Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

12 Killed Dozens Wounded In Colorado Theatre Shooting

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    A very shocking and senseless act. Feel very sad for the victims.

    Cheers!...on the rocks!!

    Comment


    • #32
      B/F only criminals have guns in the UK ,handguns / auto weapons /etc were taken away from legal owners , gun crime is on the rise here , good old govt thinking huh , even our olympic pistol shooters have to go abroad to practice , soooooooooo how do they get around this prob at the Londonistan games ???????

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by tankie View Post
        B/F only criminals have guns in the UK ,handguns / auto weapons /etc were taken away from legal owners , gun crime is on the rise here , good old govt thinking huh , even our olympic pistol shooters have to go abroad to practice , soooooooooo how do they get around this prob at the Londonistan games ???????
        Tankie,

        You know full well that it isn't just criminals who have guns in the UK so just repeating it doesn't make it true. As for gun crime, if it is rising it is from a very low base. I'm betting gun crime per capita in the US dwarfs UK figures. England & Wales have something like 1 homicide per 100,000. Australia has 1.3. The US has over 4. Convince yourself you are unsafe all you want, I'll take those odds any day.

        Not sure about your point on the games - dispensation has been granted to allow shooting as it was 10 years ago at the Commonwealth games. No problem.
        sigpic

        Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

        Comment


        • #34
          B/F ALL the handguns / M/Gs legally held had to be handed in ,even Olympians , the Police still have them tho shotguns no / rifles no , so to be quite clear , only criminals and Police /the Forces / have banned guns , and im quite safe thanks , I dont own a jewellers / a bank / deal in drugs /or screw around with married women and am no fkin peedo ,:pari: so ya see , im quite safe thank you

          The point ref the games is simple , Olympian hand shooters are not allowed to use pistols in this country unless they are .22 , they must go abroad to practice and I believe they must leave their pistols there , not to sure tho , soooo what dispensation will be offered regarding shooting at the Olympics ??
          http://click.infospace.com/ClickHand...E26FEF7859EB61
          Last edited by tankie; 23 Jul 12,, 12:47.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by tankie View Post
            B/F ALL the handguns / M/Gs legally held had to be handed in ,even Olympians , the Police still have them tho shotguns no / rifles no , so to be quite clear , only criminals and Police /the Forces / have banned guns , and im quite safe thanks , I dont own a jewellers / a bank / deal in drugs /or screw around with married women and am no fkin peedo ,:pari: so ya see , im quite safe thank you
            Pleased to hear you are safe Tankie. So just to be clear, it isn't only criminals who have guns, but there are some kinds of gun that are illegal to own.

            The point ref the games is simple , Olympian hand shooters are not allowed to use pistols in this country unless they are .22 , they must go abroad to practice and I believe they must leave their pistols there , not to sure tho , soooo what dispensation will be offered regarding shooting at the Olympics ??
            My understanding is that they could have practiced in Nth Ireland, Isle of man & one or two other places but chose not to - perhaps thre were more suitable facilities elsewhere. I also understand that there were permits issued to allow some shooters to practice in the UK. As for the games, the shooting is going ahead as it did at the Comm games in 2002. Does it really matter how?
            sigpic

            Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by JAD_333 View Post
              You're coming close to the heart of the matter.
              that is my point, violence and crimes are only symptoms of disease, the root of the problem is somewhere else, it isn't addressed. like we are wiping the puss, and putting band aids, while looking for better band aid, totally ignoring infection spreading under the skin.
              "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!" B. Franklin

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Bigfella View Post
                Pleased to hear you are safe Tankie. So just to be clear, it isn't only criminals who have guns, but there are some kinds of gun that are illegal to own.



                My understanding is that they could have practiced in Nth Ireland, Isle of man & one or two other places but chose not to - perhaps thre were more suitable facilities elsewhere. I also understand that there were permits issued to allow some shooters to practice in the UK. As for the games, the shooting is going ahead as it did at the Comm games in 2002. Does it really matter how?
                The "ordinary law abiding citizen can not own handguns" end of , and if you do , you are committing a criminal act , which makes you a CRIMINAL , shotguns and rifles are not banned as YET .

