goemaw.com

General Discussion => Essentially Flyertalk => Topic started by: j-von on July 21, 2012, 01:13:20 AM

Title: Aurora Shooting
Post by: j-von on July 21, 2012, 01:13:20 AM
Lots of new info being dug up by Reddit if anyone is interested:

http://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/ww5e3/comprehensive_timeline_part_5_aurora_massacre/?sort=new

(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic01.mediaite.com%2Fmed%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F07%2FAFF.jpg&hash=970dd9c2e65a59c24211b3f6dc7e3427db603df8)

(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fassets.nydailynews.com%2Fpolopoly_fs%2F1.1119002%21%2Fimg%2FhttpImage%2Fimage.jpg_gen%2Fderivatives%2Flandscape_635%2Fholmes-red-hair.jpg&hash=7b36ce9550f11e6bebadbb7e9394e3d0c96652f5)

(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FDkcUJ.jpg&hash=305ddcb6026ae9de9c4aa1bc1cedd7092ba41b00)

(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FGCAOV.jpg&hash=005b68028adfddadf0c47c47a6ba9ac319ad6178)
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: OK_Cat on July 21, 2012, 09:29:50 AM
if being registered on a loser needing sex website is a sign of a serial killer than goEMAW is a breeding ground for death.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Kat Kid on July 21, 2012, 09:40:27 AM
pro tip: 2nd one is shooped.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 21, 2012, 11:26:35 AM
I don't think it's photoshopped, I think it's a poster he has up on his wall behind him... notice the shadows?   What kind of loser, at 24, has half naked women posters on his wall?  What is he, like 12?  Good luck bringing the babes back to your room dude.  Be sure and hide your action figures and the classic car models you've been working on.   
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Trim on July 21, 2012, 11:31:14 AM
How'd they capture the guy alive?  Did he surrender easily in the parking lot despite being all armed and armored up?
Title: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 21, 2012, 11:41:42 AM
I imagine he had this all planned out in his head as going out in a hail of gunfire, but at the last minute realized he's a spineless pussy.


Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.


Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: j-von on July 21, 2012, 12:11:56 PM
How'd they capture the guy alive?  Did he surrender easily in the parking lot despite being all armed and armored up?

As I understand it he may have tried to go out to the lobby or into another theater but someone held the door shut so he decided to go back out to his car.

I'm pretty sure he didn't want to die and just wanted the fame.  If you look at the top of his AFF profile, it says "Will you visit me in jail?"  Look closer and you'll see that he has a small dick.

Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Trim on July 21, 2012, 12:20:50 PM
That makes sense.  Still a little surprised that hundreds of cops in a mass hysteria situation dealing with a body-armored, armed dude who just shot up a theater, that not one panicked/fired-up cop shot him.  They wouldn't have got in troubs.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: j-von on July 21, 2012, 02:00:36 PM
That makes sense.  Still a little surprised that hundreds of cops in a mass hysteria situation dealing with a body-armored, armed dude who just shot up a theater, that not one panicked/fired-up cop shot him.  They wouldn't have got in troubs.

Ya, I haven't heard a clear description of how it went down.  I'm guessing eventually they'll release dash cam footage or security camera footage of it but who knows.  They said they aren't releasing the mugshot, but don't they have to if it's an adult?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Trim on July 21, 2012, 02:05:08 PM
They said they aren't releasing the mugshot, but don't they have to if it's an adult?

Released or not, I'm sure the creep who posted OregonHawk's mugshot will have it out within days.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: j-von on July 21, 2012, 02:09:26 PM
Quote
According to NYPD Commissioner Raymond Kelly, the mass killer declared that “he was the Joker, enemy of Batman” after the massacre ended.

Quote
“Let’s just say he hasn’t shown any remorse,” a jail employee told the Daily News. “He thinks he’s acting in a movie.”
A released inmate said Holmes’ behavior behind bars was increasingly irrational.

“He was spitting at the door and spitting at the guards,” the inmate told The News. “He's spitting at everything. Dude was acting crazy.”

Holmes, 24, was also placed on suicide watch in solitary confinement before eating a jailhouse breakfast of grits and sausage, according to a cafeteria worker.
Two other just-released inmates said the concerns of Arapahoe Detention Center officials over Holmes’ life were well-founded.

“All the inmates were talking about killing him,” Wayne Medley, 24, said as he left the facility. “Everyone was looking for an opportunity. It’s all they could talk about.”

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/aurora-shooting-suspect-james-holmes-jailed-solitary-inmates-talking-killing-article-1.1119173
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: star seed 7 on July 21, 2012, 02:55:35 PM
the moral code of criminals always fascinates me.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Stevesie60 on July 21, 2012, 05:30:03 PM
1. I don't know if the "looking for" part of his AFF profile is in order of preference, but the second one is "couples", so that's pretty disturbing. As if everything after it.

2. I found it funny that the AFF profile asks if you are circumcised or not.

3. What if he put a bomb inside another prisoner's stomach and is going to blow it up to escape prison?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: star seed 7 on July 21, 2012, 07:23:58 PM
why is couples disturbing?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Stevesie60 on July 21, 2012, 08:10:59 PM
why is couples disturbing?

You don't find doing it with another couple disturbing? Or are you joking?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: star seed 7 on July 21, 2012, 08:37:42 PM
why is couples disturbing?

You don't find doing it with another couple disturbing? Or are you joking?

it's not something i'd be into, but i certainly wouldn't call it disturbing.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Pexikan on July 21, 2012, 08:50:46 PM
And on that note this thread has taken an unusual turn in direction.
Title: Aurora Shooting
Post by: That_Guy on July 21, 2012, 11:23:56 PM
Didn't he come out and tell the cops "I'm the Joker." and that's why he dyed his hair orange.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: puniraptor on July 22, 2012, 12:12:27 AM
What a dingbat. The joker had green hair.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Cartierfor3 on July 22, 2012, 01:39:42 PM
why is couples disturbing?

You don't find doing it with another couple disturbing? Or are you joking?

It's disturbing Jakesie.  It is.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: SkinnyBenny on July 22, 2012, 02:18:27 PM
why is couples disturbing?

You don't find doing it with another couple disturbing? Or are you joking?

It's disturbing Jakesie.  It is.

What, so this guy should be blamed because he likes to party?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Cartierfor3 on July 22, 2012, 03:17:11 PM
why is couples disturbing?

You don't find doing it with another couple disturbing? Or are you joking?

It's disturbing Jakesie.  It is.

What, so this guy should be blamed because he likes to party?

No.  He should be blamed because he's a murderer.  The weird fetishes part is just weird. 


I'm concerned that some of you seem to think being a dude and hooking up with a couple is normal behavior. 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Trim on July 22, 2012, 03:21:09 PM
I'm concerned that some of you seem to think being a dude and hooking up with a couple is normal behavior. 

Nothing wrong with our female goEMAW'rs getting down with a couple?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Cartierfor3 on July 22, 2012, 03:31:22 PM
I'm concerned that some of you seem to think being a dude and hooking up with a couple is normal behavior. 

Nothing wrong with our female goEMAW'rs getting down with a couple?

If a chick was on AFF looking for a couple, then yes, I'd assume she's pretty messed up
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: j-dub on July 22, 2012, 03:42:04 PM
http://www.chicagonow.com/good-bad-parents/2012/07/colorado-shooting-reveals-the-nominee-for-worst-father-of-the-year/ (http://www.chicagonow.com/good-bad-parents/2012/07/colorado-shooting-reveals-the-nominee-for-worst-father-of-the-year/)

welp. this one, just.. i don't know man.. (ignore the first paragraph, we don't need to discuss that one any further.)

best part is that this fool proposed while she was at the hospital being treated for her shrapnel wound. she said yes.  :facepalm:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Cartierfor3 on July 22, 2012, 04:16:33 PM
http://www.chicagonow.com/good-bad-parents/2012/07/colorado-shooting-reveals-the-nominee-for-worst-father-of-the-year/ (http://www.chicagonow.com/good-bad-parents/2012/07/colorado-shooting-reveals-the-nominee-for-worst-father-of-the-year/)

welp. this one, just.. i don't know man.. (ignore the first paragraph, we don't need to discuss that one any further.)

best part is that this fool proposed while she was at the hospital being treated for her shrapnel wound. she said yes.  :facepalm:

that's awful
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: star seed 7 on July 22, 2012, 04:46:33 PM
No.  He should be blamed because he's a murderer.  The weird fetishes part is just weird. 


I'm concerned that some of you seem to think being a dude and hooking up with a couple is normal behavior.

not normal, and disturbing are 2 different things.

im concerned some of you think desire for a threesome is indicative of psychotic behavior.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Stevesie60 on July 22, 2012, 04:47:52 PM
No.  He should be blamed because he's a murderer.  The weird fetishes part is just weird. 


I'm concerned that some of you seem to think being a dude and hooking up with a couple is normal behavior.

not normal, and disturbing are 2 different things.

im concerned some of you think desire for a threesome is indicative of psychotic behavior.

There's a difference between a threesome and doing it with a couple. The main one is that you're signing up for another guy to be included.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Trim on July 22, 2012, 04:53:54 PM
No.  He should be blamed because he's a murderer.  The weird fetishes part is just weird. 


I'm concerned that some of you seem to think being a dude and hooking up with a couple is normal behavior.

not normal, and disturbing are 2 different things.

im concerned some of you think desire for a threesome is indicative of psychotic behavior.

There's a difference between a threesome and doing it with a couple. The main one is that you're signing up for another guy to be included.

Yes, it's pretty mumped up of this mass murderer who did his hair up like the Joker and shot up a movie theater to have maybe wanted to do a guy and a girl at the same time.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Stevesie60 on July 22, 2012, 04:57:29 PM
No.  He should be blamed because he's a murderer.  The weird fetishes part is just weird. 


I'm concerned that some of you seem to think being a dude and hooking up with a couple is normal behavior.

not normal, and disturbing are 2 different things.

im concerned some of you think desire for a threesome is indicative of psychotic behavior.

There's a difference between a threesome and doing it with a couple. The main one is that you're signing up for another guy to be included.

Yes, it's pretty mumped up of this mass murderer who did his hair up like the Joker and shot up a movie theater to have maybe wanted to do a guy and a girl at the same time.

And that the guy and girl would have been a couple, yes. Agreed. Finally, some weigh in from a poster we can all agree knows a lot about ethics.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: star seed 7 on July 22, 2012, 04:59:41 PM
i see, so what you really find "disturbing" is gay people.

got it.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: SkinnyBenny on July 22, 2012, 06:45:01 PM
What an awful thread.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Dugout DickStone on July 22, 2012, 06:46:26 PM
if being registered on a loser needing sex website is a sign of a serial killer than goEMAW is a breeding ground for death.

Opposite day?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: SwiftCat on July 22, 2012, 11:15:27 PM
weird thread.

way more  :opcat: than I was expecting.
Title: Aurora Shooting
Post by: SkinnyBenny on July 22, 2012, 11:47:44 PM
weird thread.

way more  :opcat: than I was expecting.

Yeah, it got real terrible real fast.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: ew2x4 on July 23, 2012, 10:47:41 AM
Guys, the joker has green hair. Not red. I think they have the wrong guy.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Dugout DickStone on July 23, 2012, 11:30:21 AM
So, if you are a survivor who didn't get injured, do you go back to see how the movie ends?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 8manpick on July 23, 2012, 11:32:26 AM
So, if you are a survivor who didn't get injured, do you go back to see how the movie ends?

Probably not at that theater, but yeah, you're obviously a big fan if you saw it at midnight
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Dugout DickStone on July 23, 2012, 11:33:36 AM
So, if you are a survivor who didn't get injured, do you go back to see how the movie ends?

Probably not at that theater, but yeah, you're obviously a big fan if you saw it at midnight

That theatre will be closed for awhile.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 8manpick on July 23, 2012, 11:54:31 AM
So, if you are a survivor who didn't get injured, do you go back to see how the movie ends?

Probably not at that theater, but yeah, you're obviously a big fan if you saw it at midnight

That theatre will be closed for awhile.

I think it is opening up again next week sometime
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: OK_Cat on July 23, 2012, 01:06:50 PM
i hope someone went to their hospital room and told them that batman died in the end, just to screw with them (might need to go to trim's "screw with people" thread?)
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: j-von on July 23, 2012, 01:23:22 PM
Looked pretty crazy in court but I still think the mentally ill plea has always been part of his plan.

(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fl3.yimg.com%2Fbt%2Fapi%2Fres%2F1.2%2FWFVPlUXwz3FqmhRMSxN23Q--%2FYXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NTt3PTYzMA--%2Fhttp%3A%2F%2Fmedia.zenfs.com%2Fen%2Fblogs%2Fthelookout%2Fjames-holmes-ap-court.jpg&hash=d349903cd9695c941d7da071a6d3804fd237b2e0)
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: ChiComCat on July 23, 2012, 01:27:38 PM
Looked pretty crazy in court but I still think the mentally ill plea has always been part of his plan.

(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fl3.yimg.com%2Fbt%2Fapi%2Fres%2F1.2%2FWFVPlUXwz3FqmhRMSxN23Q--%2FYXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NTt3PTYzMA--%2Fhttp%3A%2F%2Fmedia.zenfs.com%2Fen%2Fblogs%2Fthelookout%2Fjames-holmes-ap-court.jpg&hash=d349903cd9695c941d7da071a6d3804fd237b2e0)

I'd imagine it will be tough for an insanity plea with the 4 months of planning that went into it.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: pissclams on July 23, 2012, 01:32:27 PM
it's hard for me to imagine a sane person doing what he did.  i don't care if he went crazy 4 months ago, a sane person doesn't commit the acts that this guy did.  just an imo.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: The Tonya Harding of Twitter Users Creep on July 23, 2012, 01:33:59 PM
Looked pretty crazy in court but I still think the mentally ill plea has always been part of his plan.

(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fl3.yimg.com%2Fbt%2Fapi%2Fres%2F1.2%2FWFVPlUXwz3FqmhRMSxN23Q--%2FYXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NTt3PTYzMA--%2Fhttp%3A%2F%2Fmedia.zenfs.com%2Fen%2Fblogs%2Fthelookout%2Fjames-holmes-ap-court.jpg&hash=d349903cd9695c941d7da071a6d3804fd237b2e0)

Hope his insanity plea is just him saying "scarecrow" every 5 seconds
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: slobber on July 23, 2012, 01:35:12 PM
Looked pretty crazy in court but I still think the mentally ill plea has always been part of his plan.

(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fl3.yimg.com%2Fbt%2Fapi%2Fres%2F1.2%2FWFVPlUXwz3FqmhRMSxN23Q--%2FYXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NTt3PTYzMA--%2Fhttp%3A%2F%2Fmedia.zenfs.com%2Fen%2Fblogs%2Fthelookout%2Fjames-holmes-ap-court.jpg&hash=d349903cd9695c941d7da071a6d3804fd237b2e0)

Hope his insanity plea is just him saying "scarecrow" every 5 seconds
or pulling crazy handmade gadgets out of a giant box.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: kstate16 on July 23, 2012, 01:36:04 PM
I never really got the whole "insanity plea" thing.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 23, 2012, 01:41:58 PM
I never really got the whole "insanity plea" thing.
It's how you get out of crap by taking no responsibility, because your rough ridin' "crazy in the brain". Even if you aren't, they just send you to some psych ward, cause they say you are. This is how I get out of saying stupid crap all the time: "It's ok guys, it's fanning, you have to forgive him, he's a little slow". I'm actually not slow, but I'll play the card sometimes if I have too.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: slobber on July 23, 2012, 01:43:24 PM
ie. Like he totally knows where that comment is going to end up.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: kstate16 on July 23, 2012, 01:44:48 PM
I never really got the whole "insanity plea" thing.
It's how you get out of crap by taking no responsibility, because your rough ridin' "crazy in the brain". Even if you aren't, they just send you to some psych ward, cause they say you are. This is how I get out of saying stupid crap all the time: "It's ok guys, it's fanning, you have to forgive him, he's a little slow". I'm actually not slow, but I'll play the card sometimes if I have too.
The whole process of determining someone "mentally insane" is sketchy. 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: OK_Cat on July 23, 2012, 01:45:16 PM
2 things that don't exist, according to fanning:

1) mental illness

2) his bastard child
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 23, 2012, 01:48:51 PM
2 things that don't exist, according to fanning:

1) mental illness
2) his bastard child
I think mental illness is real, I also think a lot of people use that for their case cause they have nothing left. I have no clue what this fucktards situation is, but after his whole act, I think even he know's that's his best card to play. "I'm insane, I think I'm the joker, I think I'm Heath Ledger back from the dead". No he doesn't, but it will help his insanity plea.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: puniraptor on July 23, 2012, 01:51:51 PM
I guess I am most troubled that you can compare yourself to a mass murderer.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: OK_Cat on July 23, 2012, 01:53:12 PM
2 things that don't exist, according to fanning:

1) mental illness
2) his bastard child
I think mental illness is real, I also think a lot of people use that for their case cause they have nothing left. I have no clue what this fucktards situation is, but after his whole act, I think even he know's that's his best card to play. "I'm insane, I think I'm the joker, I think I'm Heath Ledger back from the dead". No he doesn't, but it will help his insanity plea.

everything this guy did adds up to mental illness.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: EllToPay on July 23, 2012, 01:56:20 PM
2 things that don't exist, according to fanning:

1) mental illness
2) his bastard child
I think mental illness is real, I also think a lot of people use that for their case cause they have nothing left. I have no clue what this fucktards situation is, but after his whole act, I think even he know's that's his best card to play. "I'm insane, I think I'm the joker, I think I'm Heath Ledger back from the dead". No he doesn't, but it will help his insanity plea.

everything this guy did adds up to mental illness.

are you a shrink or wedding photographer? which is it?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: kstate16 on July 23, 2012, 01:56:30 PM
2 things that don't exist, according to fanning:

1) mental illness
2) his bastard child
I think mental illness is real, I also think a lot of people use that for their case cause they have nothing left. I have no clue what this fucktards situation is, but after his whole act, I think even he know's that's his best card to play. "I'm insane, I think I'm the joker, I think I'm Heath Ledger back from the dead". No he doesn't, but it will help his insanity plea.

everything this guy did adds up to mental illness.
maybe that's what he exactly wants you to think?

idk, I believe there's a line between people just being really f'ed up (orange hair guy) and mentally insane.  you can claim anybody that does a mass murder 'insane', but I don't believe that's the case.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Trim on July 23, 2012, 01:58:43 PM
2 things that don't exist, according to fanning:

1) mental illness
2) his bastard child
I think mental illness is real, I also think a lot of people use that for their case cause they have nothing left. I have no clue what this fucktards situation is, but after his whole act, I think even he know's that's his best card to play. "I'm insane, I think I'm the joker, I think I'm Heath Ledger back from the dead". No he doesn't, but it will help his insanity plea.

Yes, he's a perfectly sane person who hatched a plot to kill dozens of strangers under the guise of a crazy batman fan.

On the other hand, he likes to get freaky with guy-girl couples. Throw him in Arkham.

Fanning, you can probably google how insanity defenses work in real life.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: The Tonya Harding of Twitter Users Creep on July 23, 2012, 02:02:20 PM
I guess I am most troubled that you can compare yourself to a mass murderer.

This is what makes Fanning so special.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: OK_Cat on July 23, 2012, 02:40:45 PM
2 things that don't exist, according to fanning:

1) mental illness
2) his bastard child
I think mental illness is real, I also think a lot of people use that for their case cause they have nothing left. I have no clue what this fucktards situation is, but after his whole act, I think even he know's that's his best card to play. "I'm insane, I think I'm the joker, I think I'm Heath Ledger back from the dead". No he doesn't, but it will help his insanity plea.

everything this guy did adds up to mental illness.
maybe that's what he exactly wants you to think?

idk, I believe there's a line between people just being really f'ed up (orange hair guy) and mentally insane.  you can claim anybody that does a mass murder 'insane', but I don't believe that's the case.

yeah, perfectly sane for someone to plot a mass murder and think of themselves as a batman villain.  perfectly sane.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 23, 2012, 03:15:40 PM
Fwiw I think that the guy's bat crap crazy. I just get sick of all the insanity pleas. They're not all crazy (murderers). Some are just evil pieces of crap.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: mocat on July 23, 2012, 03:19:00 PM
Fwiw I think that the guy's bat crap crazy. I just get sick of all the insanity pleas. They're not all crazy (murderers). Some are just evil pieces of crap.

Very poor choice of words!

(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcontent8.flixster.com%2Fquestion%2F54%2F82%2F86%2F5482862_std.jpg&hash=8c88035bf4a59461c41bb5ac427ae2d719aacd8c)
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: pissclams on July 23, 2012, 03:22:34 PM
i think fanning watched the episode of Matlock where the killer pleaded insanity and so they dropped him off at a mental hospital/country club where he drank mimosas every day and played lots of golf in his spare time while grinding through his 2 week sentence.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: slobber on July 23, 2012, 03:25:36 PM
i think fanning watched the episode of Matlock where the killer pleaded insanity and so they dropped him off at a mental hospital/country club where he drank mimosas every day and played lots of golf in his spare time while grinding through his 2 week sentence.
Best. Matlock. Ever.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 23, 2012, 03:27:40 PM
i think fanning watched the episode of Matlock where the killer pleaded insanity and so they dropped him off at a mental hospital/country club where he drank mimosas every day and played lots of golf in his spare time while grinding through his 2 week sentence.
:thumbs: Se7en and Shutter Island also helped me in my studies.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: ChiComCat on July 23, 2012, 04:15:23 PM
2 things that don't exist, according to fanning:

1) mental illness
2) his bastard child
I think mental illness is real, I also think a lot of people use that for their case cause they have nothing left. I have no clue what this fucktards situation is, but after his whole act, I think even he know's that's his best card to play. "I'm insane, I think I'm the joker, I think I'm Heath Ledger back from the dead". No he doesn't, but it will help his insanity plea.

everything this guy did adds up to mental illness.
maybe that's what he exactly wants you to think?

idk, I believe there's a line between people just being really f'ed up (orange hair guy) and mentally insane.  you can claim anybody that does a mass murder 'insane', but I don't believe that's the case.

yeah, perfectly sane for someone to plot a mass murder and think of themselves as a batman villain.  perfectly sane.

Theres a big difference between calling yourself "The Joker" and actually thinking that you are "The Joker".  I have yet to make up mind on which side of that fence I think this guy falls.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Stevesie60 on July 23, 2012, 05:03:35 PM
I read somewhere that the insanity plea ends up being a worse sentence than if you say you're sane. At least, usually you end up in a psych ward for way longer than you would be in prison, but since this guy would probably be in prison for life, who knows?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 23, 2012, 05:14:51 PM
Insane or sane, he should be dead either way.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 23, 2012, 05:23:23 PM
Also, if I dress up as Batman and kill this guy in jail, am I insane?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: star seed 7 on July 23, 2012, 05:38:24 PM
Also, if I dress up as Batman and kill this guy in jail, am I insane?

batman doesn't kill people fanning.

jesus.
Title: Aurora Shooting
Post by: puniraptor on July 23, 2012, 05:39:32 PM
 Uncommon to get these fucks alive. He needs to be studied exhaustively and invasively to figure out how it came to this.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 23, 2012, 06:40:37 PM
Doesn't matter if he's sane or insane.  He killed 12 people and attempted to kill several others.  Let the rough rider loose in general population federal prison and put it on reality TV.  You'll see real damn quick if he's capable of logical thought while he's trying to escape a horrible and painful death.  Anyone that goes through that will never be rehabilitated, and putting it on Live TV will either have some preventative measures in creating more people like him, or you'll get some clue as to who is capable of behavior like his during the monday morning water cooler talks.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: The Tonya Harding of Twitter Users Creep on July 23, 2012, 08:12:31 PM
Also, if I dress up as Batman and kill this guy in jail, am I insane?

batman doesn't kill people fanning.

jesus.

 :lol:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Trim on July 23, 2012, 08:14:49 PM
Also, if I dress up as Batman and kill this guy in jail, am I insane?

No, you're slow.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: hemmy on July 23, 2012, 08:29:32 PM
He basically copied Mickey from Scream 2.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: hemmy on July 23, 2012, 08:50:23 PM
He basically copied Mickey from Scream 2.

First two people Mickey killed were in a movie theater. Uncanny.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: jmlynch1 on July 23, 2012, 11:48:57 PM
Why does Batman use the Batman voice when talking to Fox? Now THAT'S insane.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: j-dub on July 24, 2012, 12:11:51 AM
It sort of reminds me of Ed Norton in Primal Fear. Evil bastard who acts like a simpleton with a split personality and gets off scot free..

I'm not all that well versed in what is/isn't legally considered insanity. But does the fact that he was quite lucid come into play?

The well orchestrated and meticulous planning, the immediate retaining of legal counsel, the incredibly calm demeanor immediately after destroying a dozen human lives.. All of that is more unnerving to me than if he had been slobbering and shitting himself while waving around a gun. All of the mentally ill people that I've known, haven't exactly been aware of it. This guy seemed to know exactly what he was doing. I think people are sometimes capable of shutting off their humanity and performing heinous acts that I can only describe as evil.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Cire on July 24, 2012, 12:17:24 AM
need dax to weigh in...
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Trim on July 24, 2012, 07:04:39 AM
It sort of reminds me of Ed Norton in Primal Fear. Evil bastard who acts like a simpleton with a split personality and gets off scot free..

That was a movie.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: pissclams on July 24, 2012, 08:35:33 AM
It sort of reminds me of Ed Norton in Primal Fear. Evil bastard who acts like a simpleton with a split personality and gets off scot free..

That was a movie.

kudos to his attorney if he does manage to get this guy off scot free
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: ChiComCat on July 24, 2012, 08:36:23 AM
It sort of reminds me of Ed Norton in Primal Fear. Evil bastard who acts like a simpleton with a split personality and gets off scot free..

That was a movie.

Movies/Television shows give the viewer a meticulously accurate look into the judicial and criminal systems
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Stevesie60 on July 24, 2012, 09:06:11 AM
Also, if I dress up as Batman and kill this guy in jail, am I insane?

batman doesn't kill people fanning.

jesus.

 :lol:

Pretty disgusting that you laugh at the idea of someone not killing people. I'm sure if he was in your cult he'd kill people for you, IWKHYCCMC.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: OK_Cat on July 24, 2012, 09:46:40 AM
It sort of reminds me of Ed Norton in Primal Fear. Evil bastard who acts like a simpleton with a split personality and gets off scot free..

I'm not all that well versed in what is/isn't legally considered insanity. But does the fact that he was quite lucid come into play?

The well orchestrated and meticulous planning, the immediate retaining of legal counsel, the incredibly calm demeanor immediately after destroying a dozen human lives.. All of that is more unnerving to me than if he had been slobbering and shitting himself while waving around a gun. All of the mentally ill people that I've known, haven't exactly been aware of it. This guy seemed to know exactly what he was doing. I think people are sometimes capable of shutting off their humanity and performing heinous acts that I can only describe as evil.

i don't think planning shows a level of sanity.  from everything that's come out so far, the guy was living in a different reality.  he may very well have a mental illness that makes him believe that it is all fantasy.  not all mental illnesses make a person drool on themselves.

Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: sonofdaxjones on July 24, 2012, 09:48:37 AM
Why do I need to weigh in?

Dude is crazy, but what made him crazy?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 24, 2012, 09:51:54 AM
It sort of reminds me of Ed Norton in Primal Fear. Evil bastard who acts like a simpleton with a split personality and gets off scot free..

I'm not all that well versed in what is/isn't legally considered insanity. But does the fact that he was quite lucid come into play?

The well orchestrated and meticulous planning, the immediate retaining of legal counsel, the incredibly calm demeanor immediately after destroying a dozen human lives.. All of that is more unnerving to me than if he had been slobbering and shitting himself while waving around a gun. All of the mentally ill people that I've known, haven't exactly been aware of it. This guy seemed to know exactly what he was doing. I think people are sometimes capable of shutting off their humanity and performing heinous acts that I can only describe as evil.

i don't think planning shows a level of sanity.  from everything that's come out so far, the guy was living in a different reality.  he may very well have a mental illness that makes him believe that it is all fantasy.  not all mental illnesses make a person drool on themselves.
Does it shock anyone that OKC is really pushing for this guy to get off with insanity? No, I mean OKC loves death, so he's practially bff's with this guy. Sickening.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Trim on July 24, 2012, 09:54:24 AM
It sort of reminds me of Ed Norton in Primal Fear. Evil bastard who acts like a simpleton with a split personality and gets off scot free..

That was a movie.

Movies/Television shows give the viewer a meticulously accurate look into the judicial and criminal systems

Double Jeopardy nailed it.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: OK_Cat on July 24, 2012, 09:59:59 AM
It sort of reminds me of Ed Norton in Primal Fear. Evil bastard who acts like a simpleton with a split personality and gets off scot free..

I'm not all that well versed in what is/isn't legally considered insanity. But does the fact that he was quite lucid come into play?

The well orchestrated and meticulous planning, the immediate retaining of legal counsel, the incredibly calm demeanor immediately after destroying a dozen human lives.. All of that is more unnerving to me than if he had been slobbering and shitting himself while waving around a gun. All of the mentally ill people that I've known, haven't exactly been aware of it. This guy seemed to know exactly what he was doing. I think people are sometimes capable of shutting off their humanity and performing heinous acts that I can only describe as evil.

i don't think planning shows a level of sanity.  from everything that's come out so far, the guy was living in a different reality.  he may very well have a mental illness that makes him believe that it is all fantasy.  not all mental illnesses make a person drool on themselves.
Does it shock anyone that OKC is really pushing for this guy to get off with insanity? No, I mean OKC loves death, so he's practially bff's with this guy. Sickening.

your bastard son will be shooting up a movie theater in 15 years because his daddy abandoned him.  at least send a birthday card, fanning.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: CNS on July 24, 2012, 10:11:12 AM
Don't put any money in that card though.  Refuse to finance the arming of the little guy.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: OK_Cat on July 24, 2012, 10:30:53 AM
Don't put any money in that card though.  Refuse to finance the arming of the little guy.

i doubt little fanning is holding his breath
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: slobber on July 24, 2012, 10:36:28 AM
Yeah, fanning is not really raking in it and based upon the "my boss is trying to catch me loafing" thread and the fact that he is watching a The Hills marathon today (middle of the week), I am kind of thinking that whatever income fanning had may have dried up?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: SkinnyBenny on July 24, 2012, 01:01:11 PM
your bastard son will be shooting up a movie theater in 15 years because his daddy abandoned him.  at least send a birthday card, fanning.

Don't put any money in that card though.  Refuse to finance the arming of the little guy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkcbxjWG9Mc&t=1m20s
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: CNS on July 24, 2012, 01:07:19 PM
your bastard son will be shooting up a movie theater in 15 years because his daddy abandoned him.  at least send a birthday card, fanning.

Don't put any money in that card though.  Refuse to finance the arming of the little guy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkcbxjWG9Mc&t=1m20s

Yeah, that's what I was thinking of too.  I mean, there is an active decision to be made here.  Either the kid becomes a soulless murderer or he becomes an ex-heroin addicted rich alternative band leader. 

Tread lightly, Fanning.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 24, 2012, 01:41:50 PM
If my bastard son makes a bunch of money writing/singing a hate song about me, he owes me 50% of his earnings.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: CNS on July 24, 2012, 02:08:17 PM
If my bastard son makes a bunch of money writing/singing a hate song about me, he owes me 50% of his earnings.

Fanning, I agree.  However, let's face it, many a muse have gone unpaid.

Inspiration often goes unrewarded. 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: SkinnyBenny on July 24, 2012, 02:22:42 PM
Sounds like some of you need to read Everclear's wikipedia page.

Quote
On January 4, 2005, Alexakis filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in United States Bankruptcy Court, Central District of California. According to the filing, Alexakis owed a federal tax bill for the years 1999, 2001 and 2002 of $2.75 million, as well as nearly $230,000 to the Oregon Department of Revenue and more than $120,000 in credit card debt spread over several accounts. As a result of the bankruptcy, he sold all his rights to the previous Everclear catalogue in order to pay some off.


At least fanning will be there to help his son pay off those bills.

:users:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: CNS on July 24, 2012, 02:32:08 PM
Oh man, he sold his rights.  That is mumped up.

Fanning, be sure to include some info on how to budget in that birthday card.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Trim on July 24, 2012, 02:50:49 PM
Everclear*, Sugar Ray, Gin Blossoms, Marcy Playground, etc. are playing Hartman in Wichita in a couple weeks I think.

