Shooting at Movie screening of TDKR in Colorado

[chemgear]

It's a bit large of an image but quite interesting:

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/07...n-with-a-plan/

Spoiler!

[Nage Waza]

Originally Posted by zunie75

The death penalty is to good for this guy. Its to bad that guys on death row couldnt be subject to daily tourture instead.

Watch out, you are going to get the Greyhound dude's support group coming out to defend him because he was sick and should be released.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by EddyBeers

Who are the news guys on the daily Fox schedule.

Fox and Friends - Nope, this cannot be classified as unbiased news.

America Newsroom - Perhaps

Happening Now - Perhaps

America Live with Megyn Kelly - Far from it, this is a pure opinion show

Shepard Smith - He is a decent news guy, this is a news show

Neil Cavuto - No

The Five - No

Bret Baier - Barely a news show but it is a news show

O'Reilly - No
Hannity - No
Van Susteren - No

When you look at their lineup they have maybe 5 hours of news programming a day. And even in their news programming they consistently and purposely misrepresent the news.

What in god's name does that have to do with an article posted on their website?

None of those people you mentioned wrote the article so that whole list is completely irrelevant.

[EddyBeers]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

What in god's name does that have to do with an article posted on their website?

None of those people you mentioned wrote the article so that whole list is completely irrelevant.

So in order to prove a bias in Fox News, you have to show a bias in the individual writer? The editor of any article has way more influence on the final content of the article than almost anyone else involved. The original poster stated that Fox News is a questionable news source. Someone else posted that it is just their opinion people who are questionable news sources. I merely pointed out that virtually all the content on their television station is made up of opinion people. I suppose it is possible that the online portion of Fox News is where the fair and balanced kicks in, it just seems unlikely.

[Northendzone]

this is too rich:

http://www.wmctv.com/story/19099951/...studio-theater

according to the article: "Somebody has to be responsible for the rampant violence that is shown today"......if you ask me, and i am no expert, there is someone to blame and that is the shooter..........

article mentions how the survivor has been traumatized and can't cry, but he was still lucid enough to be able to find a lawyer.......

hopefully this guy gets stuck with a huge legal bill for what seems like a nuscience lawsuit.

[EddyBeers]

Originally Posted by Aleks

And you're correct, gun control has little to do with this but the ban gun crowd came out as usual and started an offensive wage had to defend

Seems to me stringent gun control makes this situation far less likely. It is odd that in places like Chicago when they had gun control their murder rate went way down compared with other major cities. Perhaps guns contribute to killing people. Perhaps even a gun had something to do with how many people were killed and injured in Colorado.

Firearm homicides in the US are about 6 times more likely to occur than in Canada. Non gun homicides in the states are 1.5 times more likely to occur. So it is not necessarily that the Americans are a more violent people, they just have easier access to the most efficient killing vehicles (guns). The US is in the company of Columbia, Guatamala and Slovakia in terms of the percentage increase of gun homicides vis-a-vis non gun related homicides. Every other country in the world has more non-gun homicides than gun homicides, mainly because they have less access to guns. But this also means that every other western nation has a lower overall rate of homicide because all things being equal guns are a more efficient killing mechanism than a knife or a baseball bat. But I suppose people can continue to say that gun control has nothing to do with gun murders, that these people would kill just as much under a stricter gun control situation, but that is simply not true.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by chemgear

It's a bit large of an image but quite interesting:

Spoiler!

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/07...n-with-a-plan/

Please edit your post with the spoiler tags, as it ruins post formatting on the whole page.

For people who use 40+ posts per page, this is problematic.

[Red Slinger]

Originally Posted by EddyBeers

But I suppose people can continue to say that gun control has nothing to do with gun murders, that these people would kill just as much under a stricter gun control situation, but that is simply not true.

Good post.

To be clear, I stated that stricter gun control would likely not have prevented this particular situation. I do believe that tighter gun control would prevent many other gun related incidents.

[Red Slinger]

Originally Posted by Aleks

Well my guns don't seem to mind at all that they shoot paper only. Thats a really poor statement to say that guns are made for one reason.

That's not what I said. I said hand guns and semi-automatic weapons, not all guns, are made for shooting people. What I should have said is that hand guns and semi-automatic weapons were created for the purpose of shooting people. Whereas shotguns and rifles have another primary purpose. I can't put it in to words exactly why, but I find it troubling that some people are so fascinated to own, brandish and practice with a tool whose primary function is to harm other people, even if they only use it to shoot paper. I would feel the same way about switchblade knives, ninja throwing stars or mustard gas. Maybe it's just me.

Just saying your argument is flawed

Well, that's like, your opinion dude. I didn't think I had an argument.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Nage Waza

Watch out, you are going to get the Greyhound dude's support group coming out to defend him because he was sick and should be released.

Ugh. Greyhound Dude's Support Group (GDSD) totally sucks. All they do in their meetings is sing "I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing" and eat sugar cookies.

Is there any chance I can get in the "Internet Commenters Who Make Up Elaborate Punishments For Criminals Because They Think It Makes Them Look Tough And Not At All Like Jackasses" (ICWMUEPFCBTTIMTLTANAALJ) support group?

