Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Uproxx)   Rep. Louie Gohmert and the NRA are the early frontrunners in the "Who Can Make the Biggest Idiot of Themselves Following the Colorado Shooting" contest   (uproxx.com ) divider line 615
    More: Dumbass, Louie Gohmert  
•       •       •

9663 clicks; posted to Politics » on 20 Jul 2012 at 2:42 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



615 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-07-20 02:23:39 PM  
Stay classy, GOP.
 
2012-07-20 02:27:50 PM  
"It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

He's got a point. I mean, establishing a crossfire in a dark room filled with tear gas seems like a reasonable alternative.
 
2012-07-20 02:28:16 PM  
I'm willing to give the NRA tweeter the benefit of the doubt -- they probably had simply not heard about the event. Gohmert, on the other hand, is an utter waste of skin who by the end of this day will probably have claimed at least once that the shooting is the direct fault of the President and/or teh gheys.
 
2012-07-20 02:30:06 PM  

Quasar: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

He's got a point. I mean, establishing a crossfire in a dark room filled with tear gas seems like a reasonable alternative.


Are you suggesting it would be difficult to wound a target wearing a bullet proof vest and gas mask, wielding an assault rifle, shotgun and several pistols in the middle of a darkly lit theater while your eyes and lungs are being burned by tear gas?
 
2012-07-20 02:33:04 PM  

Codenamechaz: Quasar: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

He's got a point. I mean, establishing a crossfire in a dark room filled with tear gas seems like a reasonable alternative.

Are you suggesting it would be difficult to wound a target wearing a bullet proof vest and gas mask, wielding an assault rifle, shotgun and several pistols in the middle of a darkly lit theater while your eyes and lungs are being burned by tear gas?


I think if several heroic bystanders just started firing towards muzzle flashes, the situation would resolve itself rapidly.
 
2012-07-20 02:33:10 PM  
I am 100% sure that, given the opportunity to "clarify" his statement Gohmert will choose to double-down on retard and insist that he is being persecuted by the lamestream media.

Then the "joke" where he wishes the reporters would have been in the theater dressed like Robin for easy targeting.

Then, the obligatory "I'm sorry you got offended because you have no sense of humor" apology.

Then, the ice weasels come.
 
2012-07-20 02:33:33 PM  
"It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

The killer also had some sort of tear gas bomb.

So with all those people, nobody was carrying a gas mask? Way to be unprepared.
 
2012-07-20 02:34:25 PM  
Gohmert is competing against Mayor Bloomberg, so he has to bring out the big derp.

The bodies are still warm people, we have a long way to go.
 
2012-07-20 02:34:51 PM  

Quasar: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

He's got a point. I mean, establishing a crossfire in a dark room filled with tear gas seems like a reasonable alternative.


Looks like the NRA's website on firearm safety is oppressing Gohmert's Judeo-Christian Values, too.

"Know your target and what is beyond."
"Be absolutely sure you have identified your target beyond any doubt. Equally important, be aware of the area beyond your target. This means observing your prospective area of fire before you shoot. Never fire in a direction in which there are people or any other potential for mishap. Think first. Shoot second."
 
2012-07-20 02:34:54 PM  

Codenamechaz: Are you suggesting it would be difficult to wound a target wearing a bullet proof vest and gas mask, wielding an assault rifle, shotgun and several pistols in the middle of a darkly lit theater while your eyes and lungs are being burned by tear gas?


BYO Gasmasks, etc
 
2012-07-20 02:39:49 PM  
gohmert is human filth.
 
2012-07-20 02:43:37 PM  

Quasar: Codenamechaz: Quasar: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

He's got a point. I mean, establishing a crossfire in a dark room filled with tear gas seems like a reasonable alternative.

Are you suggesting it would be difficult to wound a target wearing a bullet proof vest and gas mask, wielding an assault rifle, shotgun and several pistols in the middle of a darkly lit theater while your eyes and lungs are being burned by tear gas?

I think if several heroic bystanders just started firing towards muzzle flashes, the situation would resolve itself rapidly.


Exactly!

There would have been a lot of collateral damage, but they would be heroes that were killed by bullets of freedom!

And as such they would have been eligible for a full military funeral! *

* Offer void where prohibited by law.
 
2012-07-20 02:43:49 PM  
The perfect representative for his constituents
 
2012-07-20 02:44:17 PM  
I dunno, this online store might be the frontrunner:

img.gawkerassets.com
 
2012-07-20 02:44:32 PM  
I dunno, Celeb Boutique is giving them a run for their money.
 
2012-07-20 02:45:55 PM  
I still regret the day I was 50 ft from Louis Gohmert and didn't take that opprotunity to punch him in the face.
 
2012-07-20 02:47:35 PM  
Don't worry, the Brady Campaign is doing some shiat as well.

They're all retards and attention whores. The sooner you realize that, the sooner you become an intelligent American.

/RIP to the victims.
 
2012-07-20 02:47:35 PM  
Waiting to hear Ms. Bachmann's take on all this nasty business.
 
2012-07-20 02:47:57 PM  

Quasar: Codenamechaz: Quasar: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

He's got a point. I mean, establishing a crossfire in a dark room filled with tear gas seems like a reasonable alternative.

Are you suggesting it would be difficult to wound a target wearing a bullet proof vest and gas mask, wielding an assault rifle, shotgun and several pistols in the middle of a darkly lit theater while your eyes and lungs are being burned by tear gas?

I think if several heroic bystanders just started firing towards muzzle flashes, the situation would resolve itself rapidly.


Yeah, and just imagine if they managed to hit a kid.. or of the police came in and mistook our 'heroic bystander' for the shooter.

A responsible gun owner will only fire their weapon if they are confident of their target and their surroundings. It's the gun owners who use their weapons as penis extensions who get stiffies at the thought of a running gun battle with an armed gunman, in dark and chaotic circumstances.
 
2012-07-20 02:48:03 PM  

Quasar: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

He's got a point. I mean, establishing a crossfire in a dark room filled with tear gas seems like a reasonable alternative.


I bet there actually were some CCW people there. I know if I was there I would have been carrying. I also know that if I was there, unless I was in a VERY close proximity to the shooter under reasonable conditions to engage, or could have positioned my self in such a way, I would not have been stupid enough to even try it - for just the reasons you mention.

/There probably were CCW holders there. Likely just smart ones.
 
2012-07-20 02:48:59 PM  

spcMike: I still regret the day I was 50 ft from Louis Gohmert and didn't take that opprotunity to punch him in the face.


What the heck? How long are your arms?
 
2012-07-20 02:49:06 PM  

luckcat: I dunno, this online store might be the frontrunner:

[img.gawkerassets.com image 640x360]


ChancesAre910: I dunno, Celeb Boutique is giving them a run for their money.


Occam's razor, they probably just saw the word trending and didn't do any research. That said, ick.
 
2012-07-20 02:49:27 PM  
TFA:
"I don't know about you, but I don't want to live in a country where I need to be packing in self-defense when I go to the movies."

From the looks of it, you already do.
 
2012-07-20 02:49:36 PM  

Close2TheEdge: Waiting to hear Ms. Bachmann's take on all this nasty business.


It was a Gay Muslim terror attack. Duh.
 
2012-07-20 02:49:57 PM  
In this post 9/11 society we'll be given armed movie marshals. Maybe movie metal detectors? The usual 90 min to 2hour experience could be extended to 4 hours when the movie is all said and done.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-07-20 02:51:00 PM  

Codenamechaz: Quasar: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

He's got a point. I mean, establishing a crossfire in a dark room filled with tear gas seems like a reasonable alternative.

Are you suggesting it would be difficult to wound a target wearing a bullet proof vest and gas mask, wielding an assault rifle, shotgun and several pistols in the middle of a darkly lit theater while your eyes and lungs are being burned by tear gas?


Yes, but the panicked people running between you and the target will stop some of the return fire and give you more time to spot the muzzle flashes, so it sort of cancels out.
 
2012-07-20 02:51:35 PM  

The Silver Mullet: spcMike: I still regret the day I was 50 ft from Louis Gohmert and didn't take that opprotunity to punch him in the face.

What the heck? How long are your arms?


Obviously at least 51 feet.
 
2012-07-20 02:52:05 PM  
I thought this was already won by the news organizations that reported that he was a member of the Tea Party.

Not realizing that there are more than one person named John Holmes in the world.
 
2012-07-20 02:52:14 PM  
Of course it's the victims' fault. If everyone just had a gun, body armor, gas mask, hand-to-hand combat training, guard dogs, body guards, knives, grenades, and a bible, none of this would have happened.

Only Mr. Gohmert has the b@lls to step up and speak this truth.
 
2012-07-20 02:52:34 PM  
I dunno, the original Fark thread on the shooting had some pretty good ITGs and "I carry a large weapon in a holster to make up for the tiny one in my pants" folks.
 
2012-07-20 02:52:42 PM  
Why is everyone piling on Louie Gohmert? What's with the Gohmert pile...?
 
2012-07-20 02:52:53 PM  
If only Gohmert had been in the theater and he could've heroically unloaded on this guy and taken bullets for the children who were hurt, like he expects everyone else to when he isn't involved.
 
2012-07-20 02:53:05 PM  

vernonFL: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

The killer also had some sort of tear gas bomb.

So with all those people, nobody was carrying a gas mask? Way to be unprepared.


Normally I carry IR goggles too when I go to the movies. It's easier to find my seat again if I have to take a piss.
 
2012-07-20 02:53:50 PM  

luckcat: I dunno, this online store might be the frontrunner:

[img.gawkerassets.com image 640x360]


Will Kim Kardashian stop at nothing?
 
2012-07-20 02:54:02 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: I thought this was already won by the news organizations that reported that he was a member of the Tea Party.

Not realizing that there are more than one person named John Holmes in the world.


Time for Brian Ross to Find a New Job
 
2012-07-20 02:54:30 PM  

I Browse: What's with the Gohmert pile...?


... ouch ...
 
2012-07-20 02:54:40 PM  

Petit_Merdeux: Quasar: Codenamechaz: Quasar: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

He's got a point. I mean, establishing a crossfire in a dark room filled with tear gas seems like a reasonable alternative.

Are you suggesting it would be difficult to wound a target wearing a bullet proof vest and gas mask, wielding an assault rifle, shotgun and several pistols in the middle of a darkly lit theater while your eyes and lungs are being burned by tear gas?

I think if several heroic bystanders just started firing towards muzzle flashes, the situation would resolve itself rapidly.

Exactly!

There would have been a lot of collateral damage, but they would be heroes that were killed by bullets of freedom!

And as such they would have been eligible for a full military funeral! *

* Offer void where prohibited by law.


Freedom bullets never miss their intended target. They are blessed with Judeo-Christian Freedom
 
2012-07-20 02:54:47 PM  
Time to repeal the Second amendment. Hunters, either learn to use a bow and arrow, or go fishing instead. Last I heard its not possible to have a fully-automatic assault fish rod, unless I just got done FARKING a chick with a yeast infection.
 
2012-07-20 02:55:07 PM  
I think ABC is already ahead in that they've already linked the suspect to the Tea Party.
 
2012-07-20 02:55:07 PM  
If someone was carrying a 20 gallon gas can and a match he could have stopped the shooter.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-07-20 02:55:15 PM  

CliChe Guevara: Quasar: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

He's got a point. I mean, establishing a crossfire in a dark room filled with tear gas seems like a reasonable alternative.

I bet there actually were some CCW people there. I know if I was there I would have been carrying. I also know that if I was there, unless I was in a VERY close proximity to the shooter under reasonable conditions to engage, or could have positioned my self in such a way, I would not have been stupid enough to even try it - for just the reasons you mention.

/There probably were CCW holders there. Likely just smart ones.


There could have been. But the people who are suggesting that someone should have been shooting back are crazy.
 
2012-07-20 02:55:34 PM  
I don't need to bother reading. If it's a "Biggest Idiot" contest, Gohmert wins.
 
2012-07-20 02:55:49 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Not realizing that there are more than one person named John Holmes in the world.


encrypted-tbn0.google.com
 
2012-07-20 02:56:02 PM  
Abc news already said he was a tea party member. I nominate them.
 
2012-07-20 02:56:05 PM  
Don't you dare use this tragedy to bad mouth assault weapons of peace!
 
2012-07-20 02:56:07 PM  
If only someone would have stood their ground.
 
2012-07-20 02:56:07 PM  

Quasar: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

He's got a point. I mean, establishing a crossfire in a dark room filled with tear gas seems like a reasonable alternative.


I love you.
 
2012-07-20 02:56:12 PM  

Quasar: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

He's got a point. I mean, establishing a crossfire in a dark room filled with tear gas seems like a reasonable alternative.


Well, since everyone would be running towards the isles and away from the shooter, You would have a pretty clear shot on him(The chance of hitting someone else would be less). And maybe this draws fire away from the people running away. So maybe less die.

Put it this way - He got to execute his plan. Nobody slowed him up, and he left the theater of his own accord, and the police got him outside. Anything anyone could have done to slow up his plan might have saved lives.
 
2012-07-20 02:56:26 PM  

sillydragon: I dunno, the original Fark thread on the shooting had some pretty good ITGs and "I carry a large weapon in a holster to make up for the tiny one in my pants" folks.


Not all CCW people are ITG's. I often carry a compact but efficient weapon in a holster to protect the compact but efficient one in my pants. Not all gun owners are nutters, we roll our eyes at those guys too.
 
2012-07-20 02:56:29 PM  
I also don't think self-defense firearms would fit into this situation very well. Personal firearms are more appropriate for situations where you aren't ambushed in the dark with gas-grenades and disoriented crowds.

That being said, I don't want to get a pat-down or rapiscan when going to see a movie.

Looking forward to the analysis of this guy's motives. Maybe we can get some kind of homicide hotline to help them through their troubles.
 
2012-07-20 02:56:36 PM  
The NRA tweet seems like an honest mistake. I don't love their organization, but even I know they're not so callous. Louie Gohmert, on the other hand is another vapid, conservative flapping head.
 
2012-07-20 02:56:39 PM  
Over under on number of days until the NRA decides to hold a gun show in the city? 2 weeks?
 
2012-07-20 02:56:39 PM  

CujoQuarrel: I think ABC is already ahead in that they've already linked the suspect to the Tea Party.


O ho? Any links?
 
2012-07-20 02:57:10 PM  

Publikwerks: Quasar: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

He's got a point. I mean, establishing a crossfire in a dark room filled with tear gas seems like a reasonable alternative.

Well, since everyone would be running towards the isles and away from the shooter, You would have a pretty clear shot on him(The chance of hitting someone else would be less). And maybe this draws fire away from the people running away. So maybe less die.

Put it this way - He got to execute his plan. Nobody slowed him up, and he left the theater of his own accord, and the police got him outside. Anything anyone could have done to slow up his plan might have saved lives.


Yeah, and if my Aunt had a dick she'd be my Uncle.
 
2012-07-20 02:57:51 PM  

LasersHurt: luckcat: I dunno, this online store might be the frontrunner:

[img.gawkerassets.com image 640x360]

ChancesAre910: I dunno, Celeb Boutique is giving them a run for their money.

Occam's razor, they probably just saw the word trending and didn't do any research. That said, ick.


Happens a lot. A pastry company joined in that they were #notguilty of too much cake or something after the Casey Anthony verdict

But you got why you pay for with your "social media specialists."
 
2012-07-20 02:57:54 PM  

MyRandomName: Abc news already said he was a tea party member. I nominate them.


Given that he's from North San Diego County, it's a strong possibility.

/Just sayin'
 
2012-07-20 02:57:55 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: I thought this was already won by the news organizations that reported that he was a member of the Tea Party.

Not realizing that there are more than one person named John Holmes in the world.


Freudian slip?
 
2012-07-20 02:58:01 PM  
Gohmert always has been and always will be a retard, but the NRA tweet was clearly innocent. There will be plenty of stupid responses to get worked up about. Stop trying to manufacture outrage.
 
2012-07-20 02:58:07 PM  

Quasar: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

He's got a point. I mean, establishing a crossfire in a dark room filled with tear gas seems like a reasonable alternative.


From those I know, concealers are the first to hit the door running.
 
2012-07-20 02:58:16 PM  

qorkfiend: CujoQuarrel: I think ABC is already ahead in that they've already linked the suspect to the Tea Party.

O ho? Any links?


Just google it. The rightwing blogodrome is all over it.

I got a plethora of links with "abc aurora shooting tea party".
 
2012-07-20 02:58:21 PM  

MyRandomName: Abc news already said he was a tea party member. I nominate them.


Good thing the FBI is firmly focused on setting up fundie muslim tards and OWS hippies.
 
2012-07-20 02:58:42 PM  

spcMike: I still regret the day I was 50 ft from Louis Gohmert and didn't take that opprotunity to punch him in the face.


wow,you have long arms and you are exactly what is wrong with country - always wanting to resort to violence.
if you didn't learn from Giffords, at least you can learn from this.
 
2012-07-20 02:58:46 PM  
UpRoxx passing judgement. That's choice. Most of the time their articles of full of liberal bull shiat
 
2012-07-20 02:59:02 PM  

qorkfiend: O ho? Any links?


Link
 
2012-07-20 02:59:11 PM  

MyRandomName: Abc news already said he was a tea party member. I nominate them.


That is bad but blaming the victims is at least two times as dickish.
 
2012-07-20 03:00:06 PM  
Gohmert -h -t = Gomer.
 
2012-07-20 03:00:19 PM  

LeroyBourne: In this post 9/11 society we'll be given armed movie marshals.


Job creation!
 
2012-07-20 03:00:38 PM  

dahmers love zombie: I'm willing to give the NRA tweeter the benefit of the doubt -- they probably had simply not heard about the event. Gohmert, on the other hand, is an utter waste of skin who by the end of this day will probably have claimed at least once that the shooting is the direct fault of the President and/or teh gheys.


This right here.
 
