By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - Shooting at Batman Premiere - 12 dead / Your opinions on gun laws

binary solo said:

No, if a criminal thinks his mark might be armed he'll attack first, rather than simply go for the stick up.  The opportunist criminal might be deterred if he thinks there's a high chance of the mark being armed, but the career criminal will simply have different strategies.

Did you just suggest that a criminal will shoot first if he believes his target is armed?  Do you really think a criminal is not aware of the charge difference between assault with a deadly weapon and first degree murder?

Convenience store clerks have a high weapon carry rate yet do we see the average criminal walk in and shoot first because of the probability the clerk is armed?  No.

The majority of armed criminals are opportunist criminals anyway.  Even career criminals know to find targets that are not likely to be armed...in fact, I'm pretty certain that career criminals are even more likely to avoid targets that are armed in the same way that career burglars tend to avoid houses that have alarms.



The rEVOLution is not being televised

Around the Network

well this is rather interesting. if it is true where did they get this guy? lol even the eyebrows is different



CPU: Ryzen 7950X
GPU: MSI 4090 SUPRIM X 24G
Motherboard: MSI MEG X670E GODLIKE
RAM: CORSAIR DOMINATOR PLATINUM 32GB DDR5
SSD: Kingston FURY Renegade 4TB
Gaming Console: PLAYSTATION 5

Two Aurora Shootings: One Widely Known; the Other Ignored

Written by  Bob Adelmann

On April 22 of this year a convicted felon, just out of jail, went to an Aurora, Colorado, church and shot and killed a member of the congregation before being killed himself by a congregant carrying a gun.

On July 20, following the horrific shooting at a movie theater in Aurora, President Obama offered his condolences to the victims of the more recent tragedy. "Our time here [on Earth] is limited and it is precious," the president said. "And what matters at the end of the day is not the small things, it’s not the trivial things which so often consume us and our daily lives. It’s about how we choose to treat one another and how we love one another."

Obama then led his supporters at a rally in Fort Myers, Florida, in a moment of silent prayer “for all the victims of less publicized acts of violence that plague our communities every single day.”

No doubt the president was unaware of the other, less-publicized lethal shooting that took place earlier in the year in Aurora, when there was only one victim, thanks to the quick thinking and action of a responsibly armed individual. Aurora police spokesman Frank Fania asked rhetorically: “Who knows what would’ve happened if the [church member, an off-duty police officer] had not been there? It certainly could have been a lot worse.”

How much worse? Could the killing spree have been as bad as the shooting at the movie theater, where a dozen victims lost their lives? Thankfully, we'll never know.

The killer in the April shooting was 29-year-old Kiarron Parker, who had just been released from prison. He had been convicted for assaulting two police officers, drug abuse, and breaking and entering. The details are here and here. But the point is clear: Because the perpetrator was able to claim only one life before being killed himself by someone carrying a gun and acting in self-defense, it garnered relatively little publicity.

In contrast, by now there may hardly be a single sentient soul in the country who doesn’t yet know what happened on Friday, July 20 at about 12:38 a.m., when James Egan Holmes opened fire on a theater full of people attending the premier of the latest Batman movie, killing 12 individuals and wounding at least another 50.

If we've paid attention to the mega publicity the horrific July 20 tragedy has garnered, we know that Holmes entered the theater, bought a ticket, and sat in the front row. We know that about 10 minutes into the movie, he left the theater through the emergency door at the front of the theater, returning a few minutes later. We know that he was dressed up in SWAT gear, including chest protector, leg protectors, a black helmet, and black tactical gloves. We also know that he was wearing a gas mask and carrying two handguns, a shotgun — and what the media inaccurately, and relentlessly, referred to as an "assault rifle." (The latter weapon was a semi-automatic rifle.)

We know that upon re-entering the theater through the same emergency door, Holmes threw two canisters of tear gas, striking one patron in the head. When both exploded, many patrons sat still, thinking that it was part of the Batman movie, with special effects.