I think this guy should be roasted and salted like an almond and held in a jail cell just far enough from the sun to keep him alive but close enough that he is always uncomfortably hot and fed only broccoli while having to spend the rest of his days smelling his own mouthwatering roasted almond aroma but never, ever getting to eat a roasted almond.

[Aleks]

Originally Posted by Red Slinger

That's not what I said. I said hand guns and semi-automatic weapons, not all guns, are made for shooting people. What I should have said is that hand guns and semi-automatic weapons were created for the purpose of shooting people. Whereas shotguns and rifles have another primary purpose. I can't put it in to words exactly why, but I find it troubling that some people are so fascinated to own, brandish and practice with a tool whose primary function is to harm other people, even if they only use it to shoot paper. I would feel the same way about switchblade knives, ninja throwing stars or mustard gas. Maybe it's just me.




Well, that's like, your opinion dude. I didn't think I had an argument.

You find it troubling that I would enjoy practicing a skill that requires concentration and technique just because its with a gun in a controlled environment that you don't have to see or hear? What kind of hobbies do you enjoy that I can perhaps say make me uncomfortable and tell everyone that "I don't do it, I dont see a use for it, so I don't think anyone should be allowed to". I won't, because I know that everyone is different and you can feel free to do whatever you please and I will gladly defend your right to be able to do so if ever needed...

By the way, there was a time, pre 1995 that you could hunt with handguns in Canada.... In many US states it is still permitted. Granted those aren't glock 22's and the like, but many common revolvers and some semi's are...

but remember we are discussing semantics here, all guns do the same thing, pistols are in all actuality relatively safe, they have the shortest "lethal range", they are the hardest to fire accurately and are by all accounts "least powerful". That's why its so funny that I can take my rifle out to any piece of crown land and shoot a projectile that has potential to travel up to 2km+, but my pistol which may have a Max of 200m of potential lethality can't be shot outside because it looks dangerous. These are laws created by people like yourself who base judgement on what makes them feel uncomfortable instead of fact, and the result is clearly contradictory rules that truly benefit nobody except anyone who wets their pants whenever they see a gun.

I'll say again, in conclusion, stop painting us all as crazy. I'm a paramedic, I've been to many shootings, I see what happens and I know what it looks like. Myself and many of my co workers shoot, we have police friends we shoot with, we have neighbors we shoot with, we introduce people to the sport, and we store and transport and discharge our firearms safely. We are the majority.....

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Ugh. Greyhound Dude's Support Group (GDSD) totally sucks. All they do in their meetings is sing "I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing" and eat sugar cookies.

Is there any chance I can get in the "Internet Commenters Who Make Up Elaborate Punishments For Criminals Because They Think It Makes Them Look Tough And Not At All Like Jackasses" (ICWMUEPFCBTTIMTLTANAALJ) support group?

I think this guy should be roasted and salted like an almond and held in a jail cell just far enough from the sun to keep him alive but close enough that he is always uncomfortably hot and fed only broccoli while having to spend the rest of his days smelling his own mouthwatering roasted almond aroma but never, ever getting to eat a roasted almond.

That sounds horrible.

I mean, only Broccoli? Blech.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by Aleks

but remember we are discussing semantics here, all guns do the same thing, pistols are in all actuality relatively safe, they have the shortest "lethal range", they are the hardest to fire accurately and are by all accounts "least powerful". That's why its so funny that I can take my rifle out to any piece of crown land and shoot a projectile that has potential to travel up to 2km+, but my pistol which may have a Max of 200m of potential lethality can't be shot outside because it looks dangerous. These are laws created by people like yourself who base judgement on what makes them feel uncomfortable instead of fact, and the result is clearly contradictory rules that truly benefit nobody except anyone who wets their pants whenever they see a gun.

Handguns are dangerous, particularly dangerous in fact, because they are easily concealed, surreptitiously carried into places with a lot of unsuspecting people, and be quickly fired. One would have thought that was obvious.

[Red Slinger]

Originally Posted by Aleks

You find it troubling that I would enjoy practicing a skill that requires concentration and technique just because its with a gun in a controlled environment that you don't have to see or hear?

Nope. I have no issue with you or anyone else going to a firing range or whatever else to practice a skill that hopefully you'll never have to use.

What kind of hobbies do you enjoy that I can perhaps say make me uncomfortable and tell everyone that "I don't do it, I dont see a use for it, so I don't think anyone should be allowed to".

At what point did I suggest that I don't think anyone should be allowed to?

These are laws created by people like yourself who base judgement on what makes them feel uncomfortable instead of fact, and the result is clearly contradictory rules that truly benefit nobody except anyone who wets their pants whenever they see a gun.

People like myself? You mean people that don't like to see other people get shot? Or is it that I'm a black, jewish, gay woman? If it's the latter you got some splainin to do!

I'll say again, in conclusion, stop painting us all as crazy.

I don't believe I ever did. But you're starting to do a pretty good job of it yourself.

We are the majority.....

Oh, in that case you must be right and I must be wrong.