                Ref the Olympics , I did not know some permits were given , as to why does it matter ,its hypocrisy , why was I and others not given the chance to shoot for the country (mind tho i did when was needed and was also a weapons instructor but i cant own a pistol pffffft) because we all had to hand in our very expensive hobbies , you see , it isnt the normal licenced person that commits gun crimes , its the criminal , Dunnblane was an exception , that fkin dingbat was licenced , even tho the police were aware of what he was buying but did nothing about it but the govt sure as hell destroyed an industry in one fell swoop.

                PS the commonwealth games , read bolded . ;)

                Anyway , we r way off topic ,

                RIP to the slain
                Last edited by tankie; 23 Jul 12,, 14:05.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by omon View Post
                  ^^^^^

                  Tankie is right, he is safer in usa.
                  His presence there may sway the odds in our favour

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by dave lukins View Post
                    His presence there may sway the odds in our favour
                    #### Orf

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by JAD_333 View Post
                      You're coming close to the heart of the matter. While automatic weapons are probably responsible for the high number of victims in modern day mass murders, mass murders are nothing new. There may indeed be societal roots to these incidents. Another problem, though I wouldn't call it a cause, is our deplorable mental health system.

                      Virginia Tech Mass Murder: A Forensic Psychiatrist's Perspective
                      JAD,

                      I am not sure how mental health comes into this particular case. The reason this one is shocking for me is that this seems to be a reasonably normal, even intelligent individual (a neuroscience PHD candidate, to boot). If I meet this guys at a Starbucks line or at the bus stop I would probably be casually chatting with him. He is, to all intent and purposes, completely - ordinary, till he did this.

                      I do think we need a more stringent process for vetting gun purchases and also subsequent monitoring.
                      A scary thought for me (and I am a gun lover, as others on this board would know) is that how accumulated his arsenal in a completely legal manner. What would happen if a criminal group explored this route and collected a large arsenal which they could then use against our LEOs?
                      "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" ~ Epicurus

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        A fucking nut is a fucking nut. There is no stopping a determined nut from hurting others. We can ban all guns. That would merely funnel the nut into another avenue. Timothy McVeigh used fertilizer. Ted Kaczynski used mail delivery system. The Supreme Truth cult in Japan released home-made nerve agent in a subway. Even this guy, James Holmes, set up IED at home using gasoline. Look up "acid attack" and find hundreds of these cases in countries where guns are banned.

                        Ever noticed all mass shootings involved large crowd gatherings? Maybe we should ban public gatherings.

                        There's a reason I don't like public transit systems. They are very vulnerable to attacks.
                        "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by antimony View Post
                          JAD,

                          I am not sure how mental health comes into this particular case. The reason this one is shocking for me is that this seems to be a reasonably normal, even intelligent individual (a neuroscience PHD candidate, to boot). If I meet this guys at a Starbucks line or at the bus stop I would probably be casually chatting with him. He is, to all intent and purposes, completely - ordinary, till he did this.
                          I'm not sure either. I do, however, believe that in general the professionals are right. We have a lousy protocol for weeding out potentially psychotic killers.

                          I would take issue with you that the killer's intelligence and school credentials would have made him seem normal to you if you ran into him in Starbucks. Probably the only way we laymen can judge the state of someone's mind is to have known him earlier in his life.


                          I do think we need a more stringent process for vetting gun purchases and also subsequent monitoring.
                          Do you mean better enforcing the current vetting process?

                          A scary thought for me (and I am a gun lover, as others on this board would know) is that how accumulated his arsenal in a completely legal manner. What would happen if a criminal group explored this route and collected a large arsenal which they could then use against our LEOs?
                          Yes, it is scary, but only now that we know what his intent was. Unfortunately, buyer intent is not a factor in our system of vetting gun purchases, and can't be. Even if it was, people would lie if their intent was to commit a crime, or they may have bought the gun with good intentions to start with and only years later used it to commit a crime they had not contemplated before.

                          The problem in looking at any mass murder or crime involving a firearm as a failure of regulation is illogical. It removes the perpetrator from the picture. It deflects from the real cause of the crime, which may never be known until after the crime is committed.