We know that when he first fired his shotgun into the air, only then did the moviegoers realize that something was terribly wrong and start running for the exits. We know that the perp then turned his weapons on the hapless patrons and fired, round after round, pausing to reload when he ran out of ammunition, until 12 of moviegoers were dead or dying, and another 50 were wounded, some severely.

We know that Holmes' car was parked outside the emergency exit. We know that he was arrested next to his vehicle without incident. We know that Holmes has no criminal record, save for a single speeding ticket.

But how many Americans know about the earlier shooting at an Aurora church? How many people in Colorado — or in Aurora for that matter — even know? I live in eastern Colorado, only about 70 miles from Aurora, yet I did not find out about the church shooting until I started doing research on the movie-theater shooting.

The little-known Aurora-church shooting illustrates how a tragedy (in this instance, the loss of one innocent life) can be prevented from becoming a much worse tragedy because one of the would-be victims was armed. The widely known movie-theater shooting illustrates the horrendous loss of life that can occur when the intended victims are not only defenseless but known by the perpetrator to be defenseless. Because movie theater was a "gun free" zone, it was an easy target for any madman wanting to prey on victims lacking the ability to fight back.

Anti-gun zealots, however, ignore how the absence of guns in the hands of the law-abiding encourages more crime, and in the Aurora movie-theater shooting they've found an opportunity to promote their agenda and have already seized it. For example, Dan Gross, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, was quick to opine:

This tragedy is another grim reminder that guns are the enablers of mass killers and that our nation pays an unacceptable price for our failure to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people....

We are outraged....

We don’t want sympathy. We want action!

And New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, virtually parroting Gross, claimed, “This is yet another horrific reminder that guns enable mass killings.” He went on to say:

Maybe it’s time that the two people who want to be president of the United States stand up and tell us what they are going to do about it, because this is obviously a problem across the country.

This was just too much for Dudley Brown, executive director of Rocky Mountain Gun Owners, who countered:

The blatant attempt by New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg to use the blood of these innocents to advance his radical political agenda is disgusting. Mayor Bloomberg’s campaign succeeded in disarming not just these movie-goers [in Aurora], but has created millions of gun-free “criminal-safe zones” across the country.

The victims of this heinous act will not be comforted by being exploited for political gain by elected officials, especially [by] the mayor of one of the most violent cities in the country.

In an interview with The New AmericanLarry Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners of America, called such claims by the anti-gun zealots “not just hypocrisy but duplicity.” The victims in the movie theater were like “fish in a barrel” to the perpetrator because they were disarmed, thanks to the anti-gun agenda.

The contrast between the two Aurora shootings couldn’t be more striking. In the first, a potential holocaust was prevented by an armed citizen taking action. In the second, the perpetrator was free to act out his evil intent on unarmed innocents, knowing that none could return fire. The world knows about the Aurora movie-theater shooting; the world also needs to know about the Aurora church shooting.



killerzX said:

What Hollabackenny said.

That picture with the old chain gun doesn't have an argument either, that gun is far too impractical and probably expensive, children were also far more controlled and disciplined, their parents would have definitely been involved, that is assuming that anybody ordered it.

As for the last picture, they fire the same calibre round, but one is bolt action or semi-automatic at best, while the other fires 800 rounds per minute. I don't really think that needs an explanation, especially when were are talking about mass murders.



brendude13 said:
killerzX said:

What Hollabackenny said.

That picture with the old chain gun doesn't have an argument either, that gun is far too impractical and probably expensive, children were also far more controlled and disciplined, their parents would have definitely been involved, that is assuming that anybody ordered it.

As for the last picture, they fire the same calibre round, but one is bolt action or semi-automatic at best, while the other fires 800 rounds per minute. I don't really think that needs an explanation, especially when were are talking about mass murders.

well there are many modes of transportation, car arent the only ones. and since car are one of the most deadly thing ever made, they should be banned.

furthermore guns are used for much more there killing other people that have guns. first its used all the time to defend against non gun weilding criminals. it is also used for sport, target practice, recreation, hunting, and collecting, etc. much more than just killing gun wielding foes.

