This kind of event makes me wish it were almost possible to not publicize some events just so it doesn’t put any ideas into another disturbed young mind. It makes me want to rethink my support of gun ownership while solemnly realizing that it probably wouldn’t make any difference. Previous school shootings, as disturbing and terrible as they were, much like a shooting at an office or work place, at least seemed linked to the shooters motivation for … well at least seemed to make some kind of horrible sense as a place where someone may loss control in the worst way possible. But to do this at an event for which me and many of my friends and family have taken part in over the years where no one every really feels unsafe is to some degree unfathomable.
My gut reaction? (Mabye I’m Dexter in this life), but bad shit happens all the time that people don’t give 2 shits about… but I guess the way you put it, people can see themselves in this situation.
I get why people are talking about it, but to me there’s so much more that goes on, on a daily basis that deserves more people getting upset about.
That probably makes me sound like a bad person, just my thoughts.
This kind of event makes me wish it were almost possible to not publicize some events just so it doesn’t put any ideas into another disturbed young mind. It makes me want to rethink my support of gun ownership while solemnly realizing that it probably wouldn’t make any difference. Previous school shootings, as disturbing and terrible as they were, much like a shooting at an office or work place, at least seemed linked to the shooters motivation for … well at least seemed to make some kind of horrible sense as a place where someone may loss control in the worst way possible. But to do this at an event for which me and many of my friends and family have taken part in over the years where no one every really feels unsafe is to some degree unfathomable.
Any thoughts? [/quote]
I have lost several people in my life to terrorist attacks, which, when you get down to it are little different than crazy people attacks.
They have tapered off in Israel, despite the willingness of so many people to kill us simply because so many civilians are armed and vigilent. You simply cannot effectively disarm people; someone willing to kill will find a way to do so. It could be a gun or it could be a taxicab driven up on the sidewalk. As a result, the only effective defense is a quick and ready offense.
It’s a crappy way to live, but we live in dangerous times.
This kind of event makes me wish it were almost possible to not publicize some events just so it doesn’t put any ideas into another disturbed young mind. It makes me want to rethink my support of gun ownership while solemnly realizing that it probably wouldn’t make any difference. Previous school shootings, as disturbing and terrible as they were, much like a shooting at an office or work place, at least seemed linked to the shooters motivation for … well at least seemed to make some kind of horrible sense as a place where someone may loss control in the worst way possible. But to do this at an event for which me and many of my friends and family have taken part in over the years where no one every really feels unsafe is to some degree unfathomable.
Any thoughts? [/quote]
I have lost several people in my life to terrorist attacks, which, when you get down to it are little different than crazy people attacks.
[/quote]
As you have killed several as you like to remind people.
Either let go or try to see it in a more gentlemanly manner.
First of all I have a great amount of empathy for the families of the many who were killed in this horrible incident.
Secondly, I’ll take the contrary view to the liberals on this board. I think that more people should be carrying guns if so one of them would have cut this lunatic down before he did as much damage as he did. There were not these types of mass style shootings when gun toting was more popular in the 19th century. If you pulled out your gun with bad intentions you would have multiple guns pointed at you within seconds.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
First of all I have a great amount of empathy for the families of the many who were killed in this horrible incident.
Secondly, I’ll take the contrary view to the liberals on this board. I think that more people should be carrying guns if so one of them would have cut this lunatic down before he did as much damage as he did. There were not these types of mass style shootings when gun toting was more popular in the 19th century. If you pulled out your gun with bad intentions you would have multiple guns pointed at you within seconds. [/quote]
Strong this. If more people had been packing heat, guaranteed somebody would have shot that fucker dead before he did more damage, and maybe, just maybe, he would’ve thought twice about shooting that place up.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
First of all I have a great amount of empathy for the families of the many who were killed in this horrible incident.
Secondly, I’ll take the contrary view to the liberals on this board. I think that more people should be carrying guns if so one of them would have cut this lunatic down before he did as much damage as he did. There were not these types of mass style shootings when gun toting was more popular in the 19th century. If you pulled out your gun with bad intentions you would have multiple guns pointed at you within seconds. [/quote]
In a cinema at midnight filled with tear gas, against a man in a gas mark with a bulletproof vest?
Wouldn’t matter if citizens were armed (perhaps if there were some soldiers off duty there but that’s outside your point) or not this man was going to kill some people and he did.
If you want to kill people that badly, you will, regardless of gun laws.
CountingBeans said it best in his post and I agree entirely with him. The thread should end there. But it won’t.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
First of all I have a great amount of empathy for the families of the many who were killed in this horrible incident.
Secondly, I’ll take the contrary view to the liberals on this board. I think that more people should be carrying guns if so one of them would have cut this lunatic down before he did as much damage as he did. There were not these types of mass style shootings when gun toting was more popular in the 19th century. If you pulled out your gun with bad intentions you would have multiple guns pointed at you within seconds. [/quote]
I think that all anyone with a weapon would have done in this case is get themselves killed. This guy was not only armed but was wearing body armor and using tear gas. But perhaps they may have occupied him long enough for others to escape.