                          There may be a debate to be had as to what types of firearms and peripheral equipment should be legally for sale. But I don't see it leading anywhere. You're a smart guy. You know that with enough determination you can get the guns and ammo you need although they are not legally available to you. We've had 3 murders around here in the last few years in which the gun was stolen. As long as guns are legal to own, things like that will happen. The causes were anger, jealousy and pay-back. How do you control that?
                          To be Truly ignorant, Man requires an Education - Plato

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by gunnut View Post
                            A fucking nut is a fucking nut. There is no stopping a determined nut from hurting others. We can ban all guns. That would merely funnel the nut into another avenue. Timothy McVeigh used fertilizer. Ted Kaczynski used mail delivery system. The Supreme Truth cult in Japan released home-made nerve agent in a subway. Even this guy, James Holmes, set up IED at home using gasoline. Look up "acid attack" and find hundreds of these cases in countries where guns are banned.

                            Ever noticed all mass shootings involved large crowd gatherings? Maybe we should ban public gatherings.

                            There's a reason I don't like public transit systems. They are very vulnerable to attacks.
                            GN,

                            I will take a fucking nut without a gun over a fucking nut with a gun any day. Also I am not talking about banning guns (come on man, you know I love guns myself). However, I am in favour of putting in place a more stringent vetting process (enforce the current background check, even between private individual sales) and also expand monitoring of individuals and groups who amass large quantities of guns and ammo (this will probably affect some collectors). Anyone tracking the purchases of John Holmes would probably have a reason to be suspicious.

                            We live in a post 9/11 world where we put with inconveniences in the name of stopping terrorism. How is this any different from terrorism? why do we always need to treat this as the job of nutcases where we are powerless to do anything? Regardless of reasons like mental condition or evil ideology, the current system facilitates the actions of those intent on doing harm.
                            "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" ~ Epicurus

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by JAD_333 View Post
                              I would take issue with you that the killer's intelligence and school credentials would have made him seem normal to you if you ran into him in Starbucks. Probably the only way we laymen can judge the state of someone's mind is to have known him earlier in his life.
                              My point is that there is nothing in his background, apart from his gun and ammo purchases, that would have rang up any alarm bells for anyone.

                              Originally posted by JAD_333 View Post
                              Do you mean better enforcing the current vetting process?
                              I mean both enforce it and expand it. Ensure background checks for each gun purchase, be it from a private individual or from an FFL. Keep a tab on gun purchases, so that buying a lot of guns and ammo get some attention. Enforce training in proper usage for anyone seeking to carry.

                              We do this for car ownership, why not for guns? None of this curtails gun ownership, but instead provides the LEAs tools to prevent things going wrong or tracking points of failure.

                              Originally posted by JAD_333 View Post
                              Yes, it is scary, but only now that we know what his intent was. Unfortunately, buyer intent is not a factor in our system of vetting gun purchases, and can't be. Even if it was, people would lie if their intent was to commit a crime, or they may have bought the gun with good intentions to start with and only years later used it to commit a crime they had not contemplated before.

                              The problem in looking at any mass murder or crime involving a firearm as a failure of regulation is illogical. It removes the perpetrator from the picture. It deflects from the real cause of the crime, which may never be known until after the crime is committed.
                              I am sorry but this sounds defeatist. We are the greatest country in the world and we can do better than this. Regardless of intent we should be in a position to track and monitor sources of harm to society. We track a lot of things in the name of preventing terrorism, why not this. What if Islamic terrorists make use of these existing processes to amass an arsenal and recreate this horror? Would our response as a society be any different ? Why should this not shock us at a similar level and let us take steps to prevent this?

                              Originally posted by JAD_333 View Post
                              There may be a debate to be had as to what types of firearms and peripheral equipment should be legally for sale. But I don't see it leading anywhere. You're a smart guy. You know that with enough determination you can get the guns and ammo you need although they are not legally available to you. We've had 3 murders around here in the last few years in which the gun was stolen. As long as guns are legal to own, things like that will happen. The causes were anger, jealousy and pay-back. How do you control that?
                              I differ with that - for legal guns there should be a tracking process. We renew car licenses every year, why not for guns? Also, once you are able to track all legal purchases (which was done here for the initial sale but not monitored at an aggregate level) then you can focus on the illegal aspects of gun trade.

