the things I brought up for why it's hard to kill him apply to his accuracy as well, but he doesn't have to aim for specific people just shoot into the crowd.

In this particular case I'd suggest keeping low and moving quickly.


----------



## drache (Jul 26, 2012)

Banhammer said:


> you make a decent enough point
> Not an easy one, but God there has got to be a better solution to that situation other than run like a herd of sheep and hope your brains don't get splattered all over your friends


 
you know I am sick of the macho undercurrent to all this

sometimes the best if not only solution is to 'run away' that doesn't make you a coward. As moogle said there were actual police and military there and the only thing they were thinking about was getting people out of there.

To be in a situation like that is pure hell but running away or helping people run away is the best option.


----------

