[kevinbahnz]

Originally Posted by EmmettBrown

that's one thing i noticed about the people who pull off these shootings - they are always the ones who are doing well in school or go to a good school, etc then for some reason it's like they need attention then do some stupid shit like this, its sad and pathetic.

hearing the stories about those who died really makes it harder. im sure you all heard about the one whose birthday it was and how his 1 year wedding anniversary was a day or two later..... fuck man

It makes sense because these types of ppl fly under the radar and they are smart enough to succeed in what they are doing. The dumb ones get caught before they start.

[Maestro]

Originally Posted by kevinbahnz

It makes sense because these types of ppl fly under the radar and they are smart enough to succeed in what they are doing. The dumb ones get caught before they start.

This is the problem with law enforcement they assume all criminal are dumb, they fail to catch the smart ones or it takes them a very long time to finally figure out who did it.

[Uber V8]

It was the six year old girl being shot and killed that really did it for me.

The most frustrating acts of violence to me are those that involve the innocent.

I'm only 28, but I would honestly lay my life down for that six year old girl even though I don't know her.

[sjk9671]

Originally Posted by Sara504

Is this sarcasm?

God, I hope so.

[CollinsE90]

Originally Posted by FwdFtl

It was the six year old girl being shot and killed that really did it for me.

The most frustrating acts of violence to me are those that involve the innocent.

I'm only 28, but I would honestly lay my life down for that six year old girl even though I don't know her.

6 year old shouldn't have been in the movie, nor the infant.

[stimpy]

Originally Posted by CollinsE90

6 year old shouldn't have been in the movie, nor the infant.

nor the gunman.

[solefald]

Put the gunman discussion aside for a moment.

Every emergency door I have seen has a scary sign warning that the alarm will sound if that door was open. Why didn't that happen in this particular case?

[PINeely]

Originally Posted by solefald

Put the gunman discussion aside for a moment.

Every emergency door I have seen has a scary sign warning that the alarm will sound if that door was open. Why didn't that happen in this particular case?

Not in a lot of theaters because people use them to get to their cars faster or leave for phone calls- the same ruse employed by the shooter.

[Sara]

Originally Posted by FwdFtl

It was the six year old girl being shot and killed that really did it for me.

The most frustrating acts of violence to me are those that involve the innocent.

I'm only 28, but I would honestly lay my life down for that six year old girl even though I don't know her.

+100

[kevinbahnz]

Originally Posted by PINeely

Not in a lot of theaters because people use them to get to their cars faster or leave for phone calls- the same ruse employed by the shooter.

true, i remember as a teen 15 or so years ago we would sneak in through those exit doors.

[PINeely]

Originally Posted by kevinbahnz

true, i remember as a teen 15 or so years ago we would sneak in through those exit doors.

Haha the local theaters had no outside door handles so that you couldn't do that, but since ticketing was only done at the front door we would buy tickets to one movie and see three in a row instead.

[hasta la pasta 27]

Originally Posted by BMWinNorthdakota

they should ban all guns because of this. How could they allow him to buy those guns?

OMG YES! Lets make it illegal for people to buy guns! Fuck it, lets make drugs illegal too.....oh wait they are and yet they are all around us. Half the guns on the street are not registered anyways so there will continue to be a black market for it. This guy purchased the guns like a regular civilian would. 6,000 rounds IS alot but there are plenty of people that can run through 6,000 round at a gun range between them and their friends. My personal opinion; the sentencing of convicted 1st degree murders should be death penalty. We kill alligators and sharks when we catch humans feeding them or whenever they attack us and why? because they are not afraid of us and could do it again. Why shouldn't we treat people who have mass murdered the exact same way. Im sorry if i sound irrational but its BS. We spend so much money to put scums in jail for life.....WHY?!??! they are going to rot in there anyways so just give it up. Sorry

You need to give them something to think about....Would taking a life be worth your own? Im sure people would think twice before they thought about killing innocent people or for $20 of weed. Its like someone asking you if you want to do a 20 roll but theres a cop behind you....camon, you're not going to do it because you know the consequences are severe.

