Based on tweet from the police chief, the suspect's residence is booby-trapped (IS that how you spell it?) with explosives, he's saying it is very sophisticated.
Really? I just heard there was no traps.
From Fox tweet: BREAKING: Aurora police say shooting suspect's 3rd floor apartment is "booby trapped" with sophisticated explosives #breaking news
AP: BREAKING: Police say Colorado movie theater suspect's apartment is booby-trapped and area evacuated. -PP
I also think the bigger issue is that we don't look at mental health in this country in any real way. I have yet to see someone who does something like this in a state of sound mind, unfortunately. I think THAT is the bigger issue than this crutch of gun control.
I agree. We're so focused on looking at the means that we forget about the cause.
Tritto. We always have the gun control debate after these things, but we sweep the mental illness under the rug.
Look, we own two guns. They're for hunting and target practice only, not self defense. I don't support assault/automatic weapons. I see how stricter gun laws could have helped prevent this. I also think there's a bit of missing the forest for the trees.
And I think any president who seriously made an effort to do so would be killed. I absolutely believe that.
And that is weak, imo. If that were to happen, God forbid, it would rally so many to actually do it. So, I doubt even the crazies would want to make a martyr.
I don't think so. Someone already tried to shoot and kill the president, remember, and it resulted in moderate, at best, gun control laws that the NRA has been lobbying to overturn ever since.
How do people obtain "illegal" guns? That is, where do the criminal sellers get them? Do they steal them and sell them? How does this go down?
My dad's house was just robbed three nights ago. They got 8 rifles, a crossbow and 2 compound bows... among many, many other things.
My dad owned those guns legally. The guys who stole them do not.
I'm hope your father is safe. Sorry to hear about the robbery. That's terrifying.
The thing is, one could argue that if it weren't legal to just have any kind of weapon, that those robbers wouldn't now have them either. But now they do. And now we all need more guns to protect ourselves from them because criminals steal law-abiding people's guns and use them against other law-abiding people.
As with any other national discussion about important issues, the mental health discussion is fleeting in this country. We'll talk about it in the wake of a tragedy, and then once we've moved on, all is forgotten.
At least, that's how I see it and maybe just because the media isn't covering it doesn't mean things aren't going on behind the scenes to make improvements to our mental health system. But clearly we've still got a long way to go.
How do people obtain "illegal" guns? That is, where do the criminal sellers get them? Do they steal them and sell them? How does this go down?
Different ways. Most often, someone goes into states with lax gun laws like Virginia and buys large quantities, then goes to a state with strict gun laws and sells them on the black market. Something like 90% of guns recovered from crime scenes in NYC came from Virginia or Georgia. That's because it is very hard to buy a gun in NY so people don't buy guns in NY- they go elsewhere and just bring them into NY. This is also how Mexican cartels get a good chunk of their guns - they send people into Arizona to make mass gun purchases (because AZ's gun laws are virtually nonexistent), then smuggle them over the border.
Also, they steal them from peoples homes and resell them.
I 100% support stricter gun laws and I also 100% believe it would cut down on tragedies like this.
Listen, a concealed carry would have probably done little in the broad scope of things in a dimly lit movie theater.
especially in a dimly lit movie theater where tear gas was used... I don't know how anyone would have known where to shoot
Most of my inner circle of friends and family are gun owners and have their conceal permits. I'm not against guns nor am I against conceal and carry. However, most of them think they should be able to carry whereever they want, business/property owners be damned. I do not agree with that. If a business wants to say no firearms allowed, that is their right.
I also, much to their chagrin, believe that there should be much better background checks done before someone can buy a gun. Maybe before you buy a gun you should have to go through the same conceal/carry class that they had to go through to get their permit and maybe you should have to be vetted by a psychologist or someone along those lines to make sure you don't have homicidal or suicidal tendencies. I believe most mental illnesses should automatically exclude you from being able to buy a gun. That coming from someone with depression and anxiety issues who has been semi-suicidal in the past.
