12 Dead, 50 Injured at The Dark Knight Rises Showing In Colorado 1706
beaverdownunder sends the sad news that a gunman opened fire on an audience watching the new Batman movie early this morning, killing 12 and wounding 50 others. The shooting took place in Aurora, Colorado, and the suspect was arrested by police.
"Witnesses told KUSA that the gunman kicked in an emergency exit door and threw a smoke bomb into the darkened theater before opening fire. One movie-goer, who was not identified, told KUSA the gunman was wearing a gas mask. Some people in the audience thought the thick smoke and gunfire was a special effect accompanying the movie, police and witnesses said."
Re:Maybe same old 'leave your guns at entrance' ru (Score:5, Informative)
From what I read, the shooter came into the theater from outside through an emergency exit door. I don't know how he got it open, unless perhaps someone had propped it open to sneak their friends into the theater, that happens at my local theater all the time...
Re:how 'bout some gun control... (Score:4, Informative)
It would of been better if everyone in the audience was armed. There would of been no shooting then... right?
Yes, you are right. Just like and armed churchgoer stopped this attck before anyone got killed: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sKQl-Qp5W0 [youtube.com] And yes, it was in Colorado as well.
It's too bad the majority of people have been brainwashed over the last 30 years to think that they should never take any active role in defending themselves.
Re:Maybe same old 'leave your guns at entrance' ru (Score:5, Informative)
Re:how 'bout some gun control... (Score:4, Informative)
Just like and armed churchgoer stopped this attack
It wasn't an "armed churchgoer" as you misleadingly state. It was an off-duty police officer, trained in the use of lethal force.
When you start with untrained use of lethal force you get George Zimmerman shooting at Trayvon Martin.
Re:Get ready (Score:4, Informative)
Re:That is a very touchy subject (Score:5, Informative)
Has any shooting like this been ended by a civilian carrying a gun? Any? Ever? I don't know.
Look at the massacre on UT campus in the 60s. Troubled sniper got up to the bell tower and started firing mostly indiscriminately (1 shot, 1 kill or he left you alone). Once people realized what was going on, many of the students who owned guns got them and started returning fire, severely limiting the number shots the sniper (Whitman) could take as he was forced to take cover. There was even an armed civilian in the group of 4 people who got to the bell tower and ended the killing spree.
Authorities have stated that the large number of armed civilians returning fire was instrumental in keeping Whitman from inflicting further harm
Charles Whitman [wikipedia.org]
Re:Willing to bet.. (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Willing to bet.. (Score:5, Informative)
Indeed, the FBI has your back:
FBI spokesman Jason Pack said it did not appear the incident was related to terrorism.
It Switzerland every house REQUIRED to have a gun (Score:5, Informative)
and the mandatory training ... are you calling these guys crazy?
The Swiss army has long been a militia trained and structured to rapidly respond against foreign aggression. Swiss males grow up expecting to undergo basic military training, usually at age 20 in the Rekrutenschule (German for "recruit school"), the initial boot camp, after which Swiss men remain part of the "militia" in reserve capacity until age 30 (age 34 for officers). Each such individual is required to keep his army-issued personal weapon (the 5.56x45mm Sig 550 rifle for enlisted personnel and/or the 9mm SIG-Sauer P220 semi-automatic pistol for officers, medical and postal personnel) at home. Up until October 2007, a specified personal retention quantity of government-issued personal ammunition (50 rounds 5.56 mm / 48 rounds 9mm) was issued as well, which was sealed and inspected regularly to ensure that no unauthorized use had taken place.[4] The ammunition was intended for use while traveling to the army barracks in case of invasion.
Re:Statistics, correlation and conclusions. (Score:4, Informative)
No. There is, however, ample evidence that gun ownership rates do NOT correlate to higher murder rates.
You said it, I didn't.
That aside, have you ever noticed that mass-shootings like this are almost invariably done by white men?
Re:how 'bout some gun control... (Score:5, Informative)
One of the worst shooting incidents in recent times came on an army base.
You do realize that on a state-side base (such as Ft Hood that you're referring to) almost none of the soldiers inside are allowed to carry loaded weapons right? The fact that they're wearing camo and have Jeeps sitting outside means zilch if you're still force to walk around unarmed
Re:Willing to bet.. (Score:4, Informative)
I have a love/hate relationship with the right to bear arms. On one hand, when interpreted the way I'm sure our founding fathers intended when they codified our rights, I think it is an excellent check on governmental power; if the shit truly hit the fan there would be militia's and guerrilla forces springing up overnight to fight back (the apathy of the modern-age be damned). " But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security." Attacking the right to bear arms seems to me to be attacking our right of revolution [wikipedia.org] as spelled out in the Declaration.