                              Bottom line, I do not want to stop gun ownership like the Brady bunch, rather I am comfortable with the government and LEAs knowing about and monitoring my purchases.

                              Also, would like to explore two areas:
                              1. Why exactly does one need guns with high capacity magazines outside a sporting arena? If you think you need it for self defense you are in the wrong place and the wrong time and I would advise you to move out fast.
                              2. The capability of a armed citizenry in the face of an attack like this is a myth. As someone who has faced off with a home intruder (thankfully unarmed) you would not be thinking rationally enough to operate a gun effectively, unless you have specfically trained for it. An untrained armed citizen is nearly as dangerous to the general public as the perp.
                              "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" ~ Epicurus

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by antimony View Post
                                GN,

                                I will take a fucking nut without a gun over a fucking nut with a gun any day. Also I am not talking about banning guns (come on man, you know I love guns myself). However, I am in favour of putting in place a more stringent vetting process (enforce the current background check, even between private individual sales) and also expand monitoring of individuals and groups who amass large quantities of guns and ammo (this will probably affect some collectors). Anyone tracking the purchases of John Holmes would probably have a reason to be suspicious.
                                We have that process already. There's a national data base that one has to go through in order to buy a gun. This process stops thousands of people with prior records from owning a gun every year.

                                Here's the thing: James Holmes does NOT have a PRIOR record. He came up clean.

                                And what is "large quantities of guns and ammo?" Virginia (I think) and California has 1 handgun per month limit. That still gives me 12 hand guns and unlimited rifles per year. Do we limit that to 1 handgun per year? What if I want to buy a pair of matching pistols with consecutive serial numbers? Which I have done. I have a pair of unfired Sigs with consecutive serial numbers. How did I get around the 1 pistol per month limit? Private sales do not count toward the limit.

                                Now to the ammo business. What is "large quantity" of ammo? 22LR rounds come in 525 bulk pack. I routinely buy 2 boxes to 4 boxes at a time. 4 boxes of 22LR is 2100 rounds. Further more, who will keep this ammo sale? We need to have another government bureaucracy in place to track every single ammo sale to make sure one does not exceed the number of rounds one is rationed. What does that mean? Every single store that sells ammo will need to have a computer terminal connected to the DOJ in real time to track ammo purchase. California wanted to do this but luckily it has been defeated. It was nearly "unworkable" without seriously burdening businesses.

                                Let's say we do have this ammo tracking thing in place. How about reloaders? Do you restrict reloading equipment too? I can sit in the garage, if I really wanted to, and crank out hundreds of rounds in a day using my single stage press. People with multi stage press can quadruple that rate. Let's not even talk about people with full auto Dillon press. Pour bullets, brass, primer, and powder in on one end, flip switch, ammo comes out the other end.

                                Originally posted by antimony View Post
                                We live in a post 9/11 world where we put with inconveniences in the name of stopping terrorism. How is this any different from terrorism? why do we always need to treat this as the job of nutcases where we are powerless to do anything? Regardless of reasons like mental condition or evil ideology, the current system facilitates the actions of those intent on doing harm.
                                Yes, this is a terrorist act. However, this is not the same type of terrorism that we normally see. Normal terrorism has an ideology behind it. Be it Timothy McVeigh (anti-government), 9-11 hijackers (anti-west/USA), or that Norway shooter (anti-immigrant), they all have a political motivation. We can profile those people. They follow a certain pattern. Most of the time they discuss these kinds of plots with those whom they share a common belief.

                                Not James Holmes. He's a nut. He had very little contact with anyone else. He had no political ideology. He's not a stalker like the Arizona shooter. He's not anti government or even anti establishment. He's not married, no kids, came from a nice neighborhood, went to good schools, highly intelligent...etc. This guy was so ordinary that he could not be profiled.

                                We cannot stop crimes from happening. What we can do is to be vigilant and punish those who commit crimes. Make it not worthwhile for the vast majority of them. Of course these measures won't stop nuts like Holmes. He has no motive nor does he care about consequences. Some people are just evil. They just want to watch the world burn. No amount of banning...anything, can prevent these people from harming others.

                                Freedom is a risky thing. I'd rather be free in a dangerous society than to be safe under house arrest.
                                "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X