Topic: Aurora, CO movie theater shooting

[ofreen]

... and planes on conveyor belts.

I just felt a twinge of nostalgia.

[MCRider]

... and planes on conveyor belts.

I just felt a twinge of nostalgia.

Yes, it can.

[BeSeeingYou]

Forgive me for editing this down to the three salient points.

OK

With your typical pistol or rifle/shotgun you have a limited magazine of what 10 shots or less.  That still would not stop this from happening but the carnage would be much less.

It would have been easy to substitute/exchange multiple 10, 20, or 30 round magazines for the same result.  Magazines can be changed in one or two seconds with a little practice.

Alternately, he could also have had multiple firearms loaded with the equivalent number of rounds.  That's actually happened elsewhere.

Anyway, you are still blaming the tool rather than the individual.  There are many alternate tools that could have done more or less damage.

Are you aware that 100 round magazines have been available since at least the 1920's?  But suddenly, in 2012 our society can no longer tolerate their existence?  This really seems logical to you?

But allowing these types of weapons is directly responsible for the high toll of victims.  I don't see how it can be argued any other way.

Hmmm, don't see or won't see?

We are not a wants based society.  Government (us after all) imposes all kinds of laws and rules about what you can do and have. 

No, I disagree.  The vast majority of laws and restrictions are punishment based, not preventive or issuance based.
A needs based society does require you to justify why you need something before an allowance or availability is made.  That is NOT the basis for our current society.

I can't have an outhouse in my front yard no matter how much I might want one. 

Yes you can.  No one physically prevents you from installing one.  They may punish you and or apply penalties, and even remove it for you, if you do.
But, no one prevents you from obtaining one before the fact.

I can't burn old tires in my backyard either 

Yes you can.  But if you get caught there are punishments and penalties.  No one prevents you from obtaining tires.

or own a collection of RPG's or boxes of landmines.

There is an open availability restriction with these.  But, with the proper licenses and government contacts, you can probably obtain these, too. It currently varies with Fed and state statutes.  Explosive devices such as these are regulated.
However, I will reject the notion a 100 round magazine as being the equivalent of an RPG or landmine.  That's just silly.

And even though it is easier to dump my used engine oil down the drain I can't do that either.   

Again, yes you can.  But there are punishments when caught doing so.  You don't have to demonstrate a need to buy oil.  Just walk up to the counter and say I want it, here's some money.  No one need ask what you want it for or what you are going to do with it, before making it available.

But somehow if people find this is all too much of an imposition maybe they need to separate themselves from civil society and go live a "Lord of the Flies" existence with other like minded people in some remote area.

No no, that is not what you are proposing.  You are proposing to change the current society to fit your model, with additional laws and restrictions.
It might well be suggested that the reverse is more in line.  That you find an area more in line with your desires rather than change the current one.
I hear the UK or AU may be more in line with your wants. 

Cheers,

A kid is sitting in the living room with his feet up on the coffee table.  Mom comes in and says to the kid, "get your feet off the table".  The kid raises his legs and holds his feet in the air a few inches above the table.

TT your response is nothing more than you holding your feet in the air over the table all the while thinking how clever it is.

 Just throw a bunch of word soup up on the wall to misdirect and cloud the issue without really answering anything. 

Brevity is the soul of wit.....Shakespeare

[HondaMan]

Don't worry Aussies and Brits not all Americans think this way.  They are the minority.  About 40% of American households have a gun and only a few percent have a conceal and carry permit and most of them don't actually carry.

Careful, now...where I live, 57% of the County population has Carry Permits. And, you have to own a gun and be trained, to get one...and, we are considered 'pikers' in this area.

I don't think I believe this.  Don't you live in the Denver area?  I used to live in Wash Park.  Are you in Jefferson County? I don't think the number is anywhere near that even in Colorado Springs wich is the opposite culture from Denver.

It's true. When I picked mine up, it was 53% some years ago, now is higher. Stats are from the Jeffco Sheriff website.

[HondaMan]

The city of Aurora does not allow open or concealed carry.