On the other hand, however, I cannot believe that our founding fathers would have intended for the high-powered weaponry we have available to us today to be freely available to anyone out there that's capable of passing a cursory background check. People aren't buying AK's for practical defense, they're buying AK's for ePeen. For instance, a friend of mine, who lives in an apartment and recently got his Concealed Carry license, the day he got his license in the mail he went out and bought a massive Desert Eagle hand cannon that he loves to show off to people. If someone were to break into his apartment, and he started firing with that gun...how many rounds would end up in his neighbors apartments as they blast through those poorly-insulated plaster-board walls? He tells me he's in the market for an AR-15 now...for 'home defense', and he's still in that apartment with the tissue paper walls. He's a fucking accident waiting to happen...which is precisely why I won't hang out with him when he's strapped. He'd probably end up taking me or someone else around him out just trying to draw down on someone...
The problem, as I see it, is how you reliably prevent the fuck-tards like the stupid 20-year-old kid I mentioned above from endangering themselves and others while still preserving the rights of those that have the maturity and gravitas to properly be trusted with a lethal weapon. Just making sure the person in question doesn't have any felonies and isn't certifiably mentally ill doesn't seem like enough. How many kids in this country die every year because their dumbass parents don't properly secure the guns in the home? How many kids have been killed by other kids because their parents didn't properly secure them? We need to have an honest conversation about this on a national level but unfortunately the issue is driven to extremes: Either you're pro-gun and anyone and their sister should be able to buy whatever gun they want, no questions asked, or you're anti-gun and think that they should be completely illegal for everyone but the police and military. There's no grey area anymore.
Re:Willing to bet.. (Score:5, Informative)
Guns are banned in many parts of Europe and even in countries where they are banned, gunmen open fire on crowds, e.g.:
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Latest-News-Wires/2011/1214/Belgium-gunman-also-killed-a-cleaning-woman [csmonitor.com]
So:
D) Get an illegal gun, because no gun ban in the history of the entire world ever, anywhere, in any time nor place, has ever been meaningfully successful at keeping guns out of the hands of nutjobs.
Re:To those thinking gun control would help: (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Maybe same old 'leave your guns at entrance' ru (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Maybe same old 'leave your guns at entrance' ru (Score:5, Informative)
Well, it's worth pointing out that Canada has a much lower gun violence rate than either of those places, and there ARE strict gun laws in place. In fact, the gun laws are getting much stricter in an attempt to quash the gun violence that we DO have. There was recently a shooting here, and it was a big deal that TWO people were killed. 12 with 50 injured would be a national catastrophe and on the front page of every major newspaper.
The USA and Canada are different; I wouldn't suggest that you adopt our system per se, because your circumstances aren't the same. But it seems obvious to me that sufficiently strict gun laws CAN work if they have an appropriate societal context to exist.
Re:how 'bout some gun control... (Score:5, Informative)
Major Caudill does not exist. This essay was originally written by Marko Kloos in 2007.
http://munchkinwrangler.wordpress.com/2007/03/23/why-the-gun-is-civilization/ [wordpress.com]
Shortly thereafter it was plagiarized and falsely attributed to the nonexistent Major Caudill. It even appeaed in a certain celebrity's book.
http://munchkinwrangler.wordpress.com/2009/05/17/major-caudill-hits-the-big-time/ [wordpress.com]
Re:The true enemy... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Willing to bet.. (Score:5, Informative)
In short, would I want to spend every waking moment surrounded by people who are armed to the teeth for the highly unlikely offchance that I happen to be in a situation like this one at some point, and then hope that amateurs take him down without hitting even more innocent people in the smoke, darkness, and chaos?
There was an incident in Montréal (Canada) last year where police officers firing upon a criminal hit and killed a random passerby about half a block away. If trained police officers in relatively controlled conditions can kill innocent people, I'd hate to see what would happen if a bunch of amateurs started firing in a crowded and smoky movie theater.
Re:how 'bout some gun control... (Score:4, Informative)
That's an impressively high density of tired cliches you have there.
This attack likely would have happened no matter if the audience were all armed. However, the more dangerous ranged weapons that are available to the public, the more victims a mentally unbalanced person can potentially claim before being taken out themselves.
