massive shooting at Batman projection...

[ChangoLanzao 0]

Quote

Quote

This issue has nothing to do with the War On Drugs.
The NRA is an accomplice to this crime, and must be held to account.

I disagree, he should be held accountable as the Individual who committed the crime.

I agree that Holmes should be held accountable as the individual who committed the crime.

Quote

But for giggles lets use your logic. The NRA passed no laws and enable no one, now the Politicians did, lets line them up. His Mom is quoted as knowing in her gut the PD arrested the right guy, add her. A school mate was quoted today of having seen a change in him, add him as well.

See how silly all that sounds?

Matt

I agree. That sounds very silly.

[ChangoLanzao 0]

Quote

Name one thing that is illegal to own that you can't put your hands on.

That's a non-sequitor. Some laws are necessary and effective despite the fact that we know there are people who will violate them.

[billvon 2,393]

>Name one thing that is illegal to own that you can't put your hands on.

Highly enriched uranium.
Lawful intercept boxes.
Sarin.

That's three!

[CSpenceFLY 1]

Quote

>Name one thing that is illegal to own that you can't put your hands on.

Highly enriched uranium.
Lawful intercept boxes.
Sarin.

That's three!

Care to comment on how the ban on illegal drugs is working? A ban on any type of weapons will work out just the same.

[ChangoLanzao 0]

Quote

>The NRA is an accomplice to this crime, and must be held to account.

Nonsense, no more so than the movie industry is an accomplice.

Both are PART of what happened but neither helped him do this, and both would have stopped him had the opportunity arisen.

Your logic is flawless, of course. On the other hand, I'm pretty sure you're aware of the nuances involved with this issue.

There is no doubt that the NRA facilitated this crime by helping to ensure that the weapons and ammo are readily available and law enforcement is unable to prevent it from happening.

[CSpenceFLY 1]

Quote

Quote

Name one thing that is illegal to own that you can't put your hands on.

That's a non-sequitor. Some laws are necessary and effective despite the fact that we know there are people who will violate them.

So we need this law to take the weapons away from the people who would never use them in the manner that caused us to need the law, while full well knowing it's not going to stop the act that caused us to need the law.

If I were a liberal I'd be calling you names by now.

[billvon 2,393]

>Care to comment on how the ban on illegal drugs is working?

It has significantly reduced, but not eliminated, illegal drug usage.

>A ban on any type of weapons will work out just the same.

Agreed.

[ChangoLanzao 0]

Quote

Quote

>Name one thing that is illegal to own that you can't put your hands on.

Highly enriched uranium.
Lawful intercept boxes.
Sarin.

That's three!

Care to comment on how the ban on illegal drugs is working? A ban on any type of weapons will work out just the same.

Actually, it's not the same. This crime has nothing to do with the drugs. Stop trying to change the subject with false equivalences.

[CSpenceFLY 1]

Quote

Quote

>The NRA is an accomplice to this crime, and must be held to account.

Nonsense, no more so than the movie industry is an accomplice.

Both are PART of what happened but neither helped him do this, and both would have stopped him had the opportunity arisen.

Your logic is flawless, of course. On the other hand, I'm pretty sure you're aware of the nuances involved with this issue.

There is no doubt that the NRA facilitated this crime by helping to ensure that the weapons and ammo are readily available and law enforcement is unable to prevent it from happening.

For fucks sake. Do you really think this way?

[ChangoLanzao 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

>The NRA is an accomplice to this crime, and must be held to account.

Nonsense, no more so than the movie industry is an accomplice.

Both are PART of what happened but neither helped him do this, and both would have stopped him had the opportunity arisen.

Your logic is flawless, of course. On the other hand, I'm pretty sure you're aware of the nuances involved with this issue.

There is no doubt that the NRA facilitated this crime by helping to ensure that the weapons and ammo are readily available and law enforcement is unable to prevent it from happening.

For fucks sake. Do you really think this way?

Yes, I do and there are many more of us.

[billvon 2,393]

>There is no doubt that the NRA facilitated this crime by helping to ensure that the
>weapons and ammo are readily available and law enforcement is unable to prevent it
>from happening.

