horrific shooting where i live

[princealbertofb]

My dad just told me about that. I don't think I'll be entering any movie theaters until they are guarded with armed security~ You can say I'm paranoid.

In the meantime, how about just a simple metal detecting portico???

[princealbertofb]

Considering a person walks in a place and shoots many people only occasionally in a nation of over 300 million people, I would have to say that the percentage of people who are capable of doing that is pretty darn low.

This is not a 'right situation' type thing. This is a guy who went around the bend, most likely has been around the bend for a long time and finally acted on thoughts he has had for a long period of time.

This is a mental illness, not something that a 'normal' or healthy individual would seriously consider doing. MAYBE joke about shooting up a place, but not actually think about it seriously nor do it.

Gun control laws would not have kept this from happening. This guy was armed to the teeth, in fully body armor and had a gas mask. He had planned this out for a long time and covered every single base. This is the sort of person who, in a society where guns are controlled and regulated or just illegal, would have found a way to get firearms off the black market along with the rest of his gear.

This isn't a person like me who has a few firearms for hunting and target practice. I have a rifle and a shotgun - not a semi-automatic arsenal with ammo meant to take out a tank.

This guy went off his rocker, most likely been off for a very, very long time and finally got his plans in order and set a date and an event. It is a mind set which isn't too terribly common. It only seems common because we have such a high population and a shooting like this on average once per year, however one person out of three hundred million plus a year is a very, very low number.

Hmmmm, here when the number of deaths goes up on the roads, the government decides to crack down on all sorts of driving misdemeanours and dangers.... we want those numbers to come DOWN!!! That is not the only area where people try to save more lives.

I understand your argument that one shooting a year is not that much considering the population of the country but it still remains that the US has one of the highest rates of deaths and injuries from firearms (if I remember correctly)... Why try to save deaths at war, or on the highways, or even from nuclear accidents, if you're not also going to make an effort to save these random lives?

I'm afraid the argument can only sail so far, Bowyn....
(And I'm not saying that you aren't a careful user of your firearms). Things like drunken driving etc can be curbed, so there must be some ways of curbing those violent urges too. Maybe changing the culture?

[pellaz]

3a3a3a34a3a3a3

[Pix]

I know plenty of grannies (and grandpas) with guns and they've never done any such thing. (And besides, even if they're so willing to break the law so grievously, why would they need a carry concealed permit to shoot the kid on their lawn or even chase them next door?)

I have known a granny who's life was probably saved because she had a permit and had a gun on already on her when she entered her home to find a home invader there waiting for her.

In many states you're vetted pretty carefully before you can get a permit to carry, and some want a compelling reason (like being stalked by a man with a history of violence) as well, so when I know someone has such a permit I'm inclined to trust them more than I trust most other people. (Of course that doesn't apply in states where all you have to do is buy a permit, or even have "Vermont carry".)

And just for the record I don't consider Bowyn Aerrow any way responsible for what happened in Colorado or violence in general, anymore than I blame him for all the stupid jerks who drive drunk (including the ones who parked on the sidewalk and knocked my trashcan into the street last Independence Day and made unpleasant comments that were both sexual and insulting to me around their vehicle as I got my trashcan out of the street *), text while driving, and have nearly run me over twice (when they weren't drinking or texting as far as I can tell, they were just stupid) in their vehicles despite that he has his own vehicle as well.

(*Btw, I have a Glock 23 AND a CCW permit. It didn't even occur to me to take it out there and use it on those obnoxious drunks. Unfortunately it also didn't occur to me to call the cops on them before they left again so I can only hope they don't prove to be "part of another problem" by killing a family as they drunkenly crash into a mother's car and then gets off by taking a course that teaches them, "Drunk driving is bad." But if that did happen it's still not BA fault for having a vehicle of his own and/or his drinking from time to time.)

[Rainbowmum]

My prayers to the families.

[Zet]

Was this in Aurora, Denver Colorado? There hasn't been a lot in the news in Sweden about it but I just recently heard that it was in the same area my cousin was living in, she was even planing to get to the same theater the day after. Thank god she is safe. My heart goes to everyone who got lost or got hurt.

[pellaz]

[quote=Zet]Aurora is east of denver still, a mix of nice neighborhoods and challenged bad places. The bad is mostly suburban gang related.

[Lunar]

Hmmmm, here when the number of deaths goes up on the roads, the government decides to crack down on all sorts of driving misdemeanours and dangers.... we want those numbers to come DOWN!!! That is not the only area where people try to save more lives.

I understand your argument that one shooting a year is not that much considering the population of the country but it still remains that the US has one of the highest rates of deaths and injuries from firearms (if I remember correctly)... Why try to save deaths at war, or on the highways, or even from nuclear accidents, if you're not also going to make an effort to save these random lives?