In a cinema at midnight filled with tear gas, against a man in a gas mark with a bulletproof vest? Wouldn’t matter if citizens were armed (perhaps if there were some soldiers off duty there but that’s outside your point) or not this man was going to kill some people and he did. [/quote]
I tend to agree, if only because the man with the rifle beats the man with the pistol 99% of the time. Pistols (which is what you have for CCW) very seldom result in a quick kill and it’s very hard to kill someone in body armor/helmet with a pistol.
Still, he apparently paused several times to reload, and that would have been the time to use a pistol.
This guy was determined, that’s for sure. This is one of those rare events that if a few good men in the crowd had pistols, they wouldn’t have been particularly effective. Maybe I missed it in the article, but how did he get into the theater?
Maybe the next serial shooter can break into the death-row section of a local prison instead of a movie theater or college.
As far as the “if more people carried guns…” comment:
Assuming several people WERE carrying guns for “self-defense” purposes – and were, say, recreational shooters who hit the range every so often to keep the rust off but have no actual experience operating in sudden, shocking, adrenaline-flooding combat situations… do we REALLY want them firing their weapons in a dark, crowded, panicked room?
I can see the argument being made for the societal benefit of police officers/soldiers packing heat off-duty, but I’m not sure how much “good” people with no actual experience shooting others – and being shot AT – would actually do in this sort of situation.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
First of all I have a great amount of empathy for the families of the many who were killed in this horrible incident.
Secondly, I’ll take the contrary view to the liberals on this board. I think that more people should be carrying guns if so one of them would have cut this lunatic down before he did as much damage as he did. There were not these types of mass style shootings when gun toting was more popular in the 19th century. If you pulled out your gun with bad intentions you would have multiple guns pointed at you within seconds. [/quote]
I swear, Zeb…
You could turn baking Cornbread into a “Lib/Conservative”/ “DEM/GOP” issue.
(Now if you could just work Obama’s failed policies in as a reason for these shootings…we’ve got a WIN!)
[quote]ZEB wrote:
First of all I have a great amount of empathy for the families of the many who were killed in this horrible incident.
Secondly, I’ll take the contrary view to the liberals on this board. I think that more people should be carrying guns if so one of them would have cut this lunatic down before he did as much damage as he did. There were not these types of mass style shootings when gun toting was more popular in the 19th century. If you pulled out your gun with bad intentions you would have multiple guns pointed at you within seconds. [/quote]
I swear, Zeb…
You could turn baking Cornbread into a “Lib/Conservative”/ “DEM/GOP” issue.
(Now if you could just work Obama’s failed policies in as a reason for these shootings…we’ve got a WIN!)
I think you guys are being ridiculous when you say that people with handguns couldn’t do anything
body armor isn’t like you’re playing a video game with infinite health. You can still get shot
As far as comparing a relaxing time at the shooting range vs. life and death - yea there is a difference, but I’m not sure that it would negatively impact performance. I would actually expect the adrenaline to increase accuracy and aiming speed, while also causing inexperienced people to forget the basics. (am I properly loaded? what about the safety?) There is also the obvious issue of people targeting the wrong people - but hold on - two scenarios to show the ridiculousness
Guy in the front with basically infinite ammo. 200 people trying to jet for the exits
Guy in the front with basically infinite ammo. 190 people trying to jet for the exits. 10 lightly trained people shooting at the one.
Ridiculous. I blame this ultra weak / “liberal” type idea of only the gov’t or experts / “authorities” can ever do anything positive. You yourself or random, regular old people cant. Even on T-Nation, no less. Whats this world coming to?
Ya I just made all that up, actual military people can be more realistic and show my flaws if they disagree
[quote]njrusmc wrote:
This guy was determined, that’s for sure. This is one of those rare events that if a few good men in the crowd had pistols, they wouldn’t have been particularly effective. Maybe I missed it in the article, but how did he get into the theater?
Maybe the next serial shooter can break into the death-row section of a local prison instead of a movie theater or college.[/quote]
From what I’ve read he had a ticket to the movie and once he was in he propped he emergency exit open with a rock.
[quote]squating_bear wrote:
I think you guys are being ridiculous when you say that people with handguns couldn’t do anything
body armor isn’t like you’re playing a video game with infinite health. You can still get shot
As far as comparing a relaxing time at the shooting range vs. life and death - yea there is a difference, but I’m not sure that it would negatively impact performance. I would actually expect the adrenaline to increase accuracy and aiming speed, while also causing inexperienced people to forget the basics. (am I properly loaded? what about the safety?) There is also the obvious issue of people targeting the wrong people - but hold on - two scenarios to show the ridiculousness
Guy in the front with basically infinite ammo. 200 people trying to jet for the exits
Guy in the front with basically infinite ammo. 190 people trying to jet for the exits. 10 lightly trained people shooting at the one.
Ridiculous. I blame this ultra weak / “liberal” type idea of only the gov’t or experts / “authorities” can ever do anything positive. You yourself or random, regular old people cant. Even on T-Nation, no less. Whats this world coming to?
Ya I just made all that up, actual military people can be more realistic and show my flaws if they disagree[/quote]
Tear gas is a serious game changer here. Even if there were 10 individually armed people in the crowd they are still contending with tear gas and he isn’t. The body armor may not make him invincible but it’s yet another huge advantage for him.