So if you have had a radio or TV on today you've heard about the 71 people shot, 12 killed, at the Aurora Co. opening of the Batman- The Dark Knight Rises movie opening.
And as usual, the gun grabbers are capitalizing on the tragedy to spew their anti-firearms messages.
When the hell are they going to understand that only when they learn how to enforce the draconian regulations ALREADY in place, will they be capable of impacting events such as this one?
Some idiot goes off the deep end and kills / wounds a herd of people, and somehow the law abiding private firearm owners are to blame? Seriously?! What makes anyone think that an individual that has total disregard for the law is going to be impacted by such crap? :roll eyes:
Hey, a political issue we line up on... ;D
ABC News was REAL quick to falsly claim the shooter was a member of the Tea Party....they later apologized. It is very sad when the media WANTS to politicize such events for a political gain.
The man thought he was the "Joker"..........
The people of Colorado have to go through ANOTHER tragedy as they did back in 99....
It sure does sound like what some red neck right wing Tea Bagger would do. Especially after what Rush Limbaugh said Wednesday. :yes: :doh:
"You People" do know that Rush is the radio spokesman for the Republican Party and the Golden Con Man. :biggrin:
All of the weapons they've found so far were acquired legally.
18+ minutes of scanner traffic of the police response to the incident.
http://www.youtube.com/v/DkUi6q5kgbU
Very disturbing...hard to finish listening to the audio, Loc. :(
Quote from: Sunny on July 21, 2012, 02:21:32 PM
Very disturbing...hard to finish listening to the audio, Loc. :(
Yes, it was quite a chaotic scene. You could tell how difficult it was for them to coordinate a response of both rescue and police with events unfolding as rapidly as they did.
Quote from: Locutus on July 20, 2012, 04:25:19 PM
All of the weapons they've found so far were acquired legally.
Which proves they either are not enforcing the laws already on the books, or this guy went wacko over the fact he could not find a job after university. . .
Quote from: Palehorse on July 20, 2012, 03:24:30 PM
And as usual, the gun grabbers are capitalizing on the tragedy to spew their anti-firearms messages.
As with everything, there are two sides to this issue. I am clearly on the side of citizens having the right to arm themselves and have a lifetime personal carry permit but why can't people bring up this subject after something like this happens? When New Orleans flooded, we talked about the failure of our flood control policy and we talk about limiting texting after a horrific crash kills several people. Why are guns the only aspect of our society in which we aren't allowed to have similar discussions without being labeled gun-grabbers or anti-2nd amendment?
Simply because of the "aura" surrounding firearms.
The principal reason for the existence of a gun is an ability to exert deadly force, unlike just about any other item used as a weapon.
Likewise, an object used to text has a different principal use -- communication.
Guns, however have a history and "baggage" that go with them -- making it much easier to blame the tool than the mechanic.
When was the last time anyone blamed the wrenches when a mechanic screwed up their car?
Quote from: Locutus on July 21, 2012, 02:45:27 PM
Yes, it was quite a chaotic scene. You could tell how difficult it was for them to coordinate a response of both rescue and police with events unfolding as rapidly as they did.
It is a really damn shame that we can't cure mental illness. The pain that one nut can do to destroy life and live of innocent people in his well planned mass murder. :rant:
But this brings out all of the anti-gun nuts. Wanting to take our only self defense from the other crooks, thieves and other nuts in the world. There is 314 Million men, women and children in this country and because one, just one (1) crazy "smart man" goes berserk, O boy let's get the guns. :mad:
If he had entered that theater through the exit doors like he did with 5 gallons of gasoline under high pressure and set it off, the death from the fire would have been a lot more that his guns.