That being said, this would only stop people from buying from an actual gun store that follows the law. This would not stop people from selling guns amongst themselves, which probably is the way that the bulk of gun purchases are made. Right now, if my husband (who has a conceal permit and is a responsible gun owner) wants to buy a gun from a store, he has to fill out a form and have an ATF check done on him. But if he has a friend that has a gun he wants, all he does is gives the dude some cash, and there ya go. I don't know how you really stop the crazies and the criminals from purchasing guns.
While I think mental illness care in this country is pretty pathetic, I also think it's a red herring to the overall gun control argument. People with severe mental illness who want to carry out attacks like this probably can't be stopped. Look at the guy in Belgium who stabbed to death a woman and two babies a couple years ago. How do you stop that? If he had had a gun, the death toll probably would have been much higher. But you can't really stop everyone who gets violence into their head. You can, however, make it more difficult for them to actually carry out that violence. Which is where the gun control argument comes into play.
And again, gun control isn't really about stopping random mass shootings - it's about stopping overall gun violence in this country, whether from regular street crime or accidents. That's where you would really see an impact from increased gun control.
Yep. Human nature is not inherently different than it was 50 years ago, yet we did not have these types of events occurring the way they do now. So, what is the difference? What has changed? Guns. The companies that manufacture firearms discovered a HUGE market for them within the last 30 years, and with gun laws so loose they exploited the market. 50 years ago you could not purchase hand guns that carried the load size they do now. You could not purchase military grade assault weapons that can fire a 30 round magazine in less than 3 seconds. It’s guns man. All about the guns. Human beings are the same now and have always been that way. It’s only the ‘tools’ that have changed.
Ok, so we've got TTT pointing out that mentally ill people with a penchant for violence will find a way regardless. That gun control is really more about the every day kind of gun violence. And I totally agree with that.
And then we've got hawkeye saying that it's the new, more powerful guns - bigger magazines, faster automatic weapons, etc - that are really the problem. Except that this everyday kind of violence isn't somebody with a fully-auto machine gun taking people out.
Even in the case that sparked this conversation, it says the guy had two "assault weapons." that doesn't neccessarily mean he had a fully automatic anything or an extended mag or anything else that gets people panties in an extra wad.
So what kind of gun control are we talking about that would actually be effective on the day-to-day kind of violence that we might be able to actually impact?
And that is weak, imo. If that were to happen, God forbid, it would rally so many to actually do it. So, I doubt even the crazies would want to make a martyr.
I don't think so. Someone already tried to shoot and kill the president, remember, and it resulted in moderate, at best, gun control laws that the NRA has been lobbying to overturn ever since.
they didn't succeed though, as horrible as that is to type. I think that is the difference. Jmo.
There is no way ever on God's green earth America will give up guns. Absolutely no way. And I think any president who seriously made an effort to do so would be killed by Ted Nugent.
Ok, so we've got TTT pointing out that mentally ill people with a penchant for violence will find a way regardless. That gun control is really more about the every day kind of gun violence. And I totally agree with that.
And then we've got hawkeye saying that it's the new, more powerful guns - bigger magazines, faster automatic weapons, etc - that are really the problem. Except that this everyday kind of violence isn't somebody with a fully-auto machine gun taking people out.
Even in the case that sparked this conversation, it says the guy had two "assault weapons." that doesn't neccessarily mean he had a fully automatic anything or an extended mag or anything else that gets people panties in an extra wad.
So what kind of gun control are we talking about that would actually be effective on the day-to-day kind of violence that we might be able to actually impact?
Guns are bad, the end. HTH.
I'm going to hand mine over now since I've got moderate depression on my record. Which makes me schizophrenic.
Ok. I suck at jokes. A few months ago Nugent went on a rant saying he was going to kill the president if he was re-elected because he's for more gun control.
Ok, so we've got TTT pointing out that mentally ill people with a penchant for violence will find a way regardless. That gun control is really more about the every day kind of gun violence. And I totally agree with that.