Be careful, Rafster: know your laws.
http://www.rmgo.org/concealed-carry-guide/summary-of-colorados-concealed-carry-law

[TwoTired]

Just throw a bunch of word soup up on the wall to misdirect and cloud the issue without really answering anything.

It was not misdirection.  And was never intended to be.  I'm disappointed you didn't understand it.

If I understand you correctly, all you want to do is take something (a tool) away from everyone, or anyone besides you, because you don't understand its value, or place any positive value upon it.  The loss of the tool in question won't effect you one way or the other, and it costs you absolutely nothing.  So, you are giving something away that belongs to someone else and expect every one to believe you're very clever and helping them?

There are laws against killing people.  The law doesn't stop people from killing.  It defines the crime and outlines punishment for those that get caught.

Why is it more important or somehow special because of the particular tool used to complete the crime, than to punish on the merits of the crime itself?

A tool is not responsible for the crime.  It is unworthy of vilification, loathing, or ire.  It has no will of its own. 

If a truck fitted with an extra large fuel tank is used to murder a schoolyard full of children, are you going to then say society would be safer if we ban all extra large fuel tanks for the general populace?  I am, of course, assuming you personally have no need or desire to own an extra large fuel tank.

Is this what you think is fair and reasonable?

[trueblue]

OK TT, let me get this straight, you are perfectly alright for anyone who wants a 100 round auto repeating assault rifle to own one, just because a couple of blokes over 200 years ago say it is ok.  But if someone wants to ride a motorcycle with an exhaust producing 90Db you jump up and down and whinge and moan and carry on about it, talk about a hypocrite.  It is an attitude like this that gives America a bad name, I personally know quite a few Americans and in general most are nice people, I even dated a nice American lass for a few months.  Then again I have known a couple that were loud, arrogant, opinionated a#$#holes and unfortunately for the majority, these people are the ones that make the biggest impression on the rest of the world.

[demon78]

Apropos of nothing I would think a 100 round clip would be unwieldy.
Bill the demon.

[Eddie]

just read this about the Aussie society....
Australian Gun Law Update
Here's a thought to warm some of your hearts....
From: Ed Chenel, A police officer in AustraliaHi Yanks, I thought you all would like to see the real
figures from Down Under.It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were
forced by a new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by our own
government, a program costing Australia taxpayersmore than $500 million dollars.The first year results are now in:
Australia-wide, homicides are up 6.2 percent,
Australia-wide, assaults are up 9.6 percent;
Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. (Note that
while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not and criminals still possess their guns!)
While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically
upward in the past 12 months, since the criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed.
There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the elderly, while the resident is at home.Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was
expended in 'successfully ridding Australian society of guns....' You won't see this on the American evening news or hear your governor or
members of the State Assembly disseminating this information.The Australian experience speaks for itself. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control
laws affect only the law-abiding citizens.Take note Americans, before it's too late!

maybe they can shed some light on this....true or not? 

[rickmancr750]

From: Ed Chenel, A police officer in Australia

There is only one Chenel in the phone book, and he/she is "A Chenel". The likelihood that person is an officer is low. With that in mind, I mistrust the balance of the report.

[trueblue]

just read this about the Aussie society....
Australian Gun Law Update
Here's a thought to warm some of your hearts....
From: Ed Chenel, A police officer in AustraliaHi Yanks, I thought you all would like to see the real
figures from Down Under.It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were
forced by a new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by our own
government, a program costing Australia taxpayersmore than $500 million dollars.The first year results are now in:
Australia-wide, homicides are up 6.2 percent,
Australia-wide, assaults are up 9.6 percent;
Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. (Note that
while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not and criminals still possess their guns!)
While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically
upward in the past 12 months, since the criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed.
There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the elderly, while the resident is at home.Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was
expended in 'successfully ridding Australian society of guns....' You won't see this on the American evening news or hear your governor or
members of the State Assembly disseminating this information.The Australian experience speaks for itself. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control
laws affect only the law-abiding citizens.Take note Americans, before it's too late!

maybe they can shed some light on this....true or not? 