2012-07-20 03:00:38 PM  

Buffalo77: UpRoxx passing judgement. That's choice. Most of the time their articles of full of liberal bull shiat


static.guim.co.uk
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-07-20 03:00:55 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: I thought this was already won by the news organizations that reported that he was a member of the Tea Party.

Not realizing that there are more than one person named John Holmes in the world.


He may be. This is certainly the sort of thing the TPers love to talk about doing. On the other hand, he was a graduate student in neuroscience so probably not Tea Party material.
 
2012-07-20 03:01:31 PM  

GWSuperfan: MyRandomName: Abc news already said he was a tea party member. I nominate them.

Given that he's from North San Diego County, it's a strong possibility.

/Just sayin'


I thought tea party members were old people in hoverounds on Medicare.

They didn't learn after jared loughner it seems.
 
2012-07-20 03:02:06 PM  

Publikwerks: Anything anyone could have done to slow up his plan might have saved lives.


Yeah, and it might have cost more of them too. Mights don't do any good when that isn't what happened. If armed police had been outside every emergency entrance to every theater in the country, that might have saved lives, but if Gohmer was suggesting that people would call that stupid too.
 
2012-07-20 03:02:26 PM  
So if 10 people in that theatre had guns, and 5 of them opened up on the "bad guy" gunman, none of them would have any idea who was a "friendly" and who was a "bad guy". Now you have 11 people all shooting at each other. In that scenario, the only person any of the 10 friendlies can count on not to be a bad guy is themselves.
 
2012-07-20 03:02:47 PM  
Thank you doctors.
 
2012-07-20 03:02:58 PM  

God Is My Co-Pirate: luckcat: I dunno, this online store might be the frontrunner:

[img.gawkerassets.com image 640x360]

Will Kim Kardashian stop at nothing?


She will be remembered as history's greatest monster.

I'm only half kidding.
 
2012-07-20 03:03:34 PM  
Incorrect submittard. The biggest idiots are ABC's Stephanopoulos and Ross for suggesting Tea Party link. Oops. Leftists are so dumb.
 
2012-07-20 03:03:40 PM  

Fart_Machine: vernonFL: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

The killer also had some sort of tear gas bomb.

So with all those people, nobody was carrying a gas mask? Way to be unprepared.

Normally I carry IR goggles too when I go to the movies. It's easier to find my seat again if I have to take a piss.


If you don't have a Smartlink system, you're not a real American.
 
2012-07-20 03:04:53 PM  
Yet ABC waited a whole 5 min on GMA this morning to mention how easy it is to obtain a weapon in CO. Oh, how they TRIED to after Columbine, but it wasn't "enough".

Don't kid yourselves, the damn bodies weren't even out of the theatre when the media was brewing a 2nd Ammendment issue from this. No gun tragedy will go unused in these times.

/concealer
//ALWAYS retreat, unless you absolutely can't
 
2012-07-20 03:05:07 PM  

luckcat: God Is My Co-Pirate: luckcat: I dunno, this online store might be the frontrunner:

[img.gawkerassets.com image 640x360]

Will Kim Kardashian stop at nothing?

She will be remembered as history's greatest monster.

I'm only half kidding.


Isn't one her sister more monsterish?
 
2012-07-20 03:05:15 PM  
Wow. That got pulled from the Main Page pretty quick. Half and hour of daylight and then gone.
 
2012-07-20 03:05:45 PM  

MyRandomName: I thought tea party members were old people in hoverounds on Medicare.


There are always exceptions....

i599.photobucket.com
 
2012-07-20 03:05:51 PM  

Electromax: Publikwerks: Anything anyone could have done to slow up his plan might have saved lives.

Yeah, and it might have cost more of them too. Mights don't do any good when that isn't what happened. If armed police had been outside every emergency entrance to every theater in the country, that might have saved lives, but if Gohmer was suggesting that people would call that stupid too.


Fair enough. He's an idiot for saying it because now is not the time to make political hay.
 
2012-07-20 03:06:06 PM  
Jesus H. Pennypacking CHRIST, Louie Gohmert is an embarrassment to Texas, to Congress, and to the human race.

DIAF you idiotic piece of shiat.
 
2012-07-20 03:06:23 PM  
Cymbal
Time to repeal the Second amendment. Hunters, either learn to use a bow and arrow, or go fishing instead. Last I heard its not possible to have a fully-automatic assault fish rod, unless I just got done FARKING a chick with a yeast infection.

I agree. When things become illegal no one has access to buy them and use them anymore. I have never seen drugs in my life because of the war on drugs. Thankfully everybody is honest and follows laws.
 
2012-07-20 03:06:28 PM  

We are incredibly sorry for our tweet about Aurora - Our PR is NOT US based and had not checked the reason for the trend, at that time our

- Celeb Boutique (@celebboutique) July 20, 2012

social media was totally UNAWARE of the situation and simply thought it was another trending topic - we have removed the very insensitive

- Celeb Boutique (@celebboutique) July 20, 2012

tweet and will of course take more care in future to look into what we say in our tweets. Again we do apologise for any offense caused

- Celeb Boutique (@celebboutique) July 20, 2012

this was not intentional & will not occur again. Our most sincere apologies for both the tweet and situation. - CB

- Celeb Boutique (@celebboutique) July 20, 2012
 
2012-07-20 03:06:29 PM  
Everyone relax. He was just saying that this fine American patriot was applying a second amendment solution to the exorbitant price of theater refreshments.
 
2012-07-20 03:06:55 PM  
If you don't leave your house clad in kevlar and heavily armed, you pretty much deserve to be killed.

This message brought to you by The NRA and their purchased politicians.
 
2012-07-20 03:07:03 PM  

justinsmith354: Don't kid yourselves, the damn bodies weren't even out of the theatre when the media was brewing a 2nd Ammendment issue from this. No gun tragedy will go unused in these times.


Hopefully we can use this tragedy to ban barrel shrouds and bayonet mounts.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-07-20 03:07:14 PM  

Publikwerks: Quasar: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

He's got a point. I mean, establishing a crossfire in a dark room filled with tear gas seems like a reasonable alternative.

Well, since everyone would be running towards the isles and away from the shooter, You would have a pretty clear shot on him(The chance of hitting someone else would be less). And maybe this draws fire away from the people running away. So maybe less die.

Put it this way - He got to execute his plan. Nobody slowed him up, and he left the theater of his own accord, and the police got him outside. Anything anyone could have done to slow up his plan might have saved lives.


Yes, and somehow none of them would have to cross in front of you to get to the isle, and no one would panick and run in the wrong direction

CliChe Guevara: sillydragon: I dunno, the original Fark thread on the shooting had some pretty good ITGs and "I carry a large weapon in a holster to make up for the tiny one in my pants" folks.

Not all CCW people are ITG's. I often carry a compact but efficient weapon in a holster to protect the compact but efficient one in my pants. Not all gun owners are nutters, we roll our eyes at those guys too.


No, but there seem to be quite a few who think using a gun in real life is just like the movies.
 
2012-07-20 03:07:32 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: We are incredibly sorry for our tweet about Aurora - Our PR is NOT US based and had not checked the reason for the trend, at that time our- Celeb Boutique (@celebboutique) July 20, 2012

social media was totally UNAWARE of the situation and simply thought it was another trending topic - we have removed the very insensitive- Celeb Boutique (@celebboutique) July 20, 2012

tweet and will of course take more care in future to look into what we say in our tweets. Again we do apologise for any offense caused- Celeb Boutique (@celebboutique) July 20, 2012

this was not intentional & will not occur again. Our most sincere apologies for both the tweet and situation. - CB- Celeb Boutique (@celebboutique) July 20, 2012


Live by the twitiverse, die by the twitiverse.
 
2012-07-20 03:07:49 PM  

justinsmith354: Yet ABC waited a whole 5 min on GMA this morning to mention how easy it is to obtain a weapon in CO. Oh, how they TRIED to after Columbine, but it wasn't "enough".

Don't kid yourselves, the damn bodies weren't even out of the theatre when the media was brewing a 2nd Ammendment issue from this. No gun tragedy will go unused in these times.

/concealer
//ALWAYS retreat, unless you absolutely can't


A mass shooting by a civilian in a public place will always trigger a gun control discussion. Why should we, as a society, shrug and say "That's too bad, but we can't talk about gun control and the 2nd amendment" when we hear about something like this?
 
2012-07-20 03:08:34 PM  
Dammit, if they check me and my gf for weapons they'll find the bottle of wine we smuggled in. They'll think it's a molotov cocktail, and we'll both be tazed to death.
 
2012-07-20 03:08:59 PM  

justinsmith354: Don't kid yourselves, the damn bodies weren't even out of the theatre when the media was brewing a 2nd Ammendment issue from this.


American gun massacres are a 2nd amendment issue, whether you like it or not.
 
2012-07-20 03:09:08 PM  

vpb: No, but there seem to be quite a few who think using a gun in real life is just like the movies.


BIATCH I PLAY 10 HOURS OF CALL OF DUTY A DAY YOU CAN SEE WHO THE BAD GUYS ARE THEY HVE RED NAMES AND U LOOK AT A MINIMAP
 
2012-07-20 03:09:29 PM  

Publikwerks: Quasar: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

He's got a point. I mean, establishing a crossfire in a dark room filled with tear gas seems like a reasonable alternative.

Well, since everyone would be running towards the isles and away from the shooter, You would have a pretty clear shot on him(The chance of hitting someone else would be less). And maybe this draws fire away from the people running away. So maybe less die.

Put it this way - He got to execute his plan. Nobody slowed him up, and he left the theater of his own accord, and the police got him outside. Anything anyone could have done to slow up his plan might have saved lives.


Those people could easily be running in your direction, or across your line of fire. You would end up shooting at muzzle flashes in a dark room filled with running people, and with tear gas in your eyes. You are just as likely to do his work for the attacker as you are to stop him. And the next person to pull his firearm now has two muzzle flashes to target, with no way to know for sure who is the villain.

If there was any way to stop that guy it was going to be hand-hand; your pistol is just going to get someone else killed.
 
2012-07-20 03:10:33 PM  

qorkfiend: A mass shooting by a civilian in a public place will always trigger a gun control discussion. Why should we, as a society, shrug and say "That's too bad, but we can't talk about gun control and the 2nd amendment" when we hear about something like this?


Eh, the problem tends to be that the second amendment discussions that emerge generally have absolutely farkall to do with what actually happened.
 
2012-07-20 03:11:05 PM  

doyner: He was just saying that this fine American patriot was applying a second amendment solution to the exorbitant price of theater refreshments.


oh well, now that's something worth fighting for... wtf 8 dollar soda????
 
2012-07-20 03:11:25 PM  

ChancesAre910: I dunno, Celeb Boutique is giving them a run for their money.


Well at least they followed it up


with a four tweet apology


because as completely stupid and moronic as twitter is


it can always be made more so
 
2012-07-20 03:11:40 PM  
Wait. Louie, what are you saying....? Is Gohmert alleging that there WAS a cc permit person there and they were just too pussy to do something about it?
 
2012-07-20 03:11:59 PM  

vernonFL: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"
The killer also had some sort of tear gas bomb.
So with all those people, nobody was carrying a gas mask? Way to be unprepared.


I only go to the movies fully prepared, like you all should. The world is a treacherous place.

t3.gstatic.com
 
2012-07-20 03:12:04 PM  

spcMike: I still regret the day I was 50 ft from Louis Gohmert and didn't take that opprotunity to punch him in the face.


You have a really long arm?
 
2012-07-20 03:12:29 PM  

qorkfiend: A mass shooting by a civilian in a public place will always trigger a gun control discussion. Why should we, as a society, shrug and say "That's too bad, but we can't talk about gun control and the 2nd amendment" when we hear about something like this?


We aren't shocked anymore when children are killed. It's become a normal part of American life. The taboo has shifted from horror at the shootings to horror at talking about shooting. This is called "politicizing tragedy" as if these mass murders are an act of nature rather than an act of human evil or madness (or both) enabled by easy access to the tools of mass murder.

But let's not go there. We will mourn the casualties the way we mourn the deaths of those in hurricanes and tornadoes. Gun violence is now a "natural" event in America, as unpredictable as the weather, and there's nothing we can do about it except gather together in the aftermath to help the victims. Indeed, the only enduring threat these events foretell is from those who would question a culture that deifies the gun as if it were a religious symbol rather than a lethal weapon. Link
 
2012-07-20 03:12:33 PM  

TFerWannaBe: If there was any way to stop that guy it was going to be hand-hand; your pistol is just going to get someone else killed.


Always carry a machete.
 
2012-07-20 03:12:50 PM  
Because it's just like abortion...it isn't going anywhere. There isn't a real threat to either regardless of what people think they want.

People shoot other people every day of the week. Babies are aborted every day of the week. Why can't we just talk about the tragedy of the human condition?
 
2012-07-20 03:12:54 PM  
The NRA tweet is nothing. Guy just rolls out of bed and tweets a friendly tweet. That Rep though? What a D-bag.
 
2012-07-20 03:13:21 PM  

vernonFL: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

The killer also had some sort of tear gas bomb.

So with all those people, nobody was carrying a gas mask? Way to be unprepared.


If the theater served taco bell burritos, I'd brought a gas mask just in case.
 
2012-07-20 03:13:43 PM  
Welcome to America, where we politicize everything. Even the senseless(operative word here) of a dozen people and the injuring of many others.

Embarassing.
 
2012-07-20 03:14:05 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: spcMike: I still regret the day I was 50 ft from Louis Gohmert and didn't take that opprotunity to punch him in the face.

wow,you have long arms and you are exactly what is wrong with country - always wanting to resort to violence.
if you didn't learn from Giffords, at least you can learn from this.


That was truly a tragic day when Rep. Giffords, Judge Roll, and those other people were punched in the face.
 
2012-07-20 03:14:45 PM  

Cymbal: Time to repeal the Second amendment. Hunters, either learn to use a bow and arrow, or go fishing instead. Last I heard its not possible to have a fully-automatic assault fish rod, unless I just got done FARKING a chick with a yeast infection.


*Yawn* Normal knee-jerk reaction. Today alone 10 times or more will be killed by cars. So I suppose it is time to pass a law making it so only mode of transportation is walking. Wait, people die from walking too. So the only mode of transportation is.... crawling?

Idiots are still idiots.
 
2012-07-20 03:15:10 PM  
Uuuuuggghhhhhhh.
 
2012-07-20 03:15:14 PM  

sprawl15: TFerWannaBe: If there was any way to stop that guy it was going to be hand-hand; your pistol is just going to get someone else killed.

Always carry a machete.


My standard movie going coat. It gets cold in those theaters.

static.guim.co.uk
 
2012-07-20 03:15:33 PM  

justinsmith354: Because it's just like abortion...it isn't going anywhere. There isn't a real threat to either regardless of what people think they want.

People shoot other people every day of the week. Babies are aborted every day of the week. Why can't we just talk about the tragedy of the human condition?


There's new restrictions on women's health care every week now. That one's not a Phantom Menace.
 
2012-07-20 03:16:24 PM  
Why didn't anyone else have a gun at the theater? Because lord knows that the best solution to a guy lobbing smoke grenades and tear canisters and then firing guns into a chaotic crowd is TWO people firing in that same crowd!
 
2012-07-20 03:16:29 PM  

Petit_Merdeux: Quasar: Codenamechaz: Quasar: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

He's got a point. I mean, establishing a crossfire in a dark room filled with tear gas seems like a reasonable alternative.

Are you suggesting it would be difficult to wound a target wearing a bullet proof vest and gas mask, wielding an assault rifle, shotgun and several pistols in the middle of a darkly lit theater while your eyes and lungs are being burned by tear gas?

I think if several heroic bystanders just started firing towards muzzle flashes, the situation would resolve itself rapidly.

Exactly!

There would have been a lot of collateral damage, but they would be heroes that were killed by bullets of freedom!

And as such they would have been eligible for a full military funeral! *

* Offer void where prohibited by law.


Except we wouldn't know whether those shot and killed while holding a gun were the killers or the, uh, killers' killers. Other than the guy with the bullet-proof vest and gas mask, if there were twenty other people dead and ten had guns, were those armed also part of the killing group, or noble defenders? They probably would have shot themselves trying to get the gun out of the holster in the dark.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-07-20 03:17:38 PM  

xrayspx: So if 10 people in that theatre had guns, and 5 of them opened up on the "bad guy" gunman, none of them would have any idea who was a "friendly" and who was a "bad guy". Now you have 11 people all shooting at each other. In that scenario, the only person any of the 10 friendlies can count on not to be a bad guy is themselves.


All they would have to do is start shooting at muzzle flashes.

Besides, the bystanders will all run from the shooter so just shoot at the ones that are coming right you.
 
2012-07-20 03:18:02 PM  

Kazrath: Cymbal: Time to repeal the Second amendment. Hunters, either learn to use a bow and arrow, or go fishing instead. Last I heard its not possible to have a fully-automatic assault fish rod, unless I just got done FARKING a chick with a yeast infection.

*Yawn* Normal knee-jerk reaction. Today alone 10 times or more will be killed by cars. So I suppose it is time to pass a law making it so only mode of transportation is walking. Wait, people die from walking too. So the only mode of transportation is.... crawling?

Idiots are still idiots.


Are you seriously trying to draw an equivalence between automobile accidents and a planned massacre?
 
2012-07-20 03:18:30 PM  

qorkfiend: CujoQuarrel: I think ABC is already ahead in that they've already linked the suspect to the Tea Party.

O ho? Any links?


They jumped the gun on no info as usual.
 
2012-07-20 03:18:40 PM  
There's lots of candidates for "biggest idiot" here.

- ABC for the Tea Party thing
- The various rightist elements who, in their turn, are trying to connect it to Occupy
- CelebBoutique
- Louie Gohmert
- Anyone trying to make political hay out of this in any way

But we've only had a couple hours for the stupid to get rolling, so the pickings are slim. Let's see how it looks this afternoon.
 
