Batman Shooting

[quote]theBird wrote:

IMO, it has made the country a safer place. We havent had a mass shooting since the laws have changed. The last mass shooting we had was in Tasmania, atleast 10 years ago now, before the laws changed.

Yes, by making guns illegal wont stop people killing people. But it does make it alot harder.

Let go off your guns America!

tweet[/quote]

“It has been suggested that the 1996 bans prevented further mass shootings in Australia, but this has been questioned in recent years with researchers finding that Australias close neighbor New Zealand had a number of mass shootings up until the mid 1990s but like Australia has not had a mass shooting in over 15 years. New Zealand still allows ownership of the guns Australia banned.”


[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Severiano wrote:

[quote]mathew260 wrote:
What is the motive for getting rid of guns and making them illegal? Is it to prevent people from dying? Is it to prevent people from dying tragic deaths? If the answer is yes, I just don’t get that line of thinking. Automobiles kill an average of about 100 people in the U.S. every DAY. NSAIDs used for arthritis kill an average of around 15,000 people every single year. Every year, double that amount of people kill themselves by suicide. Where is the outrage?

This is why gun advocates get so irritated with people acting do emotionally when events like this occur. I can’t imagine having to go through something like what happened on Friday, and I feel for the families involved. I know that energy and anger over what happened needs to be channeled into acting in a manner that will make the victims feel as though something is being done to “prevent” another tragedy like this from occurring again. However, this is is not the way to go about it. It is not going to prevent people from dying, it will not heal those deranged individuals, it will not rid the world of death, suffering and pain.

Taking away rights, creating and enforcing more laws, and building a police state so rigid that no action goes unnoticed will not prevent death. It will only make things worse in the end. It will only consolidate the power, it will only strip away more freedom. Luckily enough people in this country seem to think with their brain and realize this. Ice T gave a great interview and I hope more people speak up about utilizing a crises to mask real intentions and hidden agendas. [/quote]

I love rifles and shooting as much as anybody. Problem is these companies are in it for profit, they are in business to produce weapons and get people to purchase them. Not saying they have it in mind to sell firearms to unstable people, but it is an inevitability with so many weapons being in circulation and being produced along with the ease of purchase.

[/quote]

Talking about using something like that to ram home an agenda.

You know what weapon killed more people in the 20th century than just about anything else?

Well except maybe non profit, aka socialist agriculture induced famines?

The Awtomat Kalaschnikowa, obrasza 47.

Those terrible capitalist pigs. [/quote]

Eh, I have no agenda. I’m partial to the m16 platform, but I prefer a heavier combat rifle like the m14. Earlier I made the point that the same end could have been accomplished with various other hunting rifes, and that the magazine on this particular weapon is a non issue considering it is probably what caused the jam.

Anyhow, as far as capitalism goes, capitalism isn’t a perfect system when it goes unchecked. Combination of all weapons companies, not just the ones in the U.S. have contributed to a more global problem with weapons. But here in the U.S. you have organizations like the NRA which treat arms companies like they can do no wrong. Every time something has been done to try and make it more difficult to get weapons, the NRA has been there to stomp it out. We have been in a situation where this sort of thing has been an inevitability for quite a while. It’s already happened in the past… I don’t think making a ban on assault rifles or the magazines will do a thing. But I am seriously concerned, and would like to see something done to make it more difficult for nut cases to get their hands on firearms.

This isn’t to say I think people should have access to everything. I mean, I’d probably the first guy to purchase a maw deuce if they were legal, but honestly I don’t want civilians having this sort of weapon at their disposal, no more than I want them having street sweepers or mac 10’s or 11’s, which really are virtually designed for drive by shootings, I wish I were kidding about that, but we are talking capitalism here.

I’m also saying that the nature of psychological disorders is curious. Some are genetic and tend to come about in people at a certain age. I imagine there are those who may be into fire arms that succumb to these sort of mental disorders naturally. So, screening people, even with a psych evaluation isn’t going to solve all the problems given the nature of psychological disorders. I’m just saying something needs to be done about insane people getting their hands on firearms.

[quote]theBird wrote:
In Australia we changed the laws and made it almost impossible for people to own a gun. Even proffesional sport shooters need to jump through alot of hoops before they get to have their own gun.

[/quote]

By way of background, Australia provided the Empire with a huge pool of skilled marksmen from rural properties in the Boer war and the First and Second World Wars. Prior to 1996 most rural properties were either sufficiently armed for pest eradication/hunting/self-defence or at the very least had an old Lee Enfield, a shotgun and .22 lying around. After the Port Arthur massacre anti-gun advocates, the Greens Party and leftists abused the public outrage and ignorance of firearms to wage a relentless propaganda campaign against gun owners and specifically the Shooters and Fishers Party.

Labor backed the Greens as they had done previously in 1992 and the newly elected Liberal government caved in to pressure issuing draconian federal legislation designed to force the states to disarm the populace. This caused a rift between the Nationals(Country Party) and the Liberals and helped with the rise of Pauline Hanson and the One Nation Party.