[kevinbahnz]

Originally Posted by PINeely

Haha the local theaters had no outside door handles so that you couldn't do that, but since ticketing was only done at the front door we would buy tickets to one movie and see three in a row instead.

yes, one of your friends would buy a ticket and open the door for the rest . I miss those days nothing like this to worry about and kids get bullied and picked on all the time.

[kevinbahnz]

Originally Posted by ericruiz911

OMG YES! Lets make it illegal for people to buy guns! Fuck it, lets make drugs illegal too.....oh wait they are and yet they are all around us. Half the guns on the street are not registered anyways so there will continue to be a black market for it. This guy purchased the guns like a regular civilian would. 6,000 rounds IS alot but there are plenty of people that can run through 6,000 round at a gun range between them and their friends. My personal opinion; the sentencing of convicted 1st degree murders should be death penalty. We kill alligators and sharks when we catch humans feeding them or whenever they attack us and why? because they are not afraid of us and could do it again. Why shouldn't we treat people who have mass murdered the exact same way. Im sorry if i sound irrational but its BS. We spend so much money to put scums in jail for life.....WHY?!??! they are going to rot in there anyways so just give it up. Sorry

The decision should be up to the family of the convicted murderer Like the life support machine If you want them to be locked up in jail the family should pay for the cost if not well then pull the plug..

[M_Six]

Originally Posted by Maestro

Because in the US we are allow to own guns so the government is not allowed to disarm the people and so the people can over through the government if the govern fails to do what the people want.

Read history, the reason you have a right to bear arms, was due to the fact governments and rulers in the past disarmed public so they did not have to worry about the people raising up against them.

Also, read my previous post, someone set on destruction will always be successful, you can not stop them, history has shown this many times over.

Well, not exactly. The right to bear arms was given so that a militia could be formed to protect the government, not overthrow it.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The Supreme Court later ruled in favor of an individual's right to bear arms for "lawful" purposes, which certainly does not include overthrowing the gov't.

Still, as it has been stated here and as it's obvious from such massacres in countries where gun control is much stricter, if some nutcase wants to commit mass murder, he'll find a way to obtain guns. You can't stop a lunatic like this.

[sjk9671]

Originally Posted by M_Six

Well, not exactly. The right to bear arms was given so that a militia could be formed to protect the government, not overthrow it.



The Supreme Court later ruled in favor of an individual's right to bear arms for "lawful" purposes, which certainly does not include overthrowing the gov't.

I have to respectfully disagree with you. That’s exactly why it was written. Look what our founding fathers did. They used their weapons to overthrow their tyrannical government.

They then placed the clause in the 2nd amendment so that the people will always be armed, to keep the government in check. That is the original purpose

[Draven]

Originally Posted by BMWinNorthdakota

they should ban all guns because of this. How could they allow him to buy those guns?

Originally Posted by Sara504

Is this sarcasm?

Originally Posted by sjk9671

God, I hope so.

That thinking is the exact problem. Lets say out of a theater full of what, 200 people, that 1% of that sample population was responsibly armed and relatively proficient. Suddenly the shooter has 2 people in the theater also armed and able to return fire. Sure, he was wearing body armor, but you get hit by a JHP round in a protected area and it's going to have some kinetic energy behind it and you're not going to be standing afterwards. Suddenly the shooter might not want to continue his engagement and withdraws, and you potentially save lives.

Now lets pretend that on average, 5% of the population carries concealed, and you have 10 people who carry a concealed weapon in that senario. What are the chances the shooter walks into a theater in the first place, knowing more likely than not that people who are armed will be able to defend themselves. What do you think that's going to do to the average criminal, or worse, a guy like this one who isn't your average criminal?

Originally Posted by CollinsE90

6 year old shouldn't have been in the movie, nor the infant.

I couldn't believe it when I read those reports. School out or not, 3am is not a reasonable time for infants and 6 year olds to be at the movies.

Originally Posted by PINeely

Not in a lot of theaters because people use them to get to their cars faster or leave for phone calls- the same ruse employed by the shooter.

Hopefully this practice stops as well.