2nd point that actual machine gun (it is actually a machine gun, which the media love mis-atributing to an AR-15. was actually quite cheap. after WW1 andWWII people were able to order these things with catalogs from military surplus. it was really quite cheap. furthermore you are no arguing parenting, which i completely agree with you. intodays society we are taught anything goes, and any life style is acceptable, a very moral relitivist society. but that has no bearing on the type of firearms im allowed to buy. it proves that guns arent the problem, its peoples moral code, its parenting, its schooling.

3rd, that AR-15 can shoot no where near 800 rounds per minute. unless of course you can pull that trigger 800 times in that one minute, but something tells me neither you nor I nor anyone else can do that. that thing is just as fast as any other semi-auto out there (which is about 90% of all guns made). and while the hunting rifle shown is a bolt action, there are many many many semi-auto hunting rifles, that shoot just as fast, and shoot a much more powerful round. a 5.56 (.223) is not a very prefered round for killing things, as it is so weak.

take this gun for example, it is significantly more deadly than that AR-15 shoots, just as fast, and much more deadly.



Around the Network
killerzX said:

well there are many modes of transportation, car arent the only ones. and since car are one of the most deadly thing ever made, they should be banned.

furthermore guns are used for much more there killing other people that have guns. first its used all the time to defend against non gun weilding criminals. it is also used for sport, target practice, recreation, hunting, and collecting, etc. much more than just killing gun wielding foes.

2nd point that actual machine gun (it is actually a machine gun, which the media love mis-atributing to an AR-15. was actually quite cheap. after WW1 andWWII people were able to order these things with catalogs from military surplus. it was really quite cheap. furthermore you are no arguing parenting, which i completely agree with you. intodays society we are taught anything goes, and any life style is acceptable, a very moral relitivist society. but that has no bearing on the type of firearms im allowed to buy. it proves that guns arent the problem, its peoples moral code, its parenting, its schooling.

3rd, that AR-15 can shoot no where near 800 rounds per minute. unless of course you can pull that trigger 800 times in that one minute, but something tells me neither you nor I nor anyone else can do that. that thing is just as fast as any other semi-auto out there (which is about 90% of all guns made). and while the hunting rifle shown is a bolt action, there are many many many semi-auto hunting rifles, that shoot just as fast, and shoot a much more powerful round. a 5.56 (.223) is not a very prefered round for killing things, as it is so weak.

take this gun for example, it is significantly more deadly than that AR-15 shoots, just as fast, and much more deadly.

I've seen a full auto AR-15 before on Youtube, but I just found out it was semi-auto. I can't tell the difference between that and an M4 though, my mistake. Think of what could have happened if his weapon was fully automatic though, those types of guns are still legal. Semi-auto is still very deadly, but it's the high capacity mags that make all the difference, 5 rounds and 30 rounds is the difference between a tool and a killing machine.

Cars are personal transportation and personal transportation is needed, especially for the emergency services. Roads are quite safe and cars are getting safer every year, there are only so many deaths on roads because so many people have cars. Banning cars would be like banning obesity, or the internet or making people wear gas masks and bubble wrap suits when they step outside. The problem with guns is that I believe they're far more dangerous than they are useful. This is coming from somebody who loves guns. I want gun laws to be more lenient in my country, but I think even semi-automatic weapons and easily concealed pistols is pushing it. I would sleep much better at night knowing that none of the idiots I know will be able to walk around with a gun.



brendude13 said:
killerzX said:

I've seen a full auto AR-15 before on Youtube, but I just found out it was semi-auto. I can't tell the difference between that and an M4 though, my mistake. Think of what could have happened if his weapon was fully automatic though, those types of guns are still legal. Semi-auto is still very deadly, but it's the high capacity mags that make all the difference, 5 rounds and 30 rounds is the difference between a tool and a killing machine.