*Art and some other dudes that he's calling Everclear.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: "storm"nut on July 25, 2012, 11:21:44 AM
Well looks like the University of Colorado is going to get sued off the face of the earth now:

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/07/25/exclusive-movie-massacre-suspect-laid-out-plans-in-package-mailed-to/ (http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/07/25/exclusive-movie-massacre-suspect-laid-out-plans-in-package-mailed-to/)
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 25, 2012, 11:29:53 AM
He's so smart. He's really playing up this whole insanity thing. He probably laughs it off at night when the camera's aren't around.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: mocat on July 25, 2012, 11:31:42 AM
Well looks like the University of Colorado is going to get sued off the face of the earth now:

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/07/25/exclusive-movie-massacre-suspect-laid-out-plans-in-package-mailed-to/ (http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/07/25/exclusive-movie-massacre-suspect-laid-out-plans-in-package-mailed-to/)

holy crap
Title: Aurora Shooting
Post by: That_Guy on July 25, 2012, 11:37:59 AM
I think he is playing the insanity thing because he did get a degree in neurology, which I think that would help him out and know what to do to to make his insanity be more believable
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: puniraptor on July 25, 2012, 11:40:03 AM
maybe he was doing nutty brain experiments on himself trying to acheive the next level or something and mumped his brain up
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Poster formerly known as jthutch on July 25, 2012, 12:51:13 PM
maybe he was doing nutty brain experiments on himself trying to acheive the next level or something and mumped his brain up
To the Steve DAve Conspiracy thread!  :runaway:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: dmartin on July 25, 2012, 01:37:42 PM
Well looks like the University of Colorado is going to get sued off the face of the earth now:

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/07/25/exclusive-movie-massacre-suspect-laid-out-plans-in-package-mailed-to/ (http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/07/25/exclusive-movie-massacre-suspect-laid-out-plans-in-package-mailed-to/)

probably not since it was unopened.  Now if they had opened it, and had any idea this was coming...........
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: shivvyman on July 25, 2012, 04:07:57 PM
This instance is yet another point in favor of allowing citizens to carry firearms anywhere they please.

As Chuck Michel says: "If 5% of the ducks could shoot back, you're not going to go duck hunting."

 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Dugout DickStone on July 25, 2012, 04:12:57 PM
This instance is yet another point in favor of allowing citizens to carry firearms anywhere they please.

As Chuck Michel says: "If 5% of the ducks could shoot back, you're not going to go duck hunting."

The hell I'm not.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Emo EMAW on July 25, 2012, 04:13:40 PM
This instance is yet another point in favor of allowing citizens to carry firearms anywhere they please.

As Chuck Michel says: "If 5% of the ducks could shoot back, you're not going to go duck hunting."

While I agree with the idea that we should be able to carry in more places, this guy was a lunatic and he was going to do that regardless.  A private citizen might have mitigated some of it, but it still would have happened. 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: puniraptor on July 25, 2012, 04:17:04 PM
This instance is yet another point in favor of allowing citizens to carry firearms anywhere they please.

As Chuck Michel says: "If 5% of the ducks could shoot back, you're not going to go duck hunting."

While I agree with the idea that we should be able to carry in more places, this guy was a lunatic and he was going to do that regardless.  A private citizen might have mitigated some of it, but it still would have happened.

Exactly, this dude was planning on getting shot at. He was armored to the point where any carry gun a person would be likely to have would be ineffective. Of course, he may have pissed himself and ran the instant someone started shooting back.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: The Tonya Harding of Twitter Users Creep on July 25, 2012, 04:23:17 PM
This instance is yet another point in favor of allowing citizens to carry firearms anywhere they please.

As Chuck Michel says: "If 5% of the ducks could shoot back, you're not going to go duck hunting."

Did he say anything about how a duck is almost 5 times more likely to be shot at if it can also shoot back?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Trim on July 25, 2012, 04:26:06 PM
I shook down ever potential loon I saw at last night's late night batman showing.  Turned out most of them were just fat social weirdos.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: CNS on July 25, 2012, 04:28:32 PM
LOL at the thought of half the people I know who own a gun being able to hit the guy half a theater away through smoke, fear, chaos, and panic.

The only thing that would have helped is if a cop, FBI, etc type was in the audience and packing. 

Your neighbor who deer hunts would have been killed as soon as he peeled off and missed 3 rounds in rapid succession and drew the lunatic's attention.

We don't need more retards carrying guns to the movies.  Most of them can't work their cellphone in the dark.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: OK_Cat on July 25, 2012, 04:30:23 PM
This instance is yet another point in favor of allowing citizens to carry firearms anywhere they please.

As Chuck Michel says: "If 5% of the ducks could shoot back, you're not going to go duck hunting."

hey dumbfuck, so you think that some untrained chode would pull out his gun and successfully stop the shooter when there are hundreds of people running around in chaos, smoke in the air, and his/her adrenaline pumping?  chances are way more likely that the dumbass hick would have shot someone who was running for their life.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: OK_Cat on July 25, 2012, 04:30:51 PM
eff you cns casey, i thought it first.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Mr Bread on July 25, 2012, 04:37:57 PM
This instance is yet another point in favor of allowing citizens to carry firearms anywhere they please.

As Chuck Michel says: "If 5% of the ducks could shoot back, you're not going to go duck hunting."

The hell I'm not.

eff yeah.  Most dangerous game and crap.  "[T]here is no hunting like the hunting of man and those who have hunted armed men long enough and liked it, never really care for anything else thereafter." - Hemingway; also Adrien Brody's character in Predators said it. 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: DQ12 on July 25, 2012, 04:40:33 PM
The thought of the type of people who probably have C&C licenses trying to be heroes and engage in a firefight is probably more terrifying than any alternative.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: CNS on July 25, 2012, 04:42:23 PM
eff you cns casey, i thought it first.

Yeah, right after you got in your time machine and went back 2 whole entire min.  :gocho:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: shivvyman on July 25, 2012, 04:49:03 PM
What a bunch of pathetic pussies on this board.

1) If more people are carrying, then yes, I do believe the chances of this kid walking into the movies and blowing people away are reduced. Obviously, he didn't turn the gun on himself afterwards. He still wanted to live. He didn't go into the theatre with the intent of being harmed or dying.

2) True, I don't think most people would be able to effectively combat the shooter if they were carrying. However, I do feel they could effectively reduce the total loss of life. If I start popping off shots from the side and he sees me, his firepower gets aimed in my direction. Sure, I may go down, but I buy everyone a little more time to escape/evade to safety.

What are the risks? Your hero with a CC permit does take out a crowd member. It could happen, but to this date, there has yet to be a reported shooting incident where an innocent bystandard was killed by a CC holder using his weapon.

Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Mr Bread on July 25, 2012, 04:50:48 PM
eff you cns casey, i thought it first.

Yeah, right after you got in your time machine and went back 2 whole entire min.  :gocho:

Take a gander at this and see if you still feel the same: http://www.gainesville.com/article/20120716/ARTICLES/120719707 (http://www.gainesville.com/article/20120716/ARTICLES/120719707).  Make sure you watch the video.

Game, set, old guy with a gun. 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: j-dub on July 25, 2012, 04:51:31 PM
This instance is yet another point in favor of allowing citizens to carry firearms anywhere they please.

As Chuck Michel says: "If 5% of the ducks could shoot back, you're not going to go duck hunting."

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/07/24/background-checks-for-guns-in-colorado-reportedly-jump-41-percent-since-movie/ (http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/07/24/background-checks-for-guns-in-colorado-reportedly-jump-41-percent-since-movie/)

unfortunately, people are following your advice. yeah, this is what we need, untrained jittery civilians carrying guns everywhere.

I think he is playing the insanity thing because he did get a degree in neurology, which I think that would help him out and know what to do to to make his insanity be more believable

from an article about the unopened notebook he sent to the professor/pschiatrist

Quote
Both sources said the intended recipient of Holmes’ notebook was a professor who also treated patients at the psychiatry outpatient facility, located in Building 500, where the first suspicious package was delivered. It could not be verified that the psychiatrist had had previous contact with Holmes, who was a dropout from the school’s neuroscience doctoral program and had studied various mental health issues and ailments as part of his curriculum.

Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Brock Landers on July 25, 2012, 04:52:59 PM
This instance is yet another point in favor of allowing citizens to carry firearms anywhere they please.

As Chuck Michel says: "If 5% of the ducks could shoot back, you're not going to go duck hunting."


Armed human vs. armed duck?  Pffft, still not even a challenge.  Please post this in the What Animals Do You Think You Could Take in a Fight Thread.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: star seed 7 on July 25, 2012, 04:55:03 PM
We don't need more retards carrying guns to the movies.  Most of them can't work their cellphone in the dark.

Or keep their babies quiet.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: OK_Cat on July 25, 2012, 04:55:34 PM
What a bunch of pathetic pussies on this board.

1) If more people are carrying, then yes, I do believe the chances of this kid walking into the movies and blowing people away are reduced. Obviously, he didn't turn the gun on himself afterwards. He still wanted to live. He didn't go into the theatre with the intent of being harmed or dying.

2) True, I don't think most people would be able to effectively combat the shooter if they were carrying. However, I do feel they could effectively reduce the total loss of life. If I start popping off shots from the side and he sees me, his firepower gets aimed in my direction. Sure, I may go down, but I buy everyone a little more time to escape/evade to safety.

What are the risks? Your hero with a CC permit does take out a crowd member. It could happen, but to this date, there has yet to be a reported shooting incident where an innocent bystandard was killed by a CC holder using his weapon.

i'm sure the guy with bulletproof clothing covering 100% of his body would care about some hick with a pistol who probably wouldn't even hit him.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: j-dub on July 25, 2012, 04:55:53 PM
eff you cns casey, i thought it first.

Yeah, right after you got in your time machine and went back 2 whole entire min.  :gocho:

Take a gander at this and see if you still feel the same: http://www.gainesville.com/article/20120716/ARTICLES/120719707 (http://www.gainesville.com/article/20120716/ARTICLES/120719707).  Make sure you watch the video.

Game, set, old guy with a gun.

ill grant ya. that was pretty badass
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Mr Bread on July 25, 2012, 04:57:52 PM
We don't need more retards carrying guns to the movies.  Most of them can't work their cellphone in the dark.

Or keep their babies quiet.

Arm the babies?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Saulbadguy on July 25, 2012, 04:58:57 PM
Seems like most idiots I know also happen to be "gun nuts"
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: star seed 7 on July 25, 2012, 05:01:53 PM
What if gang members had blown their whistles and got the guy with their sideways aim, would gun nuts be cool with that?  You know, more guns protecting us and all.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Lemonrock on July 25, 2012, 05:02:50 PM
LOL at the thought of half the people I know who own a gun being able to hit the guy half a theater away through smoke, fear, chaos, and panic.

The only thing that would have helped is if a cop, FBI, etc type was in the audience and packing. 

Your neighbor who deer hunts would have been killed as soon as he peeled off and missed 3 rounds in rapid succession and drew the lunatic's attention.

We don't need more retards carrying guns to the movies.  Most of them can't work their cellphone in the dark.
Yes only a cop, FBI type could have saved lives and not taken an innocent by accident just ask the Tillman family. They are all snipers with sidearms.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Dugout DickStone on July 25, 2012, 05:03:43 PM
2 tickets to Dark Knight please.  1 for me and 1 for the Judge.  And I'd say "all rise!"
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: nicname on July 25, 2012, 05:03:53 PM
Prob not crazy.  Prob a sociopath, or some other Type B personality disorder.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: DQ12 on July 25, 2012, 05:05:00 PM
This is why people should be allowed to carry RPGs into movie theaters.  Orange hair would've thought twice about his little stunt if he knew he was walking into a theater full of grenade wielding citizens prepared to defend themselves.  Would you go hunting if the birds had RPGs and were capable of aiming and firing them?  No, you wouldn't. 

Dumbass.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: shivvyman on July 25, 2012, 05:06:41 PM
LOL at the thought of half the people I know who own a gun being able to hit the guy half a theater away through smoke, fear, chaos, and panic.

The only thing that would have helped is if a cop, FBI, etc type was in the audience and packing. 

Your neighbor who deer hunts would have been killed as soon as he peeled off and missed 3 rounds in rapid succession and drew the lunatic's attention.

We don't need more retards carrying guns to the movies.  Most of them can't work their cellphone in the dark.
Yes only a cop, FBI type could have saved lives and not taken an innocent by accident just ask the Tillman family. They are all snipers with sidearms.

What a terrible comparison. Kill yourself.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: shivvyman on July 25, 2012, 05:09:35 PM
This is why people should be allowed to carry RPGs into movie theaters.  Orange hair would've thought twice about his little stunt if he knew he was walking into a theater full of grenade wielding citizens prepared to defend themselves.  Would you go hunting if the birds had RPGs and were capable of aiming and firing them?  No, you wouldn't. 

Dumbass.

Hyperbole.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: j-dub on July 25, 2012, 05:11:45 PM
it's threads like these where you really find out about people
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Lemonrock on July 25, 2012, 05:11:50 PM
LOL at the thought of half the people I know who own a gun being able to hit the guy half a theater away through smoke, fear, chaos, and panic.

The only thing that would have helped is if a cop, FBI, etc type was in the audience and packing. 

Your neighbor who deer hunts would have been killed as soon as he peeled off and missed 3 rounds in rapid succession and drew the lunatic's attention.

We don't need more retards carrying guns to the movies.  Most of them can't work their cellphone in the dark.
Yes only a cop, FBI type could have saved lives and not taken an innocent by accident just ask the Tillman family. They are all snipers with sidearms.

What a terrible comparison. Kill yourself.
nice one
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: DQ12 on July 25, 2012, 05:12:21 PM
This is why people should be allowed to carry RPGs into movie theaters.  Orange hair would've thought twice about his little stunt if he knew he was walking into a theater full of grenade wielding citizens prepared to defend themselves.  Would you go hunting if the birds had RPGs and were capable of aiming and firing them?  No, you wouldn't. 

Dumbass.

Hyperbole.
Libtard.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: CNS on July 25, 2012, 05:13:42 PM
Look, I am just saying that I don't want some armed redneck sitting next to me who's only gun training is a childhood of A-Team and a little time in the back field where half the instruction starts with "Hold my beer and watch this..." and ends with "eff yeah(high fives)".
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: The Tonya Harding of Twitter Users Creep on July 25, 2012, 05:13:52 PM
Wow. This escaladed quickly...

Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: CNS on July 25, 2012, 05:14:54 PM
Full disclosure: I own guns.  I have used them all my life.  And, I don't feel like I would be qualified to safely take the guy out given the circumstances without possibly harming others.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Lemonrock on July 25, 2012, 05:17:04 PM
would you pull?
or run?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: The Tonya Harding of Twitter Users Creep on July 25, 2012, 05:20:10 PM
rough ridin' run
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: CNS on July 25, 2012, 05:21:56 PM
would you pull?
or run?

Look, if you are looking to measure dicks, I bet there are other boards for that.

Reality in sitch's like this is that no change in gun policy is best.  Stupid stuff happens and no matter how well you plan, you can't control stupid or insanity.  So, when this happens, you feel bad, hope it doesn't happen to you, and move on.  You don't lobby to legislate against insanity.  Statistical outliers will always exist.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Emo EMAW on July 25, 2012, 05:26:08 PM
Count me as a self aware gun nut.  If any of you have fired a CCW weapon you'd know it's pretty effing hard to hit a moving head sized target in the dark at much more than 5 or 10 feet away, especially when he's shooting back with a high powered semi-automatic rifle. 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: shivvyman on July 25, 2012, 05:27:38 PM
would you pull?
or run?

Look, if you are looking to measure dicks, I bet there are other boards for that.

Reality in sitch's like this is that no change in gun policy is best.  Stupid stuff happens and no matter how well you plan, you can't control stupid or insanity.  So, when this happens, you feel bad, hope it doesn't happen to you, and move on.   You don't lobby to legislate against insanity.  Statistical outliers will always exist.

Sweet outlook.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Lemonrock on July 25, 2012, 05:30:27 PM
Nice evasion, I take from your comments that everyone should be able to arm without regulation. B/c you can't regulate against insanity, then you must let the sane choose whether they arm or not.

I do feel bad, this bad person had bigger plans with bringing down a building with innocent people as well to distract authorities as he got away. The violence displayed in this act should dealt with the most harsh penalties and I believe there should be more than just the shooter punished. Someone else knew he was at the very least capable of this, if not then what the eff is the agency known as Homeland Security cashing checks for?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: CNS on July 25, 2012, 05:30:54 PM
would you pull?
or run?

Look, if you are looking to measure dicks, I bet there are other boards for that.

Reality in sitch's like this is that no change in gun policy is best.  Stupid stuff happens and no matter how well you plan, you can't control stupid or insanity.  So, when this happens, you feel bad, hope it doesn't happen to you, and move on.   You don't lobby to legislate against insanity.  Statistical outliers will always exist.

Sweet outlook.

It's the only rational one to have.  I mean, either that or we give everyone a gun, take guns away from everyone, or we could stage large metal detectors, xray machines, and pat down areas at all public places. 


Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: AppleJack on July 25, 2012, 05:35:10 PM
I think a good gift for the President would be a chocolate revolver. And since he's so busy, you'd probably have to run up to him real quick and hand it to him.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Stevesie60 on July 25, 2012, 05:39:19 PM
rough ridin' run

Interesting, I figured you'd be the one starting it.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: CNS on July 25, 2012, 05:39:52 PM
Nice evasion, I take from your comments that everyone should be able to arm without regulation. B/c you can't regulate against insanity, then you must let the sane choose whether they arm or not.

I do feel bad, this bad person had bigger plans with bringing down a building with innocent people as well to distract authorities as he got away. The violence displayed in this act should dealt with the most harsh penalties and I believe there should be more than just the shooter punished. Someone else knew he was at the very least capable of this, if not then what the eff is the agency known as Homeland Security cashing checks for?

You don't seem to be the best at reading.  Current policy is to not let the known insane arm.  Current policy is to not let everyone arm. I am saying that you shouldn't take it away and that it shouldn't be more open.  Reasonable control is what is best.  Reason is what is missing from people who want it all or nothing in either direction. 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Dugout DickStone on July 25, 2012, 05:45:06 PM
I am in Colorado and I don't see too many people I'd want packing heat everywhere they went.

I assume there are states where there are CC laws and we can look at stats that these people are probably not popping off shots all over town so I am not really opposed to them but to think they'd really lessen the death toll when someone like Jerry the Joker from losing his crap is not reality.

I think permits to carry should take a lot of effort to get and be really expensive though.  Rich people are just more responsible.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: shivvyman on July 25, 2012, 05:52:14 PM
I am in Colorado and I don't see too many people I'd want packing heat everywhere they went.

I assume there are states where there are CC laws and we can look at stats that these people are probably not popping off shots all over town so I am not really opposed to them but to think they'd really lessen the death toll when someone like Jerry the Joker from losing his crap is not reality.

I think permits to carry should take a lot of effort to get and be really expensive though.  Rich people are just more responsible.

Colorado allows CC permits, the problem is the movie theatre was designated as a gun-free zone. Those places where firearms are permissible/non-permissible needs to be vetted more thoroughly.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Dugout DickStone on July 25, 2012, 05:53:33 PM
I am in Colorado and I don't see too many people I'd want packing heat everywhere they went.

I assume there are states where there are CC laws and we can look at stats that these people are probably not popping off shots all over town so I am not really opposed to them but to think they'd really lessen the death toll when someone like Jerry the Joker from losing his crap is not reality.

I think permits to carry should take a lot of effort to get and be really expensive though.  Rich people are just more responsible.

Colorado allows CC permits, the problem is the movie theatre was designated as a gun-free zone. Those places where firearms are permissible/non-permissible needs to be vetted more thoroughly.

Seems like every private business has the right to have that policy. 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Lemonrock on July 25, 2012, 05:57:38 PM
Nice evasion, I take from your comments that everyone should be able to arm without regulation. B/c you can't regulate against insanity, then you must let the sane choose whether they arm or not.

I do feel bad, this bad person had bigger plans with bringing down a building with innocent people as well to distract authorities as he got away. The violence displayed in this act should dealt with the most harsh penalties and I believe there should be more than just the shooter punished. Someone else knew he was at the very least capable of this, if not then what the eff is the agency known as Homeland Security cashing checks for?

You don't seem to be the best at reading.  Current policy is to not let the known insane arm.  Current policy is to not let everyone arm. I am saying that you shouldn't take it away and that it shouldn't be more open.  Reasonable control is what is best.  Reason is what is missing from people who want it all or nothing in either direction.
You can keep talking in circles and hopefully bad people don't do bad things to you. Here is your problem you wouldn't use your gun if you had it on you, to protect INNOCENT lives. But you will shoot the crap out of Bambi for fun and 12 turkeys just to have your mom buy from the store on Thanksgiving. Maybe you hit someone fleeing, but you hit the assailant hopefully stunning him, at the ver least confusing him. Maybe he leaves, maybe he aims at you at not the 10 or however many people are closer than you. You grew up with guns but still don't understand them.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: shivvyman on July 25, 2012, 06:03:41 PM
I am in Colorado and I don't see too many people I'd want packing heat everywhere they went.

I assume there are states where there are CC laws and we can look at stats that these people are probably not popping off shots all over town so I am not really opposed to them but to think they'd really lessen the death toll when someone like Jerry the Joker from losing his crap is not reality.

I think permits to carry should take a lot of effort to get and be really expensive though.  Rich people are just more responsible.

Colorado allows CC permits, the problem is the movie theatre was designated as a gun-free zone. Those places where firearms are permissible/non-permissible needs to be vetted more thoroughly.

Seems like every private business has the right to have that policy.

True, yet we should expect these businesses to keep our safety in mind should they set this policy. Any venue that hosts a large group of people needs to provide security or allow its patrons to protect themselves.

Sporting events, concerns, clubs, etc. all do not allow firearms, but all provide security. Granted, the security isn't top notch at many places, but it is provided.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: hemmy on July 25, 2012, 06:32:21 PM
Gun laws are pointless. The person committing the crime is not following the law of murder, why would they care about a gun law?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Dugout DickStone on July 25, 2012, 06:32:54 PM
Bordering on Dome time....
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Pete on July 25, 2012, 06:35:07 PM
Bordering on Dome time....

Weapons hot, Limestone....you are cleared....
Title: Re: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: CNS on July 25, 2012, 06:39:01 PM
Nice evasion, I take from your comments that everyone should be able to arm without regulation. B/c you can't regulate against insanity, then you must let the sane choose whether they arm or not.

I do feel bad, this bad person had bigger plans with bringing down a building with innocent people as well to distract authorities as he got away. The violence displayed in this act should dealt with the most harsh penalties and I believe there should be more than just the shooter punished. Someone else knew he was at the very least capable of this, if not then what the eff is the agency known as Homeland Security cashing checks for?

You don't seem to be the best at reading.  Current policy is to not let the known insane arm.  Current policy is to not let everyone arm. I am saying that you shouldn't take it away and that it shouldn't be more open.  Reasonable control is what is best.  Reason is what is missing from people who want it all or nothing in either direction.
You can keep talking in circles and hopefully bad people don't do bad things to you. Here is your problem you wouldn't use your gun if you had it on you, to protect INNOCENT lives. But you will shoot the crap out of Bambi for fun and 12 turkeys just to have your mom buy from the store on Thanksgiving. Maybe you hit someone fleeing, but you hit the assailant hopefully stunning him, at the ver least confusing him. Maybe he leaves, maybe he aims at you at not the 10 or however many people are closer than you. You grew up with guns but still don't understand them.

Lol.  Wut?

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: EMAWmeister on July 25, 2012, 06:54:10 PM
This thread got Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) in a hurry.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 25, 2012, 07:12:51 PM
This instance is yet another point in favor of allowing citizens to carry firearms anywhere they please.

As Chuck Michel says: "If 5% of the ducks could shoot back, you're not going to go duck hunting."

While I agree with the idea that we should be able to carry in more places, this guy was a lunatic and he was going to do that regardless.  A private citizen might have mitigated some of it, but it still would have happened.

Exactly, this dude was planning on getting shot at. He was armored to the point where any carry gun a person would be likely to have would be ineffective. Of course, he may have pissed himself and ran the instant someone started shooting back.

The armor was just to prevent himself from being killed.   This isn't some hollywood movie where the dude just keeps firing.  Someone takes a slug from a .45, even with body armor, they're going to be on the ground with the wind knocked out of them.  2 minutes response time from the cops, when someone in the crowd could have put one in him within 45 seconds.   Could have saved MANY of those people. 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 25, 2012, 07:15:45 PM
LOL at the thought of half the people I know who own a gun being able to hit the guy half a theater away through smoke, fear, chaos, and panic.

The only thing that would have helped is if a cop, FBI, etc type was in the audience and packing. 

Your neighbor who deer hunts would have been killed as soon as he peeled off and missed 3 rounds in rapid succession and drew the lunatic's attention.

We don't need more retards carrying guns to the movies.  Most of them can't work their cellphone in the dark.

Cops are given 1 box of shells each month to target practice with.  Several of them rarely ever target practice.  Those same lunatic jack asses carrying are practicing every night for scenarios exactly like this. 

What I'd like you to answer is, why was this guy able to do this?  The movie theatre clearly had signs in the entrance that said "NO GUNS"  Perhaps they should put up a sign that reads "NO MURDERING PEOPLE"   Think that would help?  :dunno:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: DQ12 on July 25, 2012, 07:22:04 PM
Let's cut through the bullshit, okay?  If some one in the crowd had a gun and was accurate and willing to shoot then yes, it would have been a good thing that night.  Some people would have been saved.  I wish there was some one in that particular theater who had a gun.  Anyone arguing otherwise is kidding themselves.

The issue, though, is that a culture wherein people habitually carry around guns to movie theaters and churches and college campuses and wherever a mass murder might next occur is probably more dangerous and definitely makes people (myself included) uneasy.  I'm trying to imagine how that society might look, and I'm sure people like Heinballz and myself have two very different visions.

In my opinion I think it's extremely unhealthy for a society that encourages a sort of day-to-day individual quasi-brinksmanship/mutually assured destruction. 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Emo EMAW on July 25, 2012, 07:41:31 PM
Let's cut through the bullshit, okay?  If some one in the crowd had a gun and was accurate and willing to shoot then yes, it would have been a good thing that night.  Some people would have been saved.  I wish there was some one in that particular theater who had a gun.  Anyone arguing otherwise is kidding themselves.

The issue, though, is that a culture wherein people habitually carry around guns to movie theaters and churches and college campuses and wherever a mass murder might next occur is probably more dangerous and definitely makes people (myself included) uneasy.  I'm trying to imagine how that society might look, and I'm sure people like Heinballz and myself have two very different visions.

In my opinion I think it's extremely unhealthy for a society that encourages a sort of day-to-day individual quasi-brinksmanship/mutually assured destruction.

You should vacation to Montana or Wyoming, then form an informed an opinion.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: DQ12 on July 25, 2012, 07:43:57 PM
Let's cut through the bullshit, okay?  If some one in the crowd had a gun and was accurate and willing to shoot then yes, it would have been a good thing that night.  Some people would have been saved.  I wish there was some one in that particular theater who had a gun.  Anyone arguing otherwise is kidding themselves.

The issue, though, is that a culture wherein people habitually carry around guns to movie theaters and churches and college campuses and wherever a mass murder might next occur is probably more dangerous and definitely makes people (myself included) uneasy.  I'm trying to imagine how that society might look, and I'm sure people like Heinballz and myself have two very different visions.

In my opinion I think it's extremely unhealthy for a society that encourages a sort of day-to-day individual quasi-brinksmanship/mutually assured destruction.

You should vacation to Montana or Wyoming, then form an informed an opinion.
Not a bad idea.  Those places are good cross-sections of our society.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: AppleJack on July 25, 2012, 07:45:17 PM
What if everyone was forced to carry a gun? I think that would be a neat experiment.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Emo EMAW on July 25, 2012, 07:51:50 PM
Let's cut through the bullshit, okay?  If some one in the crowd had a gun and was accurate and willing to shoot then yes, it would have been a good thing that night.  Some people would have been saved.  I wish there was some one in that particular theater who had a gun.  Anyone arguing otherwise is kidding themselves.

The issue, though, is that a culture wherein people habitually carry around guns to movie theaters and churches and college campuses and wherever a mass murder might next occur is probably more dangerous and definitely makes people (myself included) uneasy.  I'm trying to imagine how that society might look, and I'm sure people like Heinballz and myself have two very different visions.

In my opinion I think it's extremely unhealthy for a society that encourages a sort of day-to-day individual quasi-brinksmanship/mutually assured destruction.

You should vacation to Montana or Wyoming, then form an informed an opinion.
Not a bad idea.  Those places are good cross-sections of our society.

Well they're just the other side.  For every Chicago or Baltimore there is a Helena, MT or a Cody, WY.  IMO, KS/Kansas City are a good middle ground between those two cultures.  I will say I've never felt unsafe when I vacation up there, aside from maybe unintentionally (or intentionally) insulting some bar patron.  Those are places where you can still get decked and they don't call the cops.  Just take your licks and GTFO.

Anyway, people up there carry for different reasons than someone in Aurora would.  I'm not saying it's safer up there because people carry guns; but it's probably safer because there aren't crazy people like in high density population areas.
Title: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Pete on July 25, 2012, 08:08:57 PM
Wait, aren't Chicago and Baltimore like 1000x bigger than the little places you mention? :dunno:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: EMAWmeister on July 25, 2012, 08:10:44 PM
Let's cut through the bullshit, okay?  If some one in the crowd had a gun and was accurate and willing to shoot then yes, it would have been a good thing that night.  Some people would have been saved.  I wish there was some one in that particular theater who had a gun.  Anyone arguing otherwise is kidding themselves.

The issue, though, is that a culture wherein people habitually carry around guns to movie theaters and churches and college campuses and wherever a mass murder might next occur is probably more dangerous and definitely makes people (myself included) uneasy.  I'm trying to imagine how that society might look, and I'm sure people like Heinballz and myself have two very different visions.

In my opinion I think it's extremely unhealthy for a society that encourages a sort of day-to-day individual quasi-brinksmanship/mutually assured destruction.

You should vacation to Montana or Wyoming, then form an informed an opinion.
Not a bad idea.  Those places are good cross-sections of our society.

Well they're just the other side.  For every Chicago or Baltimore there is a Helena, MT or a Cody, WY.  IMO, KS/Kansas City are a good middle ground between those two cultures.  I will say I've never felt unsafe when I vacation up there, aside from maybe unintentionally (or intentionally) insulting some bar patron.  Those are places where you can still get decked and they don't call the cops.  Just take your licks and GTFO.

Anyway, people up there carry for different reasons than someone in Aurora would.  I'm not saying it's safer up there because people carry guns; but it's probably safer because there aren't crazy people like in high density population areas.

What the eff are you even talking about?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 25, 2012, 08:11:44 PM
Let's cut through the bullshit, okay?  If some one in the crowd had a gun and was accurate and willing to shoot then yes, it would have been a good thing that night.  Some people would have been saved.  I wish there was some one in that particular theater who had a gun.  Anyone arguing otherwise is kidding themselves.

The issue, though, is that a culture wherein people habitually carry around guns to movie theaters and churches and college campuses and wherever a mass murder might next occur is probably more dangerous and definitely makes people (myself included) uneasy.  I'm trying to imagine how that society might look, and I'm sure people like Heinballz and myself have two very different visions.

In my opinion I think it's extremely unhealthy for a society that encourages a sort of day-to-day individual quasi-brinksmanship/mutually assured destruction.

On the contrary, I agree with you totally. I think what's important is to look at the individual committing these crimes and understand no one dedicates that much effort into anything without feeling justified in their actions. Whether it's someone with no emotional connection, feeling trapped in poverty and oppressed by a war on drugs, or has identified an enemy based on foreign policy & occupation of their country. Regardless of what anyone believes, perception becomes their reality. We all effect perception but rarely will anyone accept responsibility when blow-back explodes in our face. We create terrorism, gang violence, & violent rampages then externalize it by placing blame solely on the logical target, then communicate our hatred & sometimes irrational response by assigning labels to these targets. It's not important what happens to this James Holmes dude, what's important is how we move forward - and assuring we don't create another "mentally ill" James Holmes, or "thug" or "terrorist".

The problem then lies with how realistic it is for society to change their attitude towards this type of behavior and prevent people like this from getting to this stage.  It's rather utopian - and I don't think we'll ever get there.   The logical alternative seems to allow people to defend themselves how they see fit.  I don't trust a police officer, FBI agent, or military dude to protect my family any better than myself; I think I have a right to not rely on anyone else for my protection. 
Title: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Pete on July 25, 2012, 08:14:08 PM
Also, I have traveled extensively to high density urban areas, and everyone I work with has as well.  I have never, ever, heard of a circumstance where anyone needed a gun.  Never.  I put the population size of my sample at around 500 people, and all are extensive travelers (over 100+ nights a year).

Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Emo EMAW on July 25, 2012, 08:14:44 PM
Let's cut through the bullshit, okay?  If some one in the crowd had a gun and was accurate and willing to shoot then yes, it would have been a good thing that night.  Some people would have been saved.  I wish there was some one in that particular theater who had a gun.  Anyone arguing otherwise is kidding themselves.

The issue, though, is that a culture wherein people habitually carry around guns to movie theaters and churches and college campuses and wherever a mass murder might next occur is probably more dangerous and definitely makes people (myself included) uneasy.  I'm trying to imagine how that society might look, and I'm sure people like Heinballz and myself have two very different visions.

In my opinion I think it's extremely unhealthy for a society that encourages a sort of day-to-day individual quasi-brinksmanship/mutually assured destruction.

You should vacation to Montana or Wyoming, then form an informed an opinion.
Not a bad idea.  Those places are good cross-sections of our society.

Well they're just the other side.  For every Chicago or Baltimore there is a Helena, MT or a Cody, WY.  IMO, KS/Kansas City are a good middle ground between those two cultures.  I will say I've never felt unsafe when I vacation up there, aside from maybe unintentionally (or intentionally) insulting some bar patron.  Those are places where you can still get decked and they don't call the cops.  Just take your licks and GTFO.

Anyway, people up there carry for different reasons than someone in Aurora would.  I'm not saying it's safer up there because people carry guns; but it's probably safer because there aren't crazy people like in high density population areas.

What the eff are you even talking about?

I'm saying the guy walking around the Wal-Mart in Cody Wyoming with a .357 on his hip isn't worried about some psycho shooting up the place.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Pete on July 25, 2012, 08:21:02 PM
A guy walking around in Cody Wyoming with a .357 on his hip is almost certainly a HUGE nut job.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 25, 2012, 08:23:35 PM
The "we should all carry guns" argument is so Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) and over blown. Cool, so anytime someone gets in a argument, they just wip out their pistol, and end it.  :flush:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Paul Moscow on July 25, 2012, 08:26:56 PM
This thread got Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) in a hurry. hemmy.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Fedor on July 25, 2012, 08:27:31 PM
A guy walking around in Cody Wyoming with a .357 on his hip is almost certainly a HUGE nut job.
Judge much?  Wyoming is full of rattlesnakes.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Trim on July 25, 2012, 08:30:23 PM
I've probably forgotten how to shoot my little handgun.  Maybe I'll stop the shooting range after hoops sunday and see if I can figure it out.

Thinking about being 1/4 asleep and laid back with a pack of twizzlers on my lap last night at batman, I definitely wouldn't have been able to crap had some tard started tear gassing and machine gunning at everyone, even if I had my gun in my cargo short pockets.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Paul Moscow on July 25, 2012, 08:32:24 PM
Let's cut through the bullshit, okay?  If some one in the crowd had a gun and was accurate and willing to shoot then yes, it would have been a good thing that night.  Some people would have been saved.  I wish there was some one in that particular theater who had a gun.  Anyone arguing otherwise is kidding themselves.

The issue, though, is that a culture wherein people habitually carry around guns to movie theaters and churches and college campuses and wherever a mass murder might next occur is probably more dangerous and definitely makes people (myself included) uneasy.  I'm trying to imagine how that society might look, and I'm sure people like Heinballz and myself have two very different visions.

In my opinion I think it's extremely unhealthy for a society that encourages a sort of day-to-day individual quasi-brinksmanship/mutually assured destruction.

You should vacation to Montana or Wyoming, then form an informed an opinion.
Not a bad idea.  Those places are good cross-sections of our society.

Well they're just the other side.  For every Chicago or Baltimore there is a Helena, MT or a Cody, WY. IMO, KS/Kansas City are a good middle ground between those two cultures.  I will say I've never felt unsafe when I vacation up there, aside from maybe unintentionally (or intentionally) insulting some bar patron.  Those are places where you can still get decked and they don't call the cops.  Just take your licks and GTFO.

Anyway, people up there carry for different reasons than someone in Aurora would.  I'm not saying it's safer up there because people carry guns; but it's probably safer because there aren't crazy people like in high density population areas.

You know they measure for simple factors like population density, right?

#1, Mississippi
Gun deaths per 100,000: 18.3


#2, Arizona
Gun deaths per 100,000: 15


#3, Alaska
Gun deaths per 100,000: 17.6


#4, Arkansas
Gun deaths per 100,000: 15.1


#5, Louisiana
Gun deaths per 100,000: 19.9


#6, New Mexico
Gun deaths per 100,000: 15


#7, Alabama
Gun deaths per 100,000: 17.6
Permissive gun laws: 27th out of 50


#8, Nevada
Gun deaths per 100,000: 16.2


#9, Montana
Gun deaths per 100,000: 14.5


#10, Wyoming
Gun deaths per 100,000: 14.5


#21, Kansas
Gun deaths per 100,000: 10.5


#40, California
Gun deaths per 100,000: 9


#45, New York
Gun deaths per 100,000: 5.1


#46, New Jersey
Gun deaths per 100,000: 5.2
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Pete on July 25, 2012, 08:34:19 PM
Wait, that means that most rural places really do have the most gun deaths!
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Paul Moscow on July 25, 2012, 08:38:52 PM
Wait, that means that most rural places really do have the most gun deaths!

YOU GOT IT PETE!! 
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gifbin.com%2Fbin%2F1236337872_fat_guy_shooting_his_gun.gif&hash=7b33ae10dbf996fe242297a8f420f2d584a02e14)
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: DQ12 on July 25, 2012, 08:41:29 PM
More people per capita carrying guns = more gun deaths???

 :surprised:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: star seed 7 on July 25, 2012, 08:43:03 PM
Well, case solved, take away them guns barrack.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: EMAWmeister on July 25, 2012, 08:43:29 PM
BUT I THOUGHT THIS WAS AMERICA AND BEAR ARMS AND STUFF
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 25, 2012, 08:47:23 PM
The "we should all carry guns" argument is so Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) and over blown. Cool, so anytime someone gets in a argument, they just wip out their pistol, and end it.  :flush:

Is that would you would do if you had a gun?  No wonder you find fault with this logic with you're warped perspective...  I've never really had issues with self esteem... and carrying a gun doesn't make me feel powerful. But it does make me feel prepared.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: star seed 7 on July 25, 2012, 08:48:08 PM
Look at Kansas working the middle like a boss as always.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: EMAWmeister on July 25, 2012, 08:51:37 PM
The "we should all carry guns" argument is so Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) and over blown. Cool, so anytime someone gets in a argument, they just wip out their pistol, and end it.  :flush:

Is that would you would do if you had a gun?  No wonder you find fault with this logic with you're warped perspective...  I've never really had issues with self esteem... and carrying a gun doesn't make me feel powerful. But it does make me feel prepared.

I bet 7/10 people with a CCL piss down their leg if they actually have to shoot someone
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 25, 2012, 08:52:28 PM
Let's cut through the bullshit, okay?  If some one in the crowd had a gun and was accurate and willing to shoot then yes, it would have been a good thing that night.  Some people would have been saved.  I wish there was some one in that particular theater who had a gun.  Anyone arguing otherwise is kidding themselves.

The issue, though, is that a culture wherein people habitually carry around guns to movie theaters and churches and college campuses and wherever a mass murder might next occur is probably more dangerous and definitely makes people (myself included) uneasy.  I'm trying to imagine how that society might look, and I'm sure people like Heinballz and myself have two very different visions.

In my opinion I think it's extremely unhealthy for a society that encourages a sort of day-to-day individual quasi-brinksmanship/mutually assured destruction.

You should vacation to Montana or Wyoming, then form an informed an opinion.
Not a bad idea.  Those places are good cross-sections of our society.

Well they're just the other side.  For every Chicago or Baltimore there is a Helena, MT or a Cody, WY. IMO, KS/Kansas City are a good middle ground between those two cultures.  I will say I've never felt unsafe when I vacation up there, aside from maybe unintentionally (or intentionally) insulting some bar patron.  Those are places where you can still get decked and they don't call the cops.  Just take your licks and GTFO.

Anyway, people up there carry for different reasons than someone in Aurora would.  I'm not saying it's safer up there because people carry guns; but it's probably safer because there aren't crazy people like in high density population areas.

You know they measure for simple factors like population density, right?

#1, Mississippi
Gun deaths per 100,000: 18.3


#2, Arizona
Gun deaths per 100,000: 15


#3, Alaska
Gun deaths per 100,000: 17.6


#4, Arkansas
Gun deaths per 100,000: 15.1


#5, Louisiana
Gun deaths per 100,000: 19.9


#6, New Mexico
Gun deaths per 100,000: 15


#7, Alabama
Gun deaths per 100,000: 17.6
Permissive gun laws: 27th out of 50


#8, Nevada
Gun deaths per 100,000: 16.2


#9, Montana
Gun deaths per 100,000: 14.5


#10, Wyoming
Gun deaths per 100,000: 14.5


#21, Kansas
Gun deaths per 100,000: 10.5


#40, California
Gun deaths per 100,000: 9


#45, New York
Gun deaths per 100,000: 5.1


#46, New Jersey
Gun deaths per 100,000: 5.2
How many of those places that have a large % of citizens with CCL's?  ... You know, the people that are armed and ACTUALLY DO FOLLOW THE LAW?

All I know is Butler county is the highest percentage of people with CCL's in Kansas and I rarely hear of gun violence here. 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: _33 on July 25, 2012, 08:55:30 PM
Let's cut through the bullshit, okay?  If some one in the crowd had a gun and was accurate and willing to shoot then yes, it would have been a good thing that night.  Some people would have been saved.  I wish there was some one in that particular theater who had a gun.  Anyone arguing otherwise is kidding themselves.

The issue, though, is that a culture wherein people habitually carry around guns to movie theaters and churches and college campuses and wherever a mass murder might next occur is probably more dangerous and definitely makes people (myself included) uneasy.  I'm trying to imagine how that society might look, and I'm sure people like Heinballz and myself have two very different visions.

In my opinion I think it's extremely unhealthy for a society that encourages a sort of day-to-day individual quasi-brinksmanship/mutually assured destruction.

You should vacation to Montana or Wyoming, then form an informed an opinion.
Not a bad idea.  Those places are good cross-sections of our society.

Well they're just the other side.  For every Chicago or Baltimore there is a Helena, MT or a Cody, WY. IMO, KS/Kansas City are a good middle ground between those two cultures.  I will say I've never felt unsafe when I vacation up there, aside from maybe unintentionally (or intentionally) insulting some bar patron.  Those are places where you can still get decked and they don't call the cops.  Just take your licks and GTFO.

Anyway, people up there carry for different reasons than someone in Aurora would.  I'm not saying it's safer up there because people carry guns; but it's probably safer because there aren't crazy people like in high density population areas.

You know they measure for simple factors like population density, right?

#1, Mississippi
Gun deaths per 100,000: 18.3


#2, Arizona
Gun deaths per 100,000: 15


#3, Alaska
Gun deaths per 100,000: 17.6


#4, Arkansas
Gun deaths per 100,000: 15.1


#5, Louisiana
Gun deaths per 100,000: 19.9


#6, New Mexico
Gun deaths per 100,000: 15


#7, Alabama
Gun deaths per 100,000: 17.6
Permissive gun laws: 27th out of 50


#8, Nevada
Gun deaths per 100,000: 16.2


#9, Montana
Gun deaths per 100,000: 14.5


#10, Wyoming
Gun deaths per 100,000: 14.5


#21, Kansas
Gun deaths per 100,000: 10.5


#40, California
Gun deaths per 100,000: 9


#45, New York
Gun deaths per 100,000: 5.1


#46, New Jersey
Gun deaths per 100,000: 5.2

Probably a lot of them in the rural areas are hunting related.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: DQ12 on July 25, 2012, 08:56:33 PM
The "we should all carry guns" argument is so Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) and over blown. Cool, so anytime someone gets in a argument, they just wip out their pistol, and end it.  :flush:

Is that would you would do if you had a gun?  No wonder you find fault with this logic with you're warped perspective...  I've never really had issues with self esteem... and carrying a gun doesn't make me feel powerful. But it does make me feel prepared.

I bet 7/10 people with a CCL piss down their leg if they actually have to shoot someone
Hell, i definitely would.

I don't think I could go from sharing a 2 for 20 with Stevesie at my local Applebees to OKAY TIME TO SHOOT AND KILL THIS CRAZY PERSON WHO ALSO HAS A GUN in an instant. 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 25, 2012, 09:00:25 PM
I'd rather know I had the option to defend myself than be angry that I wasn't allowed to.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: star seed 7 on July 25, 2012, 09:03:08 PM
You have to be super paranoid to think you need a gun on you at all times.

I bet you sleep with a gun under your pillow.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Emo EMAW on July 25, 2012, 09:04:19 PM
Let's cut through the bullshit, okay?  If some one in the crowd had a gun and was accurate and willing to shoot then yes, it would have been a good thing that night.  Some people would have been saved.  I wish there was some one in that particular theater who had a gun.  Anyone arguing otherwise is kidding themselves.

The issue, though, is that a culture wherein people habitually carry around guns to movie theaters and churches and college campuses and wherever a mass murder might next occur is probably more dangerous and definitely makes people (myself included) uneasy.  I'm trying to imagine how that society might look, and I'm sure people like Heinballz and myself have two very different visions.

In my opinion I think it's extremely unhealthy for a society that encourages a sort of day-to-day individual quasi-brinksmanship/mutually assured destruction.

You should vacation to Montana or Wyoming, then form an informed an opinion.
Not a bad idea.  Those places are good cross-sections of our society.

Well they're just the other side.  For every Chicago or Baltimore there is a Helena, MT or a Cody, WY. IMO, KS/Kansas City are a good middle ground between those two cultures.  I will say I've never felt unsafe when I vacation up there, aside from maybe unintentionally (or intentionally) insulting some bar patron.  Those are places where you can still get decked and they don't call the cops.  Just take your licks and GTFO.

Anyway, people up there carry for different reasons than someone in Aurora would.  I'm not saying it's safer up there because people carry guns; but it's probably safer because there aren't crazy people like in high density population areas.

You know they measure for simple factors like population density, right?

#1, Mississippi
Gun deaths per 100,000: 18.3


#2, Arizona
Gun deaths per 100,000: 15


#3, Alaska
Gun deaths per 100,000: 17.6


#4, Arkansas
Gun deaths per 100,000: 15.1


#5, Louisiana
Gun deaths per 100,000: 19.9


#6, New Mexico
Gun deaths per 100,000: 15


#7, Alabama
Gun deaths per 100,000: 17.6
Permissive gun laws: 27th out of 50


#8, Nevada
Gun deaths per 100,000: 16.2


#9, Montana
Gun deaths per 100,000: 14.5


#10, Wyoming
Gun deaths per 100,000: 14.5


#21, Kansas
Gun deaths per 100,000: 10.5


#40, California
Gun deaths per 100,000: 9


#45, New York
Gun deaths per 100,000: 5.1


#46, New Jersey
Gun deaths per 100,000: 5.2

How many times has a movie theatre or a high school or a college classroom been shot up in MT or WY?  That's the question.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 25, 2012, 09:06:07 PM
You have to be super paranoid to think you need a gun on you at all times.

I bet you sleep with a gun under your pillow.

I don't carry a gun on me at all times... but I have the option to.   The only time I've carried a gun on me is traveling on vacation & stopping at rest-stops.  I would not have had a gun on me in a movie theater and I would have ran like a mother rough rider.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Trim on July 25, 2012, 09:08:22 PM
You have to be super paranoid to think you need a gun on you at all times.

I bet you sleep with a gun under your pillow.

http://goEMAW.com/forum/index.php?topic=14197.0
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: star seed 7 on July 25, 2012, 09:13:20 PM
You have to be super paranoid to think you need a gun on you at all times.

I bet you sleep with a gun under your pillow.

http://goEMAW.com/forum/index.php?topic=14197.0

My dad has a cabin on 100 acres out in the middle of nowhere Kansas, and when I go sleep there it always scares the crap out of me when I lay down and find a kimber .45 (same pistol LA SWAT uses im told) 2 inches from my head.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 25, 2012, 09:13:24 PM
You have to be super paranoid to think you need a gun on you at all times.

I bet you sleep with a gun under your pillow.

http://goEMAW.com/forum/index.php?topic=14197.0

That thread is all sorts of lol
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Fedor on July 25, 2012, 10:32:28 PM
The "we should all carry guns" argument is so Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) and over blown. Cool, so anytime someone gets in a argument, they just wip out their pistol, and end it.  :flush:

Is that would you would do if you had a gun?  No wonder you find fault with this logic with you're warped perspective...  I've never really had issues with self esteem... and carrying a gun doesn't make me feel powerful. But it does make me feel prepared.

I bet 7/10 people with a CCL piss down their leg if they actually have to shoot someone
How many people do you know with a CCL?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: nicname on July 25, 2012, 11:11:45 PM
http://www.kstatecollegian.com/news/former-k-state-student-allie-young-shot-severely-wounded-in-aurora-theater-1.2748462

He went after EMAW. 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 25, 2012, 11:16:09 PM
http://www.kstatecollegian.com/news/former-k-state-student-allie-young-shot-severely-wounded-in-aurora-theater-1.2748462

He went after EMAW.
That mother rough rider, crap just got personal. Buying batman suit now and ordering architect layout on his prison as we speak.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: michigancat on July 25, 2012, 11:44:14 PM
The thought of going on a road trip and taking the time to hide a gun in your pants before you go to the bathroom is kind of a funny visual.

Are dicks blown off at rest stops more often in states with conceal carry? (population adjusted)
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: EMAWmeister on July 25, 2012, 11:45:23 PM
http://www.kstatecollegian.com/news/former-k-state-student-allie-young-shot-severely-wounded-in-aurora-theater-1.2748462

He went after EMAW.
That mother rough rider, crap just got personal. Buying batman suit now and ordering architect layout on his prison as we speak.

Batman still doesn't kill people, Fanning.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 25, 2012, 11:52:45 PM
http://www.kstatecollegian.com/news/former-k-state-student-allie-young-shot-severely-wounded-in-aurora-theater-1.2748462

He went after EMAW.
That mother rough rider, crap just got personal. Buying batman suit now and ordering architect layout on his prison as we speak.

Batman still doesn't kill people, Fanning.
Batman does what's needed in the new era. Look it up. Plus, didn't he kill the joker in the last movie? I'm too lazy to look it up.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: j-dub on July 26, 2012, 12:21:45 AM
The "we should all carry guns" argument is so Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) and over blown. Cool, so anytime someone gets in a argument, they just wip out their pistol, and end it.  :flush:

Is that would you would do if you had a gun?  No wonder you find fault with this logic with you're warped perspective...  I've never really had issues with self esteem... and carrying a gun doesn't make me feel powerful. But it does make me feel prepared.

I bet 7/10 people with a CCL piss down their leg if they actually have to shoot someone
Hell, i definitely would.

I don't think I could go from sharing a 2 for 20 with Stevesie at my local Applebees to OKAY TIME TO SHOOT AND KILL THIS CRAZY PERSON WHO ALSO HAS A GUN in an instant.

bet that is adorable as it sounds  :love:

Quote
Batman still doesn't kill people, Fanning.

nor does he believe in using guns /thread
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Dugout DickStone on July 26, 2012, 10:10:01 AM
You have to be super paranoid to think you need a gun on you at all times.

I bet you sleep with a gun under your pillow.

http://goEMAW.com/forum/index.php?topic=14197.0

My dad has a cabin on 100 acres out in the middle of nowhere Kansas, and when I go sleep there it always scares the crap out of me when I lay down and find a kimber .45 (same pistol LA SWAT uses im told) 2 inches from my head.

What a relaxing getaway. 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: kstate16 on July 26, 2012, 10:53:31 AM
So now that we've got parenting and gun control out of the way, what's next? Abortion?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: dmartin on July 26, 2012, 10:59:11 AM
http://www.kstatecollegian.com/news/former-k-state-student-allie-young-shot-severely-wounded-in-aurora-theater-1.2748462

He went after EMAW.
That mother rough rider, crap just got personal. Buying batman suit now and ordering architect layout on his prison as we speak.

Batman still doesn't kill people, Fanning.
Batman does what's needed in the new era. Look it up. Plus, didn't he kill the joker in the last movie? I'm too lazy to look it up.

Nope, sent him back to Arkham.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: puniraptor on July 26, 2012, 10:59:59 AM
yeah, he actually saves him from dying, which is at least opposite from killing him
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: The Tonya Harding of Twitter Users Creep on July 26, 2012, 11:19:14 AM
So now that we've got parenting and gun control out of the way, what's next? Abortion?

Please do not make this about abortion  :goodbyecruelworld:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 'taterblast on July 26, 2012, 11:50:30 AM
So now that we've got parenting and gun control out of the way, what's next? Abortion?

Please do not make this about abortion  :goodbyecruelworld:

if he had been aborted, 12 people would be alive today :dunno:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: puniraptor on July 26, 2012, 11:51:26 AM
murder is post-birth abortion
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: SkinnyBenny on July 26, 2012, 12:28:04 PM
Let's cut through the bullshit, okay?  If some one in the crowd had a gun and was accurate and willing to shoot then yes, it would have been a good thing that night.  Some people would have been saved.  I wish there was some one in that particular theater who had a gun.  Anyone arguing otherwise is kidding themselves.

The issue, though, is that a culture wherein people habitually carry around guns to movie theaters and churches and college campuses and wherever a mass murder might next occur is probably more dangerous and definitely makes people (myself included) uneasy.  I'm trying to imagine how that society might look, and I'm sure people like Heinballz and myself have two very different visions.

In my opinion I think it's extremely unhealthy for a society that encourages a sort of day-to-day individual quasi-brinksmanship/mutually assured destruction.


I may be in love w/ dlew
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: SkinnyBenny on July 26, 2012, 12:35:12 PM
You know they measure for simple factors like population density, right?

#1, Mississippi
Gun deaths per 100,000: 18.3


#2, Arizona
Gun deaths per 100,000: 15


#3, Alaska
Gun deaths per 100,000: 17.6


#4, Arkansas
Gun deaths per 100,000: 15.1


#5, Louisiana
Gun deaths per 100,000: 19.9


#6, New Mexico
Gun deaths per 100,000: 15


#7, Alabama
Gun deaths per 100,000: 17.6
Permissive gun laws: 27th out of 50


#8, Nevada
Gun deaths per 100,000: 16.2


#9, Montana
Gun deaths per 100,000: 14.5


#10, Wyoming
Gun deaths per 100,000: 14.5


#21, Kansas
Gun deaths per 100,000: 10.5


#40, California
Gun deaths per 100,000: 9


#45, New York
Gun deaths per 100,000: 5.1


#46, New Jersey
Gun deaths per 100,000: 5.2



The highest number you've cited here is Louisiana. I live in New Orleans, feel like I have a pretty good sense of its population, and there's no rough ridin' way I want everyone here carrying guns. Louisiana is a state where people have the freedom to walk around drinking open containers wherever, and whenever they want. It gets abused, and 99% of the people are shitfaced 24/7. If everyone had a gun here, it would be a complete disaster, and not just because everyone's drunk; it would be a complete disaster because everyone here's an idiot.

Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Emo EMAW on July 26, 2012, 12:39:03 PM
You know they measure for simple factors like population density, right?

#1, Mississippi
Gun deaths per 100,000: 18.3


#2, Arizona
Gun deaths per 100,000: 15


#3, Alaska
Gun deaths per 100,000: 17.6


#4, Arkansas
Gun deaths per 100,000: 15.1


#5, Louisiana
Gun deaths per 100,000: 19.9


#6, New Mexico
Gun deaths per 100,000: 15


#7, Alabama
Gun deaths per 100,000: 17.6
Permissive gun laws: 27th out of 50


#8, Nevada
Gun deaths per 100,000: 16.2


#9, Montana
Gun deaths per 100,000: 14.5


#10, Wyoming
Gun deaths per 100,000: 14.5


#21, Kansas
Gun deaths per 100,000: 10.5


#40, California
Gun deaths per 100,000: 9


#45, New York
Gun deaths per 100,000: 5.1


#46, New Jersey
Gun deaths per 100,000: 5.2



The highest number you've cited here is Louisiana. I live in New Orleans, feel like I have a pretty good sense of its population, and there's no rough ridin' way I want everyone here carrying guns. Louisiana is a state where people have the freedom to walk around drinking open containers wherever, and whenever they want. It gets abused, and 99% of the people are shitfaced 24/7. If everyone had a gun here, it would be a complete disaster, and not just because everyone's drunk; it would be a complete disaster because everyone here's an idiot.

Also, WTF, #1 MS has 18.3, but #5 LA has 19.9?  Obviously Paul Moscowitz pulled this crap from his ass.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 26, 2012, 12:41:07 PM
Here's what people don't understand.   Those people you don't want to have a gun, DO HAVE A GUN.  That's why it's "Conceal" and carry. You think people know when I am and am not carrying? 

Can you not accept that the people that are willing to break the laws and are walking around drunk 24/7 down in Na'leans already have guns on them - illegally?  You - or any other person willing to follow the law - do not have a gun.   I don't think you should, because obviously you can't handle having a gun; but jesus christ, these nascar fan, natty light, red neck douchebags you're wanting to legislate ways to prevent having guns - already have them - and law abiding citizens do not. 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: SkinnyBenny on July 26, 2012, 12:47:36 PM
Tons of people who commit gun crimes in New Orleans have their guns legally. 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 'taterblast on July 26, 2012, 01:00:00 PM
The highest number you've cited here is Louisiana. I live in New Orleans, feel like I have a pretty good sense of its population, and there's no rough ridin' way I want everyone here carrying guns. Louisiana is a state where people have the freedom to walk around drinking open containers wherever, and whenever they want. It gets abused, and 99% of the people are shitfaced 24/7. If everyone had a gun here, it would be a complete disaster, and not just because everyone's drunk; it would be a complete disaster because everyone here's an idiot.

can confirm. i've never seen anywhere promote "get crap faced" like louisiana.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 26, 2012, 01:18:55 PM
Tons of people who commit gun crimes in New Orleans have their guns legally.

Are they carrying them legally?   Because I bet not.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: mocat on July 26, 2012, 01:20:27 PM
I really hate the "well criminals will just get their guns illegally anyway, so there's no reason to ban guns" argument. Especially since this psycho bought them all legally.

Welp, may as well make murder legal since "criminals will just do it illegally anyway"
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: slobber on July 26, 2012, 01:24:13 PM
I really hate the "well criminals will just get their guns illegally anyway, so there's no reason to ban guns" argument. Especially since this psycho bought them all legally.

Welp, may as well make murder legal since "criminals will just do it illegally anyway"
That is a dumb argument. Two completely different things.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: michigancat on July 26, 2012, 01:51:19 PM
I really hate the "well criminals will just get their guns illegally anyway, so there's no reason to ban guns" argument. Especially since this psycho bought them all legally.

Welp, may as well make murder legal since "criminals will just do it illegally anyway"

people would really shape up if murder was legal. I mean dlew's server WOULD NOT bring out the app's too close to the 'trees if he knew there was a possibility that dlew would murder him w/o repercussions.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: SkinnyBenny on July 26, 2012, 01:57:36 PM
I really hate the "well criminals will just get their guns illegally anyway, so there's no reason to ban guns" argument. Especially since this psycho bought them all legally.

Yeah, it's awful.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: SkinnyBenny on July 26, 2012, 01:59:49 PM
So to the gun nut d00dz here: where do you stand on banning things like assault rifles or whatever, but keeping handguns legal? Is that a compromise you'd be willing to make?



Also, this is only tangentially related but it is super awesome so here you go. My friend went to Thailand and he went to a gun range place on some guy's farm where you can pay $50 to shoot a bazooka and an extra $50 to shoot that bazooka all the way across the field and try to hit a cow! 

 :weirdrobert:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: CNS on July 26, 2012, 02:12:49 PM
So to the gun nut d00dz here: where do you stand on banning things like assault rifles or whatever, but keeping handguns legal? Is that a compromise you'd be willing to make?



Also, this is only tangentially related but it is super awesome so here you go. My friend went to Thailand and he went to a gun range place on some guy's farm where you can pay $50 to shoot a bazooka and an extra $50 to shoot that bazooka all the way across the field and try to hit a cow! 

 :weirdrobert:

Wow.  $50 seems really cheap for that.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Paul Moscow on July 26, 2012, 02:13:07 PM
You know they measure for simple factors like population density, right?

#1, Mississippi
Gun deaths per 100,000: 18.3


#2, Arizona
Gun deaths per 100,000: 15


#3, Alaska
Gun deaths per 100,000: 17.6


#4, Arkansas
Gun deaths per 100,000: 15.1


#5, Louisiana
Gun deaths per 100,000: 19.9


#6, New Mexico
Gun deaths per 100,000: 15


#7, Alabama
Gun deaths per 100,000: 17.6
Permissive gun laws: 27th out of 50


#8, Nevada
Gun deaths per 100,000: 16.2


#9, Montana
Gun deaths per 100,000: 14.5


#10, Wyoming
Gun deaths per 100,000: 14.5


#21, Kansas
Gun deaths per 100,000: 10.5


#40, California
Gun deaths per 100,000: 9


#45, New York
Gun deaths per 100,000: 5.1


#46, New Jersey
Gun deaths per 100,000: 5.2



The highest number you've cited here is Louisiana. I live in New Orleans, feel like I have a pretty good sense of its population, and there's no rough ridin' way I want everyone here carrying guns. Louisiana is a state where people have the freedom to walk around drinking open containers wherever, and whenever they want. It gets abused, and 99% of the people are shitfaced 24/7. If everyone had a gun here, it would be a complete disaster, and not just because everyone's drunk; it would be a complete disaster because everyone here's an idiot.

Also, WTF, #1 MS has 18.3, but #5 LA has 19.9?  Obviously Paul Moscowitz pulled this crap from his ass.

Ranking also takes into account permissive gun laws - 25%. Other 75% is gun deaths per thousand.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Emo EMAW on July 26, 2012, 02:27:19 PM
So to the gun nut d00dz here: where do you stand on banning things like assault rifles or whatever, but keeping handguns legal? Is that a compromise you'd be willing to make?



Also, this is only tangentially related but it is super awesome so here you go. My friend went to Thailand and he went to a gun range place on some guy's farm where you can pay $50 to shoot a bazooka and an extra $50 to shoot that bazooka all the way across the field and try to hit a cow! 

 :weirdrobert:

I likes my AR's and stuff.  Can't have 'em.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 26, 2012, 02:32:43 PM
So to the gun nut d00dz here: where do you stand on banning things like assault rifles or whatever, but keeping handguns legal? Is that a compromise you'd be willing to make?



Also, this is only tangentially related but it is super awesome so here you go. My friend went to Thailand and he went to a gun range place on some guy's farm where you can pay $50 to shoot a bazooka and an extra $50 to shoot that bazooka all the way across the field and try to hit a cow! 

 :weirdrobert:

Please define assault rifle.   Because here's a dirty little secret for you; "assault rifles" ARE illegal - but I guarantee you "assault rifles" are not legally defined how you think they are.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: puniraptor on July 26, 2012, 02:34:32 PM
Even "assault weapons" as banned in the assault weapons ban could still be legally purchased, just no longer manufactured. He could still have legally purchased this AR-15 it just would have cost alot more.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: michigancat on July 26, 2012, 02:38:07 PM
HERE'S A DIRTY LITTLE SECRET
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: slobber on July 26, 2012, 02:40:38 PM
So to the gun nut d00dz here: where do you stand on banning things like assault rifles or whatever, but keeping handguns legal? Is that a compromise you'd be willing to make?



Also, this is only tangentially related but it is super awesome so here you go. My friend went to Thailand and he went to a gun range place on some guy's farm where you can pay $50 to shoot a bazooka and an extra $50 to shoot that bazooka all the way across the field and try to hit a cow! 

 :weirdrobert:
That sounds like a brilliant marketing scheme. Everyone that walks up pays the $50 to shoot a bazooka. Image now getting in a winding line of people that you cannot see the end of. After 20 minutes of slowly making your way up and trying to contain your boner every time you here a bazooka being shot, you come to a Y in road. There is a guy there who says, while pointing to the branch of the Y that has nobody in it, "You can go that way to shoot a bazooka," and then while pointing to the line in the other branch, "or, you can pay an extra $50 and shoot that bazooka at a cow. What's it gonna be?"
You've waited this long, you have completely forgotten about already paying them $50. There is no way you don't pay the extra $50 and shoot at that cow. No way.

Also, no compromise on assault rifles. That entire argument is just the anti-gun crowd trying to boil a frog alive.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: mocat on July 26, 2012, 02:44:59 PM
is an AR-15 an assault rifle? honest question.
I always thought the AR stood for Assault Rifle.
You can buy them at Cabela's.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Emo EMAW on July 26, 2012, 02:49:56 PM
is an AR-15 an assault rifle? honest question.
I always thought the AR stood for Assault Rifle.
You can buy them at Cabela's.

