Originally Posted by zsu2357

Jumping for joy and lounging in it so you can say I told you so is mocking in my book.

You are the only one here doing that.

As was pointed out this guy knew his stuff, what would the results had been if he planted ied's throughout the theater,simply walked out and detonated it.Wait a minute "no dead and wounded people" at least according you.

What over 50 million of us. Think about it(if possible),one yes one person a wacko and you condemn that many people(know doubt more).

Interesting:

Originally Posted by Doc Jones

Interesting:

MORE INTERESTING STUFF

Originally Posted by Doc Jones

MORE INTERESTING STUFF

Yes it is, glad to see some else see's to.

Originally Posted by Lionhearted55

... Guns should be in the hands of everyone else. ... In almost all mass shootings there was no one shooting back. If the Colorado shooter had picked a theater full of police, sheriffs, deputies and their families he would have looked like Swiss Cheese after his first shot and no one else, but, perhaps one from his first shot would have been hurt. ...

Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.

In a dark, smoke-filled room EVERYBODY should have a gun so's they can XXXX everybody else to smithereens.

Really, really smart!

Originally Posted by simone

Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.

In a dark, smoke-filled room EVERYBODY should have a gun so's they can XXXX everybody else to smithereens.

Really, really smart!

You possess nothing but contempt for the dead and the suffering. You seek to politicize their tragedy and use it as fuel for your own agendas in a callous and disrespectful manner. You are no different or better than the member Winston Smith.

Originally Posted by zsu2357

Tell me this then:If everyone is armed are you going to walk up to some one that has a 9mm on their hip or thigh and punch him?Thought not.As they say "an armed society is a polite society."

No, if everyone's armed I'll just shoot him.

Probably did,but as was pointed out the theater did not allow weapons(firearms)

All they can do is ask you to leave. You have broken no law if you have a permit. Most of CO is "shall issue".

If this were "a polite society"everyone that wished to be armed was, it would have rendered it moot.

Except for the multiple weapons, high capacity mags, body armor and tear gas.
Any law-abiding citizen in CO that wished to be armed could have been.

Originally Posted by sinjin

No, if everyone's armed I'll just shoot him.

You would decide to murder someone for being armed in your presence?

All they can do is ask you to leave. You have broken no law if you have a permit. Most of CO is "shall issue".

Holders of concealed carry permits are not permitted to enter an establishment while armed if they post signs at their doors to inform the public that weapons are not allowed inside. Disregarding the signs is a crime/

Except for the multiple weapons, high capacity mags, body armor and tear gas.
Any law-abiding citizen in CO that wished to be armed could have been.

With the exception of those on property that does not permit the carrying of a concealed firearm. If someone chooses to do so it is a recognized criminal offense. Disregarding the rules and stopping a murder from taking place may result in charges being dropped in light of mitigating circumstances but the percentage of those that will abide by the signs is significant.

There was also a significant percentage of theater patrons that were below twenty one years of age and thus ineligible to carry in the first place.

Several observations concerning James Holmes and his actions:

The suspect purchased four firearms in a manner that would have legally bypassed firearms rationing laws had they been in place at the time. Firearm rationing laws do not prevent a person from buying multiple long guns at any given time. The two Glock model pistols were purchased in a time frame that would have matched the mandated thirty day wait inbetween purchases. His purchases were made at multiple stores over the time period. His purchases were made well before he theater shooting so a proposed "cooling down" period had already passed and proved useless. Furthermore three of the four firearms would still have been available had the AR-15 rifle been unavailable due to it being prohibited by some new law.

Some will undoubtedly argue that if the suspected were limited to ten round magazines the amount of damage done could have been reduced. The beta-c magazine used is reported to have jammed on him after an undetermined number of rounds were discharged and thus disabled the rifle in the course of his shooting. It is unlikely a ten round magazine would have malfunctioned in such a manner due to their inline nature and thus allowed him to perform as magazine magazine changes as needed. Keep in mind James Holmes was prepared to transition between weapons in the course of his actions; an act that takes significantly more time and effort than simply changing out an empty magazine.