Nobody knows how dangerous gasoline can be if built into a thermobaric bomb. The fire, the smoke, the blocked exits with stomped trampled bodies, blocking the escapes doors, of the terrorized people. The deaths would have been the hundreds. You just no need a gun to create mass murder. :angry:
But, let us all run around like chickens with our heads off, with the drum beat, beat, beat of the 24 hour news cycle. With stupid talking head asking stupid questions 24 hours a day. :rant: Let us do what we did after 9/11, A whole lot of stupid and dumb things. :yes: :yes: :yes:
Quote from: Exterminator on July 21, 2012, 02:53:47 PM
As with everything, there are two sides to this issue. I am clearly on the side of citizens having the right to arm themselves and have a lifetime personal carry permit but why can't people bring up this subject after something like this happens? When New Orleans flooded, we talked about the failure of our flood control policy and we talk about limiting texting after a horrific crash kills several people. Why are guns the only aspect of our society in which we aren't allowed to have similar discussions without being labeled gun-grabbers or anti-2nd amendment?
Hear! Hear!
As most everyone should know by now, I've made the case the Second Amendment as it stands prohibits the infringement of the citizens to own any sort of arms/armaments, up to and including implements of war.
That being said, we, as a people, need to have the discussions and work towards an amendment to the Constitution that regulates the arms/armaments the populace is allowed to own.
The creators of the Constitution had no idea of the weaponry that would be personally available today, and many of the reasons for citizens to be armed that were enshrined in the Second Amendment are no longer applicable in today's society, and there are many compelling reasons today for regulation of personal firepower.
Quote from: Y on July 22, 2012, 01:17:46 PM
Hear! Hear!
As most everyone should know by now, I've made the case the Second Amendment as it stands prohibits the infringement of the citizens to own any sort of arms/armaments, up to and including implements of war.
That being said, we, as a people, need to have the discussions and work towards an amendment to the Constitution that regulates the arms/armaments the populace is allowed to own.
The creators of the Constitution had no idea of the weaponry that would be personally available today, and many of the reasons for citizens to be armed that were enshrined in the Second Amendment are no longer applicable in today's society, and there are many compelling reasons today for regulation of personal firepower.
It seems to me that what the populace should be demanding is enforcement of the laws that are already in place. And perhaps a reformation of the judicial system as well.
Firearms do not kill people, people do. If you remove firearms from their hands then they will take up knives, you remove the knives, they will pick up a stick, you remove the stick they'll use fertilizer and kerosene. (You get the idea).
The death penalty is not the detriment it should be for those who commit murder. (You stick a needle in their arm in a sterile environment, observed by a select few). Instead we ought to go back to public executions if we are going to continue sentencing people to death. (And I am not so sure we should be doing this in any case, but that's another subject).
The point is, when you legislate behaviors over the actions of a minuscule sector of society the only ones that are going to comply are those who were in compliance from the beginning. Those who do not comply will never do so; meaning we punish the masses over the crimes of the few, and that punishment does nothing to those who have no respect for the law in the first place.
I am in no way saying I want to own a tank or anti aircraft weaponry, nor do I think anyone outside of the military has a right to own such. However, we have all seen how good intentioned legislation gets off into the deep weeds in a real hurry, and how long it takes to get legislation to correct such implemented. Our elected representation is bought and sold on an hourly basis today, and it matters not who is right but rather, who has the deepest pockets.
I don't see anything wrong with someone owing a tank, a artillery piece, machine guns, war plane like P-51, P-38, B-24, B-17 and B-36's Thunder Bolts, F-86's if they are qualified. They are the keepers of our history. These planes, tanks could be made dangerous again, but they won't. If you want to see war birds, the EAA flyin it the place to go if you want to see World War II aircraft flying like they should. I have been there many times and it is great. Why do we go overboard on everything. Nothing is safe, nothing is a 100% and we ain't going to get off this earth alive.
How many people could this nut killed if he waited for the crowd to let out and took a car and ran into them at a 100 miles per hour. :shrug: There is no way to stop a crazy person if he or she wants to kill, NOBODY!
That I agree with.
Spent some time with the Confederate Air Force before the name change.
Great old aircraft lovingly tended and flown.
Quote from: followsthewolf on July 22, 2012, 08:46:53 PM
That I agree with.