And then we've got hawkeye saying that it's the new, more powerful guns - bigger magazines, faster automatic weapons, etc - that are really the problem. Except that this everyday kind of violence isn't somebody with a fully-auto machine gun taking people out.
Even in the case that sparked this conversation, it says the guy had two "assault weapons." that doesn't neccessarily mean he had a fully automatic anything or an extended mag or anything else that gets people panties in an extra wad.
So what kind of gun control are we talking about that would actually be effective on the day-to-day kind of violence that we might be able to actually impact?
Guns are bad, the end. HTH.
I'm going to hand mine over now since I've got moderate depression on my record. Which makes me schizophrenic.
No, no, you don't need to go THAT far. Just move to Canada or the UK. It's all good.
My dad's house was just robbed three nights ago. They got 8 rifles, a crossbow and 2 compound bows... among many, many other things.
My dad owned those guns legally. The guys who stole them do not.
I'm hope your father is safe. Sorry to hear about the robbery. That's terrifying.
The thing is, one could argue that if it weren't legal to just have any kind of weapon, that those robbers wouldn't now have them either. But now they do. And now we all need more guns to protect ourselves from them because criminals steal law-abiding people's guns and use them against other law-abiding people.
It's a never-ending cycle.
Thanks. He's fine... violated and pissed off, but fine.
All of the guns, except one, are routinely used for hunting, varmint control and for his butcher shop. He lives on a farm and raises his own beef and pork. The one gun that isn't used for hunting, was his brother's hunting rifle. Said brother died in a logging accident a few years ago.
The bows, again, were for hunting.
The crossbow was my grandfather's, also used for hunting. He's nearly 80 and can no longer draw a bow, but he's completely healthy and able to hunt, so he uses a cross bow.
I should also mention, my grandfather's dad was 100% Native American, so the hunting and bowhunting is pretty well ingrained in that side of my family.
Post by wrathofkuus on Jul 20, 2012 10:55:37 GMT -5
I see the whole "crazy people shooting people" argument for gun control in much the same way as I see the "women who have forty abortions instead of using the pill or condoms" argument for banning abortion - sure, it's an unfortunate risk that from time to time becomes an unfortunate reality, but it's not a reason to render the general law-abiding population as powerless as the Egyptians were against their government.
I support stricter gun control laws; I'm not for banning guns at all - I think you should have the right to carry, but a) you will never convince me that a civilian should ever need an assault rifle and b) I think in addition to the mandatory waiting period, you should also have to complete a mandatory training class on how to use the weapon you are purchasing.
Yes, if you ban guns, they are still going to find their way into the hands of bad guys.
I have yet to hear how a conceal/carry has stopped any mass shooter. Out of all the shootings, don't you think there would be at least 1 person in the crowd carrying a gun? (Or maybe there have been instances, and I just don't remember them.)
Wasn't there someone in the Gabby Giffords shooting that was carrying that almost shot the wrong person? I think the potential in these situations for shooting the wrong person is tremendous. Suddenly all the people carrying want to be the hero. I mean, I can just see if that happened here in Alabama. Suddenly 15 Billy Bob's pull their guns and start shooting at the gun man? I can't even imagine how bad that could possibly turn out.
And as much as I end up arguing for the anti-gun control side of things here, then I see things like this -
on facebook and i just want to hide in a hole. My crazy exboyfriend that I keep around for FB entertainment just "liked" it. It was posted by the Official US Concealed Carry Permit Association with the following caption: Share" and comment below if you believe that more businesses like this one would lead to a safer America....
I see the whole "crazy people shooting people" argument for gun control in much the same way as I see the "women who have forty abortions instead of using the pill or condoms" argument for banning abortion - sure, it's an unfortunate risk that from time to time becomes an unfortunate reality, but it's not a reason to render the general law-abiding population as powerless as the Egyptians were against their government.
Banning assault weapons would have a direct effect on a crazy person being able to spray a crowd and kill dozens of people in seconds. Death tolls in these extreme situations would be much lower if people were only able to acquire handguns and less destructive weapons in general.
There is absolutely zero need for a private citizen to own an assault weapon. Zero.
Post by wrathofkuus on Jul 20, 2012 11:01:34 GMT -5
I do cringe at that, but I cringe more when I see places like banks who have signs saying that no guns are permitted on the premises. They may as well have a neon sign asking to be robbed.
I see the whole "crazy people shooting people" argument for gun control in much the same way as I see the "women who have forty abortions instead of using the pill or condoms" argument for banning abortion - sure, it's an unfortunate risk that from time to time becomes an unfortunate reality, but it's not a reason to render the general law-abiding population as powerless as the Egyptians were against their government.
I actually agree with you, sort of. We need stricter gun control not just to prevent tragedies like the one in Colorado, but also the daily gun assaults, accidents, and other violence committed with guns. I know I'd feel a hell of a lot safer if there were fewer guns in this country.
I know that's not the point you're trying to make, though, probably because we have pretty different ideas on the necessity of protecting ourselves from the government. I seem to recall that Kuus supports the public sale of grenade launchers, correct?
I see the whole "crazy people shooting people" argument for gun control in much the same way as I see the "women who have forty abortions instead of using the pill or condoms" argument for banning abortion - sure, it's an unfortunate risk that from time to time becomes an unfortunate reality, but it's not a reason to render the general law-abiding population as powerless as the Egyptians were against their government.
Banning assault weapons would have a direct effect on a crazy person being able to spray a crowd and kill dozens of people in seconds. Death tolls in these extreme situations would be much lower if people were only able to acquire handguns and less destructive weapons in general.
There is absolutely zero need for a private citizen to own an assault weapon. Zero.
When you say assault weapon - what are you talking about? Legal definition? Specifically fully autos? What?
Banning assault weapons would have a direct effect on a crazy person being able to spray a crowd and kill dozens of people in seconds. Death tolls in these extreme situations would be much lower if people were only able to acquire handguns and less destructive weapons in general.
There is absolutely zero need for a private citizen to own an assault weapon. Zero.
When you say assault weapon - what are you talking about? Legal definition? Specifically fully autos? What?
Generally speaking, something that would considered a military-grade weapon.
Things with detachable magazines (like an M-16 or similar) and can typically do things like fire a 30 round magazine less than 3-5 seconds.
You don't need that shit for hunting or self-defense, people owning weapons like this are doing so just for fun.
I see the whole "crazy people shooting people" argument for gun control in much the same way as I see the "women who have forty abortions instead of using the pill or condoms" argument for banning abortion - sure, it's an unfortunate risk that from time to time becomes an unfortunate reality, but it's not a reason to render the general law-abiding population as powerless as the Egyptians were against their government.
I actually agree with you, sort of. We need stricter gun control not just to prevent tragedies like the one in Colorado, but also the daily gun assaults, accidents, and other violence committed with guns. I know I'd feel a hell of a lot safer if there were fewer guns in this country.
I know that's not the point you're trying to make, though, probably because we have pretty different ideas on the necessity of protecting ourselves from the government. I seem to recall that Kuus supports the public sale of grenade launchers, correct?
I am, in general, in favor of laws that protect the right of the people to revolt over laws that protect people from potential tragedies.
Why have both people who have quoted me said something having nearly nothing to do with anything I said?
When you say assault weapon - what are you talking about? Legal definition? Specifically fully autos? What?
Generally speaking, something that would considered a military-grade weapon.
Things with detachable magazines (like an M-16 or similar) and can typically do things like fire a 30 round magazine less than 3-5 seconds.
You don't need that shit for hunting or self-defense, people owning weapons like this are doing so just for fun.
Ok, fair enough - but you do realize that most "assault weapon" bans encompass a MUCH larger category of weapons, right? (dammit i wish SIIHPAPP was still here. I always screw up terminology on this stuff)