I was alerted to this just now, it's absolutely shocking to hear, just like any shooting that happens like this in the world. I thought I'd mention it on CYS as I seem to recally that some people in the CYS community (I can't remember who) aren't far from where it happened, I don't really know what to say about it but suffice to say that while the community will no doubt be shaken, I hope that nobody close to these site users suffered directly from this tragic event.
Shit, that's crazy. Would you mind keeping me posted if they found a motive, assuming you're following this?
Also, I know Endmaster's from Denver, but I don't remember where a lot of people are from.
Well he said that the area he lives in is pretty insane.
Wait, that could have been Detroit. Something with a "De" in the beginning for sure though.
He was emulating bane the main villain in this movie.
Largest mass shooting since Virginia tech 71 victims 12 dead (According to my nightly news). He did have it thoroughly plan making people think it was part of the movie.
People still support gun rights over control. Interesting isn't it?
Hmm, the guy's a neuroscience grad student.
I definitely support gun rights and I don't have any guns. The lunatics, criminals, and police already all have guns. When one or two or even three individuals acting alone over a period of a few years freak out/develop a brief psychotic disorder/etc and kill people, I don't blame that on the guns in the slightest. That's an acceptable amount of chaos. We all lament killings like this, where the total deaths in years is under 100, while our military is literally leveling entire cities and civilian targets numbering in the tens of thousands in far off lands and we don't think anything of it.
I blame these breakdowns on societal pressure, incessant marketing messages, Facebook apps, and just a general distaste for government and society coupled with mental illness. They're the exception and not the rule.
If we want to enforce gun control, don't allow police to use guns in anything but extreme circumstances, much like the UK. Even then, there'd still be someone who could get their hands on weapons and go on a rampage.
I almost think that if everyone had guns we would be safer.
It's about a balance. I always feel edgy when I see signs that straight up tell me, great, the building I just walked into has not a law abiding soul who could protect us if some nut job walks in with a shotgun. I've never felt that way at a gun show...though there was that one time I saw a thug buying a high caliber handgun and ammunition. I felt perfectly safe at the gun show, but I got the distinct feeling that somebody else was now not as safe as they were.
Well you never hear about shootings like this in Texas where it is legal to carry a gun on your hip. So I don't know which model is better but I have a feeling if there had been at least 15 people with guns in that theater the story would have been different.
It's also kind of common sense. Obviously, the black market will always exist, so there will always be a medium to obtain guns for those who are willing to break the law, so we can assume criminals will still obtain guns. So when robberies occur under gun control laws, then the citizens being robbed will have no way to protect themselves. the same goes for shootings, when you have a criminal with a gun, and a room full of citizens without them, there's no good way for that to end up.
Best possible scenario would be 10 or 15 people have the presence of mind to rush him. I mean unless he has an atomatic weapon he most likely can't hit you all in time.
I dunno about you, but I wouldn't rush a guy with a gun.
Now a guy with a knife/sword/bat, yeah maybe.
I rather die by being shot in the front then the back.
I'm sure either way would be equally as painful.
I'd rather take the action with the least chance of getting shot :P
It would take some serious balls to rush a guy who is opening fire. Unless you knew death was imminent like the plane people when the terrorists were taking over, my first instinct would be to hurl my woman to the floor and crawl out of there. Of course, that would leave you open to trampling. I can't honestly say how I'd react: I'm usually quite calm in stressful situations, but in a situation like that, I would very much like to be armed.
Yeah, I can't honestly say I would've rushed the guy. I would likely just hit the floor and hope the theater's dark enough to cover me.
i support gun rights as well madglee, but look at how much this guy bought in a short amount of time. i think it would be smart to create a database of people's purchases. if all of his purchases across all those stores were catelogued a major flag would have been raised long before this happened. it probably wouldnt have 'stopped' it, but we wouldnt be so in the dark about it. yes/no?
That's pretty smart. It'll be hell to set up with every single gun store in the nation, but it's a good idea.
just a few months ago me and a good friend and his girlfriend were talking about what we would do for each other during a crisis. sadly, its nearly impossible to know for sure what you would do under extreme pressure. of course, we all WANT to do the right thing, the hero thing, but will we? truth be told, id rather not EVER find out what i would do.
I think it's fairer to say you simply want to say you'll do the right thing, in order to look like a better person. Whether or not you'll give a damn about the right thing (read as heroic thing) when the time comes is another story. People generally aren't as nice as they want others (or themselves) to believe.
Can't we just get rid of every gun except mine? That would solve alot of problems lol.
They'll stab you when you're not looking.
You know what? Just have God push the restart button.
Exactly there will always be a black market that's why gun laws don't really do much.
The guy who did this shooting spree bought all his guns legally.
Nice try though guys.
Did he build his bombs legally too?
Not sure what that has to do with gun laws, but it's not exactly hard to build a bomb with everyday items lol.
This didn't have to do with the shooting itself, namely that people are trying to use it to pass gun laws. It was pointing out that criminals wouldn't follow the laws in the first place.
This one did, and had the laws been in place he wouldn't have been able to follow through with it, so they have a point. It's not like restricting semi-automatic rifles, or any other type of gun, would hurt.
He was willing to to shoot people. If he wanted guns he would have gotten them rather the laws let him or not.
Doesn't mean we should make it easy for him.
That also stops law abiding citizens from having guns. That they could use against a gun man.
Because citizens tend to walk around with semi-automatic rifles? I'm not talking about handguns at all, since the person who caused this (and most spree shootings) are not done with handguns.
I don't know about you but I never leave home without it ;)
Joking aside, gun laws are mostly pointless. All that would happen would be a repeat of the Prohibition only ten times worse.