I think the anti-gun people think that I shouldn't have an AR, if that's what you're asking.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 8manpick on July 26, 2012, 02:50:51 PM
At my house, I have a .22 under my bed, and my brother has a 12 gauge in his closet.  That said, when the 2nd amendment was written, the revolver hadn't been invented.  I enjoy hunting and do it several times a year, but that said, the gun lobby is ridiculous.  In 1791, if you needed to protect your house and family from some government entity, be it our own, or the British, or whoever, with your rifle you might have been able to. Currently that isn't even in the picture, IDGAF how many assault rifles you have.  The only people I know who have concealed carry permits, I would rather they didn't, and it certainly doesn't make me feel safer that they do.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: puniraptor on July 26, 2012, 02:52:50 PM
is an AR-15 an assault rifle? honest question.
I always thought the AR stood for Assault Rifle.
You can buy them at Cabela's.

I think the anti-gun people think that I shouldn't have an AR, if that's what you're asking.

Technically, it is not an assault rifle, which must be fully auto. It is an assault weapon though....

thanks wikipedia.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 26, 2012, 02:54:30 PM
You're missing the point entirely.  These liberal douchebags that everyone is begging to ban assault rifles don't know crap about guns.  The legislature does not define what determines an assault rifle in accordance with the internal mechanism.  They defined it by literally going through a gun catalog and listing them by name according to what "looked" like a scary gun.   So essentially, when assault rifles were made illegal, if you had a .22 caliber rifle, dressed up to look like an M16, it would have been made illegal.   On top of that, the law reads the guns by name, which doesn't prevent a gun maker from simply changing the name of their gun.   

Knowing this, what exactly makes an AR-15 an assault rifle?  Aesthetics?   Because mechanically, there really isn't much difference between an AR-15 and a high powered hand gun with a high capacity clip.  People hear the word assault rifle and think of a gun that performs like a military issue gun - when in fact you CANNOT purchase a weapon that performs like a military issue.  Everyone is going ape-crap about the 100 round drum, but honestly a .45 hand gun & 10 loaded clips with hollow pointed rounds strapped to your belt would have a more reliable performance, and be a crap load more dangerous.  Not to mention, he started this whole assault with a rough ridin' shot gun.  Exactly WHAT are you going to prevent this guy from doing?  Banning the purchase of ALL guns?  Dudes rough ridin' crazy - strict gun laws don't prevent crazy.

Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: SkinnyBenny on July 26, 2012, 02:58:40 PM
At my house, I have a .22 under my bed, and my brother has a 12 gauge in his closet.  That said, when the 2nd amendment was written, the revolver hadn't been invented.  I enjoy hunting and do it several times a year, but that said, the gun lobby is ridiculous.  In 1791, if you needed to protect your house and family from some government entity, be it our own, or the British, or whoever, with your rifle you might have been able to. Currently that isn't even in the picture, IDGAF how many assault rifles you have.  The only people I know who have concealed carry permits, I would rather they didn't, and it certainly doesn't make me feel safer that they do.


8manpick, you are not missing the point entirely despite what HeinzBalls says. Seems like you get it and take a rational approach to all of this. "But the second amendment!" "Uhhhhh, the revolver didn't exist when the second amendment was invented."  <---nice work.

Also, you know what would've saved more lives in the Aurora movie theater than concealed carry?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkcsUVfd_yo&feature=related
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: CNS on July 26, 2012, 03:00:34 PM
You could make something from the contents out of the avg Home Depot that, if used inside a theater, would kill large quantities of people.  Should we ban hardware?

Also, maybe if everyone was thoroughly trained on hardware store weaponry and given a Home Depot card with low interest rate, we would all be safer? 

The question is, are you man enough to use your Home Depot card in such a way to draw the other Home Depot card guy's attention long enough so that everyone else can get away? 

Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 26, 2012, 03:03:07 PM
At my house, I have a .22 under my bed, and my brother has a 12 gauge in his closet.  That said, when the 2nd amendment was written, the revolver hadn't been invented.  I enjoy hunting and do it several times a year, but that said, the gun lobby is ridiculous.  In 1791, if you needed to protect your house and family from some government entity, be it our own, or the British, or whoever, with your rifle you might have been able to. Currently that isn't even in the picture, IDGAF how many assault rifles you have.  The only people I know who have concealed carry permits, I would rather they didn't, and it certainly doesn't make me feel safer that they do.

ICE T disagrees with you.  (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbDueBuIY6g&feature=g-user-u)
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 26, 2012, 03:10:24 PM
Also, you know what would've saved more lives in the Aurora movie theater than concealed carry?

Exactly WHAT are you going to prevent this guy from doing?  Banning the purchase of ALL guns?  Dudes rough ridin' crazy - strict gun laws don't prevent crazy.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 8manpick on July 26, 2012, 03:10:45 PM
You could make something from the contents out of the avg Home Depot that, if used inside a theater, would kill large quantities of people.  Should we ban hardware?

Also, maybe if everyone was thoroughly trained on hardware store weaponry and given a Home Depot card with low interest rate, we would all be safer? 

The question is, are you man enough to use your Home Depot card in such a way to draw the other Home Depot card guy's attention long enough so that everyone else can get away?

Crazies gon' crazy, that won't change.  I'm confident that most people on this board could create a high powered explosive in under a week.  Those things also have legitimate uses.  Assault rifles have no legitimate use for civilians in society.

At my house, I have a .22 under my bed, and my brother has a 12 gauge in his closet.  That said, when the 2nd amendment was written, the revolver hadn't been invented.  I enjoy hunting and do it several times a year, but that said, the gun lobby is ridiculous.  In 1791, if you needed to protect your house and family from some government entity, be it our own, or the British, or whoever, with your rifle you might have been able to. Currently that isn't even in the picture, IDGAF how many assault rifles you have.  The only people I know who have concealed carry permits, I would rather they didn't, and it certainly doesn't make me feel safer that they do.

ICE T disagrees with you.  (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbDueBuIY6g&feature=g-user-u)

Abrams tanks and B-2 Bombers are going to laugh right in your AR-15's fat face.  This isn't some guys showing up to your farm on horseback.  The original reason for the second amendment is irrelevant today.  I don't think we should ban guns though.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Emo EMAW on July 26, 2012, 03:19:13 PM
You could make something from the contents out of the avg Home Depot that, if used inside a theater, would kill large quantities of people.  Should we ban hardware?

Also, maybe if everyone was thoroughly trained on hardware store weaponry and given a Home Depot card with low interest rate, we would all be safer? 

The question is, are you man enough to use your Home Depot card in such a way to draw the other Home Depot card guy's attention long enough so that everyone else can get away?

Crazies gon' crazy, that won't change.  I'm confident that most people on this board could create a high powered explosive in under a week.  Those things also have legitimate uses.  Assault rifles have no legitimate use for civilians in society.

At my house, I have a .22 under my bed, and my brother has a 12 gauge in his closet.  That said, when the 2nd amendment was written, the revolver hadn't been invented.  I enjoy hunting and do it several times a year, but that said, the gun lobby is ridiculous.  In 1791, if you needed to protect your house and family from some government entity, be it our own, or the British, or whoever, with your rifle you might have been able to. Currently that isn't even in the picture, IDGAF how many assault rifles you have.  The only people I know who have concealed carry permits, I would rather they didn't, and it certainly doesn't make me feel safer that they do.

ICE T disagrees with you.  (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbDueBuIY6g&feature=g-user-u)

Abrams tanks and B-2 Bombers are going to laugh right in your AR-15's fat face.  This isn't some guys showing up to your farm on horseback.  The original reason for the second amendment is irrelevant today.  I don't think we should ban guns though.

Don't be gaytarded.

Imagine the civil unrest it would create if an American (local, state, federal) government forcibly entered, skirmished with, killed/wounded, people that were living 100% legal lives.  Imagine if that same government dropped a rough ridin' bomb on someone's house.

FTR, I believe private citizens should be able to own just about whatever weapon they can afford to own, be it howitzers or tanks or whatever.  The government should fear us.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 26, 2012, 03:21:57 PM
Abrams tanks and B-2 Bombers are going to laugh right in your AR-15's fat face.  This isn't some guys showing up to your farm on horseback.  The original reason for the second amendment is irrelevant today.  I don't think we should ban guns though.

But what's the point?  Unless you can explain to me how an "assault rifle" is more dangerous than a high powered hand gun with a high capacity clip?  How is this going to make anyone more safe in these instances?  In fact MORE people lived because he switched to the AR.  If he would have had another shot gun or a few more clips for his handgun instead of the AR, he could have killed MANY more. Anyone that disputes that needs to look into what an AR-15 is capable of doing, then compare to a high performance round you can buy for your average handgun.   
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 8manpick on July 26, 2012, 03:29:53 PM
Abrams tanks and B-2 Bombers are going to laugh right in your AR-15's fat face.  This isn't some guys showing up to your farm on horseback.  The original reason for the second amendment is irrelevant today.  I don't think we should ban guns though.

But what's the point?  Unless you can explain to me how an "assault rifle" is more dangerous than a high powered hand gun with a high capacity clip?  How is this going to make anyone more safe in these instances?  In fact MORE people lived because he switched to the AR.  If he would have had another shot gun or a few more clips for his handgun instead of the AR, he could have killed MANY more. Anyone that disputes that needs to look into what an AR-15 is capable of doing, then compare to a high performance round you can buy for your average handgun.   

But what's the point of what? 

I can't explain why it is more dangerous, so we probably shouldn't have high-powered handguns with high capacity clips either.  What are they good for other than killing people?  Seeing how close you can get to the middle of a target?  Getting your rocks off 'cause you're a tough guy shooting a gun?

Emo, I agree that the government should fear us, but I don't think that is plausible at this point.  It's a fantasy.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: OK_Cat on July 26, 2012, 03:39:59 PM
guns serve no purpose.  people that own guns also watch nascar and dip.  <---- fact.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 26, 2012, 03:54:19 PM
Abrams tanks and B-2 Bombers are going to laugh right in your AR-15's fat face.  This isn't some guys showing up to your farm on horseback.  The original reason for the second amendment is irrelevant today.  I don't think we should ban guns though.

But what's the point?  Unless you can explain to me how an "assault rifle" is more dangerous than a high powered hand gun with a high capacity clip?  How is this going to make anyone more safe in these instances?  In fact MORE people lived because he switched to the AR.  If he would have had another shot gun or a few more clips for his handgun instead of the AR, he could have killed MANY more. Anyone that disputes that needs to look into what an AR-15 is capable of doing, then compare to a high performance round you can buy for your average handgun.   

But what's the point of what? 

I can't explain why it is more dangerous, so we probably shouldn't have high-powered handguns with high capacity clips either.  What are they good for other than killing people?  Seeing how close you can get to the middle of a target?  Getting your rocks off 'cause you're a tough guy shooting a gun?

Emo, I agree that the government should fear us, but I don't think that is plausible at this point.  It's a fantasy.
You know what they're good for?  Killing people.   That's all they're good for, and that's all they'll ever be good for.   Will removing ALL guns ever prevent someone from Killing?  No. 

There will always be some dude, bigger than you, faster than you, stronger than you.  There will always be greed.  There will always be corruption.  There will always be crime.  There will always be innocent people dieing for no reason.  IF society is what you're interested in changing, I suggest you focus on the reasons why one might become mentally ill or turn to gang violence or become a terrorist.  Because removing guns from the equation will not stop mentally illness, gangs or terrorist thriving within greed & corruption.  If you remove guns, you remove perfectly sane, rational, & intelligent peoples ability to protect themselves from the BTK's of the world. 

It's as simple as this, if you were being stalked by a deranged person capable of performing the most grotesque forms of torture on you or your loved ones, would you post a sign in front of your house stating "this is a gun free zone" ? 

If you think it's irrational to go to preventative measures for a disaster that occurs at a very small percentage and likely will never effect you, then why do you have smoke detectors in your house?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Emo EMAW on July 26, 2012, 03:57:42 PM
Abrams tanks and B-2 Bombers are going to laugh right in your AR-15's fat face.  This isn't some guys showing up to your farm on horseback.  The original reason for the second amendment is irrelevant today.  I don't think we should ban guns though.

But what's the point?  Unless you can explain to me how an "assault rifle" is more dangerous than a high powered hand gun with a high capacity clip?  How is this going to make anyone more safe in these instances?  In fact MORE people lived because he switched to the AR.  If he would have had another shot gun or a few more clips for his handgun instead of the AR, he could have killed MANY more. Anyone that disputes that needs to look into what an AR-15 is capable of doing, then compare to a high performance round you can buy for your average handgun.   

But what's the point of what? 

I can't explain why it is more dangerous, so we probably shouldn't have high-powered handguns with high capacity clips either.  What are they good for other than killing people?  Seeing how close you can get to the middle of a target?  Getting your rocks off 'cause you're a tough guy shooting a gun?

Emo, I agree that the government should fear us, but I don't think that is plausible at this point.  It's a fantasy.

Well shooting crap is just fun.  <--- tapout
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 8manpick on July 26, 2012, 04:07:48 PM
Abrams tanks and B-2 Bombers are going to laugh right in your AR-15's fat face.  This isn't some guys showing up to your farm on horseback.  The original reason for the second amendment is irrelevant today.  I don't think we should ban guns though.

But what's the point?  Unless you can explain to me how an "assault rifle" is more dangerous than a high powered hand gun with a high capacity clip?  How is this going to make anyone more safe in these instances?  In fact MORE people lived because he switched to the AR.  If he would have had another shot gun or a few more clips for his handgun instead of the AR, he could have killed MANY more. Anyone that disputes that needs to look into what an AR-15 is capable of doing, then compare to a high performance round you can buy for your average handgun.   

But what's the point of what? 

I can't explain why it is more dangerous, so we probably shouldn't have high-powered handguns with high capacity clips either.  What are they good for other than killing people?  Seeing how close you can get to the middle of a target?  Getting your rocks off 'cause you're a tough guy shooting a gun?

Emo, I agree that the government should fear us, but I don't think that is plausible at this point.  It's a fantasy.

It's as simple as this, if you were being stalked by a deranged person capable of performing the most grotesque forms of torture on you or your loved ones, would you post a sign in front of your house stating "this is a gun free zone" ? 

If you think it's irrational to go to preventative measures for a disaster that occurs at a very small percentage and likely will never effect you, then why do you have smoke detectors in your house?

No, at my house I would use my 12 gauge to protect myself and my family.  The problem is that high-capacity/automatic/assault rifles/whatever are basically good for shooting sprees and not much else.  An "assault rifle" isn't preventing any crime, it is either used for fun, or to commit crimes.  I obviously don't think the preventative measures are irrational, I have a gun and smoke detectors in my house.  I do not believe that all guns are preventative measures.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: mocat on July 26, 2012, 04:08:26 PM
A handgun holds what 8-12 rounds?
AR-15 holds 30 and you can shoot them as fast as your finger can pull the trigger, with a laser guide. One time I shot one at turtles in a pond, it was great.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: puniraptor on July 26, 2012, 04:10:06 PM
A handgun holds what 8-12 rounds?
AR-15 holds 30 and you can shoot them as fast as your finger can pull the trigger, with a laser guide. One time I shot one at turtles in a pond, it was great.

Some missourians like to use them for blasting prairie dogs!
Title: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 26, 2012, 04:37:43 PM
A handgun holds what 8-12 rounds?
AR-15 holds 30 and you can shoot them as fast as your finger can pull the trigger, with a laser guide. One time I shot one at turtles in a pond, it was great.

I have a 9mm that holds 15 in the clip and 1 in the barrel.   8 clips are more reliable than a 100 round drum - as they're extremely likely to jam.


Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.


Title: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 26, 2012, 04:42:44 PM
Abrams tanks and B-2 Bombers are going to laugh right in your AR-15's fat face.  This isn't some guys showing up to your farm on horseback.  The original reason for the second amendment is irrelevant today.  I don't think we should ban guns though.

But what's the point?  Unless you can explain to me how an "assault rifle" is more dangerous than a high powered hand gun with a high capacity clip?  How is this going to make anyone more safe in these instances?  In fact MORE people lived because he switched to the AR.  If he would have had another shot gun or a few more clips for his handgun instead of the AR, he could have killed MANY more. Anyone that disputes that needs to look into what an AR-15 is capable of doing, then compare to a high performance round you can buy for your average handgun.   

But what's the point of what? 

I can't explain why it is more dangerous, so we probably shouldn't have high-powered handguns with high capacity clips either.  What are they good for other than killing people?  Seeing how close you can get to the middle of a target?  Getting your rocks off 'cause you're a tough guy shooting a gun?

Emo, I agree that the government should fear us, but I don't think that is plausible at this point.  It's a fantasy.

It's as simple as this, if you were being stalked by a deranged person capable of performing the most grotesque forms of torture on you or your loved ones, would you post a sign in front of your house stating "this is a gun free zone" ? 

If you think it's irrational to go to preventative measures for a disaster that occurs at a very small percentage and likely will never effect you, then why do you have smoke detectors in your house?

No, at my house I would use my 12 gauge to protect myself and my family.  The problem is that high-capacity/automatic/assault rifles/whatever are basically good for shooting sprees and not much else.  An "assault rifle" isn't preventing any crime, it is either used for fun, or to commit crimes.  I obviously don't think the preventative measures are irrational, I have a gun and smoke detectors in my house.  I do not believe that all guns are preventative measures.

So you're arguing that a shotgun is okay because it can also be used for hunting, while a semi-automatic rifle that aestheticly looks dangerous, yet technically isn't much different than something you would shoot a deer with should be illegal...  Yet your preferred method of killing people (home defense) is the same as the aurora killers preferred weapon, a shot gun. 

Why do you refuse to acknowledge that the real issue here is mental illness and not guns?


Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: CNS on July 26, 2012, 04:45:15 PM
A handgun holds what 8-12 rounds?
AR-15 holds 30 and you can shoot them as fast as your finger can pull the trigger, with a laser guide. One time I shot one at turtles in a pond, it was great.

I have a 9mm that holds 15 in the clip and 1 in the barrel.   8 clips are more reliable than a 100 round drum - as they're extremely likely to jam.


Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.

A great southern rock band and first album name.

Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: DQ12 on July 26, 2012, 04:47:31 PM
 :lol:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: SkinnyBenny on July 26, 2012, 04:53:09 PM
With three minutes to go before noms are announced, I got a great feeling this is gonna win a csourk'y for worst thread top to bottom, gang.   :thumbs:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: shivvyman on July 26, 2012, 04:57:19 PM
Way too many uninformed jackasses posting on this thread.

I haven't read the detailed reports, but I'm near 99% certain the AR our shooter was carrying was not full automatic (since he legally procured the weapon). Everyone here seems to think all assault rifles are capable of shooting full automatic. Most states don't allow the purchase of full auto ARs; only semi-automatic (like a handgun as HB has pointed out numerous times). Those states that do allow the purchase of a full auto AR make it extremely expensive.

A semi-automatic AR is just a more accurate handgun that fires smaller rounds, yet more prone to mechanical failure.

We would have been better off if this moron did have a full auto AR. Most individuals can't shoot for crap on full auto. After the 3rd or 4th round, your aim is usually sky high.



Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 26, 2012, 04:57:51 PM
Yeah. I'm surprised this thread hasn't been dragged out and shot at by now. :punintended:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: puniraptor on July 26, 2012, 04:59:26 PM
Way too many uninformed jackasses posting on this thread.

I haven't read the detailed reports, but I'm near 99% certain the AR our shooter was carrying was not full automatic (since he legally procured the weapon). Everyone here seems to think all assault rifles are capable of shooting full automatic. Most states don't allow the purchase of full auto ARs; only semi-automatic (like a handgun as HB has pointed out numerous times). Those states that do allow the purchase of a full auto AR make it extremely expensive.

A semi-automatic AR is just a more accurate handgun that fires smaller rounds, yet more prone to mechanical failure.

We would have been better off if this respect did have a full auto AR. Most individuals can't shoot for crap on full auto. After the 3rd or 4th round, your aim is usually sky high.

This is the worst post of the thread.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: shivvyman on July 26, 2012, 05:00:50 PM
Way too many uninformed jackasses posting on this thread.

I haven't read the detailed reports, but I'm near 99% certain the AR our shooter was carrying was not full automatic (since he legally procured the weapon). Everyone here seems to think all assault rifles are capable of shooting full automatic. Most states don't allow the purchase of full auto ARs; only semi-automatic (like a handgun as HB has pointed out numerous times). Those states that do allow the purchase of a full auto AR make it extremely expensive.

A semi-automatic AR is just a more accurate handgun that fires smaller rounds, yet more prone to mechanical failure.

We would have been better off if this respect did have a full auto AR. Most individuals can't shoot for crap on full auto. After the 3rd or 4th round, your aim is usually sky high.

This is the worst post of the thread.

Sadly, you are unable to disprove any of the above comments.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 'taterblast on July 26, 2012, 05:02:38 PM
Way too many uninformed jackasses posting on this thread.

I haven't read the detailed reports, but I'm near 99% certain the AR our shooter was carrying was not full automatic (since he legally procured the weapon). Everyone here seems to think all assault rifles are capable of shooting full automatic. Most states don't allow the purchase of full auto ARs; only semi-automatic (like a handgun as HB has pointed out numerous times). Those states that do allow the purchase of a full auto AR make it extremely expensive.

A semi-automatic AR is just a more accurate handgun that fires smaller rounds, yet more prone to mechanical failure.

We would have been better off if this moron did have a full auto AR. Most individuals can't shoot for crap on full auto. After the 3rd or 4th round, your aim is usually sky high.

Brownback wins, Fully Automatic Weapons Now Legal
Kansas Governor states that with new bill, bad guys' aim will be "sky high," streets now safer
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: puniraptor on July 26, 2012, 05:05:54 PM
Way too many uninformed jackasses posting on this thread.

I haven't read the detailed reports, but I'm near 99% certain the AR our shooter was carrying was not full automatic (since he legally procured the weapon). Everyone here seems to think all assault rifles are capable of shooting full automatic. Most states don't allow the purchase of full auto ARs; only semi-automatic (like a handgun as HB has pointed out numerous times). Those states that do allow the purchase of a full auto AR make it extremely expensive.

A semi-automatic AR is just a more accurate handgun that fires smaller rounds, yet more prone to mechanical failure.

We would have been better off if this respect did have a full auto AR. Most individuals can't shoot for crap on full auto. After the 3rd or 4th round, your aim is usually sky high.

This is the worst post of the thread.

Sadly, you are unable to disprove any of the above comments.

Pretty sure no one thinks he had a full auto AR. Everyone knows it was legally purchased. A rifle is much more powerful than a handgun. His 100rd drum jammed. Full auto would have been way worse (except for maybe jamming sooner). He doesnt have to be accurate spamming a sold out movie theater.

Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: puniraptor on July 26, 2012, 05:07:32 PM
Way too many uninformed jackasses posting on this thread.

I haven't read the detailed reports, but I'm near 99% certain the AR our shooter was carrying was not full automatic (since he legally procured the weapon). Everyone here seems to think all assault rifles are capable of shooting full automatic. Most states don't allow the purchase of full auto ARs; only semi-automatic (like a handgun as HB has pointed out numerous times). Those states that do allow the purchase of a full auto AR make it extremely expensive.

A semi-automatic AR is just a more accurate handgun that fires smaller rounds, yet more prone to mechanical failure.

We would have been better off if this moron did have a full auto AR. Most individuals can't shoot for crap on full auto. After the 3rd or 4th round, your aim is usually sky high.

Brownback wins, Fully Automatic Weapons Now Legal
Kansas Governor states that with new bill, bad guys' aim will be "sky high," streets now safer

 :lol:




the universe will not be in balance until this thread is banished to the pit.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: shivvyman on July 26, 2012, 05:23:56 PM
Way too many uninformed jackasses posting on this thread.

I haven't read the detailed reports, but I'm near 99% certain the AR our shooter was carrying was not full automatic (since he legally procured the weapon). Everyone here seems to think all assault rifles are capable of shooting full automatic. Most states don't allow the purchase of full auto ARs; only semi-automatic (like a handgun as HB has pointed out numerous times). Those states that do allow the purchase of a full auto AR make it extremely expensive.

A semi-automatic AR is just a more accurate handgun that fires smaller rounds, yet more prone to mechanical failure.

We would have been better off if this moron did have a full auto AR. Most individuals can't shoot for crap on full auto. After the 3rd or 4th round, your aim is usually sky high.

Brownback wins, Fully Automatic Weapons Now Legal
Kansas Governor states that with new bill, bad guys' aim will be "sky high," streets now safer

Have you ever shot an AR on full auto? This kid hadn't, and if you've ever watched somebody shoot on full auto for the first time, you would certainly notice the kick drives the nose of the weapon up until you have to stop shooting and reset.

Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: EMAWmeister on July 26, 2012, 05:25:30 PM
Way too many uninformed jackasses posting on this thread.

I haven't read the detailed reports, but I'm near 99% certain the AR our shooter was carrying was not full automatic (since he legally procured the weapon). Everyone here seems to think all assault rifles are capable of shooting full automatic. Most states don't allow the purchase of full auto ARs; only semi-automatic (like a handgun as HB has pointed out numerous times). Those states that do allow the purchase of a full auto AR make it extremely expensive.

A semi-automatic AR is just a more accurate handgun that fires smaller rounds, yet more prone to mechanical failure.

We would have been better off if this moron did have a full auto AR. Most individuals can't shoot for crap on full auto. After the 3rd or 4th round, your aim is usually sky high.

Brownback wins, Fully Automatic Weapons Now Legal
Kansas Governor states that with new bill, bad guys' aim will be "sky high," streets now safer

Have you ever shot an AR on full auto? This kid hadn't, and if you've ever watched somebody shoot on full auto for the first time, you would certainly notice the kick drives the nose of the weapon up until you have to stop shooting and reset.

Were you born a water baby or did something happen to make you as mind-numbingly stupid as you are?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: shivvyman on July 26, 2012, 05:28:33 PM
Way too many uninformed jackasses posting on this thread.

I haven't read the detailed reports, but I'm near 99% certain the AR our shooter was carrying was not full automatic (since he legally procured the weapon). Everyone here seems to think all assault rifles are capable of shooting full automatic. Most states don't allow the purchase of full auto ARs; only semi-automatic (like a handgun as HB has pointed out numerous times). Those states that do allow the purchase of a full auto AR make it extremely expensive.

A semi-automatic AR is just a more accurate handgun that fires smaller rounds, yet more prone to mechanical failure.

We would have been better off if this moron did have a full auto AR. Most individuals can't shoot for crap on full auto. After the 3rd or 4th round, your aim is usually sky high.

Brownback wins, Fully Automatic Weapons Now Legal
Kansas Governor states that with new bill, bad guys' aim will be "sky high," streets now safer

Have you ever shot an AR on full auto? This kid hadn't, and if you've ever watched somebody shoot on full auto for the first time, you would certainly notice the kick drives the nose of the weapon up until you have to stop shooting and reset.

Were you born a water baby or did something happen to make you as mind-numbingly stupid as you are?

Can you lick your own nuts? My guess is the answer is an emphatic, YES.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 8manpick on July 26, 2012, 05:34:36 PM
So you're arguing that a shotgun is okay because it can also be used for hunting, while a semi-automatic rifle that aestheticly looks dangerous, yet technically isn't much different than something you would shoot a deer with should be illegal...  Yet your preferred method of killing people (home defense) is the same as the aurora killers preferred weapon, a shot gun. 

Why do you refuse to acknowledge that the real issue here is mental illness and not guns?

Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.

I'm not getting my point across very well apparently.  No one with a shotgun or assault rifle is stopping the Aurora shootings because no one is taking one into a theater unless it is to go on a shooting rampage.  I guess I don't see the point of "assault rifles" being available to anyone.  Please, explain the usefulness of these for anything but target practice.

I don't think guns are the issue.  I don't think all guns should be banned.  I am pro-concealed carry being legal, despite the two morons I know that have it.  I think some common sense should be applied.  I see no need for anyone outside the military to have access to many of the high-powered weapons.

Also, I disagree with the automatic mental illness label on all mass shooters. I think there are just some very bad people out there.  Bad people are going to do bad things.  If they do bad things with reduced firepower, the things they do will have less bad consequences.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: puniraptor on July 26, 2012, 05:54:12 PM
Have you ever shot an AR on full auto? This kid hadn't, and if you've ever watched somebody shoot on full auto for the first time, you would certainly notice the kick drives the nose of the weapon up until you have to stop shooting and reset.

I used to play shitloads of counterstrike.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: shivvyman on July 26, 2012, 06:04:55 PM
Have you ever shot an AR on full auto? This kid hadn't, and if you've ever watched somebody shoot on full auto for the first time, you would certainly notice the kick drives the nose of the weapon up until you have to stop shooting and reset.

I used to play shitloads of counterstrike.

Red Alert, Counterstrike? On PC? That game kicked ass back in the 90's.........
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: michigancat on July 26, 2012, 07:04:24 PM
Is the "people will still kill even if you ban all guns" thing a serious argument?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: yoga-like_abana on July 26, 2012, 07:20:45 PM
guns dont kill people I do
Title: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 26, 2012, 08:42:42 PM
Is the "people will still kill even if you ban all guns" thing a serious argument?
Is the "this guy would not have done as much damage if AR were illegal" a serious argument? 

Why can't anyone explain to me why an AR 15 is more dangerous than a shot gun?


Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.


Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 8manpick on July 26, 2012, 08:51:35 PM
Is the "people will still kill even if you ban all guns" thing a serious argument?
Is the "this guy would not have done as much damage if AR were illegal" a serious argument? 

Why can't anyone explain to me why an AR 15 is more dangerous than a shot gun?


Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.


Not sure about the ar15 specifically, but lack of 100-round clips seems to be one way.
Title: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 26, 2012, 09:12:13 PM
That hundred round clip saved lives.  They are extremely susceptible to jamming, which is exactly what happened.  More people would have been killed if he had 5 more clips for his hand gun or another shot gun.  Not to mention assault rifles are not for close range; it's more of a "keep people off my property from 100 yard range" type gun.


Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.


Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: DQ12 on July 26, 2012, 10:07:18 PM
Then why do ar15's exist if they're worse guns and not any more lethal or accurate or reliable than handguns? 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 8manpick on July 26, 2012, 10:12:48 PM
That hundred round clip saved lives.  They are extremely susceptible to jamming, which is exactly what happened.  More people would have been killed if he had 5 more clips for his hand gun or another shot gun.  Not to mention assault rifles are not for close range; it's more of a "keep people off my property from 100 yard range" type gun.


Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.

It only saved lives because it malfunctioned, that won't always happen.  If some guy has to reload frequently mid-spree, he's not going to get as many shots off.
Title: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 26, 2012, 10:22:31 PM
What part of highly susceptible to jamming do you not understand?


Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.


Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 0.42 on July 26, 2012, 10:23:10 PM
hundred round clip 4 hero of america
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 8manpick on July 26, 2012, 10:27:18 PM
What part of highly susceptible to jamming do you not understand?


Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.

I rough ridin' get that. They don't ALWAYS jam, or they wouldn't make them.  Like anything else that is manufactured and sold, the quality will improve and they won't jam as often as they do now, which must be like 98% of the time.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: EMAWmeister on July 26, 2012, 10:32:57 PM
What an argument.

This gun that is used almost exclusively for mass murder should be legal because they break every once in a while.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Trim on July 26, 2012, 11:20:11 PM
guns serve no purpose.  people that own guns also watch nascar and dip.  <---- fact.

I own a .38 special that I keep in my nightstand for when some chick's husband home invades me all mad about "the sole owner of goEMAW" banging his wife.  No nascar, no dip.
Title: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 27, 2012, 12:07:52 AM
What an argument.

This gun that is used almost exclusively for mass murder should be legal because they break every once in a while.

Well now you're just talking out your ass; exclusively for mass murder?  Please educate me, how often has the AR15 been used in mass murder?  Also, while you're at it - please explain to me why you would rather be shot with a .45 or a shot gun than an assault rifle?  That's like asking, what would you rather get hit by? A train or a Mack truck?

You want my argument? My for real argument?  Why are we wasting energy on trying to prevent stuff like this from happening by removing the means, not the source?  You want to know how this particular ass hole would have been stopped?  If someone would have noticed this guy was bat nuts rough ridin' crazy and tried to help him.  He clearly reached out for help by sending a notebook detailing his plans a week in advance.  He worked & lived around people that surely knew be needed help. It's the people that ignore that cause things like the Oklahoma city bombing, the columbine, the aurora Colorado - not a rough ridin' assault rifle.


Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.


Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: husserl on July 27, 2012, 05:57:49 AM
You want to know how this particular ass hole would have been stopped?  If someone would have noticed this guy was bat nuts rough ridin' crazy and tried to help him. 

...and I'm a crazy bastard...

Maybe I'm a crazy bastard...

People in my office think I'm crazy now.   Literal  :lol:

I have to admit - I feel crazy sometimes.

fine.  I'm a crazy lunatic.  Glad we got that out of the way...   
Title: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 27, 2012, 06:50:03 AM
:lol:


Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.


Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 8manpick on July 27, 2012, 08:27:53 AM
 :sdeek: :lol:

husserl <----- creepy stalker guy with a notebook on HeinBallz that is probably just deflecting suspicion from himself
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 'taterblast on July 27, 2012, 08:40:47 AM
holy crap, husserl.

mods, please verify that husserl is not some sort of CIA operative. tia, ftb.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: The Tonya Harding of Twitter Users Creep on July 27, 2012, 08:51:59 AM
guns dont kill people I do

(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.clearpathtofitness.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F03%2Fguns_dont_kill_people_happy_gilmore.jpg&hash=96844ab9887f78784beb8b3fd66612049b38e25b)
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: steve dave on July 27, 2012, 08:54:54 AM
holy crap, husserl.

mods, please verify that husserl is not some sort of CIA operative. tia, ftb.

our search function is pretty easy to use.  I destroyed the oneuponaggies guy with it so hard he quit posting on ksufans when he said he's always liked frank martin.  it's great to blindside posters with it when they usually post on a rivals or scout board where their old posts aren't saved after a certain time period. 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 27, 2012, 09:55:48 AM
gotta admit - absolutely fantastic post husserl.  Should be up for a csourky.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: OK_Cat on July 27, 2012, 10:05:41 AM
husserl working hard for a csourkey
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: husserl on July 27, 2012, 10:08:18 AM
 :party:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 27, 2012, 12:45:36 PM
victims families agree with me:

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/brother-of-aurora-victim-rebuts-msnbc-host-media-shouldnt-be-trying-to-politicize-shooting/

Quote
“Here’s the thing. We can try to politicize this and make some sort of polarizing debate and make this a tenet of the election. That’s not what we’re here to do right now. We’re here to celebrate the lives of the victims that have been lost. If somebody wants to do harm to somebody, they’re gonna find a way to do it, whether it be with a weapon such as a rifle or whether it be with any sort of means. We should actually start to think about why people are doing this, and the reason people are doing this is they want their names out there.”
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: ChiComCat on July 27, 2012, 01:28:13 PM
victims families agree with me:

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/brother-of-aurora-victim-rebuts-msnbc-host-media-shouldnt-be-trying-to-politicize-shooting/

Quote
“Here’s the thing. We can try to politicize this and make some sort of polarizing debate and make this a tenet of the election. That’s not what we’re here to do right now. We’re here to celebrate the lives of the victims that have been lost. If somebody wants to do harm to somebody, they’re gonna find a way to do it, whether it be with a weapon such as a rifle or whether it be with any sort of means. We should actually start to think about why people are doing this, and the reason people are doing this is they want their names out there.”[\quote]

You're politicizing it for more concealed carry.  That quote would seem to disagree with you
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 27, 2012, 01:44:08 PM
You're politicizing it for more concealed carry. 

No I'm not?!?

I've been very firmly on board with no new gun laws from this.  No laws stating business have to let people carry and no laws removing gun rights.  The basis for every statement I've made is the very basic "Guns don't kill people, crazy assholes kill people." 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Mr Bread on July 27, 2012, 02:01:35 PM
You're politicizing it for more concealed carry. 

No I'm not?!?

I've been very firmly on board with no new gun laws from this.  No laws stating business have to let people carry and no laws removing gun rights.  The basis for every statement I've made is the very basic "Guns don't kill people, crazy assholes kill people."

I haven't read this crapfest of a thread and I fully realize that guns aren't going anywhere here in the good old USofA, but obviously guns make it far, far easier to kill far more people in a short period of time (i.e., mass murder) than any other means available outside of say the use of an explosive device.  If this guy had to resort to bludgeoning or stabbing people to death he wouldn't have done jack crap in a crowded movie theater.  Serial killer then maybe.  I don't know if I'm really making a point here.  Take it or leave it.  People are going to kill people.
Title: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 27, 2012, 03:08:11 PM
You're politicizing it for more concealed carry. 

No I'm not?!?

I've been very firmly on board with no new gun laws from this.  No laws stating business have to let people carry and no laws removing gun rights.  The basis for every statement I've made is the very basic "Guns don't kill people, crazy assholes kill people."

I haven't read this crapfest of a thread and I fully realize that guns aren't going anywhere here in the good old USofA, but obviously guns make it far, far easier to kill far more people in a short period of time (i.e., mass murder) than any other means available outside of say the use of an explosive device.  If this guy had to resort to bludgeoning or stabbing people to death he wouldn't have done jack crap in a crowded movie theater.  Serial killer then maybe.  I don't know if I'm really making a point here.  Take it or leave it.  People are going to kill people.

Agreed, people are going to kill no matter what.  The point I've tried to make in this thread is a bomb would have been far more devastating and I've been trying to find out what guns actually killed the victims.  Here's what I know according to the reports.  He started with the 12 gauge shot gun, at least two of the 12 killed were shot by the 12 gauge - he then pulled a .40 hand gun with a high capacity clip that held 40 rounds - then he pulled out the AR, last, which jammed.  All anyone can talk about is the AR and im not convinced it actually was any more deadly than the other two guns.

   If you're trying to prevent stuff like this, taking particular guns away from anyone will not solve anything - and all it does is take rights away from people that will not break the law.  Identifying crazy people seems a lot more logical.


Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.


Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: michigancat on July 27, 2012, 03:21:01 PM
A lot of people are more worried about America's gun culture in general and not assault rifles specifically. I personally think outlawing handguns would do far more good and make a lot more sense than assault rifles.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 27, 2012, 03:23:36 PM
A lot of people are more worried about America's gun culture in general and not assault rifles specifically. I personally think outlawing handguns would do far more good and make a lot more sense than assault rifles.

And how do you propose going about this?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: michigancat on July 27, 2012, 03:26:38 PM
I think a good start would be to ban the manufacturing and sales of handguns for civilian use.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 0.42 on July 27, 2012, 03:35:52 PM
It should be possible to ban stupid people, that way goEMAW and tmb can run the country together
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 27, 2012, 04:04:45 PM
I think a good start would be to ban the manufacturing and sales of handguns for civilian use.

Thank god we don't live in a democracy, right?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: michigancat on July 27, 2012, 04:06:41 PM
I think a good start would be to ban the manufacturing and sales of handguns for civilian use.

Thank god we don't live in a democracy, right?

wut
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: mocat on July 27, 2012, 04:27:01 PM
The argument that a semi-automatic AR with 100 rounds is less dangerous than a handgun, because it has a reputation for jamming, has got to be a troll. HB you're trolling right?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: ChiComCat on July 27, 2012, 08:14:54 PM
When you look at statistics of gun related deaths and guns per capita in the world, it seems pretty clear that the guns are killing people.  If people killed people then population statistics would correspond with gun related deaths.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: wetwillie on July 27, 2012, 08:28:22 PM
he probably could have been more efficient with a katana.  He wouldn't have had to reload.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Cartierfor3 on July 27, 2012, 09:31:12 PM
I went to Israel about a year ago.  EVERYONE has a gun there.  EVERYONE.  Felt safe the whole time.*   :dunno:






*Not implying that everyone in USA having a gun would make us safer.  People in Israel seemed more level headed. 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: slobber on July 28, 2012, 05:32:52 AM
Now claiming amnesia. How will they prove he doesn't have amnesia? I think if they can prove he doesn't have amnesia, his insanity plea will be a lot harder to make a case for.
Title: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 28, 2012, 08:57:02 AM
The argument that a semi-automatic AR with 100 rounds is less dangerous than a handgun, because it has a reputation for jamming, has got to be a troll. HB you're trolling right?

I'm making the statement that it is no more dangerous than any other gun, which is entirely different than less dangerous. Look if you get shot by anything in a vital area, you're likely to die.   The only logical conclusion anti gun people can come to then is to get rid of all guns, including shotguns, which I might point out you can get in semi-automatic and altered to hold several rounds.   If you're going to go down that rabbit hole, you have to start asking yourself questions about home made bombs; not to mention all guns world wide will never disappear. What happens when some Riley Rat goes AWOL and starts blasting people in downtown manhattan with his government issued m16?  I have to ask you what you're trying to accomplish by restricting guns?  Making people safer, or taking people's ability to protect themselves away?  If your concern is for the safety of society, your time would be better spent creating a world where guns are not needed - not eliminating guns.


Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: SkinnyBenny on July 28, 2012, 10:48:18 AM
Look at HeinzBallz getting all mad and getting trolled and only typing really long blocks of text. This is why people coined the term gun nuts.

 :dance:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 28, 2012, 11:22:18 AM
Look at HeinzBallz getting all mad and getting trolled and only typing really long blocks of text. This is why people coined the term gun nuts.

 :dance:

  If your concern is for the safety of society, your time would be better spent creating a world where guns are not needed - not eliminating guns.

When did this become "nutty" speak?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 28, 2012, 11:30:27 AM
Heinz has really outed himself in this thread as a crazy gun person. T's & P's moving forward Heinz. T's & P's.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 28, 2012, 11:37:12 AM
Heinz has really outed himself in this thread as a crazy gun person. T's & P's moving forward Heinz. T's & P's.

I'm sure you're just giddy at the thought of not being the target for PI'n & trolling...   Luckily for the rest of us, you're still the master.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Gooch on July 28, 2012, 11:44:39 AM
#teamHeinBallz
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: ChiComCat on July 28, 2012, 12:45:22 PM
There is no good reason for a private citizen to have a semi-auto weapon.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 28, 2012, 12:46:46 PM
Heinz has really outed himself in this thread as a crazy gun person. T's & P's moving forward Heinz. T's & P's.

I'm sure you're just giddy at the thought of not being the target for PI'n & trolling...   Luckily for the rest of us, you're still the master.
Careful, your butthurt is showing.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: kim carnes on July 28, 2012, 01:02:36 PM
There is no good reason for a private citizen to have a semi-auto weapon.

 :flush:
Title: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 28, 2012, 01:53:10 PM
There is no good reason for a private citizen to have a semi-auto weapon.

There is no good reason to think taking them away will change anything.


Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.


Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: SkinnyBenny on July 28, 2012, 02:01:16 PM
It might not change anything, but it might. Know what certainly won't change anything? Doing nothing.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: ChiComCat on July 28, 2012, 02:06:05 PM
I've never heard of someone protecting their family with a semi-auto weapon in a first world country.  There needs to be at least some sort of security/contracters license or something for those weapons so you can't pick them up after a 5 day waiting list or whatever.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: kim carnes on July 28, 2012, 02:08:48 PM
they will never make semi-auto weapons illegal in the US so it's pointless to discuss
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Trim on July 28, 2012, 02:21:05 PM
they will never make semi-auto weapons illegal in the US so it's pointless to discuss

Good point, Ira Hayes.
Title: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 28, 2012, 02:44:31 PM
I've never heard of someone protecting their family with a semi-auto weapon in a first world country.  There needs to be at least some sort of security/contracters license or something for those weapons so you can't pick them up after a 5 day waiting list or whatever.

Where exactly would you hear about it?  Doesn't seem like something the media would propagate.


Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.


Title: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 28, 2012, 02:46:20 PM
It might not change anything, but it might. Know what certainly won't change anything? Doing nothing.

  If your concern is for the safety of society, your time would be better spent creating a world where guns are not needed - not eliminating guns.

This is certainly not "doing nothing"


Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.


Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 28, 2012, 02:57:48 PM
Can we lock this dumbass thread? Or atleast hide it in the Dunning Kruger?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: kim carnes on July 28, 2012, 03:00:15 PM
I've never heard of someone protecting their family with a semi-auto weapon in a first world country.  There needs to be at least some sort of security/contracters license or something for those weapons so you can't pick them up after a 5 day waiting list or whatever.


lol, you don't have to wait 5 minutes for a semiautomatic weapon
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Dugout DickStone on July 28, 2012, 03:17:52 PM
I went to Israel about a year ago.  EVERYONE has a gun there.  EVERYONE.  Felt safe the whole time.*   :dunno:






*Not implying that everyone in USA having a gun would make us safer.  People in Israel seemed more level headed.

Israel is not safe at all.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: ChiComCat on July 28, 2012, 03:21:44 PM
I've never heard of someone protecting their family with a semi-auto weapon in a first world country.  There needs to be at least some sort of security/contracters license or something for those weapons so you can't pick them up after a 5 day waiting list or whatever.

Where exactly would you hear about it?  Doesn't seem like something the media would propagate.


Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.




If it happened, it would be crazy enough to make headlines.  This thread has devolved enough anyways.  If you want to get into media conspiracies, we need to DK it.  Probably need to anyways....
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: slobber on July 28, 2012, 04:05:30 PM
It might not change anything, but it might. Know what certainly won't change anything? Doing nothing.
I have to say that anytime somebody uses the "We can't just do nothing" argument, especially on an either or proposition, I hate it.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 28, 2012, 04:24:15 PM
If it happened, it would be crazy enough to make headlines.  This thread has devolved enough anyways.  If you want to get into media conspiracies, we need to DK it.  Probably need to anyways....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1310439/Man-defended-home-gang-firing-AK47-arrested.html


http://www.newschannel5.com/story/17595261/police-shooting-of-home-intruder-was-self-defense


http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=07b_1327011647&comments=1

This one isn't about assault rifles, but it does involve a Chicago man potentially being prosecuted after it was discovered he owned a gun (which is illegal in Chicago) when he killed a bugler who had shot at him.

http://www.learnaboutguns.com/2010/05/28/armed-chicago-man-defends-himself-against-a-violent-burlgar/


There's probably more, but This was all I could find in the first 2 pages of google searching.   




Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: DQ12 on July 28, 2012, 05:28:01 PM
I read an article the other day that talked about how when the constitution was amended to include the right to form a militia and have guns and whatnot, semi-automatic weapons weren't invented yet and the only "arms" with which they were familiar were super clunky, inaccurate muskets that could only get a round off like, once every minute and a half.  I hadn't ever really thought of that. 

Question: What if the framers didn't even have AR-15s in mind when they talked about forming a militia and carrying guns and stuff? 

Answer: Boy IDK, but either way I vote to outlaw every gun besides those muskets if for no other reason than it'd be hilarious.
Title: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 28, 2012, 05:33:30 PM
Question: what's the difference between a guy with a 1 shot musket vs. an unarmed man and a guy with an AR15 vs an unarmed man?

Answer: absolutely nothing.


Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.


Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: DQ12 on July 28, 2012, 05:39:45 PM
Question: what's the difference between a guy with a 1 shot musket vs. an unarmed man and a guy with an AR15 vs an unarmed man?

Answer: absolutely nothing.


Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
1. Depends how close musket guy is to his target.

2. That's kind of irrelevant.
Title: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 28, 2012, 06:04:55 PM

2. That's kind of irrelevant.

So is any argument made after someone states that the 2nd amendment was for self protection and implying that a newly formed republic that had just liberated themselves from a tyrannical government would prohibit their citizens from owning anything that could efficiently prevent a future tyrannical government from ruling their lives.

Lol at thinking the constitution is about anything but protecting the PEOPLE'S rights.


Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.


Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: ChiComCat on July 28, 2012, 06:12:29 PM
If it happened, it would be crazy enough to make headlines.  This thread has devolved enough anyways.  If you want to get into media conspiracies, we need to DK it.  Probably need to anyways....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1310439/Man-defended-home-gang-firing-AK47-arrested.html


http://www.newschannel5.com/story/17595261/police-shooting-of-home-intruder-was-self-defense


http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=07b_1327011647&comments=1

This one isn't about assault rifles, but it does involve a Chicago man potentially being prosecuted after it was discovered he owned a gun (which is illegal in Chicago) when he killed a bugler who had shot at him.

http://www.learnaboutguns.com/2010/05/28/armed-chicago-man-defends-himself-against-a-violent-burlgar/


There's probably more, but This was all I could find in the first 2 pages of google searching.   


Only one of those seemed like the fact that it was an assualt rifle made any difference.  The rest, a musket would've sufficed.  I am pro-Dlew musket law.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Trim on July 28, 2012, 06:12:42 PM
A lot of the edginess Emily saw in Jef after the hometown dates was derived from watching him shoot off his guns, so factor that into all this.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: DQ12 on July 28, 2012, 06:22:29 PM
So is any argument made after someone states that the 2nd amendment was for self protection and implying that a newly formed republic that had just liberated themselves from a tyrannical government would prohibit their citizens from owning anything that could efficiently prevent a future tyrannical government from ruling their lives.
I think I see your point. 

Do you think it sounds maybe a little bit crazy in 2012 for people to buy guns in order to defend themselves against a hypothetical future tyrannical government?

I would think so.  After typing it all out, it sounds a little bit crazy to me.
Title: Re: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: michigancat on July 28, 2012, 06:25:42 PM
There is no good reason for a private citizen to have a semi-auto weapon.

There is no good reason to think taking them away will change anything.


Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.

Of course there is. making handguns harder to obtain would ultimately lead to fewer shooting deaths.
Title: Re: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Cartierfor3 on July 28, 2012, 06:37:06 PM


Of course there is. making handguns harder to obtain would ultimately lead to fewer shooting deaths.

you'd think that.  but the stats say different. 
Title: Re: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: DQ12 on July 28, 2012, 06:39:47 PM


Of course there is. making handguns harder to obtain would ultimately lead to fewer shooting deaths.

you'd think that.  but the stats say different.
i bet they don't.
Title: Re: Re: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: michigancat on July 28, 2012, 06:39:53 PM


Of course there is. making handguns harder to obtain would ultimately lead to fewer shooting deaths.

you'd think that.  but the stats say different.

Which stats?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Cartierfor3 on July 28, 2012, 06:42:59 PM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.justfacts.com%2Fimages%2Fguncontrol%2Fflorida-full.png&hash=6ad1aef29fda6a7c8eadb72a3709e449ed9139cf)
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Trim on July 28, 2012, 06:45:39 PM
:lol:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: sys on July 28, 2012, 06:47:54 PM
hardly anyone gots shot to death.  people are such rough ridin' cowards.
Title: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 28, 2012, 07:04:57 PM
So is any argument made after someone states that the 2nd amendment was for self protection and implying that a newly formed republic that had just liberated themselves from a tyrannical government would prohibit their citizens from owning anything that could efficiently prevent a future tyrannical government from ruling their lives.
I think I see your point. 

Do you think it sounds maybe a little bit crazy in 2012 for people to buy guns in order to defend themselves against a hypothetical future tyrannical government?

I would think so.  After typing it all out, it sounds a little bit crazy to me.

Do you think it's crazy that president had an American 16 year old boy assassinated because his father was suspected of being a terrorist?


Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.


Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Cartierfor3 on July 28, 2012, 07:44:32 PM
Quote
Just consider a few statistics: Five years before the D.C. Council banned nearly all firearms in 1976, the District’s murder rate fell from 37 to 27 per 100,000 people. In the five years after 1976, the murder rate rose to 35 per 100,000 people. Between 1976 and 1991, the D.C. homicide rate rose 200 percent. The national homicide rate during the same 15-year period rose just 12 percent.


http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2005/may/20/20050520-081040-3508r/ (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2005/may/20/20050520-081040-3508r/)
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Trim on July 28, 2012, 08:01:43 PM
CF3, you just quoted un-cited statistics from an op-ed against a ban on handguns.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 28, 2012, 08:02:09 PM
If it happened, it would be crazy enough to make headlines.  This thread has devolved enough anyways.  If you want to get into media conspiracies, we need to DK it.  Probably need to anyways....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1310439/Man-defended-home-gang-firing-AK47-arrested.html


http://www.newschannel5.com/story/17595261/police-shooting-of-home-intruder-was-self-defense


http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=07b_1327011647&comments=1

This one isn't about assault rifles, but it does involve a Chicago man potentially being prosecuted after it was discovered he owned a gun (which is illegal in Chicago) when he killed a bugler who had shot at him.

http://www.learnaboutguns.com/2010/05/28/armed-chicago-man-defends-himself-against-a-violent-burlgar/


There's probably more, but This was all I could find in the first 2 pages of google searching.   


Only one of those seemed like the fact that it was an assualt rifle made any difference.  The rest, a musket would've sufficed.  I am pro-Dlew musket law.

You know, this term assault rifle keeps being thrown out there - which I'm guilty of myself...  But seriously, no one has yet to make a clear distinction as to exactly what makes a gun an assault weapon? 

Can someone anti-assault weapon please clarify?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: WillieWatanabe on July 29, 2012, 10:13:52 AM
I admire Heinballz stick-to-it-ness.  Keep doing your thing HBz.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: sys on July 29, 2012, 03:28:26 PM
I have to say that anytime somebody uses the "We can't just do nothing" argument, especially on an either or proposition, I hate it.

it's especially stupid here.  "if we do nothing, 0.0001% more people may be killed by guns than if we do something."  seven billion people; who gives a eff?
Title: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 29, 2012, 05:28:29 PM
Obesity kills more people and I certainly don't give a eff.


Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.


Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Trim on July 29, 2012, 06:54:04 PM
LOL at wasting a day going through concealed carry class.  I'm taking my suit pants to the tailor to get them let out a bit and rolling like this here in the ICT.

(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.kansas.com%2Fsmedia%2F2011%2F08%2F24%2F16%2F43%2Fjojjh.Em.80.jpg&hash=c600ebd233ad16b5a128a77abd2de6e5e00da1cd)

http://www.kansas.com/2012/07/27/2426164/group-aims-to-reverse-open-carry.html
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 30, 2012, 02:41:08 PM
I understand that criminals who plan out crimes will still take their guns with them and all, but I don't really think people with concealed carry licenses are going to go out and stop those crimes. The only thing that is accomplished by allowing concealed carry, imo, is facilitating "crimes of passion" and other retaliatory killings that would not have otherwise occurred if we didn't allow nut jobs to tuck their pistol into their pants everywhere they go.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Emo EMAW on July 30, 2012, 03:23:38 PM
I went to Israel about a year ago.  EVERYONE has a gun there.  EVERYONE.  Felt safe the whole time.*   :dunno:






*Not implying that everyone in USA having a gun would make us safer.  People in Israel seemed more level headed.

Israel is not safe at all.

Violent death rate is less than half of the US.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: kstatefreak42 on July 30, 2012, 03:40:09 PM
Making Statism Unpopular


Kills 12 in a movie theater with an assault rifle --------> Everyone Freaks out

Kills thousands with his foreign policy---------> Wins Nobel Peace Prize?

Fox News cinci i think... Ben Swann... asks the real questions about the shooting

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RyYHgEQJz28
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 30, 2012, 03:50:23 PM
I understand that criminals who plan out crimes will still take their guns with them and all, but I don't really think people with concealed carry licenses are going to go out and stop those crimes. The only thing that is accomplished by allowing concealed carry, imo, is facilitating "crimes of passion" and other retaliatory killings that would not have otherwise occurred if we didn't allow nut jobs to tuck their pistol into their pants everywhere they go.

What about the people that aren't nut jobs?  Why should they not be able to protect themselves?  And really, you don't think CCL has stopped any crimes?  If you're suggesting it's not publicized in the media I agree, but that doesn't negate those events from actually happening. How else would you explain that in the decade since the year 2000, violent crime rates fell by 20 percent; aggravated assault by 22 percent; motor vehicle theft by 42 percent; murder – by all weapons – by 13 percent?  I also find it odd that events such as Aurora Colorado always occur in places that have "No Concealed Carry Allowed" signs plastered all over the front doors.

Do you not think people that would commit a crime of passion are not already carrying - illegally? Even if they aren't - I doubt they could cool off quicker than going home & grabbing a gun.

Look, people that have a CCL want to keep their CCL.  There are educated on what is and isn't legal and they are not about to do something stupid and lose their CCL.  The people you're talking about, were already carrying before CCL was around.  Are you aware that Open carry is legal in many states? Do you have a problem with that?

The way I see it, you're either A: Eliminate ALL guns (handguns/shotguns/rifles/etc.)  or B: Do not restrict Gun rights in any manor.  I feel very strongly that eliminating all guns would be extremely impossible, highly short sighted, & very ineffective.  Gun restrictions in any kind don't seem to achieve much either - Look at Chicago.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: michigancat on July 30, 2012, 03:58:43 PM
Fox News cinci i think... Ben Swann... asks the real questions about the shooting

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RyYHgEQJz28

LOL, that was great.

I understand that criminals who plan out crimes will still take their guns with them and all, but I don't really think people with concealed carry licenses are going to go out and stop those crimes. The only thing that is accomplished by allowing concealed carry, imo, is facilitating "crimes of passion" and other retaliatory killings that would not have otherwise occurred if we didn't allow nut jobs to tuck their pistol into their pants everywhere they go.

What about the people that aren't nut jobs?  Why should they not be able to protect themselves?  And really, you don't think CCL has stopped any crimes?  If you're suggesting it's not publicized in the media I agree, but that doesn't negate those events from actually happening. How else would you explain that in the decade since the year 2000, violent crime rates fell by 20 percent; aggravated assault by 22 percent; motor vehicle theft by 42 percent; murder – by all weapons – by 13 percent?  I also find it odd that events such as Aurora Colorado always occur in places that have "No Concealed Carry Allowed" signs plastered all over the front doors.

Do you not think people that would commit a crime of passion are not already carrying - illegally? Even if they aren't - I doubt they could cool off quicker than going home & grabbing a gun.

Look, people that have a CCL want to keep their CCL.  There are educated on what is and isn't legal and they are not about to do something stupid and lose their CCL.  The people you're talking about, were already carrying before CCL was around.  Are you aware that Open carry is legal in many states? Do you have a problem with that?

The way I see it, you're either A: Eliminate ALL guns (handguns/shotguns/rifles/etc.)  or B: Do not restrict Gun rights in any manor.  I feel very strongly that eliminating all guns would be extremely impossible, highly short sighted, & very ineffective.  Gun restrictions in any kind don't seem to achieve much either - Look at Chicago.


Roe vs. Wade led to the drop in crime. source: freakonomics
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Trim on July 30, 2012, 03:59:52 PM
I decided I didn't want to tuck my gun in my pants pointed at my ball, and I haven't found a holster yet.  My hands getting pretty cramped holding this revolver all day to make it's "open" to everyone.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 30, 2012, 04:05:32 PM
I understand that criminals who plan out crimes will still take their guns with them and all, but I don't really think people with concealed carry licenses are going to go out and stop those crimes. The only thing that is accomplished by allowing concealed carry, imo, is facilitating "crimes of passion" and other retaliatory killings that would not have otherwise occurred if we didn't allow nut jobs to tuck their pistol into their pants everywhere they go.

What about the people that aren't nut jobs?  Why should they not be able to protect themselves?  And really, you don't think CCL has stopped any crimes?  If you're suggesting it's not publicized in the media I agree, but that doesn't negate those events from actually happening. How else would you explain that in the decade since the year 2000, violent crime rates fell by 20 percent; aggravated assault by 22 percent; motor vehicle theft by 42 percent; murder – by all weapons – by 13 percent?  I also find it odd that events such as Aurora Colorado always occur in places that have "No Concealed Carry Allowed" signs plastered all over the front doors.

Do you not think people that would commit a crime of passion are not already carrying - illegally? Even if they aren't - I doubt they could cool off quicker than going home & grabbing a gun.

Look, people that have a CCL want to keep their CCL.  There are educated on what is and isn't legal and they are not about to do something stupid and lose their CCL.  The people you're talking about, were already carrying before CCL was around.  Are you aware that Open carry is legal in many states? Do you have a problem with that?

The way I see it, you're either A: Eliminate ALL guns (handguns/shotguns/rifles/etc.)  or B: Do not restrict Gun rights in any manor.  I feel very strongly that eliminating all guns would be extremely impossible, highly short sighted, & very ineffective.  Gun restrictions in any kind don't seem to achieve much either - Look at Chicago.

Why would a man who would commit a crime of passion be carrying a firearm illegally? He's not planning the crime, so why would he be carrying around a gun that if he gets caught with, would cost him a heavy fine or jail time?

I certainly wouldn't attribute reduced crime rates to concealed carry laws. I don't have a problem with open carry because that allows me to see who the nut jobs are and steer clear.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Trim on July 30, 2012, 04:08:26 PM
I don't have a problem with open carry because that allows me to see who the nut jobs are and steer clear.

 :driving:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 30, 2012, 04:10:49 PM
Roe vs. Wade led to the drop in crime. source: freakonomics

Now that I will agree with - All that's left is to allow CCL holders to pick off the rest.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: The Tonya Harding of Twitter Users Creep on July 30, 2012, 04:15:11 PM
I decided I didn't want to tuck my gun in my pants pointed at my ball, and I haven't found a holster yet.  My hands getting pretty cramped holding this revolver all day to make it's "open" to everyone.

Could be wrong about this but I think in some (maybe all) states you have to have a holster to carry. Be careful, Trim!!
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 30, 2012, 04:16:49 PM
Here are a few examples, HeinBallz.

When Mario Little walked in on his girlfriend having sexual relations with another man, he threw her face through the sink. That was horrible and could have killed her, but had he been carrying a concealed firearm, he very well could have pulled it out and shot both her and the dude.

If George Zimmerman is not carrying a concealed firearm, both he and Trayvon Martin are still alive.

If any of Trim's chokeout victims are carrying a concealed weapon, Trim is probably no longer with us.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 30, 2012, 04:18:11 PM

Why would a man who would commit a crime of passion be carrying a firearm illegally? He's not planning the crime, so why would he be carrying around a gun that if he gets caught with, would cost him a heavy fine or jail time?
 

Every gun owner I know was carrying before CCL's came about. The ones that weren't nut jobs got a CCL - the others didn't want to spend the $100 for the class or let the 'gubment know they had a gun for when Obama announced martial law and they came to take everyone's guns.   Aside from that, who really gives a eff about crimes of passion?  What are you trying to achieve? World Peace?  If some dude is nailing my wife, I can live with the jail time and I doubt anyone would miss guys like fanning.


I certainly wouldn't attribute reduced crime rates to concealed carry laws. I don't have a problem with open carry because that allows me to see who the nut jobs are and steer clear.

I steer clear from those same nut jobs by being a decent human being and not a rough ridin' dick head.  What are you worried about, flipping off some guy in traffic and getting blasted?  Here's an idea for you, stop being a dick head that people would want to shoot.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: kstatefreak42 on July 30, 2012, 04:19:22 PM
Trayvon MArtin is not the victim here.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Trim on July 30, 2012, 04:20:59 PM
I decided I didn't want to tuck my gun in my pants pointed at my ball, and I haven't found a holster yet.  My hands getting pretty cramped holding this revolver all day to make it's "open" to everyone.

Could be wrong about this but I think in some (maybe all) states you have to have a holster to carry. Be careful, Trim!!

Well then that pic that came with the Wichita open-carry article is very misleading.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Trim on July 30, 2012, 04:21:44 PM
If any of Trim's chokeout victims are carrying a concealed weapon, Trim is probably no longer with us.

Denied.  Chokeout victims become completely paralyzed with shock and are unable to use their 2 free arms.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 30, 2012, 04:22:26 PM
Here are a few examples, HeinBallz.

When Mario Little walked in on his girlfriend having sexual relations with another man, he threw her face through the sink. That was horrible and could have killed her, but had he been carrying a concealed firearm, he very well could have pulled it out and shot both her and the dude.

If George Zimmerman is not carrying a concealed firearm, both he and Trayvon Martin are still alive.

If any of Trim's chokeout victims are carrying a concealed weapon, Trim is probably no longer with us.

Mario Little isn't about to get a CCL.  Any dude that would throw his girlfriends face through a sink isn't worried about being legal when he carries his piece.  Zimmerman is a sad deal - you care because you hear about it every 3 days.  What you don't care about is the countless instances that a CCL holder stopped a rape/assault/theft/murder.

I don't know Trim personally, but judging from his bbs persona, he is probably skilled enough to choke out someone then disarm them without a shot being fired... also, Trim is probably choking out the type of dude that wouldn't get a CCL for fear that Obama is going to put him on a terrorist list.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 30, 2012, 04:23:19 PM
Trayvon MArtin is not the victim here.

The story hasn't entirely come out.  Please refrain from casting judgement on either involved party.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Trim on July 30, 2012, 04:23:49 PM
I don't know Trim personally, but judging from his bbs persona, he is probably skilled enough to choke out someone then disarm them without a shot being fired... also, Trim is probably choking out the type of dude that wouldn't get a CCL for fear that Obama is going to put him on a terrorist list.

