Lily
Administrator
Posts: 2,197
Joined: May 2011
|
Post by Lily on Jul 20, 2012 15:23:32 GMT -5
This is simply horrific. Whoever would have thought that going to see a movie could be fatal? And there is no way to avoid something like this, unless you barricade yourself in your home and never go out. The youngest victim was only 4 months old. OMG. (CNN) -- The man suspected of shooting up an Aurora, Colorado, movie theater screening the new Batman film early Friday, killing 12 and wounding 59, also left his apartment rigged with traps, police said. www.cnn.com/2012/07/20/us/colorado-theater-shooting/index.html?hpt=hp_t1 |
|
Lily
Administrator
Posts: 2,197
Joined: May 2011
|
Post by Lily on Jul 20, 2012 16:22:58 GMT -5
This tragic incident will spark the usual calls for gun control, which is not the answer. Gun control doesn't take the guns away from criminals and crazies, it takes them away from law-abiding citizens, leaving them no way to defend themselves against home-breakins, and other criminal acts. In Canada, where gun controls laws are applied rigorously, rival gangs still have shoot-outs on the streets, and have no problem getting guns.
|
|
Richard
Member
Posts: 610
Joined: July 2011
|
Post by Richard on Jul 21, 2012 11:03:42 GMT -5
This tragic incident will spark the usual calls for gun control, which is not the answer. Gun control doesn't take the guns away from criminals and crazies, it takes them away from law-abiding citizens, leaving them no way to defend themselves against home-breakins, and other criminal acts. In Canada, where gun controls laws are applied rigorously, rival gangs still have shoot-outs on the streets, and have no problem getting guns. Absolutely. The knee-jerk reaction is to call for gun confiscation. That only affects regular people. Criminals, and those with criminal intent, will always find a way to carry out their evil. The only way to stop crime is with something like the Minority Report, but that is not reality, at least not yet. If everyone in that movie theater had a gun, I'll bet he would have done less harm. |
|
greg
Member
Posts: 96
Joined: June 2011
|
Post by greg on Jul 21, 2012 14:24:10 GMT -5
I hate to play devil's advocate here, but if everyone in that theater had had a gun, the crossfire could have caused even more casualties. So-called "friendly fire" can be just as deadly."Collateral damage" as the army calls it takes a heavy toll.
|
|
Richard
Member
Posts: 610
Joined: July 2011
|
Post by Richard on Jul 21, 2012 14:36:22 GMT -5
I hate to play devil's advocate here, but if everyone in that theater had had a gun, the crossfire could have caused even more casualties. So-called "friendly fire" can be just as deadly."Collateral damage" as the army calls it takes a heavy toll. Yeah, but we don't know what would have happened, we only know what did, and that evidently no one there was able to stop it before he was able to do as much as he did. |
|
Lily
Administrator
Posts: 2,197
Joined: May 2011
|
Post by Lily on Jul 21, 2012 15:26:43 GMT -5
Greg raises some good points. There is no sure fire way to keep ourselves safe from this type of crazy attack. No guarantees. However, I'd rather be armed if faced with a deranged gunman, and I'm sure most people would. At least it gives you a fighting chance. Unarmed, you have none. Those poor people in that movie theatre were like sitting ducks, with no line of defence except to try to hide, or to run. In that type of terrifying situation, I'd much rather those around me were armed. Okay, there could well be injuries caused by the crossfire, but they would likely be a lot less than if no one had the means to defend themselves. What a dangerous world this has become. One of the victims had just survived a similar attack, in a crowded Toronto shopping mall last month. www.theprovince.com/news/Colorado+shooting+victim+Jessica+Ghawl+narrowly+missed+deadly/6965253/story.html |
|
Richard
Member
Posts: 610
Joined: July 2011
|
Post by Richard on Jul 21, 2012 19:06:05 GMT -5
|
|
Lily
Administrator
Posts: 2,197
Joined: May 2011
|
Post by Lily on Jul 21, 2012 23:37:39 GMT -5
If everyone in that movie theater had a gun, I'll bet he would have done less harm. And, if he had known the audience was armed, he probably wouldn't have opened fire on them in the first place. He'd have known he would be gunned down very quickly. It makes for a powerful deterrent. |
|
Richard
Member
Posts: 610
Joined: July 2011
|
Post by Richard on Jul 22, 2012 11:30:15 GMT -5