But again, you could blame the movie industry even more. There is no doubt they facilitated this crime by having midnight showings, and not having more security guards, and intentionally keeping their theaters in the dark so it would be harder to see what's going on etc. But that's going a bit overboard.

The NRA has been pretty consistent in being against gun violence. You can argue "they should do more" which is certainly a valid position. What else should they do?

[CSpenceFLY 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

>Name one thing that is illegal to own that you can't put your hands on.

Highly enriched uranium.
Lawful intercept boxes.
Sarin.

That's three!

Care to comment on how the ban on illegal drugs is working? A ban on any type of weapons will work out just the same.

Actually, it's not the same. This crime has nothing to do with the drugs. Stop trying to change the subject with false equivalences.

That's not what the anti-drug camp says. Let me guess, your all for legalizing drugs.

[ChangoLanzao 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

>Name one thing that is illegal to own that you can't put your hands on.

Highly enriched uranium.
Lawful intercept boxes.
Sarin.

That's three!

Care to comment on how the ban on illegal drugs is working? A ban on any type of weapons will work out just the same.

Actually, it's not the same. This crime has nothing to do with the drugs. Stop trying to change the subject with false equivalences.

That's not what the anti-drug camp says. Let me guess, your all for legalizing drugs.

I am for banning the sale and manufacture of assault weapons and high capacity magazines, and regulation of firearms.

[CSpenceFLY 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

>Name one thing that is illegal to own that you can't put your hands on.

Highly enriched uranium.
Lawful intercept boxes.
Sarin.

That's three!

Care to comment on how the ban on illegal drugs is working? A ban on any type of weapons will work out just the same.

Actually, it's not the same. This crime has nothing to do with the drugs. Stop trying to change the subject with false equivalences.

That's not what the anti-drug camp says. Let me guess, your all for legalizing drugs.

I am for banning the sale and manufacture of assault weapons and high capacity magazines, and regulation of firearms.

Good luck with that. When you get your ban I'll still be able to go out and get pretty much anything I want, (legally I might add) it will just cost a little more. Crazy people will still be shooting up schools,churches,theaters and the likes and you'll be standing there with your pants around your ankles and your dick in your hand blaming on group or another for the injustices of the world.

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

I agree, an arm chair commando is not going to be able to do much. And in this case maybe they add to the mess.

But o would not discount the argument that one, trained, armed legal carry citizen might have made a positive impact.

That possibility is easy to discount. The probability is just too low for it to be considered plausible.

No matter how well armed the audience members, it will always be possible for a gunman to overwhelm them with chemical agents, superior firepower, and the element of surprise.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[ChangoLanzao 0]

Quote

>There is no doubt that the NRA facilitated this crime by helping to ensure that the
>weapons and ammo are readily available and law enforcement is unable to prevent it
>from happening.

But again, you could blame the movie industry even more. There is no doubt they facilitated this crime by having midnight showings, and not having more security guards, and intentionally keeping their theaters in the dark so it would be harder to see what's going on etc. But that's going a bit overboard.

True. I could, but I don't blame the movie industry for this at all.

Quote

The NRA has been pretty consistent in being against gun violence. You can argue "they should do more" which is certainly a valid position. What else should they do?

I never said that I thought that the NRA is FOR gun violence. (Although I do think that many NRA members are convinced that the Constitution gives them the right to use the threat of gun violence against the government in the event that the government passes/enforces laws they disagree with.)

I do believe that the NRA is mainly interested in putting as much weaponry and ammo in the hands of every American citizen with little or no regulation. They are a clear threat to our constitutional form of government because of the insurrectionist propaganda that they use to to undermine efforts to regulate firearms.

[matthewcline 0]

Quote

Quote

>There is no doubt that the NRA facilitated this crime by helping to ensure that the
>weapons and ammo are readily available and law enforcement is unable to prevent it
>from happening.

But again, you could blame the movie industry even more. There is no doubt they facilitated this crime by having midnight showings, and not having more security guards, and intentionally keeping their theaters in the dark so it would be harder to see what's going on etc. But that's going a bit overboard.

True. I could, but I don't blame the movie industry for this at all.

Quote

The NRA has been pretty consistent in being against gun violence. You can argue "they should do more" which is certainly a valid position. What else should they do?