I'm afraid the argument can only sail so far, Bowyn....
(And I'm not saying that you aren't a careful user of your firearms). Things like drunken driving etc can be curbed, so there must be some ways of curbing those violent urges too. Maybe changing the culture?

This seems like a Kantian vs. Utilitarian approach. In a society infatuated with violence it is hard to save what is called "random lives." Placing further restrictions or an outward ban on firearms would cause a booming blackmarket. Criminals will always be criminals and they will find ways to obtain firearms regardless. An armed, trained, and well educated society can take preventive actions to stop criminals.

This was a tragic event, and there were no excuses for his actions.

[Pix]

If guns were illegal then the massacre might've been even deadlier.

It's possible that in trying to gather weapons that he'd be busted in the process. OTOH, people like him and of his background manage to score illicit drugs all the time with no problem. (Heck, given our surveillance state I think it's a legite question to ask why no red flags were raised over his buying all the things he did in the last few months, though I suppose the government is far more concerned with OWS, moderate Muslims, and even environmentalists.) And if on the black market in a society where legal guns are banned then he'd be much more likely to get the guns (and more lethal types of ammo) restricted to the military and law enforcement meaning even more dead & wounded.

Or he might've chosen an alternative route. Molotovs seem most likely though napalm and worse are very easy to make with items easily obtained at many grocery & convenience stores (and stores selling lawn & garden products for the really nasty stuff). Given his expertise he probably could've wired up something really deadly and set it off with his cellphone, and had guns not been so easy for him to get he might've took the time to realize that.

I do believe that in many cases most mass shooters would be severely hampered by strong gun control laws, but not in this case. (But I also believe that while armed citizens can--indeed, have--stop such people in their tracks, they probably wouldn't have in this case, though perhaps it might not have been as bad, but then it's possible it could've made it even worse as well.) The problem is that I'd see a general INCREASE in violence with strong gun bans because criminals and other violent people would become even more aggressive, and of course many criminals would still get their guns and they'd tend to be even deadlier than they are (and they'd be a lot bolder about using them, and if there are draconian legal penalties against their use they might be a lot less willing to be taken alive, which isn't just bad for the cops but bad for anyone who gets in the way of such a desperado). That is to say I'm pretty sure that there'd be a lot more tragedies, fear, and maybe even killings (gun and otherwise) with strong bans against guns than with the ease they're gotten now.

Still, this incident has upset me greatly and I know it has others as well. I went to the movies today and there were a lot fewer people than usual (I bet many worry about copycats who crave similar infamy that the media is all too willing to give them), one was making jokes that sounded like nervousness, and (though this may be irrelevant) I smelled cannabis as if someone just toked (which I haven't in a long time). This is a terrible tragedy and I don't blame people for grasping at straws. But I hope people can get to the root of this problem without the usual insistence in a mythical magical one-shot solution made of baseball, apple pie, and the bible with an Uncle Sam stamp on the front cover.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a "guns for everyone" type of person and have no problems with vetting people, mandatory safety courses, waiting periods, and the like (and if we're gonna have a surveillance state anyway then things like this need to be looked for, that is it should be used to protect the people, though I understand that's just not gonna happen, "safety" is the excuse but in reality that's meant for the corporate & political elites, not the little guys like us). But just going after guns (or video games, or "not enough God" and a host of other things) is going after a symptom and not a solution and likely to make the problem even worse instead of better. The Swiss seem to have very few of our problems despite sights like this (and less religion than the USA):



(Btw, quick note, the Swiss banned violent video games a couple of years ago, IIRC, but this pic was taken before then.)

The question I hope people ask is why do countries like the USA, UK, Russia, and Mexico (all but the USA having strict gun control, and the most violent parts of the USA tend to have the most gun control) have such problems but the Swiss do not?

[Genersis]

While i'm not against gun ownership; i can't help but wonder why the weapon used in this case(100 round drum magazine AR90, he was apparently carrying a shotgun and two handguns also, but i don't think they were used) should really be available to the general public.

I just can't think of many situations where you'd need to gun down 10+ people in quick succession to defend yourself.
And while criminals who still want such weapons could get such on the black market, i don't think "civilians need these guns to match criminals" is going to cut it; especially when an easier to wield handgun would be just as effective at taking a guy using such down with less collateral damage.

I really think removing access to such weapons will at least force criminals who don't know how to access illegal weapons(Which should be at least a fair amount, as most people in shootings aren't exactly career criminals) to obtain less lethal weapons.
Perhaps my thinking is just naive...