2012-07-20 03:18:58 PM  
I'm surprised that Gohmert found time to comment on this, as he appears to be quite busy with his Muslim witch-hunt.
 
2012-07-20 03:19:10 PM  

Fart_Machine: vernonFL: Normally I carry IR goggles too when I go to the movies. It's easier to find my seat again if I have to take a piss.


Meh. It's a lot easier to just piss on the back of the seat in front of me. IR goggles are too bulky and uncomfortable.
 
2012-07-20 03:19:51 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: qorkfiend: A mass shooting by a civilian in a public place will always trigger a gun control discussion. Why should we, as a society, shrug and say "That's too bad, but we can't talk about gun control and the 2nd amendment" when we hear about something like this?

We aren't shocked anymore when children are killed. It's become a normal part of American life. The taboo has shifted from horror at the shootings to horror at talking about shooting. This is called "politicizing tragedy" as if these mass murders are an act of nature rather than an act of human evil or madness (or both) enabled by easy access to the tools of mass murder.

But let's not go there. We will mourn the casualties the way we mourn the deaths of those in hurricanes and tornadoes. Gun violence is now a "natural" event in America, as unpredictable as the weather, and there's nothing we can do about it except gather together in the aftermath to help the victims. Indeed, the only enduring threat these events foretell is from those who would question a culture that deifies the gun as if it were a religious symbol rather than a lethal weapon. Link


Kind of what I've been saying...massacres are a small price to pay for the NRA and their ilk. Any bit of reality that challenges their "guns make us safer" narrative needs to be attacked, spun, and purged quickly. As long as their simple, craven defenses of their gun fetish can't be challenged, they're free to keep plying in this rather lucrative trade.

There is going to be blow back, people are only going to take this for so long. No amount of propaganda and graft can keep a lid on this shiat forever.
 
2012-07-20 03:19:58 PM  

spcMike: I still regret the day I was 50 ft from Louis Gohmert and didn't take that opprotunity to punch him in the face.


You must have really long arms
 
2012-07-20 03:20:16 PM  

Quasar: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

He's got a point. I mean, establishing a crossfire in a dark room filled with tear gas seems like a reasonable alternative.


Lets assume for a moment that the NRA's wet dream has come true, and, say 20% of the people in the theatre had concealed weapons. When the assailant starts shooting in the dark, and someone close to him pulls out a gun and tries to fire back, how are the people farther away supposed to tell the assailant from the other theatre goers? What's to stop the situation from escalating into a giant shootout?
 
2012-07-20 03:20:20 PM  
This shooting is as much about our stunning lack of mental health services in this country as it is about the fact that no citizen in this country should be allowed to carry an assault rifle. Seriously, the founders wrote that Amendment when the musket was the cutting edge of firearms. THE MUSKET.

Anyway, you look at a state like Arizona, where Loughner wouldn't have had many mental health options even if his family had been more proactive about getting help for him precisely because Governor Satan Brewer has a mentally ill son that has committed violent acts and yet STILL saw fit to drastically cut all mental health funding for the state. That's sadly the norm. I don't know what Colorado's mental health services are like, but I wouldn't be surprised if they were as bare-bones as the ones in AZ. State governments never learn - the investment in these services promotes individual health and public safety.
 
2012-07-20 03:20:21 PM  

ordinarysteve: I'm surprised that Gohmert found time to comment on this, as he appears to be quite busy with his Muslim witch-hunt.


Clearly the shooter is tied to the Muslim Brotherhood.
 
2012-07-20 03:20:53 PM  

qorkfiend: Kazrath: Cymbal: Time to repeal the Second amendment. Hunters, either learn to use a bow and arrow, or go fishing instead. Last I heard its not possible to have a fully-automatic assault fish rod, unless I just got done FARKING a chick with a yeast infection.

*Yawn* Normal knee-jerk reaction. Today alone 10 times or more will be killed by cars. So I suppose it is time to pass a law making it so only mode of transportation is walking. Wait, people die from walking too. So the only mode of transportation is.... crawling?

Idiots are still idiots.

Are you seriously trying to draw an equivalence between automobile accidents and a planned massacre?


It's a lot easier to prevent automobile accidents
 
2012-07-20 03:21:32 PM  

BarkingUnicorn: You have a really long arm?


GODDAMMITSOMUCH

*** shakes tiny fist at BarkingUnicorn ****
 
2012-07-20 03:21:35 PM  
This is 'Murika. We learn no lessons here. We just take away what we want from tragic events, and use it to reinforce our preconceived notions!!!
 
2012-07-20 03:21:36 PM  

CujoQuarrel: qorkfiend: CujoQuarrel: I think ABC is already ahead in that they've already linked the suspect to the Tea Party.

O ho? Any links?

They jumped the gun on no info as usual.


It appears they used the same mechanism as Florida's voter purges; they saw a guy on a Tea Party website with a similar name. No, really.
 
2012-07-20 03:21:47 PM  

qorkfiend: justinsmith354: Yet ABC waited a whole 5 min on GMA this morning to mention how easy it is to obtain a weapon in CO. Oh, how they TRIED to after Columbine, but it wasn't "enough".

Don't kid yourselves, the damn bodies weren't even out of the theatre when the media was brewing a 2nd Ammendment issue from this. No gun tragedy will go unused in these times.

/concealer
//ALWAYS retreat, unless you absolutely can't

A mass shooting by a civilian in a public place will always trigger a gun control discussion. Why should we, as a society, shrug and say "That's too bad, but we can't talk about gun control and the 2nd amendment" when we hear about something like this?


Because we, as a society, are literally incapable of talking about guns without it becoming a totally off-topic screaming match between "no one should have any guns ever" and "no they b takin' mah gunz."
 
2012-07-20 03:22:06 PM  
Given the past threads on Loughner, The Toulouse Shooter, and Zimmerman, when James Holmes' political affiliation is firmly established is going to EPIC!

/invest in popcorn futures
 
2012-07-20 03:22:29 PM  
Gohmert is certainly a contender for stupidest human alive.
 
2012-07-20 03:22:45 PM  

beta_plus: Given the past threads on Loughner, The Toulouse Shooter, and Zimmerman, when James Holmes' political affiliation is firmly established is going to EPIC!

/invest in popcorn futures


Funny how you left out Breivik.
 
2012-07-20 03:23:05 PM  

Smelly McUgly: This shooting is as much about our stunning lack of mental health services in this country


especially for our veterans, don't know if this guy was a veteran...
 
2012-07-20 03:23:07 PM  

spcMike: I still regret the day I was 50 ft from Louis Gohmert and didn't take that opprotunity to punch him in the face.


Has anyone yet mentioned that your arms must be larger than the average person?
 
2012-07-20 03:23:08 PM  

Vegetable Medley: ordinarysteve: I'm surprised that Gohmert found time to comment on this, as he appears to be quite busy with his Muslim witch-hunt.

Clearly the shooter is tied to the Muslim Brotherhood.


Their current talking point is that he was the leader of OWS. They have no citations or sources for it but that doesn't matter. People will be repeating that talking point in 6 months or so regardless.
 
2012-07-20 03:23:29 PM  

justinsmith354: Because it's just like abortion...it isn't going anywhere. There isn't a real threat to either regardless of what people think they want.

People shoot other people every day of the week. Babies are aborted every day of the week. Why can't we just talk about the tragedy of the human condition?


Because that's masturbation.

Guns and abortion are things that can actually be addressed.
 
2012-07-20 03:23:52 PM  

qorkfiend: It appears they used the same mechanism as Florida's voter purges; they saw a guy on a Tea Party website with a similar name. No, really.


Actually, I think they did base it on another guy with the same name in Colorado.

Stupid as hell, still, but I believe that's what happened.
 
2012-07-20 03:23:53 PM  
Alright, so: the NRA and Celeboutique have posted their "Ooops. Our bad." apologies. Is Gohmert now alone in the lead?
 
2012-07-20 03:24:45 PM  

sprawl15: spcMike: I still regret the day I was 50 ft from Louis Gohmert and didn't take that opprotunity to punch him in the face.

Has anyone yet mentioned that your arms must be larger than the average person?


The odd thing is there hasn't been a single reference to a stretchy comic book hero yet.
 
2012-07-20 03:24:54 PM  
We need conceal carry for AR-15s.
 
2012-07-20 03:24:59 PM  

busy chillin': Cymbal
Time to repeal the Second amendment. Hunters, either learn to use a bow and arrow, or go fishing instead. Last I heard its not possible to have a fully-automatic assault fish rod, unless I just got done FARKING a chick with a yeast infection.

I agree. When things become illegal no one has access to buy them and use them anymore. I have never seen drugs in my life because of the war on drugs. Thankfully everybody is honest and follows laws.


A lot easier to conceal/hide drugs as well as destroy evidence of their use. And there already is a black market for guns. It doesn't have to be criminal charges. They could pay a fine, and we could use the money to fund more outreach programs that advocate the importance of mental health.
 
2012-07-20 03:25:18 PM  

LasersHurt: sprawl15: spcMike: I still regret the day I was 50 ft from Louis Gohmert and didn't take that opprotunity to punch him in the face.

Has anyone yet mentioned that your arms must be larger than the average person?

The odd thing is there hasn't been a single reference to a stretchy comic book hero yet.


images.wikia.com
 
2012-07-20 03:25:22 PM  

czei: Quasar: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

He's got a point. I mean, establishing a crossfire in a dark room filled with tear gas seems like a reasonable alternative.

Lets assume for a moment that the NRA's wet dream has come true, and, say 20% of the people in the theatre had concealed weapons. When the assailant starts shooting in the dark, and someone close to him pulls out a gun and tries to fire back, how are the people farther away supposed to tell the assailant from the other theatre goers? What's to stop the situation from escalating into a giant shootout?


I've been assured this is impossible, because it hasn't happened yet. Seriously, that's the logic.
 
2012-07-20 03:25:25 PM  

beta_plus: /invest in popcorn futures


Actually because of the drought, corn prices are set to skyrocket. So regardless of internet flamewars, its a good idea to invest in corn now since the price will only go up.
 
2012-07-20 03:25:36 PM  
How could you have punched him in the face from 50 feet away? I say, you must have very long arms. That would be funny, right? If someone had 50 foot long arms?
 
2012-07-20 03:26:12 PM  

Flab: Alright, so: the NRA and Celeboutique have posted their "Ooops. Our bad." apologies. Is Gohmert now alone in the lead?


Amended: Gohmert and George Snuffleupagus are apparently still in the race.
 
2012-07-20 03:26:31 PM  

violetvolume: Because we, as a society, are literally incapable of talking about guns without it becoming a totally off-topic screaming match between "no one should have any guns ever" and "no they b takin' mah gunz."


A fun example is bringing up the idea of a small (like 3 day) mandatory wait for firearm purchases. The only people it significantly impacts are people buying guns for very emotional reasons - a guy pissed that his wife is cheating on him, etc. - yet people react like you just suggested Muslims raping their white women.
 
2012-07-20 03:26:32 PM  

violetvolume: qorkfiend: justinsmith354: Yet ABC waited a whole 5 min on GMA this morning to mention how easy it is to obtain a weapon in CO. Oh, how they TRIED to after Columbine, but it wasn't "enough".

Don't kid yourselves, the damn bodies weren't even out of the theatre when the media was brewing a 2nd Ammendment issue from this. No gun tragedy will go unused in these times.

/concealer
//ALWAYS retreat, unless you absolutely can't

A mass shooting by a civilian in a public place will always trigger a gun control discussion. Why should we, as a society, shrug and say "That's too bad, but we can't talk about gun control and the 2nd amendment" when we hear about something like this?

Because we, as a society, are literally incapable of talking about guns without it becoming a totally off-topic screaming match between "no one should have any guns ever" and "no they b takin' mah gunz."


Sad but true.
 
2012-07-20 03:26:41 PM  

GWSuperfan: MyRandomName: I thought tea party members were old people in hoverounds on Medicare.

There are always exceptions....

[i599.photobucket.com image 850x641]


I'll hoveround the thin one. You can orbit hoveround the the thick one.
 
2012-07-20 03:27:09 PM  

ordinarysteve: Their current talking point is that he was the leader of OWS. They have no citations or sources for it but that doesn't matter. People will be repeating that talking point in 6 months or so regardless.


This dude so far is hard to profile, if we absolutely must do such a thing.

PhD candidate in Neurobiology, so definitely not some backwoods redneck. From a liberal state, but very active in his church so quite possibly religious. Described as a loner, but mild-mannered.
 
2012-07-20 03:27:25 PM  

justinsmith354: Because it's just like abortion...it isn't going anywhere. There isn't a real threat to either regardless of what people think they want.

People shoot other people every day of the week. Babies are aborted every day of the week. Why can't we just talk about the tragedy of the human condition?


Dude....did you just bring abortion into a gun thread?

i50.tinypic.com
 
2012-07-20 03:27:28 PM  

qorkfiend: LasersHurt: sprawl15: spcMike: I still regret the day I was 50 ft from Louis Gohmert and didn't take that opprotunity to punch him in the face.

Has anyone yet mentioned that your arms must be larger than the average person?

The odd thing is there hasn't been a single reference to a stretchy comic book hero yet.

[images.wikia.com image 507x380]


I still regret the day I was 50 ft from Louis Gohmert and didn't take that opportunity to pick his nose.
 
2012-07-20 03:27:50 PM  

LasersHurt: The odd thing is there hasn't been a single reference to a stretchy comic book hero yet.


I almost went there, but it wasn't as funny as a plain old "long arms" joke. Ditto for the action figure reference
 
2012-07-20 03:28:04 PM  

doyner: Everyone relax. He was just saying that this fine American patriot was applying a second amendment solution to the exorbitant price of theater refreshments.


Well, I can understand that...
 
2012-07-20 03:28:13 PM  

Codenamechaz: Quasar: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

He's got a point. I mean, establishing a crossfire in a dark room filled with tear gas seems like a reasonable alternative.

Are you suggesting it would be difficult to wound a target wearing a bullet proof vest and gas mask, wielding an assault rifle, shotgun and several pistols in the middle of a darkly lit theater while your eyes and lungs are being burned by tear gas?


Well I know it's pretty hard to do on COD: Black Ops...
 
2012-07-20 03:28:54 PM  

Ctrl-Alt-Del: LasersHurt: The odd thing is there hasn't been a single reference to a stretchy comic book hero yet.

I almost went there, but it wasn't as funny as a plain old "long arms" joke. Ditto for the action figure reference


Oh man his arms stretch out til next week!
 
2012-07-20 03:29:25 PM  
HEY HAS ANYONE YET NOTED THAT SPCMIKE MUST HAVE QUITE LONG ARMS TO BE ABLE TO PUNCH SOMEONE FROM FULLY 15.24 METERS AWAY?
 
2012-07-20 03:29:47 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: beta_plus: Given the past threads on Loughner, The Toulouse Shooter, and Zimmerman, when James Holmes' political affiliation is firmly established is going to EPIC!

/invest in popcorn futures

Funny how you left out Breivik.


Funny how you don't like being reminded that thanks to the Norwegian Welfare State, the richest country on earth couldn't afford helicopters or even Zodiak boats for its up to that point legendary Special Forces.
 
2012-07-20 03:30:31 PM  
Abnormal arms: using humor to diffuse tragic situations since 1895
 
2012-07-20 03:31:02 PM  

sprawl15: qorkfiend: LasersHurt: sprawl15: spcMike: I still regret the day I was 50 ft from Louis Gohmert and didn't take that opprotunity to punch him in the face.

Has anyone yet mentioned that your arms must be larger than the average person?

The odd thing is there hasn't been a single reference to a stretchy comic book hero yet.

[images.wikia.com image 507x380]

I still regret the day I was 50 ft from Louis Gohmert and didn't take that opportunity to pick his nose.


A man can dream, though... a man can dream.
 
2012-07-20 03:31:21 PM  

beta_plus: Funny how you don't like being reminded that thanks to the Norwegian Welfare State, the richest country on earth couldn't afford helicopters or even Zodiak boats for its up to that point legendary Special Forces.


They ride bears, and bears can't swim.
 
2012-07-20 03:31:27 PM  

violetvolume: qorkfiend: justinsmith354: Yet ABC waited a whole 5 min on GMA this morning to mention how easy it is to obtain a weapon in CO. Oh, how they TRIED to after Columbine, but it wasn't "enough".

Don't kid yourselves, the damn bodies weren't even out of the theatre when the media was brewing a 2nd Ammendment issue from this. No gun tragedy will go unused in these times.

/concealer
//ALWAYS retreat, unless you absolutely can't

A mass shooting by a civilian in a public place will always trigger a gun control discussion. Why should we, as a society, shrug and say "That's too bad, but we can't talk about gun control and the 2nd amendment" when we hear about something like this?

Because we, as a society, are literally incapable of talking about guns without it becoming a totally off-topic screaming match between "no one should have any guns ever" and "no they b takin' mah gunz."


THANK YOU! It's like me watching the news and hearing George Stephanopoulos bring me the latest on TomKat and baby Suri. "ARE YOU KIDDING ME RIGHT NOW?" I scream at my TV each morning. Then wake up to hearing how easy it must have been for this asshole to obtain these weapons. Well no kidding!? Hey....I can run down the street and get about 20 hydro condones from the 30 year old on medicaid for 7 bucks a pop, when he paid a $2 copay to make money this month. They should make that illegal, you know...so I won't do it.

So many thoughts and emotions, and no talent in writing to express them....oh well.

Someone do us a favor and post the pic of the AK-47 and Glock as the weapons this douche nozzel used today.
 
2012-07-20 03:31:41 PM  

LasersHurt: Abnormal arms: using humor to diffuse tragic situations since 1895


I think it's 'defuse' in this situation.
 
2012-07-20 03:32:04 PM  
Last time I checked, Zimmerman did murder an unarmed child. Oh, wait, i forgot, that was because of God's plan.
 