Spent some time with the Confederate Air Force before the name change.
Great old aircraft lovingly tended and flown.
We can agree on some things. I love the old war birds, I love to see the old tanks and jeeps in parades. They came at a time in our history were we stood as one and defeated the evil that was in the world. We were winners. :4th3:
Quote from: The Troll on July 22, 2012, 08:40:15 PM
I don't see anything wrong with someone owing a tank, a artillery piece, machine guns, war plane like P-51, P-38, B-24, B-17 and B-36's Thunder Bolts, F-86's if they are qualified. They are the keepers of our history. These planes, tanks could be made dangerous again, but they won't. If you want to see war birds, the EAA flyin it the place to go if you want to see World War II aircraft flying like they should. I have been there many times and it is great. Why do we go overboard on everything. Nothing is safe, nothing is a 100% and we ain't going to get off this earth alive.
How many people could this nut killed if he waited for the crowd to let out and took a car and ran into them at a 100 miles per hour. :shrug: There is no way to stop a crazy person if he or she wants to kill, NOBODY!
Troll, have you ever been to Wright Patterson AFB? If not, you must! They have a FREE musem and tour of some amazing equipment...including the restoration of the Memphis Belle........a very cool place to go.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on July 23, 2012, 08:19:09 AM
Troll, have you ever been to Wright Patterson AFB? If not, you must! They have a FREE musem and tour of some amazing equipment...including the restoration of the Memphis Belle........a very cool place to go.
I been there three time over the years. I haven't been there since they built the new hangar. But like you said, IT IS GREAT!
Quote from: The Troll on July 23, 2012, 08:50:26 AM
I been there three time over the years. I haven't been there since they built the new hangar. But like you said, IT IS GREAT!
After this crime, one guy out of 350 million people kill a few people, they want to take our guns. Why don't they take cars, trucks, motorcycles, airplanes, boats, off road 4 wheelers, some of the work places and all of the other things that kill people. With as many people the cops and law enforcement men and women kill a year, we need to take their guns to.
Just think all of the money we could save for the funerals, legal law suits for wrongful death suits and hospital bills and the ammunition, targets, and rifle range time they use to practices to kill us. Money save would be large. :doh: :haha;
Quote from: The Troll on July 23, 2012, 01:21:34 PM
After this crime, one guy out of 350 million people kill a few people, they want to take our guns. Why don't they take cars, trucks, motorcycles, airplanes, boats, off road 4 wheelers, some of the work places and all of the other things that kill people. With as many people the cops and law enforcement men and women kill a year, we need to take their guns to.
Just think all of the money we could save for the funerals, legal law suits for wrongful death suits and hospital bills and the ammunition, targets, and rifle range time they use to practices to kill us. Money save would be large. :doh: :haha;
like I said just recently, are your meds okay? Have they expired? are YOU following the directions? Maybe you have been outside TOO lone in the heat? should I contact 911 for you?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on July 23, 2012, 08:19:09 AM
Troll, have you ever been to Wright Patterson AFB? If not, you must! They have a FREE musem and tour of some amazing equipment...including the restoration of the Memphis Belle........a very cool place to go.
And, when in Arizona (Tucson), don't forget to visit the airplane graveyard.
Went there to see my old KC -- 135's that we used for air-to-air refueling back when I wore a younger man's clothes (apologies to Billy Joel).
(http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/dam/assets/120723084633-holmes-mugshot-t1-main.jpg)
Picture of the perp. :mad:
Quote from: followsthewolf on July 23, 2012, 02:56:51 PM
And, when in Arizona (Tucson), don't forget to visit the airplane graveyard.
Went there to see my old KC -- 135's that we used for air-to-air refueling back when I wore a younger man's clothes (apologies to Billy Joel).
Never been there, but there was a good show on the Discovery channel. Showed it from the air and all through it. You look at all of these beautiful aircraft that flew laying there worn out. Just think of all of the money America spent for the planes.
