toldailytopic: Who is to blame in the Colorado movie theater shooting?

[PureX]

This is poorly reasoned in my mind. Guns don't cause gun deaths. A gun is an assembly of metal and wood components that does nothing at all until somebody picks it up. Thus, gun deaths are the result of the intentions of the person holding the gun.

No one is suggesting otherwise. But if those who did all that killing didn't have guns in their hands, they wouldn't have shot anyone. You can't deny that guns, especially hand guns, make it very easy to kill someone. That's what they are designed to do, after all. So it stands to reason that the availability of such easy-kill machines has something to do with the fact that we kill 1,000 times more of our own people with guns than those other countries do.

In some countries such as Switzerland and Israel, people are required t serve in the army and when discharged, they MUST take their guns with them yet their rate of gun related crimes is much lower. A gun is a gun so something else must be at work here.

I agree. It's not just that we have so many guns available, it's also that they are available to anyone for any reason. And they are available to people who have not been properly trained in how and when to use them.

I am not against Americans having guns, at all. I am against drunks, drug addicts, lunatics, and idiots having easy access to guns when they're drunk, high, enraged or otherwise behaving like morons.

We live in a culture in this country that promotes killing people as a solution to the problems they cause. We have all grown up watching the good guy blow away the bad guys every night on TV, and we now have multiple generations that accept this as the natural solution for dealing with "bad" people. When people get drunk, and high, and enraged, and crazy, their grasp of who is a "bad guy" and how "bad" they really are gets exaggerated and skewed, and they end up shooting someone who wasn't really a "bad guy" at all. Most gun deaths in this country are either suicides or people killed friends, lovers, or family members. None of whom were actually the "bad guys" that their killers envisioned they were at the time.

The problem isn't the guns. It's the guns getting into the hands of unstable and irresponsible people. And MORE people having guns isn't going to stop that. In fact, it just makes it worse. Somehow, we need to regulate who is getting them, better. But it's not just that, we also need to open our eyes to this cultural obsession we have with killing anyone who we deem to be a "bad guy".

 

[Town Heretic]

Jesse James Gang's last bank job in Northfield Minnesota stopped by citizens with guns, lots of guns!


When the good guys have guns the bad guys run.

--Dave

Many of those citizens, with clear targets in broad daylight, using rifles and shotguns, had been soldiers in a bloody civil war. Not exactly on point in any particular. There are any number of arguments for guns being in the hands of responsible citizens making a difference. The Colorado example just isn't one of them.

 

[DFT_Dave]

Many of those citizens, with clear targets in broad daylight, using rifles and shotguns, had been soldiers in a bloody civil war. Not exactly on point in any particular. There are any number of arguments for guns being in the hands of responsible citizens making a difference. The Colorado example just isn't one of them.

I'm from Wisconsin and lived in Minnesota, most citizens still have guns, lots of guns, for the same reason they had them after and before the civil war. They like to hunt and protect themselves rather than wait for help.

The citizens in the town of Northfield were not formally soldiers, the the bandits were.

--Dave

 

[drbrumley]

Exploiting Tragedy

Posted by Butler Shaffer on July 21, 2012 09:11 AM


With the Olympics about to start, the United States team might look to members of the gun control lobby for possible track medalists. The speed with which these people got to media cameras and microphones to exploit the Colorado killings for political advantage was remarkable, leaving intelligent minds to ask the question ancient Romans would raise: "cui bono?"

None of the 2nd Amendment foes are sincere in their efforts to rid the world of guns: they only want them out of the hands of private individuals. When I see any of these worshipers of state power proposing to take weapons away from the police and military as well, I might be prepared to listen to their case. In the meantime, gun-control laws, as well as efforts to restrict the Internet, serve no other purpose than to reinforce the state's monopoly on the use of violence to control people.

 

[DFT_Dave]

Exploiting Tragedy

Posted by Butler Shaffer on July 21, 2012 09:11 AM


With the Olympics about to start, the United States team might look to members of the gun control lobby for possible track medalists. The speed with which these people got to media cameras and microphones to exploit the Colorado killings for political advantage was remarkable, leaving intelligent minds to ask the question ancient Romans would raise: "cui bono?"

None of the 2nd Amendment foes are sincere in their efforts to rid the world of guns: they only want them out of the hands of private individuals. When I see any of these worshipers of state power proposing to take weapons away from the police and military as well, I might be prepared to listen to their case. In the meantime, gun-control laws, as well as efforts to restrict the Internet, serve no other purpose than to reinforce the state's monopoly on the use of violence to control people.

Amen, well said. :the_wave:

--Dave :thumb:

 

[Town Heretic]

I'm from Wisconsin and lived in Minnesota, most citizens still have guns, lots of guns, for the same reason they had them after and before the civil war. They like to hunt and protect themselves rather than wait for help.

I'm reasonably sure that doesn't describe the populace of Aurora.

The citizens in the town of Northfield were not formally soldiers, the the bandits were.