Squawks?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: michigancat on July 30, 2012, 04:24:26 PM
'gubment
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 30, 2012, 04:25:18 PM
I don't know Trim personally, but judging from his bbs persona, he is probably skilled enough to choke out someone then disarm them without a shot being fired... also, Trim is probably choking out the type of dude that wouldn't get a CCL for fear that Obama is going to put him on a terrorist list.

Squawks?

 :dunno:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 30, 2012, 04:26:15 PM
Almost all gun owners that I know simply keep them in a safe in their house and only remove them if they have some reason to protect themselves or if they are going hunting. I only know a few people who are frightened of the world enough to carry around a gun with no intention of using it, and those people all have concealed carry licenses. I don't know anybody who carries around a concealed weapon without a license, and I would quickly disassociate myself from anybody who does.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 30, 2012, 04:27:01 PM
'gubment

yeah, that was 2nd person speak... I was going for 'tard... did that translate well?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 30, 2012, 04:28:40 PM
Trayvon MArtin is not the victim here.

The story hasn't entirely come out.  Please refrain from casting judgement on either involved party.

Regardless of the facts that have not yet come out regarding Zimmerman's guilt or innocence, if Zimmerman doesn't have a gun, both parties are still alive. I believe GZ probably thought his life was in danger because he is a fearful man who carries a gun with him everywhere he goes. I don't think his life was truly in danger, though.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: michigancat on July 30, 2012, 04:28:45 PM
'gubment

yeah, that was 2nd person speak... I was going for 'tard... did that translate well?

no
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 30, 2012, 04:28:47 PM
Almost all gun owners that I know simply keep them in a safe in their house and only remove them if they have some reason to protect themselves or if they are going hunting. I only know a few people who are frightened of the world enough to carry around a gun with no intention of using it, and those people all have concealed carry licenses. I don't know anybody who carries around a concealed weapon without a license, and I would quickly disassociate myself from anybody who does.

Well then I have to ask - where do you obtain this "nut-job" insight that you keep speaking of?  Sounds like all of the gun owners you know are fairly responsible. 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 30, 2012, 04:30:36 PM
Trayvon MArtin is not the victim here.

The story hasn't entirely come out.  Please refrain from casting judgement on either involved party.

Regardless of the facts that have not yet come out regarding Zimmerman's guilt or innocence, if Zimmerman doesn't have a gun, both parties are still alive. I believe GZ probably thought his life was in danger because he is a fearful man who carries a gun with him everywhere he goes. I don't think his life was truly in danger, though.

I wasn't talking to you.   THIS was my rebuttal:
Zimmerman is a sad deal - you care because you hear about it every 3 days.  What you don't care about is the countless instances that a CCL holder stopped a rape/assault/theft/murder.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 30, 2012, 04:31:21 PM
Mario Little isn't about to get a CCL.

Sure he isn't now, but before this incident, on what grounds would he have been denied?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 30, 2012, 04:32:35 PM
Almost all gun owners that I know simply keep them in a safe in their house and only remove them if they have some reason to protect themselves or if they are going hunting. I only know a few people who are frightened of the world enough to carry around a gun with no intention of using it, and those people all have concealed carry licenses. I don't know anybody who carries around a concealed weapon without a license, and I would quickly disassociate myself from anybody who does.

Well then I have to ask - where do you obtain this "nut-job" insight that you keep speaking of?  Sounds like all of the gun owners you know are fairly responsible.

I just think that anybody who feels the need to pack heat when they go to the supermarket is a little bit crazy.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 30, 2012, 04:33:57 PM
'gubment

yeah, that was 2nd person speak... I was going for 'tard... did that translate well?

no

My sincerest apologies.   For anyone else that may have thought those were my words imagine a powerespect/redneck talking when you read this:

The ones that weren't nut jobs got a CCL - the others didn't want to spend the $100 for the class or let the 'gubment know they had a gun for when Obama announced martial law and they came to take everyone's guns.   
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 30, 2012, 04:35:35 PM

Zimmerman is a sad deal - you care because you hear about it every 3 days.  What you don't care about is the countless instances that a CCL holder stopped a rape/assault/theft/murder.

Mr. Bread posted a story about an old man stopping a theft, but I have never seen any story where a CCL holder actually stopped a rape, assault, or murder.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 30, 2012, 04:37:11 PM
Almost all gun owners that I know simply keep them in a safe in their house and only remove them if they have some reason to protect themselves or if they are going hunting. I only know a few people who are frightened of the world enough to carry around a gun with no intention of using it, and those people all have concealed carry licenses. I don't know anybody who carries around a concealed weapon without a license, and I would quickly disassociate myself from anybody who does.

Well then I have to ask - where do you obtain this "nut-job" insight that you keep speaking of?  Sounds like all of the gun owners you know are fairly responsible.

I just think that anybody who feels the need to pack heat when they go to the supermarket is a little bit crazy.

That's probably true in most cities.  I have only carried twice since I got a CCL 2 years ago - both were while I was on vacation driving through areas that had crime rates higher than average or where black bears may be around.   I don't know anyone that carries at all times.  If I met someone, I would assume they were paranoid... not crazy.  There's a huge difference.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 30, 2012, 04:39:20 PM

Zimmerman is a sad deal - you care because you hear about it every 3 days.  What you don't care about is the countless instances that a CCL holder stopped a rape/assault/theft/murder.

Mr. Bread posted a story about an old man stopping a theft, but I have never seen any story where a CCL holder actually stopped a rape, assault, or murder.

And why would you hear about it?  It's not exactly national news when someone prevents a crime from happening.  No one watches the news to hear about someone "Almost" getting raped or "Almost" getting murdered.  People want drama.  Unless it's a six year old, or a Labrador retriever stopping a crime, there's no sensationalized story that can be sold.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 30, 2012, 04:40:58 PM
Anyway, I'm off work and going home.   Maybe I'll do a quick google search for you later to show you some instances where a CCL holder actually stopped a crime.   I bet it's happened more often than Aurora Colorado type incidents.   
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Emo EMAW on July 30, 2012, 04:44:18 PM

Zimmerman is a sad deal - you care because you hear about it every 3 days.  What you don't care about is the countless instances that a CCL holder stopped a rape/assault/theft/murder.

Mr. Bread posted a story about an old man stopping a theft, but I have never seen any story where a CCL holder actually stopped a rape, assault, or murder.

They are literally a dozen or more stories, every month, in the NRA magazine.  Albeit some are home-invasion type stuff, I'm happy to provide details if you'd like.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 30, 2012, 04:45:19 PM

Zimmerman is a sad deal - you care because you hear about it every 3 days.  What you don't care about is the countless instances that a CCL holder stopped a rape/assault/theft/murder.

Mr. Bread posted a story about an old man stopping a theft, but I have never seen any story where a CCL holder actually stopped a rape, assault, or murder.

They are literally a dozen or more stories, every month, in the NRA magazine.  Albeit some are home-invasion type stuff, I'm happy to provide details if you'd like.

Please do.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: DQ12 on July 30, 2012, 04:56:28 PM
http://www.cracked.com/blog/the-4-most-meaningless-arguments-against-gun-control/ (http://www.cracked.com/blog/the-4-most-meaningless-arguments-against-gun-control/)
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: mocat on July 30, 2012, 05:10:29 PM
I would like to know the percentage of gun-related crimes committed by people with a CCL in CCL states. Is that info available HB?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 'taterblast on July 30, 2012, 05:42:34 PM
(https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/529014_10151127985862803_1339021416_n.jpg)
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: XocolateThundarr on July 30, 2012, 05:53:21 PM
(https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/529014_10151127985862803_1339021416_n.jpg)

Pic on the left looks like Two-Face .
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: sys on July 30, 2012, 05:59:30 PM
If some dude is nailing my wife, I can live with the jail time and I doubt anyone would miss guys like fanning.

heinballz already won the thread and none of you retards even noticed.
Title: Re: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 8manpick on July 30, 2012, 06:35:58 PM
If some dude is nailing my wife, I can live with the jail time and I doubt anyone would miss guys like fanning.

heinballz already won the thread and none of you retards even noticed.
If some dude is nailing your wife, you married a whore

Sent from my GT-S5830M using Tapatalk 2
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 30, 2012, 07:08:25 PM
(https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/529014_10151127985862803_1339021416_n.jpg)

Pic on the left looks like Two-Face .

Yeah, he could pull Two Face off much better than the Joker. Maybe he should start going with that.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: kstatefreak42 on July 30, 2012, 07:11:51 PM
Project MKUltra
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 30, 2012, 08:19:14 PM
(https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/529014_10151127985862803_1339021416_n.jpg)

That's the dumbest thing I've ever seen. 

"Hey guys!  Everyone knows that faces are completely rough ridin' symetrical, and the left ear always always always matches up identically to the right ear, so comparing this left ear from picture 1 and this right ear from picture 2 tells me that these two pictures are of a different person... except for the picture in the middle where the clearly same dude has asymmetrical ears...wait... eff... The nose!!! Look at the Nose!  Ones thin & the other isn't!   That's it!  Clearly a different person!  Except in one picture he's smiling and sometimes the muscles in your face cause an involuntary nostril flair and in the other picture he's frowning and trying to look crazy... wait... eff."
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 30, 2012, 08:23:43 PM
I would like to know the percentage of gun-related crimes committed by people with a CCL in CCL states. Is that info available HB?

How the eff should I know? 

Let's have a google contest though, my fellow gun nuts and I will look for instances of CCL's stopping a crime and the anti-gun nuts can look for instances where a person with a CCL accidentally/purposely shot someone or broke the law.  The handicap will be the mostly liberal media jumping all over a reason to ban guns and not covering CCL saves.   Ready...   GO!
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 30, 2012, 08:55:01 PM
http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/2011/05/concealed-carry-permit-holder-stops.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XaQsbdXQuZI

http://blogsofwar.com/2007/04/22/gun-control-gets-personal/

http://www.rightwingnews.com/guns/concealed-carry-permitholder-stops-stabbing-rampage-in-utah/

Oh crap: Here's a goldmine!
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/customer-shoots-suspects-during-internet-cafe-robbery/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/michigan-ccw-holder-stops-knife-assault/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/armed-colorado-physician-rescues-50-bystanders-from-hostage-situation/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/pennsylvania-cyclist-ends-teen-robbery-spree/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/south-carolinian-kills-armed-restaurant-robber/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/arizona-man-survives-gun-battle/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/ohio-woman-fights-off-sex-offender/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/armed-houston-dad-foils-attack-on-14-year-old-daughter/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/armed-naples-fl-clerk-foils-robbery-kidnap-attempt/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/st-petersburg-fl-man-decides-to-stay-armed-then-stops-mugging/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/south-carolina-convenience-store-owner-stops-armed-robber/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/philly-area-senior-citizen-pistol-whips-younger-bigger-robber/

There appears to be thousands more on that site, but before I waste any more time, I thought I'd see what you could find.  I was skipping all of the home invasion ones... I only posted the "gun-nut" carrying out in public ones - but I encourage you to double check my work.   

You know what I did notice in every story I read though?  Every one involved someone deserving to rough ridin' get shot - alot of them I wish would have been killed instead of just being wounded and later hauled off to jail.   But be sure to watch this last one below - speaks perfectly to why the 2nd amendment is extremely relevant.


A good example of why I don't think cops should be responsible for my safety - rough ridin' pig probably kept his job after this stunt - We have guns so we don't end up in a police state (http://youtu.be/kassP7zI0qc?t=7m)
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: kstatefreak42 on July 30, 2012, 09:31:03 PM
Yeah I want my guns for protection only.

Against the oppressive police state that lies ahead for my generation.  :goodbyecruelworld:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Emo EMAW on July 30, 2012, 09:37:29 PM
http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/2011/05/concealed-carry-permit-holder-stops.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XaQsbdXQuZI

http://blogsofwar.com/2007/04/22/gun-control-gets-personal/

http://www.rightwingnews.com/guns/concealed-carry-permitholder-stops-stabbing-rampage-in-utah/

Oh crap: Here's a goldmine!
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/customer-shoots-suspects-during-internet-cafe-robbery/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/michigan-ccw-holder-stops-knife-assault/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/armed-colorado-physician-rescues-50-bystanders-from-hostage-situation/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/pennsylvania-cyclist-ends-teen-robbery-spree/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/south-carolinian-kills-armed-restaurant-robber/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/arizona-man-survives-gun-battle/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/ohio-woman-fights-off-sex-offender/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/armed-houston-dad-foils-attack-on-14-year-old-daughter/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/armed-naples-fl-clerk-foils-robbery-kidnap-attempt/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/st-petersburg-fl-man-decides-to-stay-armed-then-stops-mugging/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/south-carolina-convenience-store-owner-stops-armed-robber/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/philly-area-senior-citizen-pistol-whips-younger-bigger-robber/

There appears to be thousands more on that site, but before I waste any more time, I thought I'd see what you could find.  I was skipping all of the home invasion ones... I only posted the "gun-nut" carrying out in public ones - but I encourage you to double check my work.   

You know what I did notice in every story I read though?  Every one involved someone deserving to rough ridin' get shot - alot of them I wish would have been killed instead of just being wounded and later hauled off to jail.   But be sure to watch this last one below - speaks perfectly to why the 2nd amendment is extremely relevant.


A good example of why I don't think cops should be responsible for my safety - rough ridin' pig probably kept his job after this stunt - We have guns so we don't end up in a police state (http://youtu.be/kassP7zI0qc?t=7m)

NK, do I still have to scan in my magazine?
Title: Re: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: sys on July 30, 2012, 10:09:30 PM
If some dude is nailing your wife, you married a whore.

i imagine fanning is raping her.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Cire on July 30, 2012, 10:21:53 PM
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/01/the-geography-of-gun-deaths/69354/
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 30, 2012, 10:29:49 PM
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/01/the-geography-of-gun-deaths/69354/

fail.  People like to kill - they often use guns because guns are good at killing people - banning guns will not prevent people from wanting to kill - some people kill people that need to be killed, such as people that like to kill - guns are useful for this - until people stop wanting to kill - or people that need to be killed cease to exist - removing guns would be counterproductive.   

The challenge was to find CCL people (you know those that obey the law) - committing crimes.   Try again.  GO!
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Cire on July 30, 2012, 11:15:53 PM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi0.kym-cdn.com%2Fphotos%2Fimages%2Foriginal%2F000%2F061%2F954%2FKobe-U-Mad20110725-22047-1i31pz7.jpg&hash=fbbb3e658b9fa2f44806d369f04b20438f07d2f2)

don't take it out on someone who's gay or black
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 31, 2012, 07:55:02 AM
http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/2011/05/concealed-carry-permit-holder-stops.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XaQsbdXQuZI

http://blogsofwar.com/2007/04/22/gun-control-gets-personal/

http://www.rightwingnews.com/guns/concealed-carry-permitholder-stops-stabbing-rampage-in-utah/

Oh crap: Here's a goldmine!
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/customer-shoots-suspects-during-internet-cafe-robbery/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/michigan-ccw-holder-stops-knife-assault/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/armed-colorado-physician-rescues-50-bystanders-from-hostage-situation/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/pennsylvania-cyclist-ends-teen-robbery-spree/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/south-carolinian-kills-armed-restaurant-robber/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/arizona-man-survives-gun-battle/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/ohio-woman-fights-off-sex-offender/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/armed-houston-dad-foils-attack-on-14-year-old-daughter/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/armed-naples-fl-clerk-foils-robbery-kidnap-attempt/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/st-petersburg-fl-man-decides-to-stay-armed-then-stops-mugging/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/south-carolina-convenience-store-owner-stops-armed-robber/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/philly-area-senior-citizen-pistol-whips-younger-bigger-robber/

There appears to be thousands more on that site, but before I waste any more time, I thought I'd see what you could find.  I was skipping all of the home invasion ones... I only posted the "gun-nut" carrying out in public ones - but I encourage you to double check my work.   

You know what I did notice in every story I read though?  Every one involved someone deserving to rough ridin' get shot - alot of them I wish would have been killed instead of just being wounded and later hauled off to jail.   But be sure to watch this last one below - speaks perfectly to why the 2nd amendment is extremely relevant.


A good example of why I don't think cops should be responsible for my safety - rough ridin' pig probably kept his job after this stunt - We have guns so we don't end up in a police state (http://youtu.be/kassP7zI0qc?t=7m)

NK, do I still have to scan in my magazine?

You never had to, but if you want to, you still can.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 31, 2012, 07:56:57 AM
(https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/529014_10151127985862803_1339021416_n.jpg)

That's the dumbest thing I've ever seen. 

"Hey guys!  Everyone knows that faces are completely rough ridin' symetrical, and the left ear always always always matches up identically to the right ear, so comparing this left ear from picture 1 and this right ear from picture 2 tells me that these two pictures are of a different person... except for the picture in the middle where the clearly same dude has asymmetrical ears...wait... eff... The nose!!! Look at the Nose!  Ones thin & the other isn't!   That's it!  Clearly a different person!  Except in one picture he's smiling and sometimes the muscles in your face cause an involuntary nostril flair and in the other picture he's frowning and trying to look crazy... wait... eff."

Yeah, it's pretty ridiculous. Not to mention that he's looking directly at the camera in the middle pic and his head is tilted and he has a weird facial expression in his crazy pic. This analysis must have been performed by a birther.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 31, 2012, 07:58:29 AM
don't take it out on someone who's gay or black

Do you even know what a Libertarian is?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Emo EMAW on July 31, 2012, 08:39:06 AM
http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/2011/05/concealed-carry-permit-holder-stops.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XaQsbdXQuZI

http://blogsofwar.com/2007/04/22/gun-control-gets-personal/

http://www.rightwingnews.com/guns/concealed-carry-permitholder-stops-stabbing-rampage-in-utah/

Oh crap: Here's a goldmine!
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/customer-shoots-suspects-during-internet-cafe-robbery/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/michigan-ccw-holder-stops-knife-assault/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/armed-colorado-physician-rescues-50-bystanders-from-hostage-situation/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/pennsylvania-cyclist-ends-teen-robbery-spree/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/south-carolinian-kills-armed-restaurant-robber/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/arizona-man-survives-gun-battle/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/ohio-woman-fights-off-sex-offender/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/armed-houston-dad-foils-attack-on-14-year-old-daughter/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/armed-naples-fl-clerk-foils-robbery-kidnap-attempt/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/st-petersburg-fl-man-decides-to-stay-armed-then-stops-mugging/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/south-carolina-convenience-store-owner-stops-armed-robber/
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-departments/true-stories/philly-area-senior-citizen-pistol-whips-younger-bigger-robber/

There appears to be thousands more on that site, but before I waste any more time, I thought I'd see what you could find.  I was skipping all of the home invasion ones... I only posted the "gun-nut" carrying out in public ones - but I encourage you to double check my work.   

You know what I did notice in every story I read though?  Every one involved someone deserving to rough ridin' get shot - alot of them I wish would have been killed instead of just being wounded and later hauled off to jail.   But be sure to watch this last one below - speaks perfectly to why the 2nd amendment is extremely relevant.


A good example of why I don't think cops should be responsible for my safety - rough ridin' pig probably kept his job after this stunt - We have guns so we don't end up in a police state (http://youtu.be/kassP7zI0qc?t=7m)

NK, do I still have to scan in my magazine?

You never had to, but if you want to, you still can.

Would it be redundant at this point, from your perspective?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: mocat on July 31, 2012, 08:44:39 AM
I would like to know the percentage of gun-related crimes committed by people with a CCL in CCL states. Is that info available HB?

How the eff should I know? 

Let's have a google contest though, my fellow gun nuts and I will look for instances of CCL's stopping a crime and the anti-gun nuts can look for instances where a person with a CCL accidentally/purposely shot someone or broke the law.  The handicap will be the mostly liberal media jumping all over a reason to ban guns and not covering CCL saves.   Ready...   GO!

Well I was asking because I feel like it would be extremely low, which would help your point.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 'taterblast on July 31, 2012, 08:46:00 AM
(https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/529014_10151127985862803_1339021416_n.jpg)

That's the dumbest thing I've ever seen. 

"Hey guys!  Everyone knows that faces are completely rough ridin' symetrical, and the left ear always always always matches up identically to the right ear, so comparing this left ear from picture 1 and this right ear from picture 2 tells me that these two pictures are of a different person... except for the picture in the middle where the clearly same dude has asymmetrical ears...wait... eff... The nose!!! Look at the Nose!  Ones thin & the other isn't!   That's it!  Clearly a different person!  Except in one picture he's smiling and sometimes the muscles in your face cause an involuntary nostril flair and in the other picture he's frowning and trying to look crazy... wait... eff."

Yeah, it's pretty ridiculous. Not to mention that he's looking directly at the camera in the middle pic and his head is tilted and he has a weird facial expression in his crazy pic. This analysis must have been performed by a birther.

james holmes is a real-life sock!
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 31, 2012, 08:46:24 AM
Would it be redundant at this point, from your perspective?

Probably, but if the articles have cool pictures, it could be worth everyone's time.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: CNS on July 31, 2012, 09:15:16 AM
(https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/529014_10151127985862803_1339021416_n.jpg)

Pic on the left looks like Two-Face .

Yeah, he could pull Two Face off much better than the Joker. Maybe he should start going with that.

In a theater, that would have been a lot of coin flips.  I mean, enough to nullify this gun argument.  I mean, you just get up and walk out the first time he drops the coin.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 31, 2012, 09:30:54 AM
(https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/529014_10151127985862803_1339021416_n.jpg)

Pic on the left looks like Two-Face .

Yeah, he could pull Two Face off much better than the Joker. Maybe he should start going with that.

In a theater, that would have been a lot of coin flips.  I mean, enough to nullify this gun argument.  I mean, you just get up and walk out the first time he drops the coin.

He could have just done one coin flip before he started spraying, though. And that coin could have saved a whole lot more lives than his 100 round clip did ( :D ). My point was that he's a really shitty joker moreso than that he's a good two face, anyway. He's a much better two face than joker.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Emo EMAW on July 31, 2012, 09:41:17 AM
Would it be redundant at this point, from your perspective?

Probably, but if the articles have cool pictures, it could be worth everyone's time.

It's the NRA, they don't even know what Youtube is.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: CNS on July 31, 2012, 09:43:00 AM
Would it be redundant at this point, from your perspective?

Probably, but if the articles have cool pictures, it could be worth everyone's time.

It's the NRA, they don't even know what Youtube is.

Thank god for that too.  Can you imagine what would be uploaded and clogging the YouTube servers?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Emo EMAW on July 31, 2012, 10:06:44 AM
Would it be redundant at this point, from your perspective?

Probably, but if the articles have cool pictures, it could be worth everyone's time.

It's the NRA, they don't even know what Youtube is.

Thank god for that too.  Can you imagine what would be uploaded and clogging the YouTube servers?

Would subscribe.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: mocat on July 31, 2012, 10:13:55 AM
Would it be redundant at this point, from your perspective?

Probably, but if the articles have cool pictures, it could be worth everyone's time.

It's the NRA, they don't even know what Youtube is.

Thank god for that too.  Can you imagine what would be uploaded and clogging the YouTube servers?

Would subscribe.

Yeah seems like it would be amazing
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 31, 2012, 10:54:13 AM
A summary of my thoughts - and if you're passionate about gun control, I would suggest you come to some sort of conclusion and form a rebuttal on this, my last argument.  Several studies found linkages between violent death rates and socio-economic development, demonstrating that homicide rates are higher wherever income disparity, extreme poverty, and hunger are high. 

Separating the stats of methodology used in violent death does not address the above causes of violence.  The argument “guns don’t kill people, people Kill people” while irritating, and factually incorrect as guns do indeed kill people – The theme behind this statement merely points out that removing the method of violent crimes, does not remove the tendency to commit violent crimes.  Gun control advocates are quick to point out that violent crimes committed with guns are abnormally high in the United States and ask for some explanation.  My only response is we have the least restrictive gun laws in the world and guns are widely available; as stated above, guns are effective tools for killing.  Seems like a victory for advocating for gun control, but I then ask you to please explain this study: www.genevadeclaration.org/fileadmin/docs/GBAV2/GBAV2011-Fig-2.3-complete.pdf
 
Why if the United states has the highest rate of gun deaths, do we not even show up on a list of countries with high rates of violent deaths?  Are we to expect that if the popular method of violent crimes are removed, that violent crimes would also disappear?  What correlation do you see between the list of countries linked above?  Is it possible that addressing issues of income disparity, extreme poverty, and hunger would go farther to stopping not only gun deaths, but all violent deaths?   What tools would individuals resort to if guns were not available?  Would instances such as Aurora Colorado have been worse if a bomb was used?  How would tighter gun control stop Oklahoma City type bombings?  Could guns play some part in preventing violent crimes from taking place?  To answer that question, I invite you to spend time here: https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/category/ccm-departments/true-stories/

Next on the agenda; Assault weapons.  The common theme seems to be “no one needs assault weapons”  I would ask you what defines an assault weapon?  High capacity? Can be obtained in most hand-guns; up to 40 rounds. High power? Most hunting rifles are consider high powered and can be expanded to have higher capacity. Rate of fire? Fully automatic weapons have been HIGHLY regulated since 1934 and purchasing one requires multiple identity checks, costly permits, and extreme laws pertaining to transportation – licensing and selling which are all punishable as federal offenses if not followed correctly; gun control enthusiast already won that battle.  Semi-automatic? Everything from a handgun, to shotgun & even high powered rifle can be purchased or modified to be semi-automatic.   The honest truth is what defines an assault weapon is the behind intent of the user.  An individual may choose to assault someone with a shotgun, while one individual may defend themselves with an “assault rifle”.  Picking and choosing what guns to restrict leads you down that dangerous rabbit hole of eliminating all guns leaving individuals defenseless against the violent crimes that, based on my above argument, are sure to still be rampant.  I do think it’s important to point out that James Holmes likely killed more people with the shot-gun & hand gun combined than he did with his AR-15; as he started first with the shotgun – unloading as little as 6 rounds – possibly more, switched to the hand gun unloading 40 rounds in one clip & finally went to the AR-15 where fortunately his gun jammed before getting off all 100 rounds.  What would preventing the sales or ownership of any weapon - stopped? He was intent on assaulting – and any available weapon could have been chosen.

The sad truth behind all of this, is we as society, need guns.  We need them to protect ourselves from tyranny.  We need them to protect ourselves from violence.  We need them to protect ourselves from our protectors.  Until the military, the police, & homeland security lay down their guns – I would suggest you keep the right to have one.

Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: michigancat on July 31, 2012, 11:08:38 AM

Separating the stats of methodology used in violent death does not address the above causes of violence.  The argument “guns don’t kill people, people Kill people” while irritating, and factually incorrect as guns do indeed kill people – The theme behind this statement merely points out that removing the method of violent crimes, does not remove the tendency to commit violent crimes.  Gun control advocates are quick to point out that violent crimes committed with guns are abnormally high in the United States and ask for some explanation.  My only response is we have the least restrictive gun laws in the world and guns are widely available; as stated above, guns are effective tools for killing.  Seems like a victory for advocating for gun control, but I then ask you to please explain this study: www.genevadeclaration.org/fileadmin/docs/GBAV2/GBAV2011-Fig-2.3-complete.pdf
 
Why if the United states has the highest rate of gun deaths, do we not even show up on a list of countries with high rates of violent deaths?  Are we to expect that if the popular method of violent crimes are removed, that violent crimes would also disappear?  What correlation do you see between the list of countries linked above?  Is it possible that addressing issues of income disparity, extreme poverty, and hunger would go farther to stopping not only gun deaths, but all violent deaths?   What tools would individuals resort to if guns were not available?  Would instances such as Aurora Colorado have been worse if a bomb was used?  How would tighter gun control stop Oklahoma City type bombings?  Could guns play some part in preventing violent crimes from taking place?  To answer that question, I invite you to spend time here: https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/category/ccm-departments/true-stories/

:lol: I feel like this is heinz ballz's slammin' dews and eating baloney sandwiches moment. The chart and subsequent analysis is top notch.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Cartierfor3 on July 31, 2012, 11:35:05 AM
A summary of my thoughts - and if you're passionate about gun control, I would suggest you come to some sort of conclusion and form a rebuttal on this, my last argument.  Several studies found linkages between violent death rates and socio-economic development, demonstrating that homicide rates are higher wherever income disparity, extreme poverty, and hunger are high. 

Separating the stats of methodology used in violent death does not address the above causes of violence.  The argument “guns don’t kill people, people Kill people” while irritating, and factually incorrect as guns do indeed kill people – The theme behind this statement merely points out that removing the method of violent crimes, does not remove the tendency to commit violent crimes.  Gun control advocates are quick to point out that violent crimes committed with guns are abnormally high in the United States and ask for some explanation.  My only response is we have the least restrictive gun laws in the world and guns are widely available; as stated above, guns are effective tools for killing.  Seems like a victory for advocating for gun control, but I then ask you to please explain this study: www.genevadeclaration.org/fileadmin/docs/GBAV2/GBAV2011-Fig-2.3-complete.pdf
 
Why if the United states has the highest rate of gun deaths, do we not even show up on a list of countries with high rates of violent deaths?  Are we to expect that if the popular method of violent crimes are removed, that violent crimes would also disappear?  What correlation do you see between the list of countries linked above?  Is it possible that addressing issues of income disparity, extreme poverty, and hunger would go farther to stopping not only gun deaths, but all violent deaths?   What tools would individuals resort to if guns were not available?  Would instances such as Aurora Colorado have been worse if a bomb was used?  How would tighter gun control stop Oklahoma City type bombings?  Could guns play some part in preventing violent crimes from taking place?  To answer that question, I invite you to spend time here: https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/category/ccm-departments/true-stories/

Next on the agenda; Assault weapons.  The common theme seems to be “no one needs assault weapons”  I would ask you what defines an assault weapon?  High capacity? Can be obtained in most hand-guns; up to 40 rounds. High power? Most hunting rifles are consider high powered and can be expanded to have higher capacity. Rate of fire? Fully automatic weapons have been HIGHLY regulated since 1934 and purchasing one requires multiple identity checks, costly permits, and extreme laws pertaining to transportation – licensing and selling which are all punishable as federal offenses if not followed correctly; gun control enthusiast already won that battle.  Semi-automatic? Everything from a handgun, to shotgun & even high powered rifle can be purchased or modified to be semi-automatic.   The honest truth is what defines an assault weapon is the behind intent of the user.  An individual may choose to assault someone with a shotgun, while one individual may defend themselves with an “assault rifle”.  Picking and choosing what guns to restrict leads you down that dangerous rabbit hole of eliminating all guns leaving individuals defenseless against the violent crimes that, based on my above argument, are sure to still be rampant.  I do think it’s important to point out that James Holmes likely killed more people with the shot-gun & hand gun combined than he did with his AR-15; as he started first with the shotgun – unloading as little as 6 rounds – possibly more, switched to the hand gun unloading 40 rounds in one clip & finally went to the AR-15 where fortunately his gun jammed before getting off all 100 rounds.  What would preventing the sales or ownership of any weapon - stopped? He was intent on assaulting – and any available weapon could have been chosen.

The sad truth behind all of this, is we as society, need guns.  We need them to protect ourselves from tyranny.  We need them to protect ourselves from violence.  We need them to protect ourselves from our protectors.  Until the military, the police, & homeland security lay down their guns – I would suggest you keep the right to have one.

/thread
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: OK_Cat on July 31, 2012, 12:46:47 PM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fgifsoup.com%2Fwebroot%2Fanimatedgifs3%2F1155406_o.gif&hash=d51e40dca983023559fef1c6a0df4545cbf3a7b2)
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Gooch on July 31, 2012, 08:40:12 PM
I own an AR-15 and multiple hand guns and have a CCL does this make me a nut bag? I own these guns because they are fun and enjoyable for me to shoot not because I am afraid of everybody including the government. Are the practical? No, but I could argue that neither is owning a Corvette. Some people like to play video games some people like to shoot firearms. To each their own.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: star seed 7 on July 31, 2012, 09:07:07 PM
I own an AR-15 and multiple hand guns and have a CCL does this make me a nut bag? I own these guns because they are fun and enjoyable for me to shoot not because I am afraid of everybody including the government. Are the practical? No, but I could argue that neither is owning a Corvette. Some people like to play video games some people like to shoot firearms. To each their own.

People like you are why I don't want to ban guns.

People like heinz are why I do want to ban guns.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Stevesie60 on July 31, 2012, 09:08:35 PM
I own an AR-15 and multiple hand guns and have a CCL does this make me a nut bag? I own these guns because they are fun and enjoyable for me to shoot not because I am afraid of everybody including the government. Are the practical? No, but I could argue that neither is owning a Corvette. Some people like to play video games some people like to shoot firearms. To each their own.

People like you are why I don't want to ban guns.

People like heinz are why I do want to ban guns.

:thumbs:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: SkinnyBenny on July 31, 2012, 09:37:30 PM
Dr. Drew was a guest on the Adam Carolla Show (podcast) on 7/29/2012 and they talked about this for a while. Was pretty interesting and didn't focus so much on gun control as it did the need for better mental health measures, assessments, supports, etc. You can get it free from the iTunes store if you're interested. Interesting listening for anyone regardless of where you fall in the gun debate. (I think they start talking about it, like, halfway through the episode or something.)
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on July 31, 2012, 10:11:21 PM



deflect, deflect, deflect...    :love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love:

... if you're passionate about gun control, I would suggest you come to some sort of conclusion and form a rebuttal ...

Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: yoga-like_abana on July 31, 2012, 10:25:41 PM
 :facepalm:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 01, 2012, 08:39:55 AM
I own an AR-15 and multiple hand guns and have a CCL does this make me a nut bag?

No, not unless you are carrying your guns with you everywhere you go because you are worried you might need them for protection.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: The Tonya Harding of Twitter Users Creep on August 01, 2012, 09:40:39 AM
If this thread was a farm animal I would have taken it out back and shot it 15 pages ago.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 01, 2012, 09:41:59 AM
If this thread was a farm animal I would have taken it out back and shot it 15 pages ago.

This thread is old yeller, but he's been taken in by a bunch of gun control advocates.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: doom on August 01, 2012, 12:18:24 PM
I own an AR-15 and multiple hand guns and have a CCL does this make me a nut bag?

No, not unless you are carrying your guns with you everywhere you go because you are worried you might need them for protection.

that's kind of the point of a ccl
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 01, 2012, 04:23:44 PM
Would it be redundant at this point, from your perspective?

Probably, but if the articles have cool pictures, it could be worth everyone's time.

It's the NRA, they don't even know what Youtube is.

They are on twitter.

http://blog.sysomos.com/2012/07/24/the-nra-commits-a-social-media-sin/ (http://blog.sysomos.com/2012/07/24/the-nra-commits-a-social-media-sin/)
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: CNS on August 01, 2012, 04:27:11 PM
Would it be redundant at this point, from your perspective?

Probably, but if the articles have cool pictures, it could be worth everyone's time.

It's the NRA, they don't even know what Youtube is.

They are on twitter.

http://blog.sysomos.com/2012/07/24/the-nra-commits-a-social-media-sin/ (http://blog.sysomos.com/2012/07/24/the-nra-commits-a-social-media-sin/)

I bet this was the hardest part of Charles Heston's job.  Tweeting with those hands.....woof.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: star seed 7 on August 01, 2012, 06:06:43 PM
I own an AR-15 and multiple hand guns and have a CCL does this make me a nut bag?

No, not unless you are carrying your guns with you everywhere you go because you are worried you might need them for protection.

that's kind of the point of a ccl

it must really be terrible to live in constant fear.  t's & p's to gun nuts, hopefully you can get some sort of professional therapy or something to really dig out the root of your fear (other than black people).
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 01, 2012, 06:14:44 PM
it must really be terrible to live in constant fear.  t's & p's to gun nuts, hopefully you can get some sort of professional therapy or something to really dig out the root of your fear (other than black people).

Funny post in an otherwise garbage thread, nice work seven.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Bloodfart on August 01, 2012, 08:47:16 PM
I imagine Heinballz has make believed one of his guns as his penis before.     :shy:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on August 01, 2012, 08:52:54 PM
This is why I need to actually meet some of you guys and hang out.  You all now have an image of me that is entirely inaccurate.  For each of you that I've disagreed with in this thread, I will buy you a beer (or hard lemonade) of your choice at the next fattyfest.






Except fanning... eff that guy.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 01, 2012, 09:28:38 PM
This is why I need to actually meet some of you guys and hang out.  You all now have an image of me that is entirely inaccurate.  For each of you that I've disagreed with in this thread, I will buy you a beer (or hard lemonade) of your choice at the next fattyfest.






Except fanning... eff that guy.

It's a real weird thing. Part of the reason I'm scared to Pak is 'cause, like, I argue and am real mean online to people in the Dunning-Kruger Dome sometime, and.....what if they remember how I said mean things to them in whatever thread however many months ago? And also it's like....are they thinking the same thing?  :ohno:  Bet it ultimately would be pretty fun. Even tough I do agree that HeinzBalls has definitely used a gun as a fake wiener a time or two.   :D




















And grenades as balls????
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on August 01, 2012, 10:14:43 PM
Grenades as balls would be rough ridin' awesome.

But no, I love all of you guys and would never want to hurt or have negative feelings towards any of you...   



But that god damned fanning.    :shakesfist:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Winters on August 01, 2012, 10:52:07 PM
Fitz would love this thread.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: ew2x4 on August 02, 2012, 12:26:42 AM
I own multiple guns and have a CCL as well. Mainly because of hunting, hiking, and recreation. I definitely don't carry all the time, nor feel like I have to. If you're around guns at all, CCL's are good to have, though. It's not a horrible thing to carry every now and then.

In terms of gun control, I honestly think the main thing that needs to happen is more mandatory education prior to gun ownership. Things like the assault weapons ban are asinine. Banning a pistol grip or a telescoping stock do nothing for safety.

That said, that is definitely not the same guy. Someone needs to get on this ASAP.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: CNS on August 02, 2012, 09:00:31 AM
For the CCL guys: what makes you wake up and decide that today is a good day to take the 9mm to the coffee shop with you?  Gut feeling?  Accessorizing with new jeans/boots?  Stiff neck from nights sleep and need slight weight pulling down on that side of the shoulder to keep alignment in check?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: ew2x4 on August 02, 2012, 09:33:09 AM
I mainly use it when hiking and protection from animals. It's common to do here. I've actually had to use it once. As for around town or whatever, I only carry it when I go to ghetto places at certain times of day.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 8manpick on August 02, 2012, 09:37:40 AM
I mainly use it when hiking and protection from animals. It's common to do here. I've actually had to use it once. As for around town or whatever, I only carry it when I go to ghetto places at certain times of day.

Not sure where you are, but I know that many parks / forest areas prohibit firearms, as do many (most?) businesses.  What do CCL people do when they are carrying, and come upon a place that does not allow it?  I mean, if it is a business that has a "no guns" sign, I realize that it isn't a law and they could only kick you out / ban you / whatever.  Just curious.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 02, 2012, 10:28:55 AM
Have wondered this as well. Also ew2x4, where do you live? PM if you don't wanna 'nnounce it.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: ew2x4 on August 02, 2012, 11:23:41 AM
I mainly use it when hiking and protection from animals. It's common to do here. I've actually had to use it once. As for around town or whatever, I only carry it when I go to ghetto places at certain times of day.

Not sure where you are, but I know that many parks / forest areas prohibit firearms, as do many (most?) businesses.  What do CCL people do when they are carrying, and come upon a place that does not allow it?  I mean, if it is a business that has a "no guns" sign, I realize that it isn't a law and they could only kick you out / ban you / whatever.  Just curious.

Colorado. Almost all parks and forests allow firearms. It's legal to shoot in national forest. The only place in those areas it's not legal to carry is in government buildings. For example, in Yellowstone, you can carry anywhere you go, except for the government owned buildings. Also, you're not able to shoot within 200 feet of a road. There's a lot of other guide lines when it comes to actual shooting.

A lot of businesses in fact don't prohibit firearms. Businesses have every right to not allow them, though. People carrying should just leave it in the car. Obviously there are places like schools and hospitals where they shouldn't even be on the premises though.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: michigancat on August 02, 2012, 11:39:41 AM
As for around town or whatever, I only carry it when I go to ghetto places at certain times of day.

what's your thought process here? Are you selling drugs or something?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: CNS on August 02, 2012, 11:41:26 AM
As for around town or whatever, I only carry it when I go to ghetto places at certain times of day.

what's your thought process here? Are you selling drugs or something?

If I had to hazard a guess:

1. owns a gun
2. has the want/license to carry
3. watches the news

Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: ew2x4 on August 02, 2012, 11:54:45 AM
As for around town or whatever, I only carry it when I go to ghetto places at certain times of day.

what's your thought process here? Are you selling drugs or something?

If I had to hazard a guess:

1. owns a gun
2. has the want/license to carry
3. watches the news



Yeah, not rocket science. I carry in town maybe once every couple months.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: michigancat on August 02, 2012, 11:55:33 AM
As for around town or whatever, I only carry it when I go to ghetto places at certain times of day.

what's your thought process here? Are you selling drugs or something?

If I had to hazard a guess:

1. owns a gun
2. has the want/license to carry
3. watches the news



Yeah, not rocket science. I carry in town maybe once every couple months.

we're talking the ghetto parts of colorado springs, right?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Cire on August 02, 2012, 12:15:41 PM
lol

also, someone clocks you from behind/pulls a gun on you you are going to draw and fire on them?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on August 02, 2012, 12:45:05 PM
For the CCL guys: what makes you wake up and decide that today is a good day to take the 9mm to the coffee shop with you?  Gut feeling?  Accessorizing with new jeans/boots?  Stiff neck from nights sleep and need slight weight pulling down on that side of the shoulder to keep alignment in check?

I only carry when I'm on vacation or hiking/hunting. Why vacation you ask?  When I'm going to be making several stops at several locations - I prefer not to fly.  And driving around Vegas or LA with Kansas Plates may draw attention to yourself.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on August 02, 2012, 12:48:23 PM
lol

also, someone clocks you from behind/pulls a gun on you you are going to draw and fire on them?

Common sense would suggest you don't...   However, there are thousands of scenarios of violent crimes being committed that did not begin in this manner.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: michigancat on August 02, 2012, 12:50:57 PM
For the CCL guys: what makes you wake up and decide that today is a good day to take the 9mm to the coffee shop with you?  Gut feeling?  Accessorizing with new jeans/boots?  Stiff neck from nights sleep and need slight weight pulling down on that side of the shoulder to keep alignment in check?

I only carry when I'm on vacation or hiking/hunting. Why vacation you ask?  When I'm going to be making several stops at several locations - I prefer not to fly.  And driving around Vegas or LA with Kansas Plates may draw attention to yourself.

lol, this is great
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: DQ12 on August 02, 2012, 01:46:55 PM
Heinballz vacationing in the Grand Canyon:

Bad Guys:  Look!  A naive tourist from Kansas!  Let's rob him!

HBz: HOLD IT RIGHT THERE!

Then he shoots the bad guys dead.

Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: slobber on August 02, 2012, 01:51:17 PM
Heinballz vacationing in the Grand Canyon:

Bad Guys:  Look!  A naive tourist from Kansas!  Let's rob him!

HBz: HOLD IT RIGHT THERE!

Then he shoots the bad guys dead.
You forgot: Then he becomes a true goEMAW hero.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 02, 2012, 01:55:35 PM
Heinballz vacationing in the Grand Canyon:

Bad Guys:  Look!  A naive tourist from Kansas!  Let's rob him!

HBz: HOLD IT RIGHT THERE!

Then he shoots the bad guys dead.

You gotta believe he has some stone cold ass saying ready for just such an occasion.  Right before he convicts the bad guys and sentences them to death.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: OK_Cat on August 02, 2012, 01:59:50 PM
"Heinzballs Amendment 2 says I just whooped yer ass!"
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: steve dave on August 02, 2012, 02:01:41 PM
I would love to know the ratio of gun nuts that shoot themselves by accident to gun nuts who stop a crime with their gun.  I'm guessing it's somewhere around 10:1. 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: steve dave on August 02, 2012, 02:04:49 PM
disclaimer:  sd's dad stopped a crime with his gun a month ago  :surprised: 

further disclaimer:  well, not really stopped it I guess...maybe made it worse actually
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: DQ12 on August 02, 2012, 02:07:32 PM
"Heinzballs Amendment 2 says I just whooped yer ass!"
And that's the bottom line because HEINZ. BALLS. SAYS SO.

And after he shoots them he brings the barrel up to his mouth and blows/spits Chad May style.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Cartierfor3 on August 02, 2012, 02:27:04 PM
disclaimer:  sd's dad stopped a crime with his gun a month ago  :surprised: 

further disclaimer:  well, not really stopped it I guess...maybe made it worse actually

Yeah..................  I'm gonna go ahead and need that story in full detail. 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: steve dave on August 02, 2012, 02:29:13 PM
disclaimer:  sd's dad stopped a crime with his gun a month ago  :surprised: 

further disclaimer:  well, not really stopped it I guess...maybe made it worse actually

Yeah..................  I'm gonna go ahead and need that story in full detail.

so there's like these escaped robbers or whatever from the county jail.  they are trying to steal a truck or something from our house.  my dad hears them and comes at them with his gun.  they freak out and slam into a bunch of other trucks and then flip the truck over and run into a field.  they get one of those infrared camera airplane deals to fly over them and they arrest them again. 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Cartierfor3 on August 02, 2012, 02:32:16 PM
disclaimer:  sd's dad stopped a crime with his gun a month ago  :surprised: 

further disclaimer:  well, not really stopped it I guess...maybe made it worse actually

Yeah..................  I'm gonna go ahead and need that story in full detail.

so there's like these escaped robbers or whatever from the county jail.  they are trying to steal a truck or something from our house.  my dad hears them and comes at them withi his gun or something.  they freak out and slam into a bunch of other trucks and then flip the truck over and run into a field.  they get one of those infrared camera airplane deals to fly over them and they arrest them again.

thats kinda badass
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 02, 2012, 02:38:47 PM
disclaimer:  sd's dad stopped a crime with his gun a month ago  :surprised: 

further disclaimer:  well, not really stopped it I guess...maybe made it worse actually

Yeah..................  I'm gonna go ahead and need that story in full detail.

so there's like these escaped robbers or whatever from the county jail.  they are trying to steal a truck or something from our house.  my dad hears them and comes at them with his gun or something.  they freak out and slam into a bunch of other trucks and then flip the truck over and run into a field.  they get one of those infrared camera airplane deals to fly over them and they arrest them again.

why didn't he judge them?  Like wait until they were standing next to each other and kill them both with one shot?  Maybe after saying "may God have mercy on your souls... because Smith & Wesson won't"
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: steve dave on August 02, 2012, 02:40:00 PM
disclaimer:  sd's dad stopped a crime with his gun a month ago  :surprised: 

further disclaimer:  well, not really stopped it I guess...maybe made it worse actually

Yeah..................  I'm gonna go ahead and need that story in full detail.

so there's like these escaped robbers or whatever from the county jail.  they are trying to steal a truck or something from our house.  my dad hears them and comes at them with his gun or something.  they freak out and slam into a bunch of other trucks and then flip the truck over and run into a field.  they get one of those infrared camera airplane deals to fly over them and they arrest them again.

why didn't he judge them?  Like wait until they were standing next to each other and kill them both with one shot?  Maybe after saying "may God have mercy on your souls... because Smith & Wesson won't"

yeah, that would definitely have been more bad ass then just scaring them into damaging a crap ton of our property.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 02, 2012, 02:42:20 PM
I bet if he could go back he would have pink misted their heads all over Meade County.  Then lit a fat cigar and had a belly laugh and tossled the ears of his faithful dog.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: steve dave on August 02, 2012, 02:42:58 PM
I bet if he could go back he would have pink misted their heads all over Meade County.  Then lit a fat cigar and had a belly laugh and tossled the ears of his faithful dog.

prolly
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on August 02, 2012, 03:29:19 PM
Heinballz vacationing in the Grand Canyon:

Bad Guys:  Look!  A naive tourist from Kansas!  Let's rob him!

HBz: HOLD IT RIGHT THERE!

Then he shoots the bad guys dead.

I'd just like to know what's so god damned funny.

(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi76.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fj11%2Fwildcatjerrod%2FEMAWGrandCanyon.jpg&hash=e6a769c84250ef663b5b0841a7dec3210948809f)

You have to be ready for this crap.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: steve dave on August 02, 2012, 03:30:12 PM
welp
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: OK_Cat on August 02, 2012, 03:35:46 PM
 :popcorn:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on August 02, 2012, 03:42:48 PM
 :popcorn:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on August 02, 2012, 03:55:58 PM
wow... either I'm too good at photoshop, or you guys don't know a joke when you see one.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: star seed 7 on August 02, 2012, 04:22:07 PM
Did you threaten the picture taker with your gun to make sure they didn't steal your camera?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 8manpick on August 02, 2012, 07:22:17 PM
Looks like you'd need an OCL for that.

Sent from my GT-S5830M using Tapatalk 2
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Emo EMAW on August 03, 2012, 01:05:08 PM
Just saw two white DHS vans driving in OP.  I'm betting they were those x-ray vans that scan the public without consent.   Good thing I left all my AR's at home today. :gocho:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 03, 2012, 01:07:28 PM
Just saw two white DHS vans driving in OP.  I'm betting they were those x-ray vans that scan the public without consent.   Good thing I left all my AR's at home today. :gocho:


wut
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Emo EMAW on August 03, 2012, 01:22:21 PM
Just saw two white DHS vans driving in OP.  I'm betting they were those x-ray vans that scan the public without consent.   Good thing I left all my AR's at home today. :gocho:


wut

http://www.thoughtsfromaconservativemom.com/2010/09/homeland-security-using-x-ray-surveillance-vans-that-peer-through-walls-clothes-fb/
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: kstatefreak42 on August 03, 2012, 04:23:06 PM
Funny how the police investigation is not including the eye witness reports of a second man. Who threw another canister of tear gas from the opposite side of holmes.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: OK_Cat on August 03, 2012, 04:26:37 PM
Funny how the police investigation is not including the eye witness reports of a second man. Who threw another canister of tear gas from the opposite side of holmes.

you're watching a very darkly lit movie in a dark theater.  suddenly, someone throws some sort of smoking device into the crowd, and gun-fire erupts.  you scramble for safety while clawing your way through the chaos.  do you know which way is north, south, east, west, up or down?  probably not.  did you just see another smoke device?  maybe!  or maybe not.  Was it from a different direction?  Maybe!  Maybe not.

there wasn't a second person in on it, dumbass.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 03, 2012, 04:46:29 PM
Funny how the police investigation is not including the eye witness reports of a second man. Who threw another canister of tear gas from the opposite side of holmes.


AAAAAAAAAAND you've somehow moved from zero credibility to negative credibility. 'grats on that.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Trim on August 03, 2012, 04:48:53 PM
Funny how the police investigation is not including the eye witness reports of a second man. Who threw another canister of tear gas from the opposite side of holmes.

Did he have a mask, seem really big, and talk kind of funny?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: DQ12 on August 03, 2012, 04:56:37 PM
Funny how the police investigation is not including the eye witness reports of a second man. Who threw another canister of tear gas from the opposite side of holmes.
kstatefreak42 post
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: kstatefreak42 on August 03, 2012, 05:10:37 PM
Operation Northwoods

Project MKUltra.



 :cool:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Stevesie60 on August 03, 2012, 07:07:58 PM
Funny how the police investigation is not including the eye witness reports of a second man. Who threw another canister of tear gas from the opposite side of holmes.

Did he have a mask, seem really big, and talk kind of funny?

Right, because Bane and The Joker worked together.  :jerk:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Trim on August 03, 2012, 07:21:23 PM
Funny how the police investigation is not including the eye witness reports of a second man. Who threw another canister of tear gas from the opposite side of holmes.

Did he have a mask, seem really big, and talk kind of funny?

Right, because Bane and The Joker worked together.  :jerk:

Didn't Joker use henchmen dressed up as batmen at the beginning of dark knight?  Anyway, I was referring to freak42's eyewitness mixing up any of the masked men on the giant screen blowing crap up w/the real life assailant (assailants? :surprised:) shooting up the theater.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Stevesie60 on August 03, 2012, 07:43:53 PM
Funny how the police investigation is not including the eye witness reports of a second man. Who threw another canister of tear gas from the opposite side of holmes.

Did he have a mask, seem really big, and talk kind of funny?

Right, because Bane and The Joker worked together.  :jerk:

Didn't Joker use henchmen dressed up as batmen at the beginning of dark knight?  Anyway, I was referring to freak42's eyewitness mixing up any of the masked men on the giant screen blowing crap up w/the real life assailant (assailants? :surprised:) shooting up the theater.

I know you were. The guy who was already arrested called himself The Joker. No way he called up Bane to attack from the other side of the theater. The were not pals.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Trim on August 03, 2012, 07:59:26 PM
Never mind.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Stevesie60 on August 03, 2012, 08:05:32 PM
Just reread our series of posts. I'm sorry Trim, I just woke up from a nap, I should have waited a half an hour before posting. The bright side is that this thread is so far gone, I feel little to no remorse for deterring it.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on August 03, 2012, 08:20:53 PM
Just reread our series of posts. I'm sorry Trim, I just woke up from a nap, I should have waited a half an hour before posting. The bright side is that this thread is so far gone, I feel little to no remorse for deterring it.

you should never feel remorse for deterring a thread. usually it's for the best.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Cartierfor3 on August 05, 2012, 03:29:10 PM
Don't know where else to put this.  Pretty sad if we need a mass shooting master thread.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-08-05/shooting-sikh-temple-wisconsin/56809408/1 (http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-08-05/shooting-sikh-temple-wisconsin/56809408/1)
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on August 06, 2012, 08:30:11 AM
Don't know where else to put this.  Pretty sad if we need a mass shooting master thread.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-08-05/shooting-sikh-temple-wisconsin/56809408/1 (http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-08-05/shooting-sikh-temple-wisconsin/56809408/1)


Odd that this isn't getting more press. 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: kstate16 on August 06, 2012, 09:36:26 AM
Don't know where else to put this.  Pretty sad if we need a mass shooting master thread.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-08-05/shooting-sikh-temple-wisconsin/56809408/1 (http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-08-05/shooting-sikh-temple-wisconsin/56809408/1)


Odd that this isn't getting more press.
exactly what i was thinking
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: ChiComCat on August 06, 2012, 10:16:25 AM
Front page of USA today/CNN is not nothing.  Although if it were a church, it would be the only story.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on August 06, 2012, 10:32:09 AM
I guess I should have looked first - I assumed that since I heard about Aurora within the hour from everyone on facebook - not to mention the cries for gun control from liberal friends almost immediately - that it was more publicized.   goEMAW was the first I've heard of this recent one; What did this guy use - Had to be something crazy - less populated area than a movie theatre, wounded 30 people, killing 7.   Must have been like an M16 or something, right?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 06, 2012, 10:36:24 AM
LOL @ HeinzBalls using this latest tragedy as some sort of reason that guns are awesome. (Or maybe that's not what you're doing, I really have no idea how to read that last post.)

Anyway, turns out this guy was a crazy rough ridin' racist who played in white power bands and was a racist bad person and received a less-than-honorable discharge from the military.

But yeah, we gotta honor the troops.
http://washington.cbslocal.com/2012/08/06/cbs-news-shooter-identified-as-former-us-military-member/
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 06, 2012, 10:41:13 AM
CNN had multiple clips of people talking about MULTIPLE gunmen.

Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: mocat on August 06, 2012, 10:41:40 AM
LOL @ HeinzBalls using this latest tragedy as some sort of reason that guns are awesome. (Or maybe that's not what you're doing, I really have no idea how to read that last post.)


I don't think that's what he was doing. I think this was in relation to his point that "assault weapons" is kind of a stupid term, since this particular shooter used a handgun, and not an "assault rifle" or whatever, and yet still wounded 30 people and killed 7.

And also, this is getting pub all over the place.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 06, 2012, 10:45:37 AM
I guess I should have looked first - I assumed that since I heard about Aurora within the hour from everyone on facebook - not to mention the cries for gun control from liberal friends almost immediately - that it was more publicized.   goEMAW was the first I've heard of this recent one; What did this guy use - Had to be something crazy - less populated area than a movie theatre, wounded 30 people, killing 7.   Must have been like an M16 or something, right?

semi-automatic 9 mm pistol
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 06, 2012, 10:46:05 AM
Yeah, it's kind of everywhere now.

MULTIPLE GUNMEN?!?!?   :horrorsurprise:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Emo EMAW on August 06, 2012, 10:47:03 AM
I guess I should have looked first - I assumed that since I heard about Aurora within the hour from everyone on facebook - not to mention the cries for gun control from liberal friends almost immediately - that it was more publicized.   goEMAW was the first I've heard of this recent one; What did this guy use - Had to be something crazy - less populated area than a movie theatre, wounded 30 people, killing 7.   Must have been like an M16 or something, right?

semi-automatic 9 mm pistol

Where are you finding that?  Read two AP reports and neither had that info.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 06, 2012, 10:47:38 AM
OMG.....
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/08/06/cnn-plays-only-good-die-young-after-segment-about-sikh-temple-shootin
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 06, 2012, 10:56:29 AM
I guess I should have looked first - I assumed that since I heard about Aurora within the hour from everyone on facebook - not to mention the cries for gun control from liberal friends almost immediately - that it was more publicized.   goEMAW was the first I've heard of this recent one; What did this guy use - Had to be something crazy - less populated area than a movie theatre, wounded 30 people, killing 7.   Must have been like an M16 or something, right?

semi-automatic 9 mm pistol

Where are you finding that?  Read two AP reports and neither had that info.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/06/us/wisconsin-temple-shooting/index.html?hpt=hp_t1 (http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/06/us/wisconsin-temple-shooting/index.html?hpt=hp_t1)

Quote
A 9 mm semiautomatic pistol believed to have been used by the gunman was found at the scene, a law enforcement source with direct knowledge of the investigation said.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on August 06, 2012, 10:59:02 AM
LOL @ HeinzBalls using this latest tragedy as some sort of reason that guns are awesome. (Or maybe that's not what you're doing, I really have no idea how to read that last post.)

Anyway, turns out this guy was a crazy rough ridin' racist who played in white power bands and was a racist bad person and received a less-than-honorable discharge from the military.

But yeah, we gotta honor the troops.
http://washington.cbslocal.com/2012/08/06/cbs-news-shooter-identified-as-former-us-military-member/

That's pretty much the complete opposite of what I'm saying.  The central theme I've kept through all of this is: crazy people gonna be crazy.  Taking guns away won't stop crazy.  LOL @ people that think gun control is the answer.  How you construe that as "Guns are awesome" is beyond me.  I want to keep my gun to protect myself from crazy people.   But go ahead and call me crazy for being paranoid - what is it, two crazy bastards in the last month killing a now combined 19 people and injuring over 80...   LOL indeed.

Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 06, 2012, 11:08:09 AM
LOL @ HeinzBalls using this latest tragedy as some sort of reason that guns are awesome. (Or maybe that's not what you're doing, I really have no idea how to read that last post.)

Anyway, turns out this guy was a crazy rough ridin' racist who played in white power bands and was a racist bad person and received a less-than-honorable discharge from the military.

But yeah, we gotta honor the troops.
http://washington.cbslocal.com/2012/08/06/cbs-news-shooter-identified-as-former-us-military-member/

That's pretty much the complete opposite of what I'm saying.  The central theme I've kept through all of this is: crazy people gonna be crazy.  Taking guns away won't stop crazy.  LOL @ people that think gun control is the answer.  How you construe that as "Guns are awesome" is beyond me.  I want to keep my gun to protect myself from crazy people.   But go ahead and call me crazy for being paranoid - what is it, two crazy bastards in the last month killing a now combined 19 people and injuring over 80...   LOL indeed.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17922-carrying-a-gun-increases-risk-of-getting-shot-and-killed.html (http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17922-carrying-a-gun-increases-risk-of-getting-shot-and-killed.html)
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on August 06, 2012, 11:10:48 AM
Excellent point.  lets get rid of all guns.  That will stop violence.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 06, 2012, 11:13:24 AM
Excellent point.  lets get rid of all guns.  That will stop violence.

I don't think anybody is saying that, other than in your head. The study I linked only shows that keeping your gun at home makes you much less likely to get killed by gunfire. The odds of that happening are ridiculously low, regardless.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: puniraptor on August 06, 2012, 11:14:21 AM
Excellent point.  lets get rid of all guns.  That will stop violence.

The point is when a crazy flips out and kills people, they can do alot less damage with a ninja sword and a t-ball bat than with a gun.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: puniraptor on August 06, 2012, 11:19:27 AM
HB, is your position that without guns, there would be more total murders even though there would be a reduction of body counts in sensational mass murder situations? Greater good and all? I can see that being an argument.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on August 06, 2012, 11:25:47 AM
Excellent point.  lets get rid of all guns.  That will stop violence.

I don't think anybody is saying that, other than in your head. The study I linked only shows that keeping your gun at home makes you much less likely to get killed by gunfire. The odds of that happening are ridiculously low, regardless.

No.  No one is saying that.  But people ARE saying guns like AR-15's need to be eliminated.  I posed the question, "What would that accomplish?"  We have an ignorant white supremacist killing what he perceives as Muslims... where does gun control factor in there?  If he didn't have a hand gun - what would he have used?  His car?  A bomb?  A knife? 

As for your study - I didn't even read it.  Even IF it had taken into account how many crimes are stopped because of legal carry, which I doubt it did, scientific data is always biased when it is reported.  I can pull studies night and day showing where carrying a gun makes you safer - just as you can pull studies night and day showing guns are hazardous. 

So it all comes down to this statement, which was one of the first statements I posted: If your concern is for the safety of society, your time would be better spent not taking away guns, but creating a world where guns are not needed.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on August 06, 2012, 11:27:05 AM
HB, is your position that without guns, there would be more total murders even though there would be a reduction of body counts in sensational mass murder situations? Greater good and all? I can see that being an argument.

No -

If your concern is for the safety of society, your time would be better spent not taking away guns, but creating a world where guns are not needed.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: "storm"nut on August 06, 2012, 10:00:10 PM
Who gets sued for more money? Penn State or University of Colorado?
][/ http://abcnews.go.com/m/story?id=16943858 ] (http://[/ http://abcnews.go.com/m/story?id=16943858)
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Cire on August 06, 2012, 10:16:10 PM
Excellent point.  lets get rid of all guns.  That will stop violence.

No one believes that dumbass
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HeinBallz on August 06, 2012, 10:41:07 PM
Excellent point.  lets get rid of all guns.  That will stop violence.

No one believes that dumbass

Thanks dumbass... keep reading to see where this goes. 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: XocolateThundarr on August 07, 2012, 01:34:14 AM
I keep a pistol in my truck because a cop won't fit in the console.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: ChiComCat on August 13, 2012, 01:37:08 PM
Looks like A&M now...
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 13, 2012, 01:53:15 PM
Burlington Coat Factory in Wichita, too. Thankfully nobody was injured.

http://www.kansas.com/2012/08/13/2449104/burlington-coat-factoring-shooting.html (http://www.kansas.com/2012/08/13/2449104/burlington-coat-factoring-shooting.html)
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Trim on August 15, 2012, 09:31:20 PM
http://www.kansas.com/2012/08/14/2450004/wichita-police-store-gunman-had.html
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: puniraptor on August 16, 2012, 10:10:57 AM
yuma st. massacre
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: reidrolled on August 16, 2012, 10:28:44 AM
http://www.kansas.com/2012/08/14/2450004/wichita-police-store-gunman-had.html

 :sdeek:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Emo EMAW on August 16, 2012, 12:24:21 PM
http://www.kansas.com/2012/08/14/2450004/wichita-police-store-gunman-had.html

 :sdeek:

That is pretty damning (although I can't say I'm surprised).  People are rough ridin' crazy.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Paul Moscow on August 16, 2012, 01:30:13 PM
Maybe he was just a little buzzed? Perfectly legal.

Quote
Kansas allows its permit holders to drink while carrying a concealed weapon, so long as they are not legally intoxicated, under the state’s Personal and Family Protection Act, enacted in 2006.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 16, 2012, 01:52:23 PM
Quote
Personal and Family Protection Act
:lol:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Trim on September 06, 2012, 07:30:26 AM
Squawk tendencies.

http://www.kansas.com/2012/09/05/2476766/theater-suspect-withdrew-application.html
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Emo EMAW on September 06, 2012, 10:02:19 AM
Squawk tendencies.

http://www.kansas.com/2012/09/05/2476766/theater-suspect-withdrew-application.html

So what you're saying is had KU been a better school this could have happened in Lawrence?  :sdeek:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: reidrolled on September 14, 2012, 10:32:02 AM
Bump... Whats going on in Austin?? they evacuated all of their buildings? can you imagine like 80K or however many students there are just  :runaway: at the same time?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: AbeFroman on September 14, 2012, 10:33:40 AM
T & P's Kansas State University-Austin
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: reidrolled on September 14, 2012, 10:36:01 AM
Bump... Whats going on in Austin?? they evacuated all of their buildings? can you imagine like 80K or however many students there are just  :runaway: at the same time?

update: sounds like a hilarious prank call so everyone could enjoy their friday afternoon. :dance: I always secretly wished that would happen in HS so I wouldnt have to sit in stupid ap calc when it was nice outside
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: reidrolled on September 14, 2012, 10:36:54 AM
Bump... Whats going on in Austin?? they evacuated all of their buildings? can you imagine like 80K or however many students there are just  :runaway: at the same time?

update: sounds like a hilarious prank call so everyone could enjoy their friday afternoon. :dance: I always secretly wished that would happen in HS so I wouldnt have to sit in stupid ap calc when it was nice outside

also, I hope nothing bad happens. that would really be sad.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 8manpick on September 14, 2012, 03:08:38 PM
Bump... Whats going on in Austin?? they evacuated all of their buildings? can you imagine like 80K or however many students there are just  :runaway: at the same time?

update: sounds like a hilarious prank call so everyone could enjoy their friday afternoon. :dance: I always secretly wished that would happen in HS so I wouldnt have to sit in stupid ap calc when it was nice outside
#fanningbrag
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: mocat on September 14, 2012, 03:52:36 PM
good lawd everybody stop rough ridin' shooting everybody! if only everybody had a gun to stop these maniacs from shooting everybody else! right?

http://www.kansascity.com/2012/09/14/3815497/death-reported-at-kauffman-stadium.html (http://www.kansascity.com/2012/09/14/3815497/death-reported-at-kauffman-stadium.html)
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 'taterblast on April 01, 2013, 10:34:08 AM
prosecution is going for the death penalty
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: The Tonya Harding of Twitter Users Creep on April 01, 2013, 10:35:28 AM
prosecution is going for the death penalty

Link? I haven't been following closely.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 'taterblast on April 01, 2013, 10:37:41 AM
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/04/01/holmes-court-appearance-today/2041881/ (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/04/01/holmes-court-appearance-today/2041881/)

Quote
CENTENNIAL, COLO. - Arapahoe County prosecutors will seek the death penalty against graduate school dropout James Holmes, accused of first-degree murder in the July 2012 deaths of 12 Aurora movie theater goers.

At a court hearing Monday, George Brauchler, Arapahoe County's District Attorney, formally rejected a defense bid that Holmes plead guilty in exchange for a life sentence without parole. Holmes faces an August trial for killing 12. Nearly 70 others were wounded or injured while fleeing. Judge William Slyvester entered a not guilty plea on Holmes' behalf last month.

"In this case, for James Egan Holmes, justice is death," Brauchler said, after explained his office has spoken with more than 800 victims and their families.

Holmes showed no visible reaction to the announcement, but his parents clasped hands and then embraced.

Holmes' court appointed attorneys said in a court filing last week that their guilty plea offer could have ended prolonged legal maneuvering. "Mr. Holmes is currently willing to resolve the case to bring the proceedings to a speedy and definite conclusion for all involved," Holmes' lawyers said in their motion.

Without such a deal, public defenders Daniel King and Tamara Brady said that an insanity defense virtually a lock. They've said repeatedly at prior hearings that Holmes, who dropped out of a University of Colorado neuroscience doctoral program after failing a final exam in May, suffers from mental illness. Holmes, 25, was undergoing psychiatric care before dropping out in May.

In a response to the filing, Brauchler said that the plea offer was a "unusual and unprecedented" and done as a publicity ploy that violates Judge William Sylvester's standing gag order on the case.

Legal experts say without a plea deal, an insanity defense may be Holmes' only legal recourse. At his January preliminary hearing, prosecutors presented seeming overwhelming evidence that showed Holmes methodically planning his July 20 attack at Aurora's Century 16 theater complex, buying an assault rifle, shotgun, two semi-automatic pistols, over 6,000 rounds of ammunition, bomb-making material and other gear for nearly two months prior to shootings.

Photos from his cellphone showed he had staked out the rear of the theater and exit doors before the shootings. Aurora police arrested Holmes in the rear of the theater parking lot minutes after the shootings.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: EllRobersonisInnocent on April 01, 2013, 10:39:44 AM
Such a waste of time and money. Take him out back and put a bullet in his head
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Pete on April 01, 2013, 10:44:39 AM
Such a waste of time and money. Take him out back and put a bullet in his head

Also, I want to win the lottery.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Emo EMAW on April 01, 2013, 10:51:58 AM
Like I don't disagree that he should die, but he's crazy, right?  And we (as a country) don't believe in capital punishment for the insane, right?  But we do when it's convenient, right?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: pissclams on April 01, 2013, 10:55:01 AM
Like I don't disagree that he should die, but he's crazy, right?  And we (as a country) don't believe in capital punishment for the insane, right?  But we do when it's convenient, right?

you should do a little more research on the subject, those are some big bridges you're building.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: The Tonya Harding of Twitter Users Creep on April 01, 2013, 10:56:42 AM
Like I don't disagree that he should die, but he's crazy, right?  And we (as a country) don't believe in capital punishment for the insane, right?  But we do when it's convenient, right?

Its these kinds of posts and make me really happy I never go into the DK dome or whatever its called these days.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: michigancat on April 01, 2013, 10:58:05 AM
Like I don't disagree that he should die, but he's crazy, right?  And we (as a country) don't believe in capital punishment for the insane, right?  But we do when it's convenient, right?

I don't think we should every use capital punishment.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Emo EMAW on April 01, 2013, 10:59:32 AM
Ok, I guess baby steps.  He's insane, right?  I think that's pretty evident.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: EllRobersonisInnocent on April 01, 2013, 11:02:20 AM
Ok, I guess baby steps.  He's insane, right?  I think that's pretty evident.

He very well could be but there was extensive planning that went into his actions.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Emo EMAW on April 01, 2013, 11:04:55 AM
Sure.  But like crazy people that are capable of planning we can execute?  Just seems like a hypocritical deal.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: EllRobersonisInnocent on April 01, 2013, 11:05:58 AM
He deserves to die a miserable death
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Emo EMAW on April 01, 2013, 11:08:03 AM
Totally agree. 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: GCJayhawker on April 01, 2013, 11:11:25 AM
Insanity in the eyes of the law is different than what most people would consider insane.  Clearly this Holmes character is mentally unstable, but all the planning and thought that he put into the act shows he was not insane in the eyes of the law.  Essentially it shows he understood the actions he was taking and appreciated what he was doing.  There are several different insanity that different states use, but you get the gist of it.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: puniraptor on April 01, 2013, 11:14:09 AM
they need to sentence him to a laboratory where they study him and do invasive experiments and figure out exactly why this happened
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: michigancat on April 01, 2013, 11:14:58 AM
our insanity laws are frickin nuts, man!
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 8manpick on April 01, 2013, 11:18:31 AM
Why would we be against killing insane people that meticulously planned the murders of several people? Because they are insane? Pfft. Silly argument.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Emo EMAW on April 01, 2013, 11:19:00 AM
Insanity in the eyes of the law is different than what most people would consider insane.  Clearly this Holmes character is mentally unstable, but all the planning and thought that he put into the act shows he was not insane in the eyes of the law.  Essentially it shows he understood the actions he was taking and appreciated what he was doing.  There are several different insanity that different states use, but you get the gist of it.

Do you think killing him has any deterrent value?  Most of these guys off themselves anyway.  A lifetime in a lab being poked and prodded might be more punitive.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: michigancat on April 01, 2013, 11:24:08 AM
I don't see how a Christian Nation could be OK with killing people.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: AbeFroman on April 01, 2013, 11:52:15 AM
I don't see how a Christian Nation could be OK with killing people.

As long as they aren't fetuses, eff em!
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: GCJayhawker on April 01, 2013, 12:09:02 PM
Insanity in the eyes of the law is different than what most people would consider insane.  Clearly this Holmes character is mentally unstable, but all the planning and thought that he put into the act shows he was not insane in the eyes of the law.  Essentially it shows he understood the actions he was taking and appreciated what he was doing.  There are several different insanity that different states use, but you get the gist of it.

Do you think killing him has any deterrent value?  Most of these guys off themselves anyway.  A lifetime in a lab being poked and prodded might be more punitive.

I don't really think it is a deterrent, but then again I'm not real high on the death penalty to begin with.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Emo EMAW on April 01, 2013, 01:20:37 PM
Okay.  So like full steam ahead with killing him, but let's not pretend we're occupying the high moral ground.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: OK_Cat on April 01, 2013, 01:35:52 PM
Like I don't disagree that he should die, but he's crazy, right?  And we (as a country) don't believe in capital punishment for the insane, right?  But we do when it's convenient, right?

I don't think we should every use capital punishment.

agreed.  i've seen too many shows on late night trutv about people being falsely accused.   :ohno:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: The Tonya Harding of Twitter Users Creep on April 01, 2013, 01:39:29 PM
Remind me again what the cost difference is between the injection and putting up a criminal for life?

IIRC, the injection is way more expensive than you'd think.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on April 01, 2013, 01:42:20 PM
I think if you murder someone, that they should be killed the same way as they murdered. Eye-for-an-eye!
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 'taterblast on April 01, 2013, 01:47:57 PM
Remind me again what the cost difference is between the injection and putting up a criminal for life?

IIRC, the injection is way more expensive than you'd think.

http://www.9news.com/news/story.aspx?storyid=323278&catid=222 (http://www.9news.com/news/story.aspx?storyid=323278&catid=222)

looks like colorado uses Sodium Thiopental
Quote
http://www.capitalpunishmentuk.org/injection.html
Quote
The five grams of sodium thiopental apparently cost the state some $351.10

there are tons and tons of costs other than the drug itself, but i was curious about the drug.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Institutional Control on April 01, 2013, 01:48:03 PM
I think if you murder someone, that they should be killed the same way as they murdered. Eye-for-an-eye!

Exactly! And if somebody rapes you, you should be able to rape them back!
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: michigancat on April 01, 2013, 01:51:41 PM
Okay.  So like full steam ahead with killing him, but let's not pretend we're occupying the high moral ground.

LOL, you're trying so hard. It's cute.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: The Tonya Harding of Twitter Users Creep on April 01, 2013, 01:59:34 PM
Remind me again what the cost difference is between the injection and putting up a criminal for life?

IIRC, the injection is way more expensive than you'd think.

http://www.9news.com/news/story.aspx?storyid=323278&catid=222 (http://www.9news.com/news/story.aspx?storyid=323278&catid=222)

looks like colorado uses Sodium Thiopental
Quote
http://www.capitalpunishmentuk.org/injection.html
Quote
The five grams of sodium thiopental apparently cost the state some $351.10

there are tons and tons of costs other than the drug itself, but i was curious about the drug.

Right, the drug itself isn't as expensive as the stuff that accompany it. 350 bones, eh? I bet you get high as crap.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Emo EMAW on April 01, 2013, 02:15:32 PM
Remind me again what the cost difference is between the injection and putting up a criminal for life?

IIRC, the injection is way more expensive than you'd think.

http://www.9news.com/news/story.aspx?storyid=323278&catid=222 (http://www.9news.com/news/story.aspx?storyid=323278&catid=222)

looks like colorado uses Sodium Thiopental
Quote
http://www.capitalpunishmentuk.org/injection.html
Quote
The five grams of sodium thiopental apparently cost the state some $351.10

there are tons and tons of costs other than the drug itself, but i was curious about the drug.

Right, the drug itself isn't as expensive as the stuff that accompany it. 350 bones, eh? I bet you get high as crap.

It'll take 10 years to kill him probably.  All the while attorneys are doing stuff.  Gets expensive.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: GCJayhawker on April 01, 2013, 02:35:22 PM
My whole thought on the death penalty is that if there is any chance that someone could be killed who is innocent it is not an ok avenue to go down.  I think we can all agree that an innocent person being killed is certainly a possibility and therefore I don't think the death penalty should be used.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: CNS on April 01, 2013, 02:41:32 PM
Russia had it right with Siberia. 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: EllRobersonisInnocent on April 01, 2013, 02:41:53 PM
My whole thought on the death penalty is that if there is any chance that someone could be killed who is innocent it is not an ok avenue to go down.  I think we can all agree that an innocent person being killed is certainly a possibility and therefore I don't think the death penalty should be used.

Some situations, no that is not a possibility though. There is such a thing as 100% stone cold lock- guilty
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: pissclams on April 01, 2013, 02:43:07 PM
Russia had it right with Siberia. 

instead of siberia, we could send all of the bad guys to lawrentucky :lol: 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: pissclams on April 01, 2013, 02:43:17 PM
lol
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: CNS on April 01, 2013, 02:45:08 PM
Oh man, Clams, that would really show them. 

I mean, waking up every day that far from an airport or decent football stadium.  Would be killer deterrent. 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: pissclams on April 01, 2013, 03:35:35 PM
i was thinking about the bhopal chemical plant outside of lawrentucky, we could make them live next to it.  :lol: 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HerrSonntag on April 01, 2013, 08:59:03 PM
My whole thought on the death penalty is that if there is any chance that someone could be killed who is innocent it is not an ok avenue to go down.  I think we can all agree that an innocent person being killed is certainly a possibility and therefore I don't think the death penalty should be used.

Some situations, no that is not a possibility though. There is such a thing as 100% stone cold lock- guilty
So you want to trust the same government that has trouble building bridges that resist the force of gravity or figuring out how to move around pieces of paper without losing boatloads of money to figure out which ones are 100% stone cold locks?

If the only cause to take a person's life, is that they murdered an innocent, and we the people execute a single, just one, innocent person, then we are all hypocrites.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: SkinnyBenny on April 01, 2013, 09:20:11 PM
My whole thought on the death penalty is that if there is any chance that someone could be killed who is innocent it is not an ok avenue to go down.  I think we can all agree that an innocent person being killed is certainly a possibility and therefore I don't think the death penalty should be used.

Some situations, no that is not a possibility though. There is such a thing as 100% stone cold lock- guilty
So you want to trust the same government that has trouble building bridges that resist the force of gravity or figuring out how to move around pieces of paper without losing boatloads of money to figure out which ones are 100% stone cold locks?

If the only cause to take a person's life, is that they murdered an innocent, and we the people execute a single, just one, innocent person, then we are all hypocrites.

no, denied, murdering one innocent is nowhere close to murdering a ton of people in a movie theater
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HerrSonntag on April 01, 2013, 09:33:23 PM
My whole thought on the death penalty is that if there is any chance that someone could be killed who is innocent it is not an ok avenue to go down.  I think we can all agree that an innocent person being killed is certainly a possibility and therefore I don't think the death penalty should be used.

Some situations, no that is not a possibility though. There is such a thing as 100% stone cold lock- guilty
So you want to trust the same government that has trouble building bridges that resist the force of gravity or figuring out how to move around pieces of paper without losing boatloads of money to figure out which ones are 100% stone cold locks?

If the only cause to take a person's life, is that they murdered an innocent, and we the people execute a single, just one, innocent person, then we are all hypocrites.

no, denied, murdering one innocent is nowhere close to murdering a ton of people in a movie theater
No argument there, but the point is you're still, by having a death penalty, assuming the risk that you will be directly responsible for executing an innocent person.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on April 02, 2013, 02:24:11 PM
Like I don't disagree that he should die, but he's crazy, right?  And we (as a country) don't believe in capital punishment for the insane, right?  But we do when it's convenient, right?

I don't think we should every use capital punishment.

I agree. Just jail them for life. Killing is wrong.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: CNS on April 02, 2013, 02:27:21 PM
I am fine with that, but don't take away their belts or shoe laces or anything.

I mean, that's bullshit.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on April 02, 2013, 02:28:18 PM
I don't even care if the person murdered like 1000 people on camera, admitted to the crime, and laughed about it in court. I don't want him getting the death penalty. Life is enough.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Mr Bread on April 02, 2013, 02:29:27 PM
I don't even care if the person murdered like 1000 people on camera, admitted to the crime, and laughed about it in court. I don't want him getting the death penalty. Life is enough.

What if he raped you and killed everybody you cared about?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on April 02, 2013, 02:30:44 PM
I don't even care if the person murdered like 1000 people on camera, admitted to the crime, and laughed about it in court. I don't want him getting the death penalty. Life is enough.

What if he raped you and killed everybody you cared about?

Life
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: CNS on April 02, 2013, 02:33:33 PM
NK, there is some combo that someone somewhere is in prison for that if committed against you and yours, you would want that person killed.

Promise.

This is like the gay marriage thing.  I don't think ppl personalize it enough to understand it. 

It isn't a question of person A killing person B.  It's an issue of your neighbor killing your daughter and what he deserves for such an act.
Title: Re: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: michigancat on April 02, 2013, 02:35:39 PM
NK, there is some combo that someone somewhere is in prison for that if committed against you and yours, you would want that person killed.

Promise.

This is like the gay marriage thing.  I don't think ppl personalize it enough to understand it. 

It isn't a question of person A killing person B.  It's an issue of your neighbor killing your daughter and what he deserves for such an act.

eff off, you don't know how he would react in that situation. I wouldn't want more people murdered just because they murdered someone I cared about. What the eff does that accomplish?
Title: Re: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: CNS on April 02, 2013, 02:36:49 PM
NK, there is some combo that someone somewhere is in prison for that if committed against you and yours, you would want that person killed.

Promise.

This is like the gay marriage thing.  I don't think ppl personalize it enough to understand it. 

It isn't a question of person A killing person B.  It's an issue of your neighbor killing your daughter and what he deserves for such an act.

eff off, you don't know how he would react in that situation. I wouldn't want more people murdered just because they murdered someone I cared about. What the eff does that accomplish?

It's human nature.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: OK_Cat on April 02, 2013, 02:37:16 PM
i don't think that the death penalty should ever be used. 
Title: Re: Re: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: michigancat on April 02, 2013, 02:37:59 PM
NK, there is some combo that someone somewhere is in prison for that if committed against you and yours, you would want that person killed.

Promise.

This is like the gay marriage thing.  I don't think ppl personalize it enough to understand it. 

It isn't a question of person A killing person B.  It's an issue of your neighbor killing your daughter and what he deserves for such an act.

eff off, you don't know how he would react in that situation. I wouldn't want more people murdered just because they murdered someone I cared about. What the eff does that accomplish?

It's human nature.

it's also human nature to eff everything that walks. Do you eff everything that walks?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on April 02, 2013, 02:39:49 PM
NK, there is some combo that someone somewhere is in prison for that if committed against you and yours, you would want that person killed.

Promise.

This is like the gay marriage thing.  I don't think ppl personalize it enough to understand it. 

It isn't a question of person A killing person B.  It's an issue of your neighbor killing your daughter and what he deserves for such an act.

What that person deserves is not the same thing as what I want the government to do. I don't support the death sentence because it's really nothing more than murdering a defenseless human.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: The Tonya Harding of Twitter Users Creep on April 02, 2013, 02:41:03 PM
This thread is a skidmark on the beautiful pair of whitie-tighties that is ComboFanning Season.

MODS!  :shakesfist:
Title: Re: Re: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: CNS on April 02, 2013, 02:41:41 PM
NK, there is some combo that someone somewhere is in prison for that if committed against you and yours, you would want that person killed.

Promise.

This is like the gay marriage thing.  I don't think ppl personalize it enough to understand it. 

It isn't a question of person A killing person B.  It's an issue of your neighbor killing your daughter and what he deserves for such an act.

eff off, you don't know how he would react in that situation. I wouldn't want more people murdered just because they murdered someone I cared about. What the eff does that accomplish?

It's human nature.

it's also human nature to eff everything that walks. Do you eff everything that walks?

No offense, but that is dumb.  I didn't say it was human nature to kill, I said it was human nature to want it for someone taking away something that is ultimately cherished. 

To relate it to your example, it would be like asking "Do you want to eff everything that walks?"
Title: Re: Re: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on April 02, 2013, 02:42:27 PM
NK, there is some combo that someone somewhere is in prison for that if committed against you and yours, you would want that person killed.

Promise.

This is like the gay marriage thing.  I don't think ppl personalize it enough to understand it. 

It isn't a question of person A killing person B.  It's an issue of your neighbor killing your daughter and what he deserves for such an act.

eff off, you don't know how he would react in that situation. I wouldn't want more people murdered just because they murdered someone I cared about. What the eff does that accomplish?

It's human nature.

it's also human nature to eff everything that walks. Do you eff everything that walks?
This seems like bait to me.  :clac:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: CNS on April 02, 2013, 02:44:33 PM
NK, there is some combo that someone somewhere is in prison for that if committed against you and yours, you would want that person killed.

Promise.

This is like the gay marriage thing.  I don't think ppl personalize it enough to understand it. 

It isn't a question of person A killing person B.  It's an issue of your neighbor killing your daughter and what he deserves for such an act.

What that person deserves is not the same thing as what I want the government to do. I don't support the death sentence because it's really nothing more than murdering a defenseless human.

I get the defenseless thing.  I think some proponents of it see it as revenge.   Also, some may say that the person had adequate defense in court.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on April 02, 2013, 02:52:38 PM
NK, there is some combo that someone somewhere is in prison for that if committed against you and yours, you would want that person killed.

Promise.

This is like the gay marriage thing.  I don't think ppl personalize it enough to understand it. 

It isn't a question of person A killing person B.  It's an issue of your neighbor killing your daughter and what he deserves for such an act.

What that person deserves is not the same thing as what I want the government to do. I don't support the death sentence because it's really nothing more than murdering a defenseless human.

I get the defenseless thing.  I think some proponents of it see it as revenge.   Also, some may say that the person had adequate defense in court.

Yeah, I get why some people support it, but I just can't support forcibly killing an unarmed person who has already surrendered and has spent the last 10 years or so living in a jail cell. It's not like life in prison with no parole would be some walk in the park for a killer, either. I mean, what would you ever have to look forward to?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: michigancat on April 02, 2013, 02:56:39 PM
No offense, but that is dumb.  I didn't say it was human nature to kill, I said it was human nature to want it for someone taking away something that is ultimately cherished. 

To relate it to your example, it would be like asking "Do you want to eff everything that walks?"

It may be human nature to "want it" but that doesn't mean he (or I) couldn't choose to rise above "human nature" and not support murdering another person. Just like you rise above "human nature" and don't act on your urges to eff everything that walks.

which I guess means I don't get the point of this post:

NK, there is some combo that someone somewhere is in prison for that if committed against you and yours, you would want that person killed.

Promise.

This is like the gay marriage thing.  I don't think ppl personalize it enough to understand it. 

It isn't a question of person A killing person B.  It's an issue of your neighbor killing your daughter and what he deserves for such an act.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Emo EMAW on April 02, 2013, 02:57:59 PM
Part of the punishment should be it's deterrent value. 

Anyway, plenty of attorneys and career police don't believe in the DP just because it takes too long and is too expensive, more expensive than life incarceration.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: CNS on April 02, 2013, 03:01:00 PM
No offense, but that is dumb.  I didn't say it was human nature to kill, I said it was human nature to want it for someone taking away something that is ultimately cherished. 

To relate it to your example, it would be like asking "Do you want to eff everything that walks?"

It may be human nature to "want it" but that doesn't mean he (or I) couldn't choose to rise above "human nature" and not support murdering another person. Just like you rise above "human nature" and don't act on your urges to eff everything that walks.

which I guess means I don't get the point of this post:

NK, there is some combo that someone somewhere is in prison for that if committed against you and yours, you would want that person killed.

Promise.

This is like the gay marriage thing.  I don't think ppl personalize it enough to understand it. 

It isn't a question of person A killing person B.  It's an issue of your neighbor killing your daughter and what he deserves for such an act.

Opportunity allows capital punishment in many states now.  Opportunity doesn't allow the average male to have his way with everything that walks.  Also, I would argue that it isn't human nature to eff everything that walks and that there is much more to it than what your simplistic example provides and therefore is a shitty comparison that can't be used adequately they way you are trying.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: EllRobersonisInnocent on April 02, 2013, 03:01:19 PM
If one of Sandusky's victims was a family member of mine I'd want him tortured and raped daily in prison
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on April 02, 2013, 03:01:59 PM
NK, there is some combo that someone somewhere is in prison for that if committed against you and yours, you would want that person killed.

Promise.

This is like the gay marriage thing.  I don't think ppl personalize it enough to understand it. 

It isn't a question of person A killing person B.  It's an issue of your neighbor killing your daughter and what he deserves for such an act.

What that person deserves is not the same thing as what I want the government to do. I don't support the death sentence because it's really nothing more than murdering a defenseless human.

I get the defenseless thing.  I think some proponents of it see it as revenge.   Also, some may say that the person had adequate defense in court.

Yeah, I get why some people support it, but I just can't support forcibly killing an unarmed person who has already surrendered and has spent the last 10 years or so living in a jail cell. It's not like life in prison with no parole would be some walk in the park for a killer, either. I mean, what would you ever have to look forward to?

So would it be ok to kill an armed person? Like instead of lethal injection they could use a Thuderdome format or something?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: EllRobersonisInnocent on April 02, 2013, 03:04:35 PM
Basically people who commit terrible crimes deserve terrible and painful punishments imo
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on April 02, 2013, 03:05:51 PM
NK, there is some combo that someone somewhere is in prison for that if committed against you and yours, you would want that person killed.

Promise.

This is like the gay marriage thing.  I don't think ppl personalize it enough to understand it. 

It isn't a question of person A killing person B.  It's an issue of your neighbor killing your daughter and what he deserves for such an act.

What that person deserves is not the same thing as what I want the government to do. I don't support the death sentence because it's really nothing more than murdering a defenseless human.

I get the defenseless thing.  I think some proponents of it see it as revenge.   Also, some may say that the person had adequate defense in court.

Yeah, I get why some people support it, but I just can't support forcibly killing an unarmed person who has already surrendered and has spent the last 10 years or so living in a jail cell. It's not like life in prison with no parole would be some walk in the park for a killer, either. I mean, what would you ever have to look forward to?

So would it be ok to kill an armed person? Like instead of lethal injection they could use a Thuderdome format or something?

Say the prisoner fashioned some form of a weapon (like a shiv) and started attacking people with it. I would be okay with one of the guards shooting him in that situation to spare other lives.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on April 02, 2013, 03:07:49 PM
Part of the punishment should be it's deterrent value. 

Anyway, plenty of attorneys and career police don't believe in the DP just because it takes too long and is too expensive, more expensive than life incarceration.

Does death really provide a greater deterrent than life without parole, though? You die in prison either way.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: michigancat on April 02, 2013, 03:08:39 PM
Opportunity allows capital punishment in many states now.  Opportunity doesn't allow the average male to have his way with everything that walks.  Also, I would argue that it isn't human nature to eff everything that walks and that there is much more to it than what your simplistic example provides and therefore is a shitty comparison that can't be used adequately they way you are trying.

Wanting to have sex with people is more a part human nature than wanting to kill someone via an opportunity created by a government entity. I mainly take issue with you telling people how they would/should react in a situation as if they can't help it.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: CNS on April 02, 2013, 03:09:11 PM
Part of the punishment should be it's deterrent value. 

Anyway, plenty of attorneys and career police don't believe in the DP just because it takes too long and is too expensive, more expensive than life incarceration.

Does death really provide a greater deterrent than life without parole, though? You die in prison either way.

It has shown to not be much of a deterrent.  That said, after the fact, I think those in prison for life would chose to continue that way rather than getting the needle.  Most, anyway.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: CNS on April 02, 2013, 03:16:31 PM
Opportunity allows capital punishment in many states now.  Opportunity doesn't allow the average male to have his way with everything that walks.  Also, I would argue that it isn't human nature to eff everything that walks and that there is much more to it than what your simplistic example provides and therefore is a shitty comparison that can't be used adequately they way you are trying.

Wanting to have sex with people is more a part human nature than wanting to kill someone via an opportunity created by a government entity. I mainly take issue with you telling people how they would/should react in a situation as if they can't help it.

I am just addressing raw emotion.  Most ppl don't have control during raw emotion and such a loss, as the one I described, creates the type of emotion that many have a very hard time processing.  The heart wants what the heart wants. 

Also, I don't think the urge for sex is stronger than the urge for revenge for such an extreme act, however I am not a Psychiatrist. 
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: HerrSonntag on April 02, 2013, 03:19:46 PM
I don't think that there aren't things a person can do that are terrible enough to warrant their own demise.  I just think that no man-made system could ever be doubtless enough to handle the task.   And if even one person is unjustly executed, that makes us all murders and hypocrites.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Emo EMAW on April 02, 2013, 03:21:59 PM
Part of the punishment should be it's deterrent value. 

Anyway, plenty of attorneys and career police don't believe in the DP just because it takes too long and is too expensive, more expensive than life incarceration.

Does death really provide a greater deterrent than life without parole, though? You die in prison either way.

I think the fact that people often plea down to life as evidence that it is a deterrent.  Probably marginal, though. 

Why do people do awful things and then kill themselves?  I think because doing prison or DP is worse than dying right there.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: EllRobersonisInnocent on April 02, 2013, 03:23:55 PM
Part of the punishment should be it's deterrent value. 

Anyway, plenty of attorneys and career police don't believe in the DP just because it takes too long and is too expensive, more expensive than life incarceration.

Does death really provide a greater deterrent than life without parole, though? You die in prison either way.

I think the fact that people often plea down to life as evidence that it is a deterrent.  Probably marginal, though. 

Why do people do awful things and then kill themselves?  I think because doing prison or DP is worse than dying right there.

Because they don't want to be beaten and raped in prison
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Emo EMAW on April 02, 2013, 03:26:38 PM
Part of the punishment should be it's deterrent value. 

Anyway, plenty of attorneys and career police don't believe in the DP just because it takes too long and is too expensive, more expensive than life incarceration.

Does death really provide a greater deterrent than life without parole, though? You die in prison either way.

I think the fact that people often plea down to life as evidence that it is a deterrent.  Probably marginal, though. 

Why do people do awful things and then kill themselves?  I think because doing prison or DP is worse than dying right there.

Because they don't want to be beaten and raped in prison

I bet Belcher could have handled himself just fine.  :dunno:
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on April 02, 2013, 03:27:02 PM
Part of the punishment should be it's deterrent value. 

Anyway, plenty of attorneys and career police don't believe in the DP just because it takes too long and is too expensive, more expensive than life incarceration.

Does death really provide a greater deterrent than life without parole, though? You die in prison either way.

I think the fact that people often plea down to life as evidence that it is a deterrent.  Probably marginal, though. 

Why do people do awful things and then kill themselves?  I think because doing prison or DP is worse than dying right there.

In that case, the person went ahead and committed the crime knowing that the death penalty was a possibility. They were just fortunate enough to be offered a plea deal. I see it as kind of a wash, myself. I'm sure life in prison is much more appealing than the death penalty once you get acclimated to that lifestyle, but it just seems unimaginably awful to me.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: EllRobersonisInnocent on April 02, 2013, 03:29:52 PM
I've seen enough Lockup on MSNBC to know I'd rather die than spend my life in prison
Title: Re: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: michigancat on April 02, 2013, 03:38:35 PM
Opportunity allows capital punishment in many states now.  Opportunity doesn't allow the average male to have his way with everything that walks.  Also, I would argue that it isn't human nature to eff everything that walks and that there is much more to it than what your simplistic example provides and therefore is a shitty comparison that can't be used adequately they way you are trying.

Wanting to have sex with people is more a part human nature than wanting to kill someone via an opportunity created by a government entity. I mainly take issue with you telling people how they would/should react in a situation as if they can't help it.

I am just addressing raw emotion.  Most ppl don't have control during raw emotion and such a loss, as the one I described, creates the type of emotion that many have a very hard time processing.  The heart wants what the heart wants. 

Also, I don't think the urge for sex is stronger than the urge for revenge for such an extreme act, however I am not a Psychiatrist.

you may have a point if it was in the heat of the moment (like you were there when it happened), but I don't think it applies to a long investigation and trial. They are so new to humans that instinct gets thrown out the window. (Read the article KK shared in the God thread)
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: CNS on April 03, 2013, 02:34:51 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/03/world/meast/saudi-arabia-paralysis-case/index.html?hpt=hp_t2 (http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/03/world/meast/saudi-arabia-paralysis-case/index.html?hpt=hp_t2)
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: GCJayhawker on April 03, 2013, 02:38:07 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/03/world/meast/saudi-arabia-paralysis-case/index.html?hpt=hp_t2 (http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/03/world/meast/saudi-arabia-paralysis-case/index.html?hpt=hp_t2)

Eye for an eye type stuff going on in Saudi Arabia.
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: puniraptor on April 03, 2013, 02:39:31 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/03/world/meast/saudi-arabia-paralysis-case/index.html?hpt=hp_t2 (http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/03/world/meast/saudi-arabia-paralysis-case/index.html?hpt=hp_t2)

Eye for an eye type stuff going on in Saudi Arabia.

wait, pay a shitload of money OR get paralyzed?
Title: Re: Aurora Shooting
Post by: puniraptor on April 03, 2013, 02:40:05 PM
AN EYE OR SOME MONEY FOR AN EYE. justice.