They show how they cut the wings off and destroyed the bodies and melted them down. But, everything wears out. One woman doctor in Arizona who had a home in the mountains took one of the huge wings and used it for part of the roof of her new home. :yes:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on July 23, 2012, 02:46:34 PM
like I said just recently, are your meds okay? Have they expired? are YOU following the directions? Maybe you have been outside TOO lone in the heat? should I contact 911 for you?
Henry, you're so funny. You do know you really could be funny if you weren't such a asshole. :biggrin:
I think this is pretty cool, that Christian Bale and his wife went to Colorado, to visit with some of the victims from the shooting....he had no photographers with him...just him and his wife.
http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2012/07/24/christian-bale-visits-colorado-shooting-victims/?test=latestnews (http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2012/07/24/christian-bale-visits-colorado-shooting-victims/?test=latestnews)
I thought that was nice too. Did you see where Peyton Manning also either talked to or went to see the people in the hospital?
Quote from: Anne on July 25, 2012, 01:35:31 PM
I thought that was nice too. Did you see where Peyton Manning also either talked to or went to see the people in the hospital?
No, I did not hear about that, it does not surprise me though.... He is a class act. :yes:
So this whole tragedy possibly could've been circumvented?!? :(
http://www.abcactionnews.com/dpp/news/national/james-holmes-notebook-shooting-suspect-sent-notebook-to-psychiatrist-detailing-attack-report-says
QuoteThe man accused in last Friday's mass shooting at an Aurora movie theater sent a notebook full of details about how he was going to kill people to a University of Colorado psychiatrist before the attack, reported Fox News.
The notebook was mailed to the professor and sat unopened in a mail room for as long as a week before it was found Monday.
FBI agents and police officers were called to the Anschutz medical campus on Monday morning on reports of a suspicious package that was sent from suspect James Holmes.
Although the package turned out to be harmless, a search of a campus services' mail room turned up another package sent to the psychiatrist with Holmes' name in the return address, Fox reported citing unmanned sources.
"Inside the package was a notebook full of details about how he was going to kill people," the source said. "There were drawings of what he was going to do in it -- drawings and illustrations of the massacre."
Read more: http://www.abcactionnews.com/dpp/news/national/james-holmes-notebook-shooting-suspect-sent-notebook-to-psychiatrist-detailing-attack-report-says#ixzz21fVYq9Gg
Quote from: Sunny on July 25, 2012, 04:33:03 PM
So this whole tragedy possibly could've been circumvented?!? :(
http://www.abcactionnews.com/dpp/news/national/james-holmes-notebook-shooting-suspect-sent-notebook-to-psychiatrist-detailing-attack-report-says
That's sad.
Does anyone read the Spider Man comics in the newspaper? There is an eerie resemblance recently to the real events. In the comic strip a couple of weeks ago (I think) a clown attacked a theater on Broadway.
Quote from: Olias on July 25, 2012, 07:44:43 PM
Does anyone read the Spider Man comics in the newspaper? There is an eerie resemblance recently to the real events. In the comic strip a couple of weeks ago (I think) a clown attacked a theater on Broadway.
I stopped getting a hard copy newspaper when I discovered the local paper in the town I moved to was nothing more than a parrot - and its best use was for lining said parrots cage. . .
That's weird though. Makes one wonder if that jackwagon was reading it eh? :eek:
So the latest reports are indicating that James Holmes is claiming he has "amnesia". :rolleyes:
Anyone else see where Steve Smith of the Carolina Panthers donated 100k to the victims of the Aurora shootings?
Anyone else see where the NRA geeks are arguing that no 'assault' rifle was used, that 'assault' rifles are only full auto or selective fire, and that you can't claim a semi-auto is an 'assault' rifle and ban 'assault' weapons because that would ban pistols, shotguns, and rifles?
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/assault
3.
Military. the stage of close combat in an attack.