2012-07-20 03:32:06 PM  

beta_plus: cameroncrazy1984: beta_plus: Given the past threads on Loughner, The Toulouse Shooter, and Zimmerman, when James Holmes' political affiliation is firmly established is going to EPIC!

/invest in popcorn futures

Funny how you left out Breivik.

Funny how you don't like being reminded that thanks to the Norwegian Welfare State, the richest country on earth couldn't afford helicopters or even Zodiak boats for its up to that point legendary Special Forces.


They caused Breivik to shoot and bomb a bunch of people? Interesting.

Stupid, false, and a deflection from the point that Pam Gellar and other conservatives directly influenced him, but interesting.
 
2012-07-20 03:32:18 PM  

Codenamechaz: Quasar: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

He's got a point. I mean, establishing a crossfire in a dark room filled with tear gas seems like a reasonable alternative.

Are you suggesting it would be difficult to wound a target wearing a bullet proof vest and gas mask, wielding an assault rifle, shotgun and several pistols in the middle of a darkly lit theater while your eyes and lungs are being burned by tear gas?


Since my son and I were thinking of going to a midnight showing of this last night (in VA not CO) I thought hard about what I would have done in that situation. Hopefully, if I'm the person I think i am , I would have made my son bear-crawl to the nearest exit, tell my wife again that I loved her and then done my best to tackle ths farker from his blindside. Even If I did go armed, and I don't, a) shooting is too dangerous in a situation like that because of bystanders, b) shooting someone isn't like it is in the moves, even guys who aren't in body armor can take a lot of bullets and not go down and C) when you weight 250+ lbs and you sit on someone's chest/back, they are NOT getting back up again unless you want them to
 
2012-07-20 03:32:39 PM  

Sabyen91: MyRandomName: Abc news already said he was a tea party member. I nominate them.

That is bad but blaming the victims is at least two times as dickish.


Not when you're part of the party of perpetual victimhood.


/I mean, sure some people died and more were wounded, but nobody cares about my feelings and the feelings of my fellow blogger-patriots.
 
2012-07-20 03:32:45 PM  

hillbillypharmacist: LasersHurt: Abnormal arms: using humor to diffuse tragic situations since 1895

I think it's 'defuse' in this situation.


I am for words.
 
2012-07-20 03:33:12 PM  
I love the "If everyone carried guns, things like this wouldn't happen" argument. It's like loving a truly stupid movie it brings a smile to my face. Then I get a bit sad when I realize that the dumber you are in this country, the more likely you are of becoming put into a position of power.
 
2012-07-20 03:33:34 PM  

LasersHurt: hillbillypharmacist: LasersHurt: Abnormal arms: using humor to diffuse tragic situations since 1895

I think it's 'defuse' in this situation.

I am for words.


I also. Words/Phrases 2012!
 
2012-07-20 03:33:39 PM  

Codenamechaz: Quasar: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

He's got a point. I mean, establishing a crossfire in a dark room filled with tear gas seems like a reasonable alternative.

Are you suggesting it would be difficult to wound a target wearing a bullet proof vest and gas mask, wielding an assault rifle, shotgun and several pistols in the middle of a darkly lit theater while your eyes and lungs are being burned by tear gas?


Madness! About 50% of the posters in fark gun threads say they could hit multiple armored targets holding bystanders hostage with their eyes closed using their off-hand, so it must be easy!
 
2012-07-20 03:33:44 PM  

Zerochance: ordinarysteve: Their current talking point is that he was the leader of OWS. They have no citations or sources for it but that doesn't matter. People will be repeating that talking point in 6 months or so regardless.

This dude so far is hard to profile, if we absolutely must do such a thing.

PhD candidate in Neurobiology, so definitely not some backwoods redneck. From a liberal state, but very active in his church so quite possibly religious. Described as a loner, but mild-mannered.


Yeah, that's what makes it so irresponsible for ABC and right-wing blogs to say what his political affiliation is. I could be wrong but it doesn't seem like there has been any info released to indicate what it may be, and if it played any part in his motivation for the attack. Regardless, every tragedy just reminds me of how much I hate the news media.
 
2012-07-20 03:34:26 PM  

qorkfiend: A mass shooting by a civilian in a public place will always trigger a gun control discussion. Why should we, as a society, shrug and say "That's too bad, but we can't talk about gun control and the 2nd amendment" when we hear about something like this?



Because any day now, The Tea Party NRA folks are going to use their handguns and semi-auto ARs to throw off this oppressive Government and free us all. Until then, only the occassional theater patrons and black kids need fear.
 
2012-07-20 03:34:34 PM  

Publikwerks: Quasar: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

He's got a point. I mean, establishing a crossfire in a dark room filled with tear gas seems like a reasonable alternative.

Well, since everyone would be running towards the isles and away from the shooter, You would have a pretty clear shot on him(The chance of hitting someone else would be less). And maybe this draws fire away from the people running away. So maybe less die.

Put it this way - He got to execute his plan. Nobody slowed him up, and he left the theater of his own accord, and the police got him outside. Anything anyone could have done to slow up his plan might have saved lives.


How would you identify the threat among the four other CCW holders who are also trying to find the shooter in a dark, confusing theater filling with teargas? Do you guys have some sort of hand signal that you can use so you know that the figure you see holding a gun down the aisle is one of the good guys and not the one shooting or an accomplice?
 
2012-07-20 03:35:15 PM  

Kazrath: Cymbal: Time to repeal the Second amendment. Hunters, either learn to use a bow and arrow, or go fishing instead. Last I heard its not possible to have a fully-automatic assault fish rod, unless I just got done FARKING a chick with a yeast infection.

*Yawn* Normal knee-jerk reaction. Today alone 10 times or more will be killed by cars. So I suppose it is time to pass a law making it so only mode of transportation is walking. Wait, people die from walking too. So the only mode of transportation is.... crawling?

Idiots are still idiots.


Not at all. The primary purpose of a car is transporting people and items from one place to another. 99% of the time, everything goes perfect and no one gets hurt.

The primary purpose of a gun is to kill people (assault rifles and such are not meant for hunting, unless you enjoy picking up pieces of bambi from across a 10 foot radius of splattered meat). Almost 100% of the time, when it's used, people die. Sometimes, people are just seriously injured.

That's the principle difference between a car and a gun. When you use a car, no one gets hurt, usually. When you use a gun, some people might survive, unusually.

That's why we need to regulate and take vigilance on people when THEY ARE USING GUNS.
 
2012-07-20 03:35:20 PM  
FTA: Yes, Gohmert actually said this: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"


Here is a serious question. Often people insult me when I ask this making me think that it's just a question people get frustrated with because they don't know the answer themselves and it harms their belief system.

If everyone had guns and are trying to fire back then when the police show up how would they now who are the people defending themselves and who are the attackers? How would other people know too? If I saw people firing at others would I just shoot at them too thinking they were the attackers? Last I checked people don't have "Bad guy" tattooed on their heads.
 
2012-07-20 03:36:09 PM  

LasersHurt: I am for words.


It's a common eggcorn.
 
2012-07-20 03:36:35 PM  

Close2TheEdge: Waiting to hear Ms. Bachmann's take on all this nasty business.


She'll probably ask if Huma Abedin had an alibi for the time of the shooting and if the shooter was really a caucasian male of just a Muslim practicing an extremely sophistcated form of Taqiyya
 
2012-07-20 03:36:41 PM  

dericwater: Kazrath: Cymbal: Time to repeal the Second amendment. Hunters, either learn to use a bow and arrow, or go fishing instead. Last I heard its not possible to have a fully-automatic assault fish rod, unless I just got done FARKING a chick with a yeast infection.

*Yawn* Normal knee-jerk reaction. Today alone 10 times or more will be killed by cars. So I suppose it is time to pass a law making it so only mode of transportation is walking. Wait, people die from walking too. So the only mode of transportation is.... crawling?

Idiots are still idiots.

Not at all. The primary purpose of a car is transporting people and items from one place to another. 99% of the time, everything goes perfect and no one gets hurt.

The primary purpose of a gun is to kill people (assault rifles and such are not meant for hunting, unless you enjoy picking up pieces of bambi from across a 10 foot radius of splattered meat). Almost 100% of the time, when it's used, people die. Sometimes, people are just seriously injured.

That's the principle difference between a car and a gun. When you use a car, no one gets hurt, usually. When you use a gun, some people might survive, unusually.

That's why we need to regulate and take vigilance on people when THEY ARE USING GUNS.


Also, and not coincidentally, we also regulate and take vigilance on people when they are using cars.
 
2012-07-20 03:36:42 PM  
Supposedly the shooter was in a Joker costume or something, his hair was dyed red and he was wearing some kind of outfit.

/wasn't the Joker's hair green though?
 
2012-07-20 03:37:13 PM  

Yuri Futanari: Publikwerks: Quasar: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

He's got a point. I mean, establishing a crossfire in a dark room filled with tear gas seems like a reasonable alternative.

Well, since everyone would be running towards the isles and away from the shooter, You would have a pretty clear shot on him(The chance of hitting someone else would be less). And maybe this draws fire away from the people running away. So maybe less die.

Put it this way - He got to execute his plan. Nobody slowed him up, and he left the theater of his own accord, and the police got him outside. Anything anyone could have done to slow up his plan might have saved lives.

How would you identify the threat among the four other CCW holders who are also trying to find the shooter in a dark, confusing theater filling with teargas? Do you guys have some sort of hand signal that you can use so you know that the figure you see holding a gun down the aisle is one of the good guys and not the one shooting or an accomplice?


Yep just asked that too. I ask that in all these. Never found an answer.

I have "well they are holding their gun threatening" which makes no sense. I mean the bad guy can just hold it not threatening and someone shooting at home would sure be holding it threatening.
 
2012-07-20 03:37:37 PM  

dericwater: Almost 100% of the time, when it's used, people die. [...] That's the principle difference between a car and a gun. When you use a car, no one gets hurt, usually. When you use a gun, some people might survive, unusually.


yourenothelping.jpg
 
2012-07-20 03:37:55 PM  

Corvus: If everyone had guns and are trying to fire back then when the police show up how would they now who are the people defending themselves and who are the attackers? How would other people know too? If I saw people firing at others would I just shoot at them too thinking they were the attackers? Last I checked people don't have "Bad guy" tattooed on their heads.


Lone hero fantasies. If you picture yourself standing up dramatically, drawing your weapon and going into bullet-time as you take down the 8' tall villain with horns growing out of his head with three well-placed shots to his glowing red weak point, you don't really think about the five other guys who might try to do the same thing.
 
2012-07-20 03:38:17 PM  

Corvus: I have "well they are holding their gun threatening" which makes no sense. I mean the bad guy can just hold it not threatening and someone shooting at him would sure be holding it threatening.

 
2012-07-20 03:40:00 PM  
Hey, do you know what literally EVERYTHING that has EVER HAPPENED is really about? It's about the victimization of the Right. That's actually what all of history, every event, and all ideas are REALLY about.
 
2012-07-20 03:40:17 PM  
Time to update. Link
 
2012-07-20 03:41:20 PM  

sprawl15: dericwater: Almost 100% of the time, when it's used, people die. [...] That's the principle difference between a car and a gun. When you use a car, no one gets hurt, usually. When you use a gun, some people might survive, unusually.

yourenothelping.jpg


Why? He's correct.
 
2012-07-20 03:41:30 PM  
The worst part about all of this is that the release of Batman's triumphant final film has been all screwed up....
It feels weird being excited about seeing it now.
 
2012-07-20 03:41:32 PM  
Gohmert then "questioned why nobody else in the theater had a gun to take down the shooter."
Really? Did this crazy bastard just indirectly place some of the blame on the people in the theatre for not taking out the shooter? Pretttty classy move Louie
 
2012-07-20 03:41:37 PM  
In a time of tragedy, it's important to air your personal political grievances. Only then can we know whom to blame .
 
2012-07-20 03:42:02 PM  

spcMike: I still regret the day I was 50 ft from Louis Gohmert and didn't take that opprotunity to punch him in the face.


i.qkme.me
 
2012-07-20 03:42:18 PM  
From now on, people wanting to commit a mass murder/shooting should be encouraged to do it at large NRA gatherings. There should be a media campaign that promotes this and labels anyone shooting up a place full of unarmed people as a pansy. Real shooters go for the NRA meetings.

Either the NRA will prove they are right by time and again stopping these shooters earning the respect and admiration of all Americans and usher in a new era of near universal gun ownership or eventually enough of them would get killed and we can have some sensible gun laws. Win/win.
 
2012-07-20 03:42:23 PM  
My solution:

All public events like movies, concerts, raves, etc: no clothing, other than shoes and maybe a belt to carry cellphones, wallets, etc. I'd definitely would go to movies more if I get to check out some boobies and coochies while watching the movie.

Would also shame the fatties to get off their butts and work off the fat before getting to the theaters or airplane or stadium.

I mean, how did the ticket person not notice a guy with a gas mask and bullet-proof vest and perhaps a gun around?
 
2012-07-20 03:42:37 PM  

Alphax: sprawl15: dericwater: Almost 100% of the time, when it's used, people die. [...] That's the principle difference between a car and a gun. When you use a car, no one gets hurt, usually. When you use a gun, some people might survive, unusually.

yourenothelping.jpg

Why? He's correct.


No, he isn't. The vast majority of gun use in the US is hunting and target practice. I know he means when used, like, AT someone, but that's not what he said. Clarity is key.
 
2012-07-20 03:42:46 PM  

doczoidberg: The worst part about all of this is that the release of Batman's triumphant final film has been all screwed up....
It feels weird being excited about seeing it now.


Yes, that is clearly the worst part about all of this...
 
2012-07-20 03:43:48 PM  

Corvus: FTA: Yes, Gohmert actually said this: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"


Here is a serious question. Often people insult me when I ask this making me think that it's just a question people get frustrated with because they don't know the answer themselves and it harms their belief system.

If everyone had guns and are trying to fire back then when the police show up how would they now who are the people defending themselves and who are the attackers? How would other people know too? If I saw people firing at others would I just shoot at them too thinking they were the attackers? Last I checked people don't have "Bad guy" tattooed on their heads.


C'mon, shirts vs skins. That's how they do it in the hood.
 
2012-07-20 03:44:29 PM  
Yep, not like people in the media aren't exploiting this for all it's worth.

farm8.staticflickr.comhttp://">
 
2012-07-20 03:44:31 PM  

Magorn: Close2TheEdge: Waiting to hear Ms. Bachmann's take on all this nasty business.

She'll probably ask if Huma Abedin had an alibi for the time of the shooting and if the shooter was really a caucasian male of just a Muslim practicing an extremely sophistcated form of Taqiyya


Because it was the start of Ramadan.
 
2012-07-20 03:44:39 PM  

dericwater: My solution:

All public events like movies, concerts, raves, etc: no clothing, other than shoes and maybe a belt to carry cellphones, wallets, etc. I'd definitely would go to movies more if I get to check out some boobies and coochies while watching the movie.

Would also shame the fatties to get off their butts and work off the fat before getting to the theaters or airplane or stadium.

I mean, how did the ticket person not notice a guy with a gas mask and bullet-proof vest and perhaps a gun around?


From what I've heard, there were several people dressed up in costumes at the theater that night. Another guy in a costume is probably pretty unremarkable, especially by the untrained high-school kids taking tickets.
 
2012-07-20 03:45:40 PM  
This thread is silly... And we should all feel silly for posting in it. : )
 
2012-07-20 03:45:44 PM  

Basily Gourt: Yep, not like people in the media aren't exploiting this for all it's worth.

[farm8.staticflickr.com image 388x1024]http://">


Should CNN not discuss the shooting on air? Why?
 
2012-07-20 03:45:55 PM  

I Browse: Why is everyone piling on Louie Gohmert? What's with the Gohmert pile...?


Outstanding, kudos to you...
 
2012-07-20 03:46:30 PM  
Cymbal


A lot easier to conceal/hide drugs as well as destroy evidence of their use. And there already is a black market for guns. It doesn't have to be criminal charges. They could pay a fine, and we could use the money to fund more outreach programs that advocate the importance of mental health.

Well, maybe on the hiding...Of course criminals will always break laws and have illegal things from the black market. But I personally like the fact that honest law abiding citizens can get guns legally.

I got sh*t for this last time but...if guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns.

/libby lib for gun ownership
 
2012-07-20 03:47:14 PM  

dericwater: My solution:

All public events like movies, concerts, raves, etc: no clothing, other than shoes and maybe a belt to carry cellphones, wallets, etc. I'd definitely would go to movies more if I get to check out some boobies and coochies while watching the movie.

Would also shame the fatties to get off their butts and work off the fat before getting to the theaters or airplane or stadium.

I mean, how did the ticket person not notice a guy with a gas mask and bullet-proof vest and perhaps a gun around?


From all accounts I've read, he used the Emergency Exit door to enter.
 
2012-07-20 03:47:22 PM  

dericwater: The primary purpose of a gun is to kill people (assault rifles and such are not meant for hunting, unless you enjoy picking up pieces of bambi from across a 10 foot radius of splattered meat). Almost 100% of the time, when it's used, people die. Sometimes, people are just seriously injured.


I don't think assault rifles work in the way you think they do.
 
2012-07-20 03:47:58 PM  

Alphax: sprawl15: dericwater: Almost 100% of the time, when it's used, people die. [...] That's the principle difference between a car and a gun. When you use a car, no one gets hurt, usually. When you use a gun, some people might survive, unusually.

yourenothelping.jpg

Why? He's correct.


If he were correct, hundreds of thousands would die at shooting ranges every day.
 
2012-07-20 03:48:01 PM  

Alphax: sprawl15: dericwater: Almost 100% of the time, when it's used, people die. [...] That's the principle difference between a car and a gun. When you use a car, no one gets hurt, usually. When you use a gun, some people might survive, unusually.

yourenothelping.jpg

Why? He's correct.