Originally Posted by ericruiz911

OMG YES! Lets make it illegal for people to buy guns! Fuck it, lets make drugs illegal too.....oh wait they are and yet they are all around us. Half the guns on the street are not registered anyways so there will continue to be a black market for it. This guy purchased the guns like a regular civilian would. 6,000 rounds IS alot but there are plenty of people that can run through 6,000 round at a gun range between them and their friends. My personal opinion; the sentencing of convicted 1st degree murders should be death penalty. We kill alligators and sharks when we catch humans feeding them or whenever they attack us and why? because they are not afraid of us and could do it again. Why shouldn't we treat people who have mass murdered the exact same way. Im sorry if i sound irrational but its BS. We spend so much money to put scums in jail for life.....WHY?!??! they are going to rot in there anyways so just give it up. Sorry

You need to give them something to think about....Would taking a life be worth your own? Im sure people would think twice before they thought about killing innocent people or for $20 of weed. Its like someone asking you if you want to do a 20 roll but theres a cop behind you....camon, you're not going to do it because you know the consequences are severe.

On the one hand, I agree with your points at the beginning completely. Gun control laws will only affect those concerned with abiding by them. If someone really wants a firearm, they're going to get one, legally or otherwise. The only people affected are the responsible owners attempting to abide by the law.

On the other hand, your point about the consequences needing to be severe is incorrect. Studies have shown that an increase in severity on punishment does not correlate to a statistically significant decrease in perpetration. I'm not saying not to increase the scope of the death penalty, because I agree that we're too lenient on our criminals in general. However, the hope that it would deter people is incorrect. You're just as likely to drive without a seatbelt if the fine is $100 or $200. People only think about the severity of the consequence when faced with it (ie caught). Before that, it's a potential risk.

Originally Posted by sjk9671

I have to respectfully disagree with you. That’s exactly why it was written. Look what our founding fathers did. They used their weapons to overthrow their tyrannical government.

They then placed the clause in the 2nd amendment so that the people will always be armed, to keep the government in check. That is the original purpose

I agree. The right to bear arms was afforded to us so that we had the right to defend ourselves from danger and oppression, either foreign or domestic. Militia being the foreign aspect of that, and crime being the domestic. As citizens, it's our right and frankly our duty to arm ourselves if we're willing and able to.

I've had my CC permit for two years, and I'm at the range at least once a month or more. I used to carry everywhere it was legal... Grocery store, movies, dinners. My ex used to give me crap, asked why. This event reminded me that you never know where you might be when the situation arises and you might need your weapon. I've been a lot more proactive in having it with me again since I read about what happened. I saw the movie last night, and guess what, I had it right at my side.

So, that's my .02. People need to stop blaming the weapon, and need to start blaming the person. We don't blame the car when it kills someone in a car crash, we don't blame a bat or a knife or a brick or a bottle or a lead pipe when used to harm a person. Stop blaming the tool, start blaming the person. He easily could've chosen another way and set the entire building on fire instead, which likely could've cost a lot more people their lives.

[hasta la pasta 27]

Originally Posted by Draven

That thinking is the exact problem. Lets say out of a theater full of what, 200 people, that 1% of that sample population was responsibly armed and relatively proficient. Suddenly the shooter has 2 people in the theater also armed and able to return fire. Sure, he was wearing body armor, but you get hit by a JHP round in a protected area and it's going to have some kinetic energy behind it and you're not going to be standing afterwards. Suddenly the shooter might not want to continue his engagement and withdraws, and you potentially save lives.

Now lets pretend that on average, 5% of the population carries concealed, and you have 10 people who carry a concealed weapon in that senario. What are the chances the shooter walks into a theater in the first place, knowing more likely than not that people who are armed will be able to defend themselves. What do you think that's going to do to the average criminal, or worse, a guy like this one who isn't your average criminal?



I couldn't believe it when I read those reports. School out or not, 3am is not a reasonable time for infants and 6 year olds to be at the movies.



Hopefully this practice stops as well.