You rarely get mass shootings like that here in the UK, because hardly anyone has access to, or even an interest in, guns. The last serious incident was in 2010, but the only other ones before that were in 1996 and 1987.
Re:Willing to bet.. (Score:5, Informative)
All of which is really easy to say right up to the moment that you're in the midst of a shooting.
Re:Statistics, correlation and conclusions. (Score:5, Informative)
Harvard Injury Control Research Center
Homicide
1. Where there are more guns there is more homicide (literature review).
Our review of the academic literature found that a broad array of evidence indicates that gun availability is a risk factor for homicide, both in the United States and across high-income countries. Case-control studies, ecological time-series and cross-sectional studies indicate that in homes, cities, states and regions in the US, where there are more guns, both men and women are at higher risk for homicide, particularly firearm homicide.
Hepburn, Lisa; Hemenway, David. Firearm availability and homicide: A review of the literature. Aggression and Violent Behavior: A Review Journal. 2004; 9:417-40.
2. Across high-income nations, more guns = more homicide.
We analyzed the relationship between homicide and gun availability using data from 26 developed countries from the early 1990s. We found that across developed countries, where guns are more available, there are more homicides. These results often hold even when the United States is excluded.
Hemenway, David; Miller, Matthew. Firearm availability and homicide rates across 26 high income countries. Journal of Trauma. 2000; 49:985-88.
3. Across states, more guns = more homicide
Using a validated proxy for firearm ownership, we analyzed the relationship between firearm availability and homicide across 50 states over a ten year period (1988-1997).
After controlling for poverty and urbanization, for every age group, people in states with many guns have elevated rates of homicide, particularly firearm homicide.
Miller, Matthew; Azrael, Deborah; Hemenway, David. Household firearm ownership levels and homicide rates across U.S. regions and states, 1988-1997. American Journal of Public Health. 2002: 92:1988-1993.
4. Across states, more guns = more homicide (2)
Using survey data on rates of household gun ownership, we examined the association between gun availability and homicide across states, 2001-2003. We found that states with higher levels of household gun ownership had higher rates of firearm homicide and overall homicide. This relationship held for both genders and all age groups, after accounting for rates of aggravated assault, robbery, unemployment, urbanization, alcohol consumption, and resource deprivation (e.g., poverty). There was no association between gun prevalence and non-firearm homicide.
Miller, Matthew; Azrael, Deborah; Hemenway, David. State-level homicide victimization rates in the U.S. in relation to survey measures of household firearm ownership, 2001-2003. Social Science and Medicine. 2007; 64:656-64.
I disagree somewhat with your link (Score:4, Informative)
Nice article, but I disagree with the premise somewhat:
Putting aside the obvious objection that poking fun at the powerful isn’t the same as bluntly confronting them, it’s important to give Stewart and Colbert their due.
They do in fact bluntly confront the powerful. Did you see the white house press correspondents dinner that Colbert hosted? No really, watch this. [youtube.com]
Watch the audience, the looks on their faces. Some are in total shock. Others look like they're ready to kill him.
That took some serious balls.
Re:Maybe same old 'leave your guns at entrance' ru (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Gun Control (Score:5, Informative)
In America, we too have VERY few massacres.
How do you define "VERY few"?
