Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The acquisition of the firearms was legal. I've also purchased 4 guns within the same amount of time. It's not the guns that got me wondering. It's the freakin' kevlar gear James was able to purchase! No civilian needs to have kevlar for any purpose. If they had looked into the acquisition of that stuff, maybe something could have been done before this occurred.
I'm sick of hearing about him and all the gun crap. If we ban guns, people will still find ways to kill a lot of people in a short amount of time. What's stopping somebody from taking a semi-truck or another kind of large vehicle and plowing it through a large crowd? What's stopping somebody from using a katana and slashing a bunch of people to death? The answer is: nothing.
Out of the millions of responsible, legal gun owners in America, there is bound of be a bad apple here and there who makes the rest of us look incredibly bad. That is reality. Banning all guns or only banning assault rifles isn't going to do a damn thing. Felons still manage to get their hands on them. All it'll do is penalize those of us who are responsible, law abiding citizens who just happen to own guns.
Why should they punish 70-80 million people (gun owners) for one horrible gun owner. I will admit the amount of casualties is almost unbelievable and shocking, but just as the other's said what good will it do?
I was watching a documentary on oakland gang violence were AT LEAST 3-2 people a week, every week were killed a by firearms. Were these weapons acquired legally, no. Mostly teenagers and a very small percentage of youngadults (18-20) were doing the killings . CA gun laws did NOTHING to stop the violence in Oakland. So restricting them elsewhere will have little to no effect on criminals or people like the colorado shooter.
What time of day did this happen? I keep hearing midnight. Who goes to a movie that time of night during the week? Surely not people that are planning to work the next day? Nothing about the entire thing makes any sense. I see this as such a lot of wasted lives. Tragic and horrible but it would not have been me because I would have been home in bed.
I hope the shooter is implicated in this criminal act.
I hope he gets the death penalty or life in the pen.
Absolutely tragic that parents and children could not enjoy family time and a movie together without being assaulted by a damn lunatic.
Absolutely. This fellow should spend the next few years in an asylum learning the truth about odd behavior and how its treated. Electro-shock, well... see CLockWork Orange for a preview!
But then, when he's still judged as totally incurable and still psychologically dangerous, we'll re-visit the death penalty and put him down.
or, and this one has a certain political charm, we bow to the bleeding heart Lib Lobby, with their "Awww... leave him alone and love all the truly deranged literally to death!"
After all, they are only the victims of hard-nosed greed-based Republicanism mentality, and we libs judge him to have been fully re-habilitated. But we Republicans in fact secretly let all the families of the vicitms know the date he's getting out, and let them quick-purchase an appropriate firearm or two, with sufficient ammo for the event, and place these angry ("and temporarily deranged", your honor...) strategically alongside the road that leads from the prison. He may wonder why we'd give him a particularly sluggoid old Pontiac, a rust-bucket in fact, but he'll get the idea after the first few warning, and "You'all git along now', sonny!" pre-shots!
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Creature of the Wheel
The acquisition of the firearms was legal. I've also purchased 4 guns within the same amount of time. It's not the guns that got me wondering. It's the freakin' kevlar gear James was able to purchase! No civilian needs to have kevlar for any purpose. If they had looked into the acquisition of that stuff, maybe something could have been done before this occurred.
I'm sick of hearing about him and all the gun crap. If we ban guns, people will still find ways to kill a lot of people in a short amount of time. What's stopping somebody from taking a semi-truck or another kind of large vehicle and plowing it through a large crowd? What's stopping somebody from using a katana and slashing a bunch of people to death? The answer is: nothing.
Out of the millions of responsible, legal gun owners in America, there is bound of be a bad apple here and there who makes the rest of us look incredibly bad. That is reality. Banning all guns or only banning assault rifles isn't going to do a damn thing. Felons still manage to get their hands on them. All it'll do is penalize those of us who are responsible, law abiding citizens who just happen to own guns.
So sorry this is making you feel ill, Creature. But it's only the beginning I'm afraid. The worst, the most incenceful (?) and insulting stuff is yet to come; after all, the socialist/commie throngs haven't had enough time to work up the right slogans and T-Shirts quite yet!
(I also just now heard on NPR that The Prez is going to make a statement in a short time. He'll dispense his condolensces on behalf of all Americans, and then he'll make some commentary-light about what the governemt must do about this sort of outrage and uncontrolled behavior. As they used to say in the '50s., "Duck and Cover!"
Your post is, otherwise, absolutely accurate and legally and technically without any faults. This means it will be categorically ignored by the evil planning of the liberal anti-gun crowd, who in fact love this sort of event for its obvious and strong political value. As we speak, they are holding tactical planning sessions and PR work.
Imagine: being excited by such tragedy instead of doing something about it. Like mandatory death sentences, longer prison terms for truly outrageous offenders, really less grande conditions in prison (Let's hear it for Sheriff Joe Arpaio and his nice bologna on white sandwiches. With good mustard mind you!)
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by NCN
What time of day did this happen? I keep hearing midnight. Who goes to a movie that time of night during the week? Surely not people that are planning to work the next day? Nothing about the entire thing makes any sense. I see this as such a lot of wasted lives. Tragic and horrible but it would not have been me because I would have been home in bed.
It was a waste, but more like, it was an example of the tragic costs of freedom. Yes, we could have prevented it and all other such tragedies, incl. drunk driving accidents, by banning everything with the potential to harm others.
No more public swimming pools, no more high-school football games, no more Go-Kart rides or roller coasters, certainly no more soccer games, and no more PhD students in neurosciences allowed to buy firearms! Who knows what goes on in THEIR heads after all? Oh yes, no more Rxs for OxyContin, Vicodin, medial Marijauna, Ambien, and so on. After all, every year, several hundred folks manage to kill themselves off with all those needless meds.
And drunk drivers? If it saves the life of only one innocent soccer mom and her kids, then we should remove and execute, right there in the streets in front of everyone, all those late-night drivers who dare to go out with anything ≈5 - 10% over the legal limit of 0.08.
What a message that would send, huh? Trouble is, all too many judges know that they have done this all too often themselves and don't want to honor any such aggressive legislation!
So... let's get on with this massive social experiment! Let's focus entirely on the firearms, and their "Assault Styling" and large-capacity clips. That must be it! For Sure! Mag capacity MUST be IT!
I don't see this tradgedy as relevant to gun control at all, although certainly some in the liberal media, and some politicians, will exploit it to jump on the gun control bandwagon.
But think of it - this individual devoted considerable time and expense to collect arms, amunition, gear, planning the attack, etc. Nothing can prevent a dedicated psycho like this, not the strongest gun controls laws in the land. And if he didn't use firearms, he would have used explosives (actually, he did use explosives, and I bet the booby traps in his home were made out of material you can get at Home Depot).
I wish these politicians and media would dedicate coverage to where it belongs - the identification and treatment of the mentally ill. That's the issue here, not guns.
I don't see this tradgedy as relevant to gun control at all, although certainly some in the liberal media, and some politicians, will exploit it to jump on the gun control bandwagon.
But think of it - this individual devoted considerable time and expense to collect arms, amunition, gear, planning the attack, etc. Nothing can prevent a dedicated psycho like this, not the strongest gun controls laws in the land. And if he didn't use firearms, he would have used explosives (actually, he did use explosives, and I bet the booby traps in his home were made out of material you can get at Home Depot).
I wish these politicians and media would dedicate coverage to where it belongs - the identification and treatment of the mentally ill. That's the issue here, not guns.
I agree its a software problem , not a hardware problem, but the debate that will surely arise is how much hardware is appropriate in a country where bad software is all too common. Already the media is challenging the citizenry's ability, and right, to buy weapons and ammo in quanitities and qualities that might overpower that of law enforcement. Others have noted that restrictions on such things probably would not make a difference in these crazy cases, however I think its a debate that needs to continue. I mean, even as a gun guy I willingly admit that a semi auto rifle is a more "convenient" way to kill a bunch of people than a molitov cocktail or machete, and is therefor more likely to be effective than the alternatives.
Why not look at what Canada, Great Britain, and Australia have done when they were faced with these questions in the 90s? Its not like we have to rediscover all the lessons learned. What were the costs to these countries, and what were the outcomes? My belief is that the outcomes were not very good (higher rates of violent crime and very large $ costs) but I don't have reliable statistics. Why aren't these statistics readily available? Any reasonable debate has to start with that.
I don't think any amount of restrictions would keep things like this from happening. If he didn't have firearms, he probably would have driven through the crowd as they were coming out.
You can't cover every scenario, every time. If you could, automobiles would have been outlawed a long time ago.
Look at it the other way. If every person in that theater was armed, the guy would have been stopped in short order. So it's not that we should restrict arms, but rather that we should require everybody to be armed and trained with those arms.
Well said. He did have his apartment booby trapped with explosives. You can not stop a killer but you can limit them when they start.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
James Holmes as a metaphor.