Try looking at some basic stats, before you believe some unreliable anectdote.  These are from the Australian Institue of Criminology.  Overall they show a downward trend in violent crimes.


Violent crime statistics Violent crimes from 1996 to 2007 (per 100,000 persons per year)


Homicide victims from 1993 to 2007 (number per year)


Homicide incidents in Australia, 1989-90 to 2006-07 (number)



Homicides involving firearms as a percentage of total homicides, 1915-2003



Source: http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics/homicide.aspx
             http://www.aic.gov.au/en/statistics/violent%20crime.aspx

[JeffSTL]

Don't sweat it trueblue, that is just one of those rubbish chain emails that g get passed around. Unfortunately you can see the sad state of affairs in this country. There has been a new wave of my way or the highway mentality.  There is no compromise left. Those 100 round clips were banned until the ban on assault weapons expired in 2004. We can't even agree that hey maybe it is not a good idea to let people buy body armour.


Mark- I've been on the fence about going with a Hondaman ignition or pamco. I will put my money where my mouth is if you could provide a link to those astounding numbers.

TT- It does appear your arguments for pipe noise and gun control directly oppose each other.

[Duke McDukiedook]

TT excercising his second amendment rights lawfully cannot be compared to the loud pipes argument, he does not offend and disturb people by excercising his rights lawfully.

Loud pipes do however disturb and disrupt the general public, you are presenting a pretty poor strawman argument.

And if you bothered to look at violent crime statistics here in America we are on a downward trend, less crime, who knew?
 

[JeffSTL]

Strawman? I don't think anyone here said he didn't have the right to have a gun.  T the argument is about limiting those rights exactly the same as limiting pipe noise.

It amazes me that the gun crowd thinks the s second amendment is the only right that is absolute. It is not. When the bill of rights was written we had black powder guns not automatic weapons with 100 round clips and body armor.

As you can see friends over seas no room for compromise. I'm done.

Btw, loud pipes annoy the hell out of me but and wish they would be limited but i'm not going to argue that they are damaging me in the few seconds that they are disturbing my peace.

[Duke McDukiedook]

The problem with your argument for compromise on the issue of bearing arms is the writers of the second amendment were crystal clear and there is no compromise.

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

When you set out to limit what types of weapons are banned or not allowed you are infringing on the public's rights by law.
Now, the supreme court will be the ultimate voice on exactly how this amendment is interpreted but as of late they and most politicians and a majority of Americans seem to feel the same way- to not limit the types of weapons you can purchase.

[MCRider]

When the 2nd amendment was written they thought the weapons they had were pretty advanced, every generation does. They can only look backwards, they can't see the future. They weren't saying to themselves, we can have this right because our weapons are primitive.

If it was to be written today there would be no allowance for the advancement of technology. As they thought their technology was pretty advanced.

Its the principle of the thing and that never changes regardless of the technology. The concern was that whatever the arms the "enemy" might have, the population could match them.  Only then is freedom preserved.

There is no allowance for the action of wackos. They occur in nature like tornadoes and drought. Random and unpredictable.

[HondaMan]

Don't sweat it trueblue, that is just one of those rubbish chain emails that g get passed around. Unfortunately you can see the sad state of affairs in this country. There has been a new wave of my way or the highway mentality.  There is no compromise left. Those 100 round clips were banned until the ban on assault weapons expired in 2004. We can't even agree that hey maybe it is not a good idea to let people buy body armour.


Mark- I've been on the fence about going with a Hondaman ignition or pamco. I will put my money where my mouth is if you could provide a link to those astounding numbers.

TT- It does appear your arguments for pipe noise and gun control directly oppose each other.

