guns

[trplnkl]

Please explain how this incident is called a terrorist attack , but not the Fort Hood shootings ?

It was Sober( not anyone else that I have heard) that called this a terrorist attack. I bet he also calls the Ft. Hood shooting terrorism.

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

This was not a terrorist attack. The sad part is that many of those watching the movie thought that the gunman was part of the show.

 

[tourists24]

This was not a terrorist attack. The sad part is that many of those watching the movie thought that the gunman was part of the show.

Makes you wonder how long this sicko had been plotting this, and if he did it as strategy to get entry

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

Makes you wonder how long this sicko had been plotting this, and if he did it as strategy to get entry

I guess we need to update "you can't yell FIRE in a crowded theater" to "you can't OPEN FIRE in a crowded theater".

Seriously, what prompts someone to open fire on a bunch of innocent people?????

 

[brett636]

Technically, he began breaking laws when he concealed his weapons with criminal intent and brought them to the theater. I highly doubt the man had undergone the requisite training and background check that is required to obtain a concealed weapon permit,

This was a tragedy, and obviously a premeditated and well planned terrorist attack. He wore body armor, he brought smoke bombs, he brought multiple weapons. There will, of course, be the usual knee- jerk reaction for more "feel good" laws and limits on our 2nd Amendment rights, but additional laws will never stop this sort of premeditated attack by a lunatic.

Care to suggest how to better enforce the current gun laws so that when he technically breaks the law by bringing in the weapons with criminal intent we can stop him before the carnage?

Care to suggest how much liberty we must sacrifice before we can be 100% safe from these kind of psychopaths?

 

[cachsux]

Please explain how this incident is called a terrorist attack , but not the Fort Hood shootings ?

It was Sober( not anyone else that I have heard) that called this a terrorist attack. I bet he also calls the Ft. Hood shooting terrorism.

This was not a terrorist attack. The sad part is that many of those watching the movie thought that the gunman was part of the show.

By what definition is it or is it not "Terrorism"? Because the protagonist was not Muslim? Did not do it in the name of his God (that we know at the moment)? If this was overseas, mass killing in a public place, carried out by an organized plan, it most definitely could be consider terrorism. If the shooter did this to "make a point", etc then by definition it was a terrorist act.

 

[cachsux]

Care to suggest how much liberty we must sacrifice before we can be 100% safe from these kind of psychopaths?

100% ?

 

[The Other Side]

If Just One Law-Abiding Moviegoer Had Been Armed…

…how many lives could have been saved?

Today, on the air, SEAN HANNITY IGNORANTLY suggested the same thing! Hannity, suggested that if someone was legally armed in the theatre, that person could have shot the gunman and saved lives.

Here's the problem with this concept.

1) The shooter was wearing a full bullet proof vest, an armored groin protector, armored leg shields, an armored neck shield, tactical gloves and a tactical helmet.

How many shots from ANY handgun would have brought this idiot down with this kind of body protection. Answer?? ZERO.

Instead, the legally armed shooter would probably end up shooting innocent persons with all the smoke in the air and kaos that was happening in the isles. There is NO proof that anyone ARMED could have changed the circumstances in that theatre.

The shooter, planned this event and executed it with serious intentions, and no one with a simple handgun in the theatre could have stopped him. The assault rifle alone would have been turned on the person with the handgun, and just using simple numerics, the rifle would have outshot the person until that person was also dead.

Its LAME to suggest that a person legally armed would have saved the day.

Peace

TOS

 

[ajblakejr]

A partial list over the last 10 years...

Westside Middle School, Jonesboro AR 3/24/98----5 students killed in a "gun-free zone"

Thurston High School, Eugene OR (my hometown) 5/20/98---2 dead and 25 wounded in a "gun-free zone"

Columbine High School, Littleton CO 5/20/99---15 dead and 22 wounded in a "gun-free zone"

Red Lake HS, Red Lake MN 3/21/05--8 dead in a "gun-free zone"

Amish school, Nickel Mines PA 10/02/06---6 dead in a "gun-free zone"

Virginia Tech, Blacksburg VA 4/16/07---33 dead and 25 wounded in a "gun-free zone"

North Illinois U, DeKalb ILL 2/14/08---6 dead and 18 wounded in a "gun-free zone"


In the last 10 years, over 120 unarmed people have been murdered in posted, designated "gun-free zones" all over the country.

How many more innocent, unarmed victims will be slaughtered at the altar of political correctness? How many more must die so that we can preserve the pathetic fantasy of the "gun-free zone" in the minds of people who think that safety from violence is as simple as posting a "no guns allowed" sign on a wall?

In the real world...murderers seek out places where they know their victims will be unarmed. That is why you dont see mass murders at gun shows.

Theatre Nine, Aurora, Co. 7/20/12 --- 12 dead and 59 wounded...death toll may rise, many in icu....

 

[bbsam]

Care to suggest how much liberty we must sacrifice before we can be 100% safe from these kind of psychopaths?

Well this psychopath wasn't a gun control activist, that seems certain.

 

[ajblakejr]

By what definition is it or is it not "Terrorism"? Because the protagonist was not Muslim? Did not do it in the name of his God (that we know at the moment)? If this was overseas, mass killing in a public place, carried out by an organized plan, it most definitely could be consider terrorism. If the shooter did this to "make a point", etc then by definition it was a terrorist act.

Domestic Terrorism.
What Timothy did to the Federal Building in 1995.
And
What happened in Aurora.

Terror = Panic

 

[bbsam]

I think it's terrorism simply because people are now thinking twice before going to see the movie.

 

[ajblakejr]

Please explain how this incident is called a terrorist attack , but not the Fort Hood shootings ?

Fort Hood was Terrorist Attack.
Enough with thic PC crap in the world.

 

[ajblakejr]

I think it's terrorism simply because people are now thinking twice before going to see the movie.

This alone makes it terrorism.

 

[bbsam]

Of course, if only there had been other patrons with weapons.... Wait a minute. How do we know that some of them didn't? In the confusion of smoke and gun shots isn't it possible that a person (or several people for that matter) simply got the hell out? And who could blame them? They had no idea how many shooters were on the scene. They probably knew within the first 10 seconds that they were horribly outgunned. This also is certain; you will never see someone step forward and say, "I had my Glock and I almost pulled it out but I couldn't be sure of the targets and bystanders."

 

[brett636]

Care to suggest how much liberty we must sacrifice before we can be 100% safe from these kind of psychopaths?

Well this psychopath wasn't a gun control activist, that seems certain.

Psychopaths by their very nature are apolitical.

 

[bbsam]

McVeigh?

 

[ajblakejr]

I recall seeing a video in which a old dude pulls his gun on some stupid kids...

 

[bbsam]

Note the excellent lighting and lack of smoke.

 

[bbsam]

Not to mention the very few bystanders. Really, Aj, hardly the same.