I don't want to jump out there and be technically correct, but US forces fired over 100k bullets for each enemy killed in the Vietnam war.

Not to say that guns aren't quite dangerous and should be regulated thoroughly.
 
2012-07-20 03:48:06 PM  
The Louie Gohmert thing, yeah, he's dumb. No argument there.

But the NRA tweet is totally innocuous and I don't see what's so wrong with that. So every time some crazy person does some crazy shiat and hurts people everyone in the entire country - all 370 million of us - must immediately bring our lives to a grinding halt and not discuss anything else or something? That seems pretty absurd to me too. I hadn't heard what happened until I got to work either, should I feel bad just because I don't pay someone to monitor cable news and wake me up every time some farkhead acts like a farkhead?

And it's not like only two Republican/Tea Baggers are the only ones saying assinine things in the wake of this tragedy. There's plenty of assinine shiat coming from the other side as well. The Police Commissioner of NYC and Mayor Bloomberg had some pretty damn assinine things to say themselves this morning as well from the other side of the spectrum.

Besides the fact... These murderous dead-enders WANT the farking notoriety. They see the attacks that other people commit, and all the attention it gets and say to themselves, ". The worst thing we can do is to insist that whole country flip out just because every single tweet farking tweet doesn't sound like it's wearing a black armband and crying in to it's cheerios. We should stop obsessing every time a tragedy like this occurs.

It's like terrorism... They WANT the attention. That's the whole farking point, so flipping out every time they send us a video where they saw some poor guy's head off only encourages them to go saw more farking heads off!!! Stop allowing it to commandeer the attention of the entire goddamn country and the appeal will diminish, at least a little.
 
2012-07-20 03:48:15 PM  

sprawl15: beta_plus: Funny how you don't like being reminded that thanks to the Norwegian Welfare State, the richest country on earth couldn't afford helicopters or even Zodiak boats for its up to that point legendary Special Forces.

They ride bears, and bears can't swim.

sprawl15: beta_plus: Funny how you don't like being reminded that thanks to the Norwegian Welfare State, the richest country on earth couldn't afford helicopters or even Zodiak boats for its up to that point legendary Special Forces.

They ride bears, and bears can't swim.


Polar bears are actually very good swimmers.
But unfortunately all of their polar bears had swum to the Mediterranean on holiday that day.
 
2012-07-20 03:48:53 PM  

Cymbal: From all accounts I've read, he used the Emergency Exit door to enter.


MSNBC:

Witnesses said the gunman entered the theater through an emergency exit door. But a federal law enforcement official told The Associated Press that the suspect bought a ticket and went into the theater as part of the crowd. He is believed to have propped open an exit door as the movie was playing, the official said.
 
2012-07-20 03:48:55 PM  

Basily Gourt: Yep, not like people in the media aren't exploiting this for all it's worth.

[farm8.staticflickr.com image 388x1024]http://">


What, we can't discuss guns?
 
2012-07-20 03:50:10 PM  

dericwater: My solution:

All public events like movies, concerts, raves, etc: no clothing, other than shoes and maybe a belt to carry cellphones, wallets, etc. I'd definitely would go to movies more if I get to check out some boobies and coochies while watching the movie.

Would also shame the fatties to get off their butts and work off the fat before getting to the theaters or airplane or stadium.

I mean, how did the ticket person not notice a guy with a gas mask and bullet-proof vest and perhaps a gun around?


He didn't have a ticket in the first place, he just kicked in the emergency door from outside.
 
2012-07-20 03:50:47 PM  

URAPNIS: TFA:
"I don't know about you, but I don't want to live in a country where I need to be packing in self-defense when I go to the movies."

From the looks of it, you already do.


One shooting out of the millions of people who go to the movies means I need to bring my weapon to the movie theater?
 
2012-07-20 03:50:56 PM  

LasersHurt: Alphax: sprawl15: dericwater: Almost 100% of the time, when it's used, people die. [...] That's the principle difference between a car and a gun. When you use a car, no one gets hurt, usually. When you use a gun, some people might survive, unusually.

yourenothelping.jpg

Why? He's correct.

No, he isn't. The vast majority of gun use in the US is hunting and target practice. I know he means when used, like, AT someone, but that's not what he said. Clarity is key.


Shooting at targets at a firing range is practice. Yeah, a lot of people have fun doing that. But I did specifically mention assault rifles, which aren't used in most hunting as well. So the only actual use of such guns are when aimed and used against other humans. Luckily, most people use that as often as they take out their $500,000 antique Model-T to drive to Costco for a BBQ purchase.
 
2012-07-20 03:51:55 PM  

qorkfiend: Basily Gourt: Yep, not like people in the media aren't exploiting this for all it's worth.

[farm8.staticflickr.com image 388x1024]http://">

Should CNN not discuss the shooting on air? Why?


I think the problem is that they perpetuate it by glamorizing mass killers. This video from a few years ago on the BB helps explain the problem Link
 
2012-07-20 03:52:10 PM  

Agneska: Incorrect submittard. The biggest idiots are ABC's Stephanopoulos and Ross for suggesting Tea Party link. Oops. Leftists are so dumb.


Uh, not saying ABC is right or wrong, but wasn't this guy directly affiliated with the Tea Party? I thought the other thread linked to his personal page on the CO Tea Party website. Note I'm also not saying his political views had any bearing at all on his decision to go shoot up a movie theater. If I had to guess, I'd say he was more likely to have cracked from the pressure of med school/failing med school or whatever that was than his political inclinations, but that said, it's not necessarily wrong to note that he was a Tea Party member if in fact, as it appears, he actually was.

/would say the same if he were an OWS protester. Just because he's a member doesn't make it relevant.
 
2012-07-20 03:52:30 PM  
They should turn Mormon bubbling porn into target practice for hicks! Good luck with them there muzzy Saudis!

i.imgur.com

//the threads today have such synergy!
 
2012-07-20 03:53:16 PM  

Cymbal: Last I heard its not possible to have a fully-automatic assault fish rod


Challenge accepted.
 
2012-07-20 03:53:29 PM  

qorkfiend: Basily Gourt: Yep, not like people in the media aren't exploiting this for all it's worth.

[farm8.staticflickr.com image 388x1024]http://">

Should CNN not discuss the shooting on air? Why?


Not by ginning up support for gun control first, like this british turd did early this morning on twitter.
 
2012-07-20 03:54:02 PM  

firefly212: dericwater: My solution:

All public events like movies, concerts, raves, etc: no clothing, other than shoes and maybe a belt to carry cellphones, wallets, etc. I'd definitely would go to movies more if I get to check out some boobies and coochies while watching the movie.

Would also shame the fatties to get off their butts and work off the fat before getting to the theaters or airplane or stadium.

I mean, how did the ticket person not notice a guy with a gas mask and bullet-proof vest and perhaps a gun around?

He didn't have a ticket in the first place, he just kicked in the emergency door from outside.


Doesn't mean that requiring people go naked to public events isn't a gosh darn good idea.
 
2012-07-20 03:54:14 PM  

Basily Gourt: Yep, not like people in the media aren't exploiting this for all it's worth.

[farm8.staticflickr.com image 388x1024]http://">


Where is the exploitation? Why shouldn't the news be allowed to talk about this?
 
2012-07-20 03:54:21 PM  

dericwater: Shooting at targets at a firing range is practice. Yeah, a lot of people have fun doing that. But I did specifically mention assault rifles, which aren't used in most hunting as well. So the only actual use of such guns are when aimed and used against other humans. Luckily, most people use that as often as they take out their $500,000 antique Model-T to drive to Costco for a BBQ purchase.


oh so you've never been to a range before is what you are saying
 
2012-07-20 03:54:43 PM  
Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) said Friday that the shootings that took place in an Aurora, Colo. movie theater hours earlier were a result of "ongoing attacks on Judeo-Christian beliefs" and questioned why nobody else in the theater had a gun to take down the shooter.

"Y u no use gun" is really a bad argument given:

-The shooter used tear gas which rendered people blind
-He was in full body armor
-People don't always become John McClane when someone starts shooting. It can be very confusing and people have more of an intention of flight over fight. When the Giffords shooting happened, a citizen did happen have a gun but he didn't want to use it because he didn't want to hurt an innocent person in the moment of chaos and didn't want to be taken by the cops as a co-conspirator
-It leads to more victim blaming than ideas to improve security
 
2012-07-20 03:55:07 PM  

ordinarysteve: Vegetable Medley: ordinarysteve: I'm surprised that Gohmert found time to comment on this, as he appears to be quite busy with his Muslim witch-hunt.

Clearly the shooter is tied to the Muslim Brotherhood.

Their current talking point is that he was the leader of OWS. They have no citations or sources for it but that doesn't matter. People will be repeating that talking point in 6 months or so regardless.


Doesn't matter - all they need is for him to have gone, as a student, to any protest linked remotely with it, and if so, he's obviously the founder and spiritual leader of the group.
 
2012-07-20 03:55:13 PM  

qorkfiend: dericwater: My solution:

All public events like movies, concerts, raves, etc: no clothing, other than shoes and maybe a belt to carry cellphones, wallets, etc. I'd definitely would go to movies more if I get to check out some boobies and coochies while watching the movie.

Would also shame the fatties to get off their butts and work off the fat before getting to the theaters or airplane or stadium.

I mean, how did the ticket person not notice a guy with a gas mask and bullet-proof vest and perhaps a gun around?

From what I've heard, there were several people dressed up in costumes at the theater that night. Another guy in a costume is probably pretty unremarkable, especially by the untrained high-school kids taking tickets.


Having been to The Dark Knight at a midnight showing, I gotta tell ya -- the comic book midnight shows bring out all the fanboys dressed up like Halloween.

And it's now reported that he bought a ticket, sat in the front row, and may be the person who took a cell phone call outside, using the exit door he later entered from. This freak had things planned. He bought his ticket, no matter how he was dressed, he'd have probably fit in. He goes to the exit, most likely rigs it to where he can get back in, and the rest, sadly, is history.

But I'm sure he probably wasn't the only one who may have dressed up like Bane.
 
2012-07-20 03:55:17 PM  

vpb: xrayspx: So if 10 people in that theatre had guns, and 5 of them opened up on the "bad guy" gunman, none of them would have any idea who was a "friendly" and who was a "bad guy". Now you have 11 people all shooting at each other. In that scenario, the only person any of the 10 friendlies can count on not to be a bad guy is themselves.

All they would have to do is start shooting at muzzle flashes.

Besides, the bystanders will all run from the shooter so just shoot at the ones that are coming right you.


Hah.

Got it: "Something runs at you, shoot it, see a flash, shoot it", yeah that about covers it. I'm convinced, Gohmert is definitely legit.
 
2012-07-20 03:55:52 PM  

Lipo: Agneska: Incorrect submittard. The biggest idiots are ABC's Stephanopoulos and Ross for suggesting Tea Party link. Oops. Leftists are so dumb.

Uh, not saying ABC is right or wrong, but wasn't this guy directly affiliated with the Tea Party? I thought the other thread linked to his personal page on the CO Tea Party website. Note I'm also not saying his political views had any bearing at all on his decision to go shoot up a movie theater. If I had to guess, I'd say he was more likely to have cracked from the pressure of med school/failing med school or whatever that was than his political inclinations, but that said, it's not necessarily wrong to note that he was a Tea Party member if in fact, as it appears, he actually was.

/would say the same if he were an OWS protester. Just because he's a member doesn't make it relevant.


He wasn't, that was the wrong James Holmes.
 
2012-07-20 03:55:56 PM  

coeyagi: They should turn Mormon bubbling porn into target practice for hicks! Good luck with them there muzzy Saudis!

//the threads today have such synergy!


If you believe and pray enough, that's what reality looks like anyway. The bubbles hide all the devil's temptations, like reason and logic and evil ladyparts.
 
2012-07-20 03:56:19 PM  

Basily Gourt: qorkfiend: Basily Gourt: Yep, not like people in the media aren't exploiting this for all it's worth.

[farm8.staticflickr.com image 388x1024]http://">

Should CNN not discuss the shooting on air? Why?

Not by ginning up support for gun control first, like this british turd did early this morning on twitter.


It said gun control/2nd amendment debate. Afraid of the debate?
 
2012-07-20 03:56:21 PM  

dericwater: But I did specifically mention assault rifles


As an aside, something irrelevant to your incredibly stupid assertion that people die the vast majority of times that guns are used.

dericwater: So the only actual use of such guns are when aimed and used against other humans.


WELL YOU SEE I SAID "USE" BUT 99% OF THE TIMES GUNS ARE USED DOESN'T COUNT AS "USING" THEM BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE CONTRARY TO THE POINT I'M TRYING TO MAKE
 
2012-07-20 03:56:43 PM  

dahmers love zombie: I'm willing to give the NRA tweeter the benefit of the doubt -- they probably had simply not heard about the event. Gohmert, on the other hand, is an utter waste of skin who by the end of this day will probably have claimed at least once that the shooting is the direct fault of the President and/or teh gheys.


Pretty sure the GOP has already blamed the gays and Obama.
 
2012-07-20 03:57:37 PM  

Jackson Herring: dericwater: Shooting at targets at a firing range is practice. Yeah, a lot of people have fun doing that. But I did specifically mention assault rifles, which aren't used in most hunting as well. So the only actual use of such guns are when aimed and used against other humans. Luckily, most people use that as often as they take out their $500,000 antique Model-T to drive to Costco for a BBQ purchase.

oh so you've never been to a range before is what you are saying


I think he's saying we should outlaw Model-T's since the only time they're taken out on the road is because they've been stolen.
 
2012-07-20 03:57:43 PM  

A Dark Evil Omen: HEY HAS ANYONE YET NOTED THAT SPCMIKE MUST HAVE QUITE LONG ARMS TO BE ABLE TO PUNCH SOMEONE FROM FULLY 15.24 METERS AWAY?


You're being glib. SPCMike's Second Amendment right to bear 50 foot arms is a cornerstone of our great nation that lib Fartbongo and the elite media are trying to take away!
 
2012-07-20 03:57:47 PM  

Lipo: Agneska: Incorrect submittard. The biggest idiots are ABC's Stephanopoulos and Ross for suggesting Tea Party link. Oops. Leftists are so dumb.

Uh, not saying ABC is right or wrong, but wasn't this guy directly affiliated with the Tea Party? I thought the other thread linked to his personal page on the CO Tea Party website. Note I'm also not saying his political views had any bearing at all on his decision to go shoot up a movie theater. If I had to guess, I'd say he was more likely to have cracked from the pressure of med school/failing med school or whatever that was than his political inclinations, but that said, it's not necessarily wrong to note that he was a Tea Party member if in fact, as it appears, he actually was.

/would say the same if he were an OWS protester. Just because he's a member doesn't make it relevant.


No, apparently not; there was a guy on the CO Tea Party website with a similar name and from Aurora, but it wasn't the shooter.
 
2012-07-20 03:57:50 PM  

dahmers love zombie: I'm willing to give the NRA tweeter the benefit of the doubt -- they probably had simply not heard about the event. Gohmert, on the other hand, is an utter waste of skin who by the end of this day will probably have claimed at least once that the shooting is the direct fault of the President and/or teh gheys.


This. NRA had bad timing. Gohmert is just a bad person.
 
2012-07-20 03:58:04 PM  
static1.firedoglake.com
 
2012-07-20 03:59:04 PM  

TimSTP: [static1.firedoglake.com image 690x662]


I can't tell what blog that's from, yet I know it sucks.
 
2012-07-20 03:59:18 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: Basily Gourt: qorkfiend: Basily Gourt: Yep, not like people in the media aren't exploiting this for all it's worth.

[farm8.staticflickr.com image 388x1024]http://">

Should CNN not discuss the shooting on air? Why?

Not by ginning up support for gun control first, like this british turd did early this morning on twitter.

It said gun control/2nd amendment debate. Afraid of the debate?


Did you read his tweets? Pretty sure he isn't looking for a debate.
 
2012-07-20 03:59:58 PM  

FlashHarry: gohmert is human filth.


ww2.hdnux.com
 
2012-07-20 04:00:24 PM  
So Romney finally found a way to get people to stop talking about his tax returns and bain
 
2012-07-20 04:00:29 PM  

LasersHurt: TimSTP: [static1.firedoglake.com image 690x662]

I can't tell what blog that's from, yet I know it sucks.


FireDogLake, a progressive/left blog. They've done good work for Occupy but they're also goonjobs (as noted by the "SHIAT JUMP TO A DEFENSIVE POSITION" headline there).
 
2012-07-20 04:00:30 PM  

TimSTP: [static1.firedoglake.com image 690x662]


Hey guys! We need to make sure the shooter is [INSERT GROUP YOU DON'T LIKE HERE] so we can rally about how bad [INSERT GROUP YOU DON'T LIKE HERE] are and how this would never happen with a [INSERT GROUP YOU LIKE HERE]. We could care less about mental healthcare.

Politics are so volatile these days.
 
2012-07-20 04:00:42 PM  

Basily Gourt: HotWingConspiracy: Basily Gourt: qorkfiend: Basily Gourt: Yep, not like people in the media aren't exploiting this for all it's worth.

[farm8.staticflickr.com image 388x1024]http://">

Should CNN not discuss the shooting on air? Why?

Not by ginning up support for gun control first, like this british turd did early this morning on twitter.

It said gun control/2nd amendment debate. Afraid of the debate?

Did you read his tweets? Pretty sure he isn't looking for a debate.


That's cute, and all, but it's the same excuse used LITERALLY every single time by pro-gun people. "We should talk about this!" "NO YOU CAN'T TAKE OUR GUNS AMERICA FREEDOM!" "But we just want to talk about it!?" "NOPE IF YOU TALK ABOUT IT, YOU HURT MY FREEDOM!"
 