Quote from: Palehorse on July 22, 2012, 04:11:14 PM
Firearms do not kill people, people do. If you remove firearms from their hands then they will take up knives, you remove the knives, they will pick up a stick, you remove the stick they'll use fertilizer and kerosene. (You get the idea).
The point is not that we can forcefully stop people from killing another, but that we can do something to end the proliferation of weapons which allow for mass killings within time spans that prevent victims from reacting.
That's the sensible course of action, and it's utter beyond belief that the 'gun debate' is so polarized that the public cannot even have a debate on a sensible course of action.
Quote from: Y on July 28, 2012, 11:44:34 PM
The point is not that we can forcefully stop people from killing another, but that we can do something to end the proliferation of weapons which allow for mass killings within time spans that prevent victims from reacting.
That's the sensible course of action, and it's utter beyond belief that the 'gun debate' is so polarized that the public cannot even have a debate on a sensible course of action.
It is not that I am for the ownership of fully automatic firearms by the average citizen. Moreover, I believe that the true danger lies in the fact that firearm control advocates react in a knee jerk fashion when events like these transpire; wanting to limit ownership to single shot, bolt action long guns, and single action side-arms. (Among other actions).
When such limitations are imposed upon the citizens of this nation, the police and military then have the means to oppress the majority; and we all know where that leads. . .
Finally, a few drums of diesel fuel and some fertilizer imposed a lot higher body count in the instances when they were used. Shall we ban or control those items as well? Where is the line? When do we begin holding the individuals responsible for their crimes instead of the entire law abiding populace?
(And when I say criminals, I include the federal, state, and local officials who abjectly fail to enforce those regulations already in place surrounding firearm ownership and purchases).
The fact is, you can ban semi automatic firearms of all types, and the only people who will own them are the ones who thumb their noses at the laws in place today.
Quote from: Y on July 28, 2012, 11:36:22 PM
Anyone else see where the NRA geeks are arguing that no 'assault' rifle was used, that 'assault' rifles are only full auto or selective fire, and that you can't claim a semi-auto is an 'assault' rifle and ban 'assault' weapons because that would ban pistols, shotguns, and rifles.
I've seen people making that claim and it's garbage. Assault weapons are typically descibed as magazine fed, rapid fire, not necessarily fully-automatic but also typically share some other characteristics like flash suppressors and bayonet mounts.
Quote from: Palehorse on July 29, 2012, 12:02:03 AM
It is not that I am for the ownership of fully automatic firearms by the average citizen. Moreover, I believe that the true danger lies in the fact that firearm control advocates react in a knee jerk fashion when events like these transpire; wanting to limit ownership to single shot, bolt action long guns, and single action sidearms. (Among other actions).
When such limitations are imposed upon the citizens of this nation, the police and military then have the means to oppress the majority; and we all know where that leads. . .
Finally, a few drums of diesel fuel and some fertilizer imposed a lot higher body count in the instances when they were used. Shall we ban or control those items as well? Where is the line? When do we begin holding the individuals responsible for their crimes instead of the entire law abiding populace?
(And when I say criminals, I include the federal, state, and local officials who abjectly fail to enforce those regulations already in place surrounding firearm ownership and purchases).
The fact is, you can ban semi automatic firearms of all types, and the only people who will own them are the ones who thumb their noses at the laws in place today.
In Switzerland, it is required by the government that each house hold has an automatic rifle. :yes: Could that be the reason the Germany didn't invade them and take all of their gold. :confused:
If we ban guns we need to ban all volatile liquids. What would have happen in that dark theater, if that nut had thrown a 5 gallon cam of gasoline with a small explosive that would have turned that gasoline on to a fine cloud of vapor and than a small flame to blow it. Hundreds would have been burnt up and killed.
But, it always has to be the gun and or the ammunition that does the killing. It is never the nut behind it and his or hers finger on the trigger. :rant:
So far cures for all mental illness. Nobody can know or rewired a shorted out brain. NOBODY! :trustme: NOBODY! :yes:
It is a fact the humans are easy targets and easy to kill and maimed. :yes: