Dark Knight Rises - 71 Shot

[Palehorse]

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? 

[Sunny]

So the latest reports are indicating that James Holmes is claiming he has "amnesia". 

[followsthewolf]

Anyone else see where Steve Smith of the Carolina Panthers donated 100k to the victims of the Aurora shootings?

[Y]

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.

[Y]

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.

[Palehorse]

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.

[Exterminator]

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.

[The Troll]

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.      Could that be the reason the Germany didn't invade them and take all of their gold.   

  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.   

  So far cures for all mental illness.  Nobody can know or rewired a shorted out brain.  NOBODY!    NOBODY!   

  It is a fact the humans are easy targets and easy to kill and maimed.