The suspect constructed numerous explosive devices and stashed them in his apartment. It is reported that the elaborate nature of these explosives and the manner in which they were set up prevented police from gaining access to his apartment for over forty hours as they worked to disarm the tripwire ignition system. Among the explosives found were thirty or more improvised hand grenades which could have easily been lobbed into the theater and detonated if they had been brought along at the time. His actions draw parallels with the Norway shooter Anders Breivik at this time last year. However Breivik possessed far fewer weapons at the time and obtained them under much tighter restrictions and regulations.

The suspect is recognized as being very intelligent and involved in post-graduate courses. He was also methodical in his planning and preparation and determined to carry out this massacre one way or another; evidenced by the construction of multiple handheld explosive devices. In a country such as the united states with access to far more resources it is unlikely James Holmes would have been stopped when Anders Breivik obtained a much higher body count with fewer resources.

Originally Posted by Xenamnes

You would decide to murder someone for being armed in your presence?

No but I reject the notion that if everyone is armed, no one gets hurt.

Holders of concealed carry permits are not permitted to enter an establishment while armed if they post signs at their doors to inform the public that weapons are not allowed inside. Disregarding the signs is a crime.

Check the CO law. You are mistaken.

With the exception of those on property that does not permit the carrying of a concealed firearm. If someone chooses to do so it is a recognized criminal offense. Disregarding the rules and stopping a murder from taking place may result in charges being dropped in light of mitigating circumstances but the percentage of those that will abide by the signs is significant.

If I got the CCW, I'd be carrying always and everywhere. The theatre's policy is just that.

There was also a significant percentage of theater patrons that were below twenty one years of age and thus ineligible to carry in the first place.

A significant percentage above 21 as well. What of it?

Originally Posted by sinjin;459729[SIZE=4

No, if everyone's armed I'll just shoot him.[/SIZE]

All they can do is ask you to leave. You have broken no law if you have a permit. Most of CO is "shall issue".

Except for the multiple weapons, high capacity mags, body armor and tear gas.
Any law-abiding citizen in CO that wished to be armed could have been.

Except for your stated desire to kill the defenders and concealed carry holders which makes you no different from any other criminal puke punk.

Note that your example of weeding out legitimate defenders against murderous perps aids the perps bent on mayhem and defeats the very principle of self defense. Auroro Colorado is still living in the past and has draconian gun laws that were overturned in Heller and McDonald. They and you still are determined to UnConstitutionally run your agenda which keeps aiding and abetting murder. Jolly good show and making threats against law abiding citizens is a criminal offense.

Originally Posted by Xenamnes

You possess nothing but contempt for the dead and the suffering. You seek to politicize their tragedy and use it as fuel for your own agendas in a callous and disrespectful manner. You are no different or better than the member Winston Smith.

You are full of chicken XXXX because you don't know a God-damned thing about my sentiments.

Furthermore, the shooter was armored to the gills, flack jacket, throat protector, helmet, armored leggings.

Obviously, because every American's life and health is constantly in jeopardy because of the NRA and the gun industry, movie goers are going to have to wear flack jackets and helmets, etc. to see a God-damned movie.

And, Colorado is a concealed carry state and there probably were movie-goers packing who knew God-damned well they couldn't get a decent shot at the shooter.

Originally Posted by simone

Furthermore, the shooter was armored to the gills, flack jacket, throat protector, helmet, armored leggings.

Obviously, because every American's life and health is constantly in jeopardy because of the NRA and the gun industry, movie goers are going to have to wear flack jackets and helmets, etc. to see a God-damned movie.

And, Colorado is a concealed carry state and there probably were movie-goers packing who knew God-damned well they couldn't get a decent shot at the shooter.

He had a crotch protector too. Did you know him?

[QUOTE=sinjin;459736]No but I reject the notion that if everyone is armed, no one gets hurt.

Check the CO law. You are mistaken.

If I got the CCW, I'd be carrying always and everywhere. The theatre's policy is just that.

Do you mean always and everywhere except gun free zones?

A significant percentage above 21 as well. What of it?

So what was a six year old doing at a midnight showing of something like that?