So semi-automatic rifles are things EVERY citizen wants and are willing to brake harsh laws to get? Don't think so, not even in the states.
Handgun laws then yes, I might agree in that people would just ignore the law. But heavy weaponry should be far more restrictive than it is right now.
What do you consider to be "heavy weapons" Because I know several friends who have rifles and shotguns.
Semi-automatic rifles, and basically any large weapon capable of rapid-fire/explosive damage. I'm not sure what some of your friends owning rifles and shotguns have to do with any of this, since I imagine they are probably hunting weapons and even if they are they don't represent all of the US.
I was just wondering if you considered rifles and shotguns heavy.
I noticed that you keep saying that civilians don't carry semi-automatic weapons. You do realize that a man with a semi-automatic rifle can still be killed by a pistol right? It's not like someone sees a man trying to shoot him and says "Oh shit, he has a rifle, better not use this pistol when compared to that firepower." A gun is a gun is a gun, and you can use one for self defense regardless of what the other guy is packing.
Edit: ignore this, I just noticed that you were talking about the impact a semi-auto ban would have on the average civilian. I actually agree that assault rifles shouldn't be sold commercially. Also, I was too lazy to delete the above post :P
Well, I'm glad that nobody on the site was hurt, I mean it's not like I know any of you that well but I like to think I'd be kind of upset about it anyway, having read your stories and everything, I mean I was reading ?The Salmon of Doubt? today (a collection of writings and tributes to Douglas Adams) and I felt sad.
Yeah there's all kinds of shit in the news about him, first he's the Joker, then he's Bane, then there's the newspapers blaming it on video games (I'm not even joking, like front page words were pretty much BATMAN KILLING SPREE CAUSED BY VIDEO GAMES or might as well have been), the legal system seems to be processing the matter very quickly based on what I heard today.
It's one of those scenarios where CONTROVERSIAL OPINION ALERT I definitely support the death penalty, luckily it's in a country where they support that, unlike that Anders Breivik prick in Europe getting off with life in prison or whatever.
Oh by the way, hi everyone, I'm Miccy2000, you may remember me as that guy who wrote that Die Zombie Die story on the front page and then left the site to fail at multiple relationships, get a shit job and drink a lot like a real Australian adult, nice to be back.
I forgive you if you had at least one excellent stereotypical australian barbeque where you 'threw shrimp on the barbie'.
Yeah the news and politicians are making this about laws and violence. Instead of just saying it was a terrible thing that a Psychotic individual did.
I don't support the death penalty but I do support cruel and unusual punishment.
That's insanely stupid. "Killing people is wrong, torturing is perfectly fine though"
Kill a man for murder is cruel, torture is just prolonging it.
One of those things about religion. Sentencing a man to death is the same as killing him in my opinion. Which breaks the"Thou shall not Kill" commandment.
Now locking the person in a 8x8 cell and having them only have basic enmities and giving them three nutritious but nasty tasting meals a day, and they don't see any other human beings is perfectly fine. Only possible parole would be for them to kill themselves using lethal injection presented in a plastic box through the slit they get there food from. That way if they kill themselves your hands are perfectly clean.
Death is also to easy they don't actually suffer for there crimes. They die in the most painless way possible.
Dude, seriously? I'm not even touching this.
Prison for life is just torture to the mind...
That's all I have to say on this.
I appreciate cool74's point of view, but I hardly agree with it. I'm okay with cutting a person off from society, like with prisons, but done in such a way that they can still have access to basic nutrition, exercise and some kind of option for them to communicate with other people with similar sentences only when all participants in the socializing are willing- as in, don't force them to go out in the yard daily where there's a chance they'll gut people, have like a prison chat room or phone line that can be monitored so they don't get Carl Williams'd in the gym.
If the prisoner is compliant and behaves themselves they should have access to a limited amount of recreational material like drawing and books and a very small television, the prison network would have limited, filtered news access.
This is just a hypothetical adjustment to your original proposition, which I expect you're using for the example of the Dark Knight murderer and not just killers in general.
Oh and JJJ, I'm pretty sure I did actually go to at least one BBQ with shrimp or similar crustaceans.
(Insert broad racial generalization about Canadians here)
Oh oh oh and while I'm throwing my 2 cent pieces around, yeah, gun control laws are kind of like marijuana laws, if somebody really wants marijuana they can get it, but, well, a person might be able to get a few grams of the stuff and get a bit stoned but if it's illegal than it's very difficult to get a giant shopping bag of it and just carry it with you on the bus home, maybe smoking some on the way.
While we're on the topic, a country where it's legal for kids to own guns but not for adults to smoke weed- like, in most states- is silly, but anyway...
Yeah, making guns illegal wouldn't get rid of them, however, the people who owned guns would all be people who were willing to break the law for some reason or another to get them- some would just be ordinary people protecting themselves, but the majority of them would probably be criminals, plus, like marijuana, it would only drive up the price of the product by making it illegal and create a bigger black market for it and that kind of thing.
Killers would have to pre-meditate and get the gun beforehand and be at risk of arrest before their killing spree or whatever, by owning one, while a normal law abiding man who suddenly finds his wife in bed with the milkman might have time to calm down about it while he's looking for an illegal gun merchant instead of having his gun ready in his glovebox to kill them both with.
So, might decrease crimes of passion but won't stop killing sprees...
The milkman? We fired all those guys a long time ago.
Also what you are describing is excatly what happened in the Prohibition.
If ti got to the point like it idid in prohibition, you wouldn't exactly have to look for an illegal merchant long.
Maple syrup, politeness, hockey, and eskimos are the normal stereotypes. Take your choice.