Some were and some weren't and all of them, with the exception of the particularly young, had lived through that Civil War. All of those factors and the ones you noted above make a strong case for the distinctions I noted. As a side note, the robbers here were mostly trying to get away and, by testimony and body count, weren't really looking to kill the citizenry.

So again, you're comparing a situation that happens in broad daylight, with clear targets and citizens armed with rifles, most of whom have tested familiarity with their weapons, many of whom had involvement in a bloody war, with a situation that almost couldn't have been more divergent.

 

[DFT_Dave]

I'm reasonably sure that doesn't describe the populace of Aurora.

Some were and some weren't and all of them, with the exception of the particularly young, had lived through that Civil War. All of those factors and the ones you noted above make a strong case for the distinctions I noted. As a side note, the robbers here were mostly trying to get away and, by testimony and body count, weren't really looking to kill the citizenry.

So again, you're comparing a situation that happens in broad daylight, with clear targets and citizens armed with rifles, most of whom have tested familiarity with their weapons, many of whom had involvement in a bloody war, with a situation that almost couldn't have been more divergent.

In Wisconsin, at night, a drunken man said he was going to kill someone. My brothers friend Paul, the county sheriff, was called. He went to the bar and was told the man's discription, car, and where he was headed. He caught up with the man, pulled him over, and the man stepped out of his car with a shot gun in his hands and threatened to kill him. To Paul's surprise, three cars had followed him and a number of citizens jump out with their guns and told Paul they had his back. Sadly the man raised his gun to fire and Paul had to kill him.

My brother in law told me of an incident when a few robberies of rural homes, when no one was there, had taken place where he lived. Neighbor's keep watch for each other and when one saw an unfamiliar car pull up to his neighbors home, knowing he was not there, he called him and together they went, with guns in hand, just in time to see intruders about to leave with stuff they were stealing.
They told the bad guys to kneel down and put their hands behind their back heads and pray the sheriff would get ther soon or they would just shoot them.

The police are never there when you need them the most.

--Dave

 

[alwight]

All I'm reasonably sure of is that what we don't more of in the UK is guns in the community.
More guns would not make our society safer. :nono:

In the US is seems that a gun culture version of MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) is what you have and an arms race against the bad guys exists, ramped up by fear.
Meanwhile crazies, bad and good guys can all just walk into a shop and stock up with more and more guns and ammo to raise the levels of MAD in the community, now that really is crazy imo.

 

[DFT_Dave]

All I'm reasonably sure of is that what we don't more of in the UK is guns in the community. More guns would not make our society safer. :nono:

In the US is seems that a gun culture version of MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) is what you have and an arms race against the bad guys exists, ramped up by fear. Meanwhile crazies, bad and good guys can all just walk into a shop and stock up with more and more guns and ammo to raise the levels of MAD in the community, now that really is crazy imo.

Who would have stopped the Soviet Union from taking over all of Europe after the defeat of Germany if America did not have "bigger and more guns" than they did?

If the "bad guys" give up their guns we will have world peace, if the "good guys" give up their guns we will all live under tyranny.

The guys and gals who don't know the difference between the "good" and "bad" guys will end up with tyranny but probably won't know the difference.

--Dave

 

[eameece]

America is a nation of rebels. It was founded on high treason and is the Protestant capitol of the world.
As such, it's society reflects the image. It simply works better for citizens of a country such as that to arm their selves.

Or, America could change. :loser:

 

[eameece]

Well England, and most other 1st world countries for that matter, are far more cultured. Society in America is simply chopped and screwed, and so the current *falling backwards* of the conservative brand is, at least temporarily, doing more harm then good.
Because America was always generally fixated on tooth and nail cowboy freedom, limiting such is an endeavor that doesn't roll over too well with it's social workings.
That's why for over the past 50-60 years or so, America has had a gargantuan issue both 'crazies' like the Columbine shooting, DC sniper, etc. along with more permanent things like inner city gangs.

Well said, I agree.

 

[eameece]

Exploiting Tragedy

Posted by Butler Shaffer on July 21, 2012 09:11 AM


With the Olympics about to start, the United States team might look to members of the gun control lobby for possible track medalists. The speed with which these people got to media cameras and microphones to exploit the Colorado killings for political advantage was remarkable, leaving intelligent minds to ask the question ancient Romans would raise: "cui bono?"

None of the 2nd Amendment foes are sincere in their efforts to rid the world of guns: they only want them out of the hands of private individuals. When I see any of these worshipers of state power proposing to take weapons away from the police and military as well, I might be prepared to listen to their case. In the meantime, gun-control laws, as well as efforts to restrict the Internet, serve no other purpose than to reinforce the state's monopoly on the use of violence to control people.

Many liberals want to see less weapons in the hands of the military as well as the people. Many also want to see violence employed as a solution less often.

We can rid America of guns, but only when Americans decide to do so. We can't force the elimination of guns, using guns. When there is a consensus, then more restrictive gun laws or gun bans can be enforced; not otherwise. That may happen someday. Until it does, we will continue to see incidents like this, and far more often here than anywhere else.