Cars are personal transportation and personal transportation is needed, especially for the emergency services. Roads are quite safe and cars are getting safer every year, there are only so many deaths on roads because so many people have cars. Banning cars would be like banning obesity, or the internet or making people wear gas masks and bubble wrap suits when they step outside. The problem with guns is that I believe they're far more dangerous than they are useful. This is coming from somebody who loves guns. I want gun laws to be more lenient in my country, but I think even semi-automatic weapons and easily concealed pistols is pushing it. I would sleep much better at night knowing that none of the idiots I know will be able to walk around with a gun.


AR-15's are "civilian" models of the M-16, they are only semi-auto. the M-16 while still abtainable by civilians is very hard to come by. first of all you are looking at spending easily over $10,000 for the gun its self, then you have to get a tax stamp, get backround check, finger prints, etc, you go on a data base, i dont know the whole process, because its so complicated, and hard, but. pretty much if you arent rich you arent getting a full auto.

i already pointed why it was actually a good thing he had a "high capacity" magazine. so i will quote myself from earlier in this thread.

 

"but i 100% disagree with you about 50/100 round magazines should be illegal.

they should be perfectly legal, in fact him using that 100 round drum magazine saved a lot of lives. see,  high capacity drum magazines are prone to "jamming" because packing all those rounds of ammunation puts a lot of stress of the spring in the mag, and it often mis-feeds into the gun, causing lots of jams. the shooter had a jam, and being the untrained, inexperienced shooter that he was, he had no idea how to fix the malfunction. that saved numerous lives."

also regarding cars. like i said there are so many more mode of transportation. there is walking, biking, trains, buses, planes, scooters, etc. and they are all safer. the fact is there are more guns in the US than cars, yet cars kill people wayyyyy more. and i think protecting ones life is much more important than a mode of transportation. while i feel the most important function of a gun is to defend ones life, like i said, there is an abundance of reasons to own a gun. furthermore, a gun is constitutional protected right, a car is not.

anyway, the fbi reported in 2009 that there were nearly 14,000 murders that year, only about 300 of them came from rifles. they dont report how many came from "assualt" rifles, so i will leavve that up to you to guess how many of the rifles were "assualt".

also over 90% of all guns are semi-auto. they arent anything special. people use that as a buzz word, and think its especially deadly.

 

also, i would like to apologize, if i sound a bit hostile, as that is not my intent. i merely want to inform the public about firearms, because most of the fear and histeria that surrounds them is breed from ignorance of firearms, and is not founded in reality or statistics. i want to infrom people, educate them, so they can form an opinion that is grounded in fact, not propaganda.

so again, i apologize if i sound that way, i want to remain civil, while stern. 

 



brendude13 said:

As for the last picture, they fire the same calibre round, but one is bolt action or semi-automatic at best, while the other fires 800 rounds per minute. I don't really think that needs an explanation, especially when were are talking about mass murders.


It's only ~800 if it's full auto and his was only semi-auto.  At best, he was shooting at a rate of fire of 40 rounds per minute.

But even being full auto would be largely pointless as you run out a full 30 round magazine in a litle over 2 seconds (800 rounds per minute / 60 seconds = 13.33 rounds per second.   30 rounds / 13.33 per second = 2.25 seconds for empty magazine).

He did have a 100 round magazine (which jammed as KillerzX notes that large drums often do) which at full auto would still run dry in just 7.5 seconds. 

 

If it were full auto, very few would have died because he'd eat through ammo too fast.  And you can't carry too much ammo on you because that gets heavy very fast (200 rounds would be about 40 pounds) and he as already holding an AR-15, a sidearm and in full protective gear.  He easily had an extra 100 pounds of weight on him.



The rEVOLution is not being televised

hollabackenny said:
killerzX said:

 

That is such a bad arguement. People use their cars to get to work, school, hospitals, friends or family houses, amongst just about every place in the world
What benefits does owning a gun have besides protecting you from other guns?

People use their guns to hunt, target sports, recreation with friends or family, and to protect themselves, property, and loved ones.

What benefits does outlawing guns have besides protecting dangerious criminals from lawful gun owners?



I wonder if any of the surviving victims asked for a refund of the entrance ticket.



Nintendo is selling their IPs to Microsoft and this is true because:

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=221391&page=1