On the one hand, I agree with your points at the beginning completely. Gun control laws will only affect those concerned with abiding by them. If someone really wants a firearm, they're going to get one, legally or otherwise. The only people affected are the responsible owners attempting to abide by the law.

On the other hand, your point about the consequences needing to be severe is incorrect. Studies have shown that an increase in severity on punishment does not correlate to a statistically significant decrease in perpetration. I'm not saying not to increase the scope of the death penalty, because I agree that we're too lenient on our criminals in general. However, the hope that it would deter people is incorrect. You're just as likely to drive without a seatbelt if the fine is $100 or $200. People only think about the severity of the consequence when faced with it (ie caught). Before that, it's a potential risk.



I agree. The right to bear arms was afforded to us so that we had the right to defend ourselves from danger and oppression, either foreign or domestic. Militia being the foreign aspect of that, and crime being the domestic. As citizens, it's our right and frankly our duty to arm ourselves if we're willing and able to.

I've had my CC permit for two years, and I'm at the range at least once a month or more. I used to carry everywhere it was legal... Grocery store, movies, dinners. My ex used to give me crap, asked why. This event reminded me that you never know where you might be when the situation arises and you might need your weapon. I've been a lot more proactive in having it with me again since I read about what happened. I saw the movie last night, and guess what, I had it right at my side.

So, that's my .02. People need to stop blaming the weapon, and need to start blaming the person. We don't blame the car when it kills someone in a car crash, we don't blame a bat or a knife or a brick or a bottle or a lead pipe when used to harm a person. Stop blaming the tool, start blaming the person. He easily could've chosen another way and set the entire building on fire instead, which likely could've cost a lot more people their lives.

All in with you. Great reply

[Uber V8]

Originally Posted by CollinsE90

6 year old shouldn't have been in the movie, nor the infant.

From a logical viewpoint, true. However, the facts still remain. That's the hard part to deal with.

[M_Six]

Originally Posted by sjk9671

I have to respectfully disagree with you. That’s exactly why it was written. Look what our founding fathers did. They used their weapons to overthrow their tyrannical government.

They then placed the clause in the 2nd amendment so that the people will always be armed, to keep the government in check. That is the original purpose

That's fine. You're entitled to disagree. But the evidence is against you. Early rebellions, such as Shay's Rebellion and the Whiskey Rebellion were put down with authority and even the patriots of the American Revolution decried the uprisings against the new government.

Sam Adams said:

Rebellion against a king may be pardoned, or lightly punished, but the man who dares to rebel against the laws of a republic ought to suffer death.

And George Washington said:

I am mortified beyond expression when I view the clouds that have spread over the brightest morn that ever dawned in any country... What a triumph for the advocates of despotism, to find that we are incapable of governing ourselves and that systems founded on the basis of equal liberty are merely ideal and fallacious.

Clearly neither Founding Father believed that the general populous had any right at all to rebel against the republic. As Sam Adams said, it's ok to rebel against a king, but rebelling against the republic is a different story.

Jefferson was famous for saying that "a little rebellion now and then is a good thing." But few historians believe he actually thought overthrowing the new government was a good thing.

The whole idea of citizens bearing arms in case they needed to overthrow the government is a load of BS created by the pro-gun lobby. Does anyone seriously believe a rebellion against the government stands any chance at all of succeeding? Has it ever?

Let me state again, I am not an anti-gun advocate. I have been a gun owner in the past, although I don't currently own one. But if you really read history and not just the propaganda from the NRA, you'll see that the 2nd Amendment *never* mentions or even implies the right to bear arms in order to overthrow the government.

[AU335i]

Originally Posted by FwdFtl

It was the six year old girl being shot and killed that really did it for me.

The most frustrating acts of violence to me are those that involve the innocent.

I'm only 28, but I would honestly lay my life down for that six year old girl even though I don't know her.

Not saying you would or would not do this, but it really is hard to say what you would really do in this situation unless you're actually in it...

like the article posted earlier in here, some people step-up in the face of danger (kid who helped the stranger and her kids) and some just naturally think of self-preservation (coward who left his wife and kids)

[AU335i]

oh and I'm just gonna leave this here...