July 2012 - 12 dead, 50 wounded - Aurora, CO
May 2012 - 6 dead, 1 wounded; Seattle, WA -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Seattle_cafe_shooting_spree [wikipedia.org]
April 2012 - 7 dead, 3 injured - Oikos University, Oakland, CA
Feb 2012 - 3 dead, 2 wounded - Chardon, OH
Aug 2011 - 8 dead, 1 wounded; Copley Township, OH -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Copley_Township,_Ohio_shooting [wikipedia.org]
July 2011 - 8 dead, 2 wounded; Grand Rapids, MI -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Grand_Rapids,_Michigan_shooting [wikipedia.org]
Jan 2011 - 6 dead; 13 wounded - Tucson, AZ -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Tucson_shooting [wikipedia.org]
Jan 2010 - 8 dead; Appomattox, VA -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Appomattox_shootings [wikipedia.org]
Nov 2009 - 13 dead, 30 wounded; Ft. Hood, TX -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Hood_Shooting [wikipedia.org]
April 2009 - 14 dead; 4 wounded - Binghamton, NY -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binghamton_shootings [wikipedia.org]
Mar 2009 - 11 dead 6 wounded, Samson, AL -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_County_massacre [wikipedia.org]
Feb 2009 - 4 dead, 1 wounded; University of AZ -- http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-201_162-527308.html [cbsnews.com]
Dec 2008 - 9 dead, 3+ injured; Covina, CA
Sept 2008 - 6 dead, 2 injured; Alger, WA -- http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008153942_webshooting02m.html [nwsource.com]
Dec 2007 - 8 dead, 5 wounded; Omaha, NE
April 2007 - 32 dead; Virginia Tech
Oct 2006 - 6 dead, 5 injured; Nickel Mines, PA -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amish_school_shooting [wikipedia.org]
Jan 2006 - 7 dead; Goleta, CA -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennifer_San_Marco [wikipedia.org]
March 2005 - 7 dead, 4 wounded; Brooksfield, WI -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_Ratzmann [wikipedia.org]
March 2005 - 10 dead, 12 injured; Red Lake HS, Minnesota
October 2002 - 10 dead, 3 injured; Washington DC (sniper attacks over 3 week period) -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beltway_sniper_attacks [wikipedia.org]
July 1999 - 9 dead 13 wounded; Atlanta, GA -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_O._Barton [wikipedia.org]
April 1999 - 12 dead; Columbine HS
Dec 1993 - 6 dead, 19 wounded; Long Island Railroad -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_Island_Rail_Road_Massacre [wikipedia.org]
May 1993 - 2 dead, 3 wounded; Dearborn, MI --
May 1993 - 3 dead; Dana Point, CA
July 1993 - 9 dead, 6 wounded; San Francisco, CA -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/101_California_Street_shootings [wikipedia.org]
Nov 1991 - 4 dead, 6 wounded; Royal Oak, MI -- http://www.nytimes.com/1991/11/15/us/ex-postal-worker-kills-3-and-wounds-6-in-michigan.html [nytimes.com]
Oct 1991 - 4 dead (1 by samurai sword); Ridgewood, NJ -- http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/a-former-postal-worker-commits-mass-murder [history.com]
Oct 1991
Re:Maybe same old 'leave your guns at entrance' ru (Score:4, Informative)
Re:And as ever... (Score:4, Informative)
Grandparent here.
I'm a Londoner.
Try 7/7.
No guns involved.
Re:God Bless America (Score:5, Informative)
Humor is a protection and coping mechanism.
The 2nd; (Score:3, Informative)
If we want to change the 2nd amendment, article five is right there, provided specifically so we can do exactly that.
Article III, which establishes the supreme court, in no way assigns article V powers to the justices or to congress. No restriction, license or ban they have implemented or rubber-stamped is relevant or authorized with regard to the 2nd; the thing explicitly says the government can't infringe on the rights to keep and carry, and that covers the entire scope of it any law dealing with any arms whatsoever. Likewise, congress can make no legitimate law that restricts these rights. Any such law they create is government malfeasance, a direct violation of the oath they swore when they became members of congress, and an exercise of unauthorized power. If we want to change this, then we must turn to article five. There is no other legitimate path.
Furthermore, I would even argue that we SHOULD change it -- I don't want my neighbor cooking up Anthrax or cobbling up a nuke somehow -- but it CAN'T be changed legitimately by congress enacting legislation or SCOTUS' sophist hand-waving. They simply do not have that authority. Power? Sure, they have the power, and they're 100% ready to misuse it, but that is no different in any sense from any banana republic where some buffoon declares "because I said so."
Let me leave you with this quote:
"Who are the militia?" asked Tench Coxe, friend of Madison and prominent ... Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their ... The unlimited power of the sword is not
Federalist, in the Pennsylvania Gazette of Feb. 20, 1788. "Are they not
ourselves.
swords, and every other terrible instrument of the soldier, are the
birth-right of an American.
in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I
trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people."
1) Yes, the militia were, and are, "ourselves" -- that's what it meant when they wrote it. Not national guard, etc.
2) You would probably be amazed at the variety of arms the authors were aware of when they wrote the second. Yet they didn't say guns: They said arms. They were also well aware that arms were under development at all times, and they *still* just said "arms." You have every right to own any arms you can afford, build, receive as a gift, or trade for. You don't legally require a license for any of it, and you don't need to tell anyone what you have. Just be aware that the government does whatever it wants, as it is, and has long been, out of control due to our consistently electing idiots to power.