Well, you will not find this info on the Internet: Jeffco government is deep blue, and won't even publish on their website that they offer the permits. State law, and groups like the CBI (who does the background checks with the FBI), RMGO and NRA, have had to keep track of these stats to make them accurate, and the Jeffco Sheriff's Department is required to divulge them upon request, or at the time you receive approval. As I am Chief of Security where I work and these things are important to us, so we regularly ask the Sheriff's Dept. what these numbers are: that's how I know them. Call it anecdote if you like, but neither the Internet nor the Press carries the truth today, so searching either one for this sort of info is fruitless. Even if you look around for "NRA statistics" on the 'net, you won't find them correctly listed.

With the Ignition: I hope you make the right choice for your ride. I don't make them to "sell" in the regular sense, but only to help out vintage riders, making an enormous $8 each for my 3 hours of assembly time. This design is unique in that it provides 100% backup should the electronics fail: that's why it was popular in the 1970s, and is again. For touring, it's unbeatable: for performance, it beats all comers. But, you'll have to ask the owners about that: I am not into "selling my wares". Lord knows I haven't the time, energy, nor desire to do so.

[JeffSTL]

Well that is simply factually wrong.  There are lots of limits on the types of weapons you can and cannnot posses. Latest poll I saw was 65% of americans support some form of gun control.again it like all others is not an absolute right

And again i'm done. This is pointless.

[MCRider]

Well that is simply factually wrong.  There are lots of limits on the types of weapons you can and cannnot posses. Latest poll I saw was 65% of americans support some form of gun control.again it like all others is not an absolute right

And again i'm done. This is pointless.

Thanks goodness the Constitution was not and is not controlled by polls.

[JeffSTL]

Hondaman I was just amussing myself a litttle but would have sent a check tomorrow if you could produce  those numbers.  Btw,  on the home page of the sherrifs site there ar only a few bullts directly linking youto a particular subject one of them being chp permits.

Again i'm done.

[JeffSTL]

Ugh...

Well that is simply factually wrong.  There are lots of limits on the types of weapons you can and cannnot posses. Latest poll I saw was 65% of americans support some form of gun control.again it like all others is not an absolute right

And again i'm done. This is pointless.

Ughh....last one...first of all it is an ammendment to the constitution.  Technically the polls could have a lot to do with it as the constitution ensured that we the people can change it if we desire.

Thanks goodness the Constitution was not and is not controlled by polls.

[MCRider]

Ugh...

Well that is simply factually wrong.  There are lots of limits on the types of weapons you can and cannnot posses. Latest poll I saw was 65% of americans support some form of gun control.again it like all others is not an absolute right

And again i'm done. This is pointless.

Ughh....last one...first of all it is an ammendment to the constitution.  Technically the polls could have a lot to do with it as the constitution ensured that we the people can change it if we desire.

Thanks goodness the Constitution was not and is not controlled by polls.

That's right, the polls have nothing to do with it. As an amendment it is every bit a part of the Constitution. Yes there is a mechanism for changing it. But until its changed, it's the law of the land and wishing it was something else (a poll) is meaningless.

The Bill of Rights was created to protect the rights of the minorities. Regardless of polls or majority thought.

[Duke McDukiedook]

Well JeffSTL, I just read a poll right here that 92.35% of forum readers disagree with you about your poll, what do you think about that?
I can conduct and produce all kinds of polls that will support just about damn near anything I want it to.
And you keep saying you are done yet I still see you here posting away.
 

luap, please stop with the personal attacks on TT, you are beginning to really show your pettiness here.

[JeffSTL]

Sir you are confused. The thank goodness part was part of your quote that got mixed up because I'm typing on my phone. Youthink it is an absolute right, you are the one wishing it is something it is not.  It is  already limited. The discusion if there were one is about where that line should be.

Again I'm done. This is now just a waste of time.

[JeffSTL]

Well JeffSTL, I just read a poll right here that 92.35% of forum readers disagree with you about your poll, what do you think about that?
I can conduct and produce all kinds of polls that will support just about damn near anything I want it to.
And you keep saying you are done yet I still see you here posting away.
 

luap, please stop with the personal attacks on TT, you are beginning to really show your pettiness here.

Sorry I have a hard time not ccorrecting facts. I'm trying tto quit. I feel like i'm swatting flies now.