2012-07-20 04:01:09 PM  

Basily Gourt: HotWingConspiracy: Basily Gourt: qorkfiend: Basily Gourt: Yep, not like people in the media aren't exploiting this for all it's worth.

[farm8.staticflickr.com image 388x1024]http://">

Should CNN not discuss the shooting on air? Why?

Not by ginning up support for gun control first, like this british turd did early this morning on twitter.

It said gun control/2nd amendment debate. Afraid of the debate?

Did you read his tweets? Pretty sure he isn't looking for a debate.


So yes, you're afraid of the debate. Maybe you should shoot him?
 
2012-07-20 04:01:21 PM  

LasersHurt: TimSTP: [static1.firedoglake.com image 690x662]

I can't tell what blog that's from, yet I know it sucks.


There is a Breitbart connection.
 
2012-07-20 04:01:24 PM  

WizardofToast: Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) said Friday that the shootings that took place in an Aurora, Colo. movie theater hours earlier were a result of "ongoing attacks on Judeo-Christian beliefs" and questioned why nobody else in the theater had a gun to take down the shooter.

"Y u no use gun" is really a bad argument given:

-The shooter used tear gas which rendered people blind
-He was in full body armor
-People don't always become John McClane when someone starts shooting. It can be very confusing and people have more of an intention of flight over fight. When the Giffords shooting happened, a citizen did happen have a gun but he didn't want to use it because he didn't want to hurt an innocent person in the moment of chaos and didn't want to be taken by the cops as a co-conspirator
-It leads to more victim blaming than ideas to improve security


Also anyone who's actually watched Die Hard knows that first thing John McClane did was retreat and call the authorities.
 
2012-07-20 04:01:31 PM  

Jackson Herring: How could you have punched him in the face from 50 feet away? I say, you must have very long arms. That would be funny, right? If someone had 50 foot long arms?


img128.imageshack.us
 
2012-07-20 04:02:16 PM  

coeyagi: LasersHurt: TimSTP: [static1.firedoglake.com image 690x662]

I can't tell what blog that's from, yet I know it sucks.

There is a Breitbart connection.


The writer of that shiat-ass blog is Breitbart.com's in house lawyer.

Link
 
2012-07-20 04:02:22 PM  

spcMike: I still regret the day I was 50 ft from Louis Gohmert and didn't take that opprotunity to punch him in the face.


It would have been his own fault for not having 50-foot arms to punch back with.
 
2012-07-20 04:02:36 PM  

A Dark Evil Omen: LasersHurt: TimSTP: [static1.firedoglake.com image 690x662]

I can't tell what blog that's from, yet I know it sucks.

FireDogLake, a progressive/left blog. They've done good work for Occupy but they're also goonjobs (as noted by the "SHIAT JUMP TO A DEFENSIVE POSITION" headline there).


Oh, it's a screencap ON FDL. Never mind. I get kinda kneejerky around those guys... cause they're jerks.
 
2012-07-20 04:02:45 PM  
Too bad Gohmert wasn't in the theater to show us dummies how it's done.
 
2012-07-20 04:03:20 PM  
Brian Ross ABC news:

STEPHANOPOULOS: I'm going to go to Brian Ross. You've been investigating the background of Jim Holmes here. You found something that might be significant.
ROSS: There's a Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colo., page on the Colorado Tea Party site as well, talking about him joining the tea party last year. Now, we don't know if this is the same Jim Holmes. But it's Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colo.
STEPHANOPOULOS: OK, we'll keep looking at that. Brian Ross thanks very much.
 
2012-07-20 04:03:44 PM  

qorkfiend: WizardofToast: Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) said Friday that the shootings that took place in an Aurora, Colo. movie theater hours earlier were a result of "ongoing attacks on Judeo-Christian beliefs" and questioned why nobody else in the theater had a gun to take down the shooter.

"Y u no use gun" is really a bad argument given:

-The shooter used tear gas which rendered people blind
-He was in full body armor
-People don't always become John McClane when someone starts shooting. It can be very confusing and people have more of an intention of flight over fight. When the Giffords shooting happened, a citizen did happen have a gun but he didn't want to use it because he didn't want to hurt an innocent person in the moment of chaos and didn't want to be taken by the cops as a co-conspirator
-It leads to more victim blaming than ideas to improve security

Also anyone who's actually watched Die Hard knows that first thing John McClane did was retreat and call the authorities.


Which is ironic since he technically is one of the authorities.
 
2012-07-20 04:03:47 PM  

Basily Gourt: HotWingConspiracy: Basily Gourt: qorkfiend: Basily Gourt: Yep, not like people in the media aren't exploiting this for all it's worth.

[farm8.staticflickr.com image 388x1024]http://">

Should CNN not discuss the shooting on air? Why?

Not by ginning up support for gun control first, like this british turd did early this morning on twitter.

It said gun control/2nd amendment debate. Afraid of the debate?

Did you read his tweets? Pretty sure he isn't looking for a debate.


Never watched Piers Morgan; don't like Piers Morgan - but he's absolutely right. Every time one of these incidents happens the right cries out that "now is not the time to talk about gun control!" It's a load of nonsense. By not talking about it, it's allowing the anti-gun control folks to win.
 
2012-07-20 04:03:50 PM  

TimSTP: [static1.firedoglake.com image 690x662]


LasersHurt: TimSTP: [static1.firedoglake.com image 690x662]

I can't tell what blog that's from, yet I know it sucks.


I think we can draw all necessary conclusions from the fact that the "article" appears to have been written by Joel Pollak.
 
2012-07-20 04:03:52 PM  

Basily Gourt: Brian Ross ABC news:

STEPHANOPOULOS: I'm going to go to Brian Ross. You've been investigating the background of Jim Holmes here. You found something that might be significant.
ROSS: There's a Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colo., page on the Colorado Tea Party site as well, talking about him joining the tea party last year. Now, we don't know if this is the same Jim Holmes. But it's Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colo.
STEPHANOPOULOS: OK, we'll keep looking at that. Brian Ross thanks very much.


And?
 
2012-07-20 04:04:38 PM  

Basily Gourt: Brian Ross ABC news:

STEPHANOPOULOS: I'm going to go to Brian Ross. You've been investigating the background of Jim Holmes here. You found something that might be significant.
ROSS: There's a Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colo., page on the Colorado Tea Party site as well, talking about him joining the tea party last year. Now, we don't know if this is the same Jim Holmes. But it's Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colo.
STEPHANOPOULOS: OK, we'll keep looking at that. Brian Ross thanks very much.


HISTORY'S GREATEST MONSTER
 
2012-07-20 04:05:20 PM  

mongbiohazard: The Police Commissioner of NYC


Is he suggesting more stop-n-frisk?
 
2012-07-20 04:05:27 PM  
Good for Gohmert, his epic derpfest with Bachmann over Muslim infiltrators is booted off the front page by tragedy and he shows his entrepreneurial spirit by launching his own line of derp.
 
2012-07-20 04:05:28 PM  

qorkfiend: TimSTP: [static1.firedoglake.com image 690x662]

LasersHurt: TimSTP: [static1.firedoglake.com image 690x662]

I can't tell what blog that's from, yet I know it sucks.

I think we can draw all necessary conclusions from the fact that the "article" appears to have been written by Joel Pollak.


Who is a Breitbart lackey.
 
2012-07-20 04:05:39 PM  

A Dark Evil Omen: There's lots of candidates for "biggest idiot" here.

- ABC for the Tea Party thing
- The various rightist elements who, in their turn, are trying to connect it to Occupy
- CelebBoutique
- Louie Gohmert
- Anyone trying to make political hay out of this in any way

But we've only had a couple hours for the stupid to get rolling, so the pickings are slim. Let's see how it looks this afternoon.


Including knee-jerk attacks on the Bill of Rights. Those types can DIAF after sucking it.
 
2012-07-20 04:06:39 PM  
They'll probably do what they did right after Columbine: schedule the next big NRA pow-wow to take place right next to the scene of the crime.

And say stuff so outlandish (like "this is the exact reason why we need less gvn control") that people will think they are right because whou would be stupid enough to say it if they were wrong?

The GOP figured out the key to convining people of stuff: no matter how crazy a thing you are going to say, just say it with a lot of conviction and then people will believe you are in the right, no matter what.

Example: "Cutting taxes on the richest people in the country is the only way to make sure that poor people are better off."
 
2012-07-20 04:06:43 PM  

Big_Fat_Liar: A Dark Evil Omen: There's lots of candidates for "biggest idiot" here.

- ABC for the Tea Party thing
- The various rightist elements who, in their turn, are trying to connect it to Occupy
- CelebBoutique
- Louie Gohmert
- Anyone trying to make political hay out of this in any way

But we've only had a couple hours for the stupid to get rolling, so the pickings are slim. Let's see how it looks this afternoon.

Including knee-jerk attacks on the Bill of Rights. Those types can DIAF after sucking it.


Agreed. Or, conversely, knee-jerk attacks on the victims for not being armed.
 
2012-07-20 04:07:15 PM  

Boxcutta: Basily Gourt: HotWingConspiracy: Basily Gourt: qorkfiend: Basily Gourt: Yep, not like people in the media aren't exploiting this for all it's worth.

[farm8.staticflickr.com image 388x1024]http://">

Should CNN not discuss the shooting on air? Why?

Not by ginning up support for gun control first, like this british turd did early this morning on twitter.

It said gun control/2nd amendment debate. Afraid of the debate?

Did you read his tweets? Pretty sure he isn't looking for a debate.

Never watched Piers Morgan; don't like Piers Morgan - but he's absolutely right. Every time one of these incidents happens the right cries out that "now is not the time to talk about gun control!" It's a load of nonsense. By not talking about it, it's allowing the anti-gun control folks to win.


From the article and other things I've seen today, they have actually moved the argument from "now it not the time to talk about it" to "we need moar guns!".

Subtle, yet completely consistent with GOP cognitive dissonance.
 
2012-07-20 04:07:27 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: Basily Gourt: HotWingConspiracy: Basily Gourt: qorkfiend: Basily Gourt: Yep, not like people in the media aren't exploiting this for all it's worth.

[farm8.staticflickr.com image 388x1024]http://">

Should CNN not discuss the shooting on air? Why?

Not by ginning up support for gun control first, like this british turd did early this morning on twitter.

It said gun control/2nd amendment debate. Afraid of the debate?

Did you read his tweets? Pretty sure he isn't looking for a debate.

So yes, you're afraid of the debate. Maybe you should shoot him?


Really? That's gonna be your talking point?

Been listening to these so called "debates" most of my life. When the "moderator" of these sham debates is so fully in the tank for one point of view, there really isn't much to listen to.
 
2012-07-20 04:07:47 PM  

A Dark Evil Omen: 15.24 METERS AWAY?


Unit conversion error!

"50 feet" is a figure that has one significant digit, so the end result of the conversion should have the same.
However, a meter is a unit that's an order of magnitude larger than a foot (in base 3); therefore one additional significant digit is acceptable.

/tldr: 50ft = 15m, not 15.24m.
 
2012-07-20 04:08:09 PM  

Maud Dib: Jackson Herring: How could you have punched him in the face from 50 feet away? I say, you must have very long arms. That would be funny, right? If someone had 50 foot long arms?

[img128.imageshack.us image 250x188]


persbaglio.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-07-20 04:09:27 PM  

Yuri Futanari: Do you guys have some sort of hand signal that you can use so you know that the figure you see holding a gun down the aisle is one of the good guys and not the one shooting or an accomplice?


www.everydaynodaysoff.com
 
2012-07-20 04:09:28 PM  

poot_rootbeer: A Dark Evil Omen: 15.24 METERS AWAY?

Unit conversion error!

"50 feet" is a figure that has one significant digit, so the end result of the conversion should have the same.
However, a meter is a unit that's an order of magnitude larger than a foot (in base 3); therefore one additional significant digit is acceptable.

/tldr: 50ft = 15m, not 15.24m.


THAT'S LESS FUNNY, BUZZ "POOT HUSSEIN SOETERO ROOTBEER" KILLINGTON.
 
2012-07-20 04:09:28 PM  

wooden_badger: Too bad Gohmert wasn't in the theater to show us dummies how it's done.


It's too bad spcMike wasn't in the theater to take the guy down from 50 feet away without having to fire a shot.
 
2012-07-20 04:09:39 PM  

Kazrath: Cymbal: Time to repeal the Second amendment. Hunters, either learn to use a bow and arrow, or go fishing instead. Last I heard its not possible to have a fully-automatic assault fish rod, unless I just got done FARKING a chick with a yeast infection.

*Yawn* Normal knee-jerk reaction. Today alone 10 times or more will be killed by cars. So I suppose it is time to pass a law making it so only mode of transportation is walking. Wait, people die from walking too. So the only mode of transportation is.... crawling?

Idiots are still idiots.


Yep they are. Of course, one could consider the false equivalence you just put up there to be idiocy too. 10 times as many people are killed by cars everyday because cars are being actively used all the time. I guarantee you that if guns were being fired as frequently as cars are being driven, there would be way more gun fatalities than car fatalities.
 
2012-07-20 04:09:43 PM  
Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) said Friday that the shootings that took place in an Aurora, Colo. movie theater hours earlier were a result of "ongoing attacks on Judeo-Christian beliefs" and questioned why nobody else in the theater had a gun to take down the shooter.

Perhaps because many of us want to live in a civilized society where we can walk amongst fellow sane, civil, and respectful citizens who are not armed to the motherf*cking teeth and ready to get their IDF on.

I hate this stupid idea that we should be living in the wild west and everyone who isn't walking around with two pistols on their gun-belt and a shotgun slung around their back somehow isn't being a responsible citizen. Tougher gun control laws may have kept this psycho from getting the tear gas and AK-47 he used to massacre these innocent people.

Yeah, gun control. I went there. Control the f*cking guns already. The rest of the civilized world does it and they haven't been taken over by the Cowboys Gang yet. I'm sick and tired of this frontier mindset that the GOP and NRA folks have that we simply HAVE to be walking commandos. Does anyone really think we'd be safer with 250+ million people walking around absolutely strapped for combat? It's ridiculous.

Oh, but don't worry, the responsible gun owners will save us. This whole thing makes me sick, and Gohmert can go f*ck himself.
 
2012-07-20 04:11:18 PM  

I Browse: Why is everyone piling on Louie Gohmert? What's with the Gohmert pile...?


Boo.

Have a +1 and a virtual slap upside the head.
 
2012-07-20 04:11:22 PM  

dericwater: I mean, how did the ticket person not notice a guy with a gas mask and bullet-proof vest and perhaps a gun around?


maybe he did, i think the attack went down pretty fast from what they've said so far. If the guy walked through the front door and the ticket taker saw him, hid under the counter and called 9/11, by the time the police arrived it was probably already too late.
 
2012-07-20 04:11:43 PM  

I Browse: Why is everyone piling on Louie Gohmert? What's with the Gohmert pile...?


i14.photobucket.com
Sha-ZAY-am, I see whut you did there!

 
2012-07-20 04:11:51 PM  
I love these swinging dick Republicans. Why do they always have the assumption that some guy with a .45 that he keeps in a holster under his jacket has the magical ability to successfully return fire to a bad guy that has the element of surprise and already has his gun(s) out?

The chances that you'd ever be in a situation where your concealed carry (or even open carry) gun is going to save people's lives is so incredibly low, the mind boggles. And if you ever ARE in such a situation, the smart move would probably be to run and call the police in the first place.
 
2012-07-20 04:11:59 PM  

Basily Gourt: HotWingConspiracy: Basily Gourt: HotWingConspiracy: Basily Gourt: qorkfiend: Basily Gourt: Yep, not like people in the media aren't exploiting this for all it's worth.

[farm8.staticflickr.com image 388x1024]http://">

Should CNN not discuss the shooting on air? Why?

Not by ginning up support for gun control first, like this british turd did early this morning on twitter.

It said gun control/2nd amendment debate. Afraid of the debate?

Did you read his tweets? Pretty sure he isn't looking for a debate.

So yes, you're afraid of the debate. Maybe you should shoot him?

Really? That's gonna be your talking point?

Been listening to these so called "debates" most of my life. When the "moderator" of these sham debates is so fully in the tank for one point of view, there really isn't much to listen to.


If you have a strong position, that shouldn't matter. You're afraid. You don't even want the other side to be considered so you seek to shut it down.
 
2012-07-20 04:12:08 PM  

tlchwi02: hid under the counter and called 9/11


Mayor Giuliani?!
 
2012-07-20 04:13:49 PM  

ordinarysteve: qorkfiend: Basily Gourt: Yep, not like people in the media aren't exploiting this for all it's worth.

[farm8.staticflickr.com image 388x1024]http://">

Should CNN not discuss the shooting on air? Why?

I think the problem is that they perpetuate it by glamorizing mass killers. This video from a few years ago on the BB helps explain the problem Link


Came here to link this. Glad it's taken care of.
 
2012-07-20 04:14:04 PM  

'Quasar: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

He's got a point. I mean, establishing a crossfire in a dark room filled with tear gas seems like a reasonable alternative.'



Even in the worst case, that would have a 50% chance of disabling the shooter, and a nearly-0% chance of killing more people than he did.

I know your sarcasm got you a lot of "rah rah!" bites here, but you're wrong. (1) People who carry firearms legally tend to be trained pretty well on their proper use (thanks in large part to the NRA, btw), and (2) even through a bit of tear gas it's not that hard to spot a guy who "randomly shot as he walked up the theater's steps"...so (3) there would very likely have been no "crossfire" like you suggest. And as to the guy's protective gear -- had he been shot that might have saved him from dying, but not from getting knocked down painfully and not being able to shoot anymore. A bulletproof vest is a puncture protector, not a force-field.

Also: What the result of properly armed patrons in the face of gun-wielding attackers might actually look like.
 
2012-07-20 04:14:21 PM  

Mercutio74: I love these swinging dick Republicans. Why do they always have the assumption that some guy with a .45 that he keeps in a holster under his jacket has the magical ability to successfully return fire to a bad guy that has the element of surprise and already has his gun(s) out?

The chances that you'd ever be in a situation where your concealed carry (or even open carry) gun is going to save people's lives is so incredibly low, the mind boggles. And if you ever ARE in such a situation, the smart move would probably be to run and call the police in the first place.


Every time I get in this argument with a GOPer, they all have like 15 stories to share about concealed carry saving the day. I am pretty they all share the same 15 stories from the "FW: FW: FW: FW:" archives.

//[csb] Saw TDKR last night, was too tired to debate the guy this morning [/csb]
 
2012-07-20 04:14:31 PM  

Basily Gourt: Brian Ross ABC news:

STEPHANOPOULOS: I'm going to go to Brian Ross. You've been investigating the background of Jim Holmes here. You found something that might be significant.
ROSS: There's a Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colo., page on the Colorado Tea Party site as well, talking about him joining the tea party last year. Now, we don't know if this is the same Jim Holmes. But it's Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colo.
STEPHANOPOULOS: OK, we'll keep looking at that. Brian Ross thanks very much.


I realize they gotta fill time and get the scoop but that's just sloppy.

OTH, he did basically say, "Hey, I got nothin'" so I'm having trouble getting too worked up about it.
 
2012-07-20 04:14:57 PM  
this is how it all went down in gohmert's fever dreams:

goo.gl
 
2012-07-20 04:15:14 PM  
I don't understand. How does this creep keep getting elected? Surely they couldn't gerrymander a district of all paranoid schizophrenics, could they?
 
2012-07-20 04:15:19 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: Basily Gourt: HotWingConspiracy: Basily Gourt: HotWingConspiracy: Basily Gourt: qorkfiend: Basily Gourt: Yep, not like people in the media aren't exploiting this for all it's worth.

[farm8.staticflickr.com image 388x1024]http://">

Should CNN not discuss the shooting on air? Why?

Not by ginning up support for gun control first, like this british turd did early this morning on twitter.

It said gun control/2nd amendment debate. Afraid of the debate?

Did you read his tweets? Pretty sure he isn't looking for a debate.

So yes, you're afraid of the debate. Maybe you should shoot him?

Really? That's gonna be your talking point?

Been listening to these so called "debates" most of my life. When the "moderator" of these sham debates is so fully in the tank for one point of view, there really isn't much to listen to.

If you have a strong position, that shouldn't matter. You're afraid. You don't even want the other side to be considered so you seek to shut it down.


Ok, I didn't realize you were an idiot.

You made your point. I was wrong. You were right.

Congratulations!
 
2012-07-20 04:16:20 PM  
Did he explain how exactly this was an attack on judeo-christian values, because otherwise that statement just reminds me of this:

Homer: But Marge, I was a political prisoner.
Marge: How were you a political prisoner?
Homer: I kicked a giant mouse in the butt! Do I have to draw you a diagram?
 
2012-07-20 04:16:27 PM  

spmkk: 'Quasar: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

He's got a point. I mean, establishing a crossfire in a dark room filled with tear gas seems like a reasonable alternative.'


Even in the worst case, that would have a 50% chance of disabling the shooter, and a nearly-0% chance of killing more people than he did.

I know your sarcasm got you a lot of "rah rah!" bites here, but you're wrong. (1) People who carry firearms legally tend to be trained pretty well on their proper use (thanks in large part to the NRA, btw), and (2) even through a bit of tear gas it's not that hard to spot a guy who "randomly shot as he walked up the theater's steps"...so (3) there would very likely have been no "crossfire" like you suggest. And as to the guy's protective gear -- had he been shot that might have saved him from dying, but not from getting knocked down painfully and not being able to shoot anymore. A bulletproof vest is a puncture protector, not a force-field.

Also: What the result of properly armed patrons in the face of gun-wielding attackers might actually look like.


You know, the rest of us don't want to live in your old-west shootout world. And even ONE person shot by someone returning fire is too many. This whole thing is just a masturbatory fantasy for gun owners.
 
2012-07-20 04:16:33 PM  

spmkk: 'Quasar: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

He's got a point. I mean, establishing a crossfire in a dark room filled with tear gas seems like a reasonable alternative.'


Even in the worst case, that would have a 50% chance of disabling the shooter, and a nearly-0% chance of killing more people than he did.

I know your sarcasm got you a lot of "rah rah!" bites here, but you're wrong. (1) People who carry firearms legally tend to be trained pretty well on their proper use (thanks in large part to the NRA, btw), and (2) even through a bit of tear gas it's not that hard to spot a guy who "randomly shot as he walked up the theater's steps"...so (3) there would very likely have been no "crossfire" like you suggest. And as to the guy's protective gear -- had he been shot that might have saved him from dying, but not from getting knocked down painfully and not being able to shoot anymore. A bulletproof vest is a puncture protector, not a force-field.

Also: What the result of properly armed patrons in the face of gun-wielding attackers might actually look like.


What you're describing is a "best-case scenario" which doesn't always happen. Given the many elements of the environment (darkness, placement, reactions of other people if more than one armed citizen try to figure out who is shooting), it could have been worse.
 
2012-07-20 04:18:01 PM  

Basily Gourt: HotWingConspiracy: Basily Gourt: HotWingConspiracy: Basily Gourt: HotWingConspiracy: Basily Gourt: qorkfiend: Basily Gourt: Yep, not like people in the media aren't exploiting this for all it's worth.

[farm8.staticflickr.com image 388x1024]http://">

Should CNN not discuss the shooting on air? Why?

Not by ginning up support for gun control first, like this british turd did early this morning on twitter.

It said gun control/2nd amendment debate. Afraid of the debate?

Did you read his tweets? Pretty sure he isn't looking for a debate.

So yes, you're afraid of the debate. Maybe you should shoot him?

Really? That's gonna be your talking point?

Been listening to these so called "debates" most of my life. When the "moderator" of these sham debates is so fully in the tank for one point of view, there really isn't much to listen to.

If you have a strong position, that shouldn't matter. You're afraid. You don't even want the other side to be considered so you seek to shut it down.

Ok, I didn't realize you were an idiot.


You've really proven your smarts here.

Your ass is so chapped that someone wants to debate gun control, and it's very telling. Shut it down, we might lose this thing.
 
2012-07-20 04:18:24 PM  
. .

FlashHarry: gohmert is human filth.


globworld.com
 
2012-07-20 04:19:45 PM  

BSABSVR: mongbiohazard: The Police Commissioner of NYC

Is he suggesting more stop-n-frisk?



The clip of him I heard on the radio was him talking about how this shows how we need to restrict guns in this country, and that it's entirely too easy to get a gun, and there are 200 million of them in America which means there are already too many of them and blah blah blah... Typical reactionist stupidity.

Doesn't even realize that by saying that he is contradicting his own assertion. If there are 200 million guns, then even if we accept his premise that the gun was responsible for the crime (which I don't) 1 gun was the problem and he thinks that means we should eliminate the other 199,999,999 of them from private ownership because of that one. When someone intentionally plows in to a crowd of people with their car the response shouldn't be to eliminate cars or make them more difficult for people to own. It's preposterous.
 
2012-07-20 04:20:00 PM  
The right's reaction to a real shooting spree... we need to make it easier for people to legally get guns. The right's reaction to imagined voter fraud... we need to make it harder for people to legally vote. That's all you need to know about that.
 
2012-07-20 04:20:02 PM  

FatherDale: I don't understand. How does this creep keep getting elected? Surely they couldn't gerrymander a district of all paranoid schizophrenics, could they?


Have you ever been to east Texas? Not everyone is a paranoid schizophrenic, but it ain't Dallas or Austin as far as sophisicated modern cosmopolitan populations go.
 
2012-07-20 04:21:04 PM  

mongbiohazard: The clip of him I heard on the radio was him talking about how this shows how we need to restrict guns in this country, and that it's entirely too easy to get a gun, and there are 200 million of them in America which means there are already too many of them and blah blah blah... Typical reactionist stupidity.


We should just make shooting people illegal. Problem solved.
 
2012-07-20 04:21:36 PM  

Decados: Quasar: Codenamechaz: Quasar: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

He's got a point. I mean, establishing a crossfire in a dark room filled with tear gas seems like a reasonable alternative.

Are you suggesting it would be difficult to wound a target wearing a bullet proof vest and gas mask, wielding an assault rifle, shotgun and several pistols in the middle of a darkly lit theater while your eyes and lungs are being burned by tear gas?

I think if several heroic bystanders just started firing towards muzzle flashes, the situation would resolve itself rapidly.

Yeah, and just imagine if they managed to hit a kid.. or of the police came in and mistook our 'heroic bystander' for the shooter.

A responsible gun owner will only fire their weapon if they are confident of their target and their surroundings. It's the gun owners who use their weapons as penis extensions who get stiffies at the thought of a running gun battle with an armed gunman, in dark and chaotic circumstances.


Since "responsible" gun owners only vote republican one has to wonder why they are afraid of enacting laws to determine if potential gun owners are actually responsible. In fact, they are the loudest to shriek whenever any type of gun regulation is proposed. Arizona has some really swell gun laws, if you're a half-wit looking to acquire some assault rifles.
 
2012-07-20 04:22:04 PM  
Ya know, if elements of the pro-gun crowd are so quick to jump to action whenever an incident like this occurs, it kind of leads me to believe that they KNOW such incidents are an indictment of their views. If they weren't, then the knees wouldn't jerk so quickly.

I have zero issue with gun ownership. But gun regulations right now are a freaking joke, and the NRA knows it.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-07-20 04:22:05 PM  

Basily Gourt: Yep, not like people in the media aren't exploiting this for all it's worth.

[farm8.staticflickr.com image 388x1024]http://">


I know what you mean. I hate it how fire departments exploit fires as an excuse to spray water on burning buildings. And how ambulances exploit it when you have a heart attack to take you to the hospital.
 
2012-07-20 04:22:09 PM  

spmkk: 'Quasar: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

He's got a point. I mean, establishing a crossfire in a dark room filled with tear gas seems like a reasonable alternative.'


Even in the worst case, that would have a 50% chance of disabling the shooter, and a nearly-0% chance of killing more people than he did.



Do you even understand what words mean?
 
2012-07-20 04:22:19 PM  
I've just turned off MSNBC's coverage of the shooting, for the crime of taking Obama and Romney's comments on the shooting and pausing their respective campaigns to go into mutual mourning, and speculating about the political horserace impact of same.

Seriously, MSNBC? Fark you. Until the handle falls off.
 
2012-07-20 04:23:17 PM  

mongbiohazard: BSABSVR: mongbiohazard: The Police Commissioner of NYC

Is he suggesting more stop-n-frisk?


The clip of him I heard on the radio was him talking about how this shows how we need to restrict guns in this country, and that it's entirely too easy to get a gun, and there are 200 million of them in America which means there are already too many of them and blah blah blah... Typical reactionist stupidity.

Doesn't even realize that by saying that he is contradicting his own assertion. If there are 200 million guns, then even if we accept his premise that the gun was responsible for the crime (which I don't) 1 gun was the problem and he thinks that means we should eliminate the other 199,999,999 of them from private ownership because of that one. When someone intentionally plows in to a crowd of people with their car the response shouldn't be to eliminate cars or make them more difficult for people to own. It's preposterous.


You're absolutely right. If a person intentionally plows into a crowd of people with a car that was designed specifically for killing a crowd of people, you're metaphor would be dead accurate.
 
2012-07-20 04:23:58 PM  
i165.photobucket.com
 
2012-07-20 04:24:29 PM  

sprawl15: Basily Gourt: Brian Ross ABC news:

STEPHANOPOULOS: I'm going to go to Brian Ross. You've been investigating the background of Jim Holmes here. You found something that might be significant.
ROSS: There's a Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colo., page on the Colorado Tea Party site as well, talking about him joining the tea party last year. Now, we don't know if this is the same Jim Holmes. But it's Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colo.
STEPHANOPOULOS: OK, we'll keep looking at that. Brian Ross thanks very much.

HISTORY'S GREATEST MONSTER


No, but that's incredibly irresponsible 'journalism' brought about by the way news programs are less interested in reporting facts and more interested in having an exciting scoop.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-07-20 04:25:08 PM  

keylock71: This thread is silly... And we should all feel silly for posting in it. : )


So when has that ever stopped us?
 
2012-07-20 04:25:32 PM  

Captain_Ballbeard: spmkk: 'Quasar: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

He's got a point. I mean, establishing a crossfire in a dark room filled with tear gas seems like a reasonable alternative.'


Even in the worst case, that would have a 50% chance of disabling the shooter, and a nearly-0% chance of killing more people than he did.


Do you even understand what words mean?


Worst case he would have killed the shooter, best case Obama is impeached for being a Muslim. Stupid DIMbocrud.
 
2012-07-20 04:25:47 PM  

you are a puppet: Did he explain how exactly this was an attack on judeo-christian values, because otherwise that statement just reminds me of this:

Homer: But Marge, I was a political prisoner.
Marge: How were you a political prisoner?
Homer: I kicked a giant mouse in the butt! Do I have to draw you a diagram?


Since he's a Republican, I'm sure that the values that he feels are under attack are a betrayal of the teachings of Christ.
 
2012-07-20 04:26:12 PM  

Basily Gourt: Yep, not like people in the media aren't exploiting this for all it's worth.


Yeah, curse the news media for being all newsy. Farking bastards, right?

Furthermore, how DARE they exploit this as a "gun issue". Next thing you know, they'll be reporting on airport/airline safety whenever someone tries to blow up a plane. THE NERVE!
 
2012-07-20 04:26:33 PM  

magusdevil: mongbiohazard: BSABSVR: mongbiohazard: The Police Commissioner of NYC

Is he suggesting more stop-n-frisk?


The clip of him I heard on the radio was him talking about how this shows how we need to restrict guns in this country, and that it's entirely too easy to get a gun, and there are 200 million of them in America which means there are already too many of them and blah blah blah... Typical reactionist stupidity.

Doesn't even realize that by saying that he is contradicting his own assertion. If there are 200 million guns, then even if we accept his premise that the gun was responsible for the crime (which I don't) 1 gun was the problem and he thinks that means we should eliminate the other 199,999,999 of them from private ownership because of that one. When someone intentionally plows in to a crowd of people with their car the response shouldn't be to eliminate cars or make them more difficult for people to own. It's preposterous.

You're absolutely right. If a person intentionally plows into a crowd of people with a car that was designed specifically for killing a crowd of people, you're your metaphor would be dead accurate.


goddamnit.
 
2012-07-20 04:26:39 PM  

Quasar: No, but that's incredibly irresponsible 'journalism' brought about by the way news programs are less interested in reporting facts and more interested in having an exciting scoop.


Seriously. I hate the Tea Party as much as anyone, but just... Jesus Christ that's irresponsible journalism.
 
2012-07-20 04:27:43 PM  

Quasar: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

He's got a point. I mean, establishing a crossfire in a dark room filled with tear gas seems like a reasonable alternative.


I can see the Onion headline now

"Theater turned into cool western shootout when assailant opened fire and multiple people not knowing who the gunman was started firing on each other." "It was like a western shootout in one of those movies Grandpa always watches." says orphaned 8 year old Billy Everykid
 
2012-07-20 04:27:47 PM  

Quasar: sprawl15: Basily Gourt: Brian Ross ABC news:

STEPHANOPOULOS: I'm going to go to Brian Ross. You've been investigating the background of Jim Holmes here. You found something that might be significant.
ROSS: There's a Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colo., page on the Colorado Tea Party site as well, talking about him joining the tea party last year. Now, we don't know if this is the same Jim Holmes. But it's Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colo.
STEPHANOPOULOS: OK, we'll keep looking at that. Brian Ross thanks very much.

HISTORY'S GREATEST MONSTER

No, but that's incredibly irresponsible 'journalism' brought about by the way news programs are less interested in reporting facts and more interested in having an exciting scoop.


They aren't interested in journalism, and the sooner we get that through our collective skulls, the better... this is newstainment... just like fark... they're all about clicks, nielsen ratings, and revenue dollars... this is a business, not a public service. Their goal is to keep you tuned, not to inform you.
 
2012-07-20 04:28:20 PM  
This happened in my hometown so excuse me if my arguments are emotional. I woke up this morning and had to call all of my family and friends to make sure they were not dead.

These are my thoughts.

1. People massacred in a public area is a political issue. Stop whining about it, it does matter what affiliations this guy had, it does matter if he needed mental help and didn't receive it, it does matter where he got his guns, and gun control groups should use this incident as a rallying call.

2. I was never for gun control (columbine was our rival when attended highschool and the shootings occurred) but today I completely changed my political opinion on it. Maybe its because I am older and see the stupidity of the situation, this act was so random, it wasn't a highschool bullying thing, it was just a guy that went to a random theater and shot up strangers.
 
2012-07-20 04:29:00 PM  

Petit_Merdeux: Exactly!

There would have been a lot of collateral damage, but they would be heroes that were killed by bullets of freedom!

And as such they would have been eligible for a full military funeral! *


Do you have even a single incident as evidence to suggest that legally armed citizens defending themselves or others resulted in a net increase in deaths (not including the deaths of bad guys)?
 
2012-07-20 04:29:09 PM  

Gosling: I've just turned off MSNBC's coverage of the shooting, for the crime of taking Obama and Romney's comments on the shooting and pausing their respective campaigns to go into mutual mourning, and speculating about the political horserace impact of same.

Seriously, MSNBC? Fark you. Until the handle falls off.


WELL IT'S IMPORTANT TO KNOW WHO THE REAL VICTIMS ARE:

FARTBONGO AND FARTROMNEY
 
2012-07-20 04:29:29 PM  

Quasar: No, but that's incredibly irresponsible 'journalism' brought about by the way news programs are less interested in reporting facts and more interested in having an exciting scoop.


All they reported were facts. There's a guy with the same name in the city this happened. He's a teabagger. He may or may not be the same guy. They'll let us know later.