If everyone in that movie theater had a gun, I'll bet he would have done less harm. And, if he had known the audience was armed, he probably wouldn't have opened fire on them in the first place. He'd have known he would be gunned down very quickly. It makes for a powerful deterrent. I'm not an NRA member, nor do I advocate that everyone should have a gun. But people will do what they want to do with what they have available. Timothy McVeigh was quite effective without guns. The problems I have with the knee-jerk reactions to these stories, is how people are easily manipulated by the media and politicians. A few Facts: 1. Hollyweird and its actors make billions sensationalizing guns, murder, and mayhem. Gun rights advocates agree that criminals should not possess guns and advocate for gun safety and training. 2. The U.S. has the #1 per capita guns per private citizen. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_guns_per_capita_by_country3. To go along with #2, the U.S. has one of the worlds lowest murder/homicide rates in the world. When compared to population, this makes the comparison even more profound. chartsbin.com/view/14544. The first opportunity the media, ABC, got was to try and paint this guy as a Tea party member. I am not a Tea party member, but when you see the media try this as soon as it happens, like they did with Gabrielle Giffords, and in both cases they were wrong, then you have to face the reality of manipulation. Many just don't care about the facts because of their personal beliefs. From some reports I have seen, the mother of this man reported him to the authorities months earlier, possibly the FBI, and they investigated and ignored him. They obviously didn't investigate too hard or they could have easily followed his purchases over the preceding months which were quite significant. |
|
Lily
Administrator
Posts: 2,197
Joined: May 2011
|
Post by Lily on Jul 22, 2012 15:58:15 GMT -5
They obviously didn't investigate too hard or they could have easily followed his purchases over the preceding months which were quite significant. Those purchases have been estimated to cost around $20,000. The question is, how could Holmes, an unemployed student, afford to shell out so much serious cash? This has raised speculation, of course, that he may have had backing from a source other than his parents. |
|
Lily
Administrator
Posts: 2,197
Joined: May 2011
|
Post by Lily on Jul 22, 2012 16:38:54 GMT -5
|
|
Richard
Member
Posts: 610
Joined: July 2011
|
Post by Richard on Jul 22, 2012 19:37:09 GMT -5
|
|
Lily
Administrator
Posts: 2,197
Joined: May 2011
|
Post by Lily on Jul 22, 2012 20:26:30 GMT -5
It's amazing that not just one, but three young guys would do this, given the times in which we live. Quite incredible really. It challenges our somewhat tarnished view of human nature. I just hope their girlfriends are worthy of the sacrifice. |
|
Lily
Administrator
Posts: 2,197
Joined: May 2011
|
Post by Lily on Jul 22, 2012 20:35:45 GMT -5
"Aurora Colorado movie theater's no-gun policy If there was ever a situation which exemplified the adage, "Outlaw guns and only outlaws will have guns," this is it. As the whole world knows, on 7/20/12, James Holmes sprayed bullets at the audience in the Century 16 movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, killing or wounding too many people. Many Texas concealed handgun license holders probably heard the news and asked, "Why didn't someone shoot back?" The state of Colorado does allow licensed individuals to carry concealed weapons. But like Texas, Colorado allows merchants to prohibit guns in their establishments. According to the search engine found at Rocky Mountain Gun Owners the Cinemark Century 16 Theater in Aurora is governed by a franchise policy of no guns. So why didn't someone shoot back? The good citizens in the theater followed the law and did not bring their guns into the theater. Seems the only one who violated that law was James Holmes. Man oh man. They'll throw the book at him for that." sleepless.blogs.com/george/2012/07/aurora-colorado-movie-theaters-no-gun-policy.htmlI also read that one of the victims was a security guard and would likely have been carrying a gun, if it hadn't been for the theatre's ban, which according to one account is posted right outside the front door. So Holmes knew no-one in there would be armed. OMG! It's being suggested that the survivors of this massacre should sue the theatre. However, it seems that according to Colorado law, businesses do have the right to ban guns from their premises. If this is the case, then a lawsuit against the theatre might not prove too successful. I would think that since the theatre didn't allow its patrons to be armed, then they had at least a moral obligation to provide security for them. Even one armed security guard would have made a world of difference. I don't know how the law would view this argument, but it might be a valid one, at least in a civil action. |
|
oracle
Member
Posts: 48
Joined: July 2012
|
Post by oracle on Jul 22, 2012 21:57:50 GMT -5
Now the blamefest begins. Yet it's not the theaters fault, nor the gun laws or whatever, the only one to blame is that evil monster who did the shooting. You can bet the farm he's planning on an insanity plea.
|
|