I never said that I thought that the NRA is FOR gun violence. (Although I do think that many NRA members are convinced that the Constitution gives them the right to use the threat of gun violence against the government in the event that the government passes/enforces laws they disagree with.)

I do believe that the NRA is mainly interested in putting as much weaponry and ammo in the hands of every American citizen with little or no regulation. They are a clear threat to our constitutional form of government because of the insurrectionist propaganda that they use to to undermine efforts to regulate firearms.

What NRA produced material are you reading?

I must say I have never heard them called a threat to our "Constitutional form of Government" before, that is a new one, to me.

Maybe, it is just how one reads things and interprets those same things, based on their Ideology.

Matt

An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!

[CSpenceFLY 1]

Quote

True. I could, but I don't blame the movie industry for this at all.

I blame the theater owner for having a no gun policy.

If you put a criminal in a room full of people where he can be fairly certain that no one is armed he will act as a criminal. If you put that same criminal in a room where he could be relatively certain that a percentage of the people are armed he might just think twice about acting as a criminal.

They created a venue where this guy could be reasonably certain he would encounter no resistance.
They should be prosecuted.

[1969912 0]

Body armor test: http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot16.htm

"Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ."
-NickDG

[quade 3]

Quote

I blame the theater owner for having a no gun policy.

Ridiculous.

The shooter clearly thought it was a possibility somebody may at some point might fire back otherwise he wouldn't have worn all the body armor.

He didn't care.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Body armor test: http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot16.htm

Are you in doubt of the validity of Newton's third law of motion?

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[quade 3]

Quote

Body armor test: http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot16.htm

That's not body armor. That's simply the material it's made from and only the soft material at that.

We don't know what type of armor this shooter was wearing. It's entirely possible he was wearing something more hardened by ceramic plating which would spread out the forces more.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[ChangoLanzao 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

>There is no doubt that the NRA facilitated this crime by helping to ensure that the
>weapons and ammo are readily available and law enforcement is unable to prevent it
>from happening.

But again, you could blame the movie industry even more. There is no doubt they facilitated this crime by having midnight showings, and not having more security guards, and intentionally keeping their theaters in the dark so it would be harder to see what's going on etc. But that's going a bit overboard.

True. I could, but I don't blame the movie industry for this at all.

Quote

The NRA has been pretty consistent in being against gun violence. You can argue "they should do more" which is certainly a valid position. What else should they do?

I never said that I thought that the NRA is FOR gun violence. (Although I do think that many NRA members are convinced that the Constitution gives them the right to use the threat of gun violence against the government in the event that the government passes/enforces laws they disagree with.)

I do believe that the NRA is mainly interested in putting as much weaponry and ammo in the hands of every American citizen with little or no regulation. They are a clear threat to our constitutional form of government because of the insurrectionist propaganda that they use to to undermine efforts to regulate firearms.

What NRA produced material are you reading?

I must say I have never heard them called a threat to our "Constitutional form of Government" before, that is a new one, to me.

Maybe, it is just how one reads things and interprets those same things, based on their Ideology.

Matt

Clearly, you haven't been doing enough reading.

[1969912 0]

Quote

Quote

Body armor test: http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot16.htm

Are you in doubt of the validity of Newton's third law of motion?

Are you aware of the difference between force and pressure? I just measured the cross section of the back of the grip on my Ruger MKII. It's about 3 sq inches. The area of a .22 bullet is ~.038 sq inches. The pressure applied to an object by the bullet is nearly 79 times the pressure applied to the shooter's hand by the grip through recoil.

ETA: And that's not considering the the effect of the mass of the gun, which is, uh, considerable.

re: quade: I have no idea what armor he was wearing (if any). It could have been plates.

"Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ."
-NickDG

[ChangoLanzao 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Name one thing that is illegal to own that you can't put your hands on.

That's a non-sequitor. Some laws are necessary and effective despite the fact that we know there are people who will violate them.

So we need this law to take the weapons away from the people who would never use them in the manner that caused us to need the law, while full well knowing it's not going to stop the act that caused us to need the law.

If I were a liberal I'd be calling you names by now.

Of course, that isn't what I'm saying. Laugh all you want. Your logic is flawed.