[SeeBass]

Originally Posted by Aleks

You find it troubling that I would enjoy practicing a skill that requires concentration and technique just because its with a gun in a controlled environment that you don't have to see or hear? What kind of hobbies do you enjoy that I can perhaps say make me uncomfortable and tell everyone that "I don't do it, I dont see a use for it, so I don't think anyone should be allowed to". I won't, because I know that everyone is different and you can feel free to do whatever you please and I will gladly defend your right to be able to do so if ever needed...

By the way, there was a time, pre 1995 that you could hunt with handguns in Canada.... In many US states it is still permitted. Granted those aren't glock 22's and the like, but many common revolvers and some semi's are...

but remember we are discussing semantics here, all guns do the same thing, pistols are in all actuality relatively safe, they have the shortest "lethal range", they are the hardest to fire accurately and are by all accounts "least powerful". That's why its so funny that I can take my rifle out to any piece of crown land and shoot a projectile that has potential to travel up to 2km+, but my pistol which may have a Max of 200m of potential lethality can't be shot outside because it looks dangerous. These are laws created by people like yourself who base judgement on what makes them feel uncomfortable instead of fact, and the result is clearly contradictory rules that truly benefit nobody except anyone who wets their pants whenever they see a gun.

I'll say again, in conclusion, **stop painting us all as crazy**. I'm a paramedic, I've been to many shootings, I see what happens and I know what it looks like. Myself and many of my co workers shoot, we have police friends we shoot with, we have neighbors we shoot with, we introduce people to the sport, and we store and transport and discharge our firearms safely. We are the majority.....

I agree I could imagine how fustrating it would be to have people lump you into a single group

[Aleks]

Originally Posted by SeeBass

I agree I could imagine how fustrating it would be to have people lump you into a single group

I see what you did there

[mikey_the_redneck]

http://www.abc4.com/content/about_4/...RhrWCM9dQ.cspx

"Police say the suspect purchased a knife inside the store and then turned it into a weapon. Smith's employee Dorothy Espinoza says, "He pulled it out and stood outside the Smiths in the foyer. And just started stabbing people and yelling you killed my people. You killed my people.""

"Then, before the suspect could find another victim - a citizen with a gun stopped the madness. "A guy pulled gun on him and told him to drop his weapon or he would shoot him. So, he dropped his weapon and the people from Smith's grabbed him."

By the time officers arrived the suspect had been subdued by employees and shoppers. Police had high praise for gun carrying man who ended the hysteria. Lt. Brian Purvis said, "This was a volatile situation that could have gotten worse. We can only assume from what we saw it could have gotten worse. He was definitely in the right place at the right time.""

Nice....

[Drake]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

http://www.abc4.com/content/about_4/...RhrWCM9dQ.cspx

"Police say the suspect purchased a knife inside the store and then turned it into a weapon. Smith's employee Dorothy Espinoza says, "He pulled it out and stood outside the Smiths in the foyer. And just started stabbing people and yelling you killed my people. You killed my people.""

"Then, before the suspect could find another victim - a citizen with a gun stopped the madness. "A guy pulled gun on him and told him to drop his weapon or he would shoot him. So, he dropped his weapon and the people from Smith's grabbed him."

By the time officers arrived the suspect had been subdued by employees and shoppers. Police had high praise for gun carrying man who ended the hysteria. Lt. Brian Purvis said, "This was a volatile situation that could have gotten worse. We can only assume from what we saw it could have gotten worse. He was definitely in the right place at the right time.""

Nice....

What a damn shame the citizen didn't put a few rounds into this idiots head.........

[puckluck2]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

http://www.abc4.com/content/about_4/...RhrWCM9dQ.cspx

"Police say the suspect purchased a knife inside the store and then turned it into a weapon. Smith's employee Dorothy Espinoza says, "He pulled it out and stood outside the Smiths in the foyer. And just started stabbing people and yelling you killed my people. You killed my people.""

"Then, before the suspect could find another victim - a citizen with a gun stopped the madness. "A guy pulled gun on him and told him to drop his weapon or he would shoot him. So, he dropped his weapon and the people from Smith's grabbed him."

By the time officers arrived the suspect had been subdued by employees and shoppers. Police had high praise for gun carrying man who ended the hysteria. Lt. Brian Purvis said, "This was a volatile situation that could have gotten worse. We can only assume from what we saw it could have gotten worse. He was definitely in the right place at the right time.""

Nice....

This was a rare time carrying a gun on you worked out for the best.

This is the exception, not the rule.

Guarantee you statistics show that the gun the guy had on him is more likely to be stolen and used in a crime than for it to be used in a situation like in the story.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Not really the best argument for gun carrying citizens are a good thing. If this was a gunman being taken down by another gunman, that'd be one thing. But since the crazy guy had a knife, the citizen could literally walk to within 4 or 5 feet of him and shoot him point blank. Going up against someone else with a gun, not a chance in hell would he be able to be in such control. It'd be a lot more random gunfire going on, since I'd assume the citizen would (wisely) take cover rather than simply going up to the crazy and shooting him.