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]theBird wrote:
In Australia we changed the laws and made it almost impossible for people to own a gun. Even proffesional sport shooters need to jump through alot of hoops before they get to have their own gun.

[/quote]

By way of background, Australia provided the Empire with a huge pool of skilled marksmen from rural properties in the Boer war and the First and Second World Wars. Prior to 1996 most rural properties were either sufficiently armed for pest eradication/hunting/self-defence or at the very least had an old Lee Enfield, a shotgun and .22 lying around. After the Port Arthur massacre anti-gun advocates, the Greens Party and leftists abused the public outrage and ignorance of firearms to wage a relentless propaganda campaign against gun owners and specifically the Shooters and Fishers Party.

Labor backed the Greens as they had done previously in 1992 and the newly elected Liberal government caved in to pressure issuing draconian federal legislation designed to force the states to disarm the populace. This caused a rift between the Nationals(Country Party) and the Liberals and helped with the rise of Pauline Hanson and the One Nation Party.[/quote]

I just want you to know that I am very disappointed in you as a people.

Somehow I had Aussies in the back of my mind as rugged individualists.

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]theBird wrote:
In Australia we changed the laws and made it almost impossible for people to own a gun. Even proffesional sport shooters need to jump through alot of hoops before they get to have their own gun.

[/quote]

By way of background, Australia provided the Empire with a huge pool of skilled marksmen from rural properties in the Boer war and the First and Second World Wars. Prior to 1996 most rural properties were either sufficiently armed for pest eradication/hunting/self-defence or at the very least had an old Lee Enfield, a shotgun and .22 lying around. After the Port Arthur massacre anti-gun advocates, the Greens Party and leftists abused the public outrage and ignorance of firearms to wage a relentless propaganda campaign against gun owners and specifically the Shooters and Fishers Party.

Labor backed the Greens as they had done previously in 1992 and the newly elected Liberal government caved in to pressure issuing draconian federal legislation designed to force the states to disarm the populace. This caused a rift between the Nationals(Country Party) and the Liberals and helped with the rise of Pauline Hanson and the One Nation Party.[/quote]

I just want you to know that I am very disappointed in you as a people.

Somehow I had Aussies in the back of my mind as rugged individualists.[/quote]

You can take our guns but you’ll never take our beer.

From Jonathan Jared Adams’ facebook wall:

Hey facebook, I had an idea- All those kids in the hospital recovering from gunshot wounds at the Batman massacre could use a visit from their hero. I propose we (as in all of facebook) should make enough noise asking Christian Bale to visit these kids in the hospital dressed in the real Batman outfit. They need to know Heroes can be real too, not just bad guys.

Not asking anything fancy from you, if you read this, share it on your wall, If you wanna go the extra mile, post it in other sites as well. Show the kids there really are herpes.

Dear Christian Bale, Please visit the injured children from the movie massacre as Batman, you have the power to be a Hero right now, not a movie Hero, a real life flesh and blood one.

Thank you,
Everyone

[quote]Cuso wrote:
Why is it that we define such a “killing spree” as “running amok” while a bombing is an “act of terrorism”? Again in my eyes the answer is quite simple: If mass slayings with handguns would correctly be labeled as acts of terrorism, we would probably have to rethink the 2nd amendment, and by definition think about outlawing handguns.
[/quote]

Terrorism is defined by having a means of Coercion. Without knowing someones motive you can’t label them as a terrorist. School shootings would not fall in the category of terrorism for this reason.

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
From Jonathan Jared Adamsâ?? facebook wall:

Hey facebook, I had an ideaâ?¦. All those kids in the hospital recovering from gunshot wounds at the Batman massacre could use a visit from their hero. I propose we (as in all of facebook) should make enough noise asking Christian Bale to visit these kids in the hospital dressed in the real Batman outfit. They need to know Heros can be real too, not just bad guys.

Not asking anything fancy from you, if you read this, share it on your wall, If you wanna go the extra mile, post it in other sites as well. Show the kids there really are heors.

Dear Christian Bale, Please visit the injured children from the movie massacre as Batman, you have the power to be a Hero right now, not a movie Hero, a real life flesh and blood one.

Thank you,
Everyone[/quote]

More copy and paste work? Being visited in the hospital by an actor with anger management issues is pretty insignificant after being visited by the President.

Yeah that facebook thing is a bad idea. Who knows what kinds of PTS these people have at the moment. I think the last thing I would want is a giant bat walking through the door after being shot. Also post people shot were older, early 20s and above, that are in CC.

Now if the actors stopped by to show their support that would be very cool. THe WB is already donating to the families.

I pray for the day being a fucking movie actor stops making you the second coming of jesus to the sheeple of this country.

If someone shot me, I wouldn’t give two shits about some turd smugglin’ actor coming to see me because he wants to look good in the court of public opinion.

Beans: What?!? That makes zero sense and as far as I know that has never happened. This wouldnt even make the actor look good. If I was an actor and released a film that people had been waiting years for, had fans from, was looked up to by children, and some asshole shot a bunch a people at a showing of MY movie, I would go and express my emotions to those people. I think that shows more humanity that being a fag-ass actor and not even acknowledging “the little people” dying by slaughter in a showing of a film I just spent almost 7 years making. No one says they crew was going to go and kiss the wounds of the victims and bring back a 6 yr old.

If anyone is interested here are the emergency responder tapes:

[quote]hipsr4runnin wrote:
Beans: What?!? That makes zero sense and as far as I know that has never happened.[/quote]

Is George Clooney on the trail for Obama right now?

What about acting makes him any sort of authority on anything? Oh yeah, he is popular so dipshits think everything he, and other actors, say is correct.

Do you live in America?

I disagree.

In that case I would say “hats off to ya” because you made the choice to go.

Getting a facebook rally to convince him, isn’t the same. It is more people worship by the public, pointless and emotionless. If he goes it is just to look good in the public eye. He is now in a lose lose because he can act and America is addicted to distraction.

Seeing as he had zero to do with the suffering and slaughter of innocent people, I don’t feel a responce from him is needed.

That isn’t him treating others like “little people”, it is him knowing he is just a fucking actor, and not some idol to look up to just because his face is on a big screen. He knows he is no more important, in fact less important, to society than the people who died in that room that night.

He isnt an authority he did it on his own free will not because he is an actor. The media picked it up because he is a heart throb and been in a couple of flicks. No said he is correct. Some people think they have a soap box and an obligation to use their star power for better. One of the reasons most of them are tied to bullshit organizations. This wouldnt be like Sean Penn going to New Orleans. This would be more of expressing concern other emotions for a tragic episode. More than Manson did after columbine which was show up in a retarded documentary basically saying he feels for and knows what those kids were going through before they killed a bunch of people. Anyone who listens to actors deserves to. Everyone following Oprahs advice is worse and no better than before.

Born and raised.

I totally agree. Using that human-destorying excuse of social media to almost force someone into doing someting because it would make them look good is a horrible idea. Thats what I originally stated. I dont think there is anything that can be done to look good in the public eye. WB is donating to the families, its not even the movies fault. It just happened in that movie. Why couldnt it have been twilight or magic mike?

A response from him isnt needed but it wouldnt be a horrible thing if it was made. And it should be made on his own free will, not because a bunch of nerds pushed him into it. He doesnt owe anyone anything, its the principle.

This james fucker should be made to listen to the beginning of the tape posted above. Reality is sometimes the greatest cruelty.

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]Cuso wrote:
Why is it that we define such a “killing spree” as “running amok” while a bombing is an “act of terrorism”? Again in my eyes the answer is quite simple: If mass slayings with handguns would correctly be labeled as acts of terrorism, we would probably have to rethink the 2nd amendment, and by definition think about outlawing handguns.
[/quote]

Terrorism is defined by having a means of Coercion. Without knowing someones motive you can’t label them as a terrorist. School shootings would not fall in the category of terrorism for this reason.[/quote]

Agreed, and most reasons for Coercion are political ideologies or outcome goals. Terrorism is generally defined as having an ulterior motive for the violence, ie: using violence and terror as a means to accomplish some other greater goal, not just kill people for the sake of it. That’s called crazy. Money/love/jealousy is generally not a proper motive for politically or religiously motivated ideological violence…but it is for “crimes of passion” and crazy. That’s why it’s not terrorism.

Suck it!:

I like this guy. Not only did he play one of my favorite characters but he cool as shit. Also he has been acting since he was like 6 so I think he is over the ego. He is more into making art. That and I have never heard him speak out for things he believes in.

Bale Visits Victims of Co. Shooting:

[quote]hipsr4runnin wrote:
Suck it!:

[/quote]

I’m not making my point clear, and it really isn’t for this thread.

But if I did, I fully believe you would get it, if not agree.

I think we are agreeing to disagree. I was actually happy for the victims. Bale showed up in a t shirt and jeans getting a ride from an ambulance. I dont understand how he could be less hollywood and more sincere. I highly doubt this was of any influence from anyone and he just did it on his own accord. I dont fully understand your point, no. Maybe you are not stating it clearly.

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
From Jonathan Jared Adams’ facebook wall:

Hey facebook, I had an idea- All those kids in the hospital recovering from gunshot wounds at the Batman massacre could use a visit from their hero. I propose we (as in all of facebook) should make enough noise asking Christian Bale to visit these kids in the hospital dressed in the real Batman outfit. They need to know Heroes can be real too, not just bad guys.

Not asking anything fancy from you, if you read this, share it on your wall, If you wanna go the extra mile, post it in other sites as well. Show the kids there really are herpes.

Dear Christian Bale, Please visit the injured children from the movie massacre as Batman, you have the power to be a Hero right now, not a movie Hero, a real life flesh and blood one.

Thank you,
Everyone[/quote]

Just what they need, PTSD