 

[PureX]

Many liberals want to see less weapons in the hands of the military as well as the people. Many also want to see violence employed as a solution less often.

We can rid America of guns, but only when Americans decide to do so. We can't force the elimination of guns, using guns. When there is a consensus, then more restrictive gun laws or gun bans can be enforced; not otherwise. That may happen someday. Until it does, we will continue to see incidents like this, and far more often here than anywhere else.

We already have gun regulation. But the laws are inconsistent and often nonsensical. All we really need to do is regulate gun ownership the same way we regulate driving motor vehicles. Make the laws sensible and consistent, nationwide, requiring various levels of training and licensing for various types of firearms. And then enforce those regulations. There's no need to ban guns any more than there's a need to ban automobiles, or any other dangerous machines. We just need to try and make sure that the people owning and using them are responsible and knowledgable about their use.

 

[Town Heretic]

In Wisconsin, at night, a drunken man said he was going to kill someone. My brothers friend Paul, the county sheriff, was called. He went to the bar and was told the man's discription, car, and where he was headed. He caught up with the man, pulled him over, and the man stepped out of his car with a shot gun in his hands and threatened to kill him. To Paul's surprise, three cars had followed him and a number of citizens jump out with their guns and told Paul they had his back. Sadly the man raised his gun to fire and Paul had to kill him.

My brother in law told me of an incident when a few robberies of rural homes, when no one was there, had taken place where he lived. Neighbor's keep watch for each other and when one saw an unfamiliar car pull up to his neighbors home, knowing he was not there, he called him and together they went, with guns in hand, just in time to see intruders about to leave with stuff they were stealing.
They told the bad guys to kneel down and put their hands behind their back heads and pray the sheriff would get ther soon or they would just shoot them.

The police are never there when you need them the most.

--Dave

I'm not sure what conversation we're having, but it doesn't seem to be this one. lain:

An active police presence, coupled with genuine neighborhood awareness will have an appreciable impact on preventing crime. To say they're NEVER there when you need them most is missing the point.

My singular point was the Colorado shooting isn't the poster child of "an armed citizenry could have prevented or limited this damage" address. If anything it's more likely to have resulted in an increase in carnage, given the particulars.

I'm not arguing against guns. I'm a Southerner who has any number of them. And I was reared in the traditions that make them a benefit to my household. Guns absent respect and the training to make their responsible use possible are a human tragedy waiting to happen. If we make people take boating safety courses and pass driver tests then the possession of a lethal instrument should come with similar restrictions. Mandate that and I'm fine with carrying in public.

 

[alwight]

Who would have stopped the Soviet Union from taking over all of Europe after the defeat of Germany if America did not have "bigger and more guns" than they did?

If the "bad guys" give up their guns we will have world peace, if the "good guys" give up their guns we will all live under tyranny.

The guys and gals who don't know the difference between the "good" and "bad" guys will end up with tyranny but probably won't know the difference.

--Dave

Well, we were all very lucky it worked then because it evolved into a Dr. Strangelove type nuclear standoff and is that really the kind of thinking you want to be part of your communities?
I suggest you make sure your police can and will do the law enforcement not assume they won't perhaps as an excuse for private ownership of lethal weapons.

 

[PureX]

 

[kmoney]

Westboro plans to picket at the memorial for these victims.
link


Disgusting. They are thanking God for the killer.


All Colorado TOLers should go teach them a lesson. :Clete:

 

[kmoney]

He was spitting at the door and spitting at the guards,' a just-released inmate told the Daily News. 'He's spitting at everything. Dude was acting crazy.'

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.”

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...lking-killing-article-1.1119173#ixzz21J6jX95l

I can see an argument for insanity coming.

 

[kmoney]

http://imgur.com/gDESi

Bias?

View attachment 17343

 

[eameece]

We already have gun regulation. But the laws are inconsistent and often nonsensical. All we really need to do is regulate gun ownership the same way we regulate driving motor vehicles. Make the laws sensible and consistent, nationwide, requiring various levels of training and licensing for various types of firearms. And then enforce those regulations. There's no need to ban guns any more than there's a need to ban automobiles, or any other dangerous machines. We just need to try and make sure that the people owning and using them are responsible and knowledgable about their use.

That would be progress. But my opinion is that noone really needs guns, unless you are in the military. And we should be cutting back on that too. The real self-defense is to remove guns from the community, and the real need is to move beyond hunting or target practice as a hobby or a profession. But we as a society have not arrived at that point of maturity yet. We idealize violence. We still feel too much fear, and are too willing to disrespect other living beings. We need to ban guns; they are not just dangerous machines, but weapons of murder that have no other purpose. But we won't ban guns until we are willing to do so; so I accept that you can't use guns to ban or restrict guns more severely, until we as a society are ready to do so.

Until then, however, look for incidents like this to continue forever, and get more and more frequent and deadly. What does it take for an addict to quit?