Shocking.
 
2012-07-20 04:29:52 PM  

WizardofToast: "Y u no use gun" is really a bad argument given


Given the fact that things don't always work to the convenience of those being attacked.
If these people knew there would be a shoot out at that theater, they would have stayed at home. There isn't much you can do against being ambushed in a crowd. But that doesn't mean people don't deserve a fighting chance.

This is like making an argument against fire extinguishers by pointing out that no one, not one fire extinguisher owner, was able to stop the Colorado Wildfires.
Fact is that fate conspired against them.
...But lets not take into account the difficulty of the situation or the root cause of this tragedy. Lets use this emotionally charged moment to renegotiate your rights.
 
2012-07-20 04:29:59 PM  

Gosling: I've just turned off MSNBC's coverage of the shooting, for the crime of taking Obama and Romney's comments on the shooting and pausing their respective campaigns to go into mutual mourning, and speculating about the political horserace impact of same.

Seriously, MSNBC? Fark you. Until the handle falls off.


You turned them off because of what? Dispassionate analysis? I don't get it.
 
2012-07-20 04:30:03 PM  
I'm sure the person responsible for the NRA twitter posting did not know about the shooting. But look at the time on the feed -- 9:20 AM. Considering that the shooting occurred at 12:30 AM Aurora time -- 2:30 AM East Coast, and it was allover the news it's could to know that the NRA person spent the entire morning under a rock.
 
2012-07-20 04:30:20 PM  
The attack on Judeo-Christian values was essentially there from the mere fact "Ra's Al Ghul", a muslimy-sounding name, was mentioned several times throughout TDKR. Good Colorado Christians were tempted by the Dark Side - Christopher Nolan - and were thus inundated by Muslimy things, which is why the shooting took place about 45 minutes into the movie - just at the part where Bruce Wayne orders falafel. Those Christians were on the path to Islamajihadatopia and had to be put down.
 
2012-07-20 04:31:40 PM  

runwiz: I'm sure the person responsible for the NRA twitter posting did not know about the shooting. But look at the time on the feed -- 9:20 AM. Considering that the shooting occurred at 12:30 AM Aurora time -- 2:30 AM East Coast, and it was allover the news it's could to know that the NRA person spent the entire morning under a rock.


Where else would you expect someone with their political beliefs to be? Sipping a latte in a Starbucks? shiate. How about sniffing some glue in the stationary aisle of Wal-mart.
 
2012-07-20 04:32:24 PM  

coeyagi: runwiz: I'm sure the person responsible for the NRA twitter posting did not know about the shooting. But look at the time on the feed -- 9:20 AM. Considering that the shooting occurred at 12:30 AM Aurora time -- 2:30 AM East Coast, and it was allover the news it's could to know that the NRA person spent the entire morning under a rock.

Where else would you expect someone with their political beliefs to be? Sipping a latte in a Starbucks? shiate. How about sniffing some glue in the stationary aisle of Wal-mart.


Getting back from their hunt?
 
2012-07-20 04:32:50 PM  

Alphax: You turned them off because of what? Dispassionate analysis? I don't get it.


Because they took what everyone with a brain is regarding as completely, totally apolitical, that both candidates have agreed is apolitical to the point where both of them are pulling their ads out of Colorado until further notice, and responding with 'So how does this affect the race?' That is the LAST question that ought to be on their minds. Take the hint and let an apolitical event be an apolitical event. For God's sake.
 
2012-07-20 04:33:05 PM  

coeyagi: The attack on Judeo-Christian values was essentially there from the mere fact "Ra's Al Ghul", a muslimy-sounding name, was mentioned several times throughout TDKR. Good Colorado Christians were tempted by the Dark Side - Christopher Nolan - and were thus inundated by Muslimy things, which is why the shooting took place about 45 minutes into the movie - just at the part where Bruce Wayne orders falafel. Those Christians were on the path to Islamajihadatopia and had to be put down.


media.desura.com

The Joker was a chaos-worshippping heretic, and his twisted ideas made the minds of Chris Nolan fans impure.
 
2012-07-20 04:33:28 PM  

SacriliciousBeerSwiller: Basily Gourt: Yep, not like people in the media aren't exploiting this for all it's worth.

Yeah, curse the news media for being all newsy. Farking bastards, right?

Furthermore, how DARE they exploit this as a "gun issue". Next thing you know, they'll be reporting on airport/airline safety whenever someone tries to blow up a plane. THE NERVE!


And there's the problem in a nutshell. Instead of digging deep and trying to find out what the fark is really happening to our society, arseholes on BOTH sides (that's right) try to sidetrack the conversation using a convenient scapegoat.

Gawd forbid we start talking about what is really wrong with society today. Neither the dems or repubs want to have that conversation out in the open. The torches and pitchforks might come out.
 
2012-07-20 04:33:32 PM  

hammettman: Decados: Quasar: Codenamechaz: Quasar: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

He's got a point. I mean, establishing a crossfire in a dark room filled with tear gas seems like a reasonable alternative.

Are you suggesting it would be difficult to wound a target wearing a bullet proof vest and gas mask, wielding an assault rifle, shotgun and several pistols in the middle of a darkly lit theater while your eyes and lungs are being burned by tear gas?

I think if several heroic bystanders just started firing towards muzzle flashes, the situation would resolve itself rapidly.

Yeah, and just imagine if they managed to hit a kid.. or of the police came in and mistook our 'heroic bystander' for the shooter.

A responsible gun owner will only fire their weapon if they are confident of their target and their surroundings. It's the gun owners who use their weapons as penis extensions who get stiffies at the thought of a running gun battle with an armed gunman, in dark and chaotic circumstances.

Since "responsible" gun owners only vote republican one has to wonder why they are afraid of enacting laws to determine if potential gun owners are actually responsible. In fact, they are the loudest to shriek whenever any type of gun regulation is proposed. Arizona has some really swell gun laws, if you're a half-wit looking to acquire some assault rifles.


It's also worth pointing out that the same Republicans pushing so hard for voter ID laws to prevent the fraud unicorn from manifesting have such a concern for the polls but don't give two shiats about making sure some some schizophrenic off his meds can't pickup an assault rifle. Because you know, that would be infringing on his freedom or something.
 
2012-07-20 04:33:38 PM  

runwiz: I'm sure the person responsible for the NRA twitter posting did not know about the shooting. But look at the time on the feed -- 9:20 AM. Considering that the shooting occurred at 12:30 AM Aurora time -- 2:30 AM East Coast, and it was allover the news it's could to know that the NRA person spent the entire morning under a rock.


Gotta say, you'd think the N fnckin' RA would've received a tweet about it or something.
 
2012-07-20 04:33:53 PM  

the_geek: Petit_Merdeux: Exactly!

There would have been a lot of collateral damage, but they would be heroes that were killed by bullets of freedom!

And as such they would have been eligible for a full military funeral! *

Do you have even a single incident as evidence to suggest that legally armed citizens defending themselves or others resulted in a net increase in deaths (not including the deaths of bad guys)?


Do you consider Trayvon Martin a "bad guy"?
 
2012-07-20 04:34:07 PM  

sprawl15: coeyagi: runwiz: I'm sure the person responsible for the NRA twitter posting did not know about the shooting. But look at the time on the feed -- 9:20 AM. Considering that the shooting occurred at 12:30 AM Aurora time -- 2:30 AM East Coast, and it was allover the news it's could to know that the NRA person spent the entire morning under a rock.

Where else would you expect someone with their political beliefs to be? Sipping a latte in a Starbucks? shiate. How about sniffing some glue in the stationary aisle of Wal-mart.

Getting back from their hunt?


2.bp.blogspot.com

If CNN / Google Alerts don't work in your den, you'd better start thinking about getting a better ISP.
 
2012-07-20 04:34:26 PM  

PDid: 2. I was never for gun control (columbine was our rival when attended highschool and the shootings occurred) but today I completely changed my political opinion on it. Maybe its because I am older and see the stupidity of the situation, this act was so random, it wasn't a highschool bullying thing, it was just a guy that went to a random theater and shot up strangers.


It's all about geography. If I told you that someone was run over by a car that went through a red light you probably aren't going to care. If you see someone get run over by a car that runs a red light, particularly if the person who dies is related to you or a friend, you're much more likely to become a anti-red light runner activist. Please pardon the rest of us as we ignore your knee-jerk emotional response and continue to focus on things that kill many more people senselessly in this country and around the world.
 
2012-07-20 04:36:00 PM  

the_geek: PDid: 2. I was never for gun control (columbine was our rival when attended highschool and the shootings occurred) but today I completely changed my political opinion on it. Maybe its because I am older and see the stupidity of the situation, this act was so random, it wasn't a highschool bullying thing, it was just a guy that went to a random theater and shot up strangers.

It's all about geography. If I told you that someone was run over by a car that went through a red light you probably aren't going to care. If you see someone get run over by a car that runs a red light, particularly if the person who dies is related to you or a friend, you're much more likely to become a anti-red light runner activist. Please pardon the rest of us as we ignore your knee-jerk emotional response and continue to focus on things that kill many more people senselessly in this country and around the world.


Most other stuff that kills a lot of people does so accidentally. Important.
 
2012-07-20 04:36:02 PM  

the_geek: Petit_Merdeux: Exactly!

There would have been a lot of collateral damage, but they would be heroes that were killed by bullets of freedom!

And as such they would have been eligible for a full military funeral! *

Do you have even a single incident as evidence to suggest that legally armed citizens defending themselves or others resulted in a net increase in deaths (not including the deaths of bad guys)?


Have you been living under a rock for the past three months? Do the names George Zimmermann or Trayvon Martin ring any bells?
 
2012-07-20 04:36:13 PM  

coeyagi: sprawl15: coeyagi: runwiz: I'm sure the person responsible for the NRA twitter posting did not know about the shooting. But look at the time on the feed -- 9:20 AM. Considering that the shooting occurred at 12:30 AM Aurora time -- 2:30 AM East Coast, and it was allover the news it's could to know that the NRA person spent the entire morning under a rock.

Where else would you expect someone with their political beliefs to be? Sipping a latte in a Starbucks? shiate. How about sniffing some glue in the stationary aisle of Wal-mart.

Getting back from their hunt?

[2.bp.blogspot.com image 450x258]

If CNN / Google Alerts don't work in your den, you'd better start thinking about getting a better ISP.


I'm pretty sure a CNN news alert from the incident would read "MASS RESURRECTION AT COLORADO MOVIE THEATER" for about 8 minutes.
 
2012-07-20 04:36:55 PM  

coeyagi: sprawl15: coeyagi: runwiz: I'm sure the person responsible for the NRA twitter posting did not know about the shooting. But look at the time on the feed -- 9:20 AM. Considering that the shooting occurred at 12:30 AM Aurora time -- 2:30 AM East Coast, and it was allover the news it's could to know that the NRA person spent the entire morning under a rock.

Where else would you expect someone with their political beliefs to be? Sipping a latte in a Starbucks? shiate. How about sniffing some glue in the stationary aisle of Wal-mart.

Getting back from their hunt?

[2.bp.blogspot.com image 450x258]

If CNN / Google Alerts don't work in your den, you'd better start thinking about getting a better ISP.


It's likely lined with tinfoil to prevent Obama's jackbooted thugs with X-Ray machines from scanning for Real Americans.
 
2012-07-20 04:37:31 PM  

Gosling: Alphax: You turned them off because of what? Dispassionate analysis? I don't get it.

Because they took what everyone with a brain is regarding as completely, totally apolitical, that both candidates have agreed is apolitical to the point where both of them are pulling their ads out of Colorado until further notice, and responding with 'So how does this affect the race?' That is the LAST question that ought to be on their minds. Take the hint and let an apolitical event be an apolitical event. For God's sake.


Would you rather they asked Snooki for her thoughts on the situation? Ran more Missing Child stories? Or just keep running the original report nonstop for the next week? I can think of many worse options, more pointless options.
 
2012-07-20 04:37:32 PM  
Was was Ghomert not a front-runner for the GOP presidential nomination?
 
2012-07-20 04:38:07 PM  

Flab: the_geek: Petit_Merdeux: Exactly!

There would have been a lot of collateral damage, but they would be heroes that were killed by bullets of freedom!

And as such they would have been eligible for a full military funeral! *

Do you have even a single incident as evidence to suggest that legally armed citizens defending themselves or others resulted in a net increase in deaths (not including the deaths of bad guys)?

Have you been living under a rock for the past three months? Do the names George Zimmermann or Trayvon Martin ring any bells?


There are other cases, as well, of "Stand your ground" style laws resulting in shootings. Those shootings would not have otherwise happened. There was the guy who shot his neighbors for having loud music on, thinking he was "standing his ground" (on their property, when they were unarmed).
 
2012-07-20 04:38:10 PM  

Apocalyptic Inferno: Was was Ghomert not a front-runner for the GOP presidential nomination?


That is, how was Ghomert not a front-runner?
 
2012-07-20 04:38:57 PM  

Apocalyptic Inferno: Was was Ghomert not a front-runner for the GOP presidential nomination?


Though he's definitely got the wingnut credentials... I don't think he was.
 
2012-07-20 04:39:18 PM  
Dear Voters in the State of Texas (1st District):

What the f*ck is wrong with you??? Jesus-Tapdancing-on-a-Cracker..... WHAT IN THE BLUE-BALLED F*CK IS WRRRROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNNNNG WITH YOU???????

Yours in Christ..... Rann
 
2012-07-20 04:39:34 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: I thought this was already won by the news organizations that reported that he was a member of the Tea Party.

Not realizing that there are more than one person named John Holmes in the world.


Watching the right-wing media pretend like they are bastions of moral authority and accurate news reporting is pretty hilarious. ABC shouldn't have done that, but let's not pretend like any right-wing blog or "news" channel has any authority to criticize them for "just asking questions".
 
2012-07-20 04:40:08 PM  

magusdevil: You're absolutely right. If a person intentionally plows into a crowd of people with a car that was designed specifically for killing a crowd of people, you're metaphor would be dead accurate.



I don't see how it matters to the metaphor either way. They're both potentially destructive tools, which create large amounts of force - though the car certainly creates much more. In fact, the car is potentially the more destructive of the two I'd argue... but because the car is the one you're more familiar with that's the one that scares you less.

He also used tear gas to facilitate his murders too. Do you propose we outlaw tear gas as well because someone might hatch a scheme to use it - and a gas mask - to help him incapacitate people so he can stab a bunch to death? What if he'd barred the doors closed and used a simple mixture of ammonia and chlorine to kill them, should we then outlaw household cleaners? Ridiculous.

Any tool is just a TOOL. It's the human wielding it which causes calamity and human beings have proven to be able to be very creative with how we bring harm to others. But set that gun on a table, leave that car in the driveway, put that hammer on the ground.... and you can come back 1,000 years later and none of them will have killed anything at all.

This guy was very methodical with what he did, and the fact that he used tear gas in his attack pretty clearly shows that he was plenty willing to be creative with the tools he used. We should be glad that he didn't use bombs, because he certainly could have killed even more people that way. But in the end it's the killer who is responsible, and focusing on the specific tool employed is a complete exercise in futility and misdirection.

The only reason we do it is because we struggle to find something to blame, even if it makes no sense, because the alternative - facing the fact that we live in a world where one dedicated nutcase can kill some people if they really try is less satisfying then finding a scapegoat to blame. Even moreso when that scapegoat is inanimate and so can't even argue on it's own behalf, so you don't have to feel bad about misdirecting your anger at it.
 
2012-07-20 04:42:37 PM  

Apocalyptic Inferno: Apocalyptic Inferno: Was was Ghomert not a front-runner for the GOP presidential nomination?

That is, how was Ghomert not a front-runner?


Too ugly, perhaps? Physically, I mean. Being ugly on the inside is now a requirement in the GOP.
 
2012-07-20 04:45:56 PM  

mongbiohazard: magusdevil: You're absolutely right. If a person intentionally plows into a crowd of people with a car that was designed specifically for killing a crowd of people, you're metaphor would be dead accurate.


I don't see how it matters to the metaphor either way. They're both potentially destructive tools, which create large amounts of force - though the car certainly creates much more. In fact, the car is potentially the more destructive of the two I'd argue... but because the car is the one you're more familiar with that's the one that scares you less.

He also used tear gas to facilitate his murders too. Do you propose we outlaw tear gas as well because someone might hatch a scheme to use it - and a gas mask - to help him incapacitate people so he can stab a bunch to death? What if he'd barred the doors closed and used a simple mixture of ammonia and chlorine to kill them, should we then outlaw household cleaners? Ridiculous.

Any tool is just a TOOL. It's the human wielding it which causes calamity and human beings have proven to be able to be very creative with how we bring harm to others. But set that gun on a table, leave that car in the driveway, put that hammer on the ground.... and you can come back 1,000 years later and none of them will have killed anything at all.

This guy was very methodical with what he did, and the fact that he used tear gas in his attack pretty clearly shows that he was plenty willing to be creative with the tools he used. We should be glad that he didn't use bombs, because he certainly could have killed even more people that way. But in the end it's the killer who is responsible, and focusing on the specific tool employed is a complete exercise in futility and misdirection.

The only reason we do it is because we struggle to find something to blame, even if it makes no sense, because the alternative - facing the fact that we live in a world where one dedicated nutcase can kill some people if they really try is less satisfying then ...


I bet if an average of 31 homicides per day were committed using cars as the weapon of choice, it would, in fact, be harder to get a car than it is now.

And yes a tool is just a tool, a car is a tool for getting from point a to point b, a hammer is a tool for driving a nail into wood, and a gun is a tool for making something or someone that is alive into something or someone that is dead.

That being said, every single car in the US is licensed and registered. The same is not true for every single gun.
 
2012-07-20 04:45:57 PM  

mongbiohazard: But in the end it's the killer who is responsible,


That doesn't mean it should be trivial for the killer to acquire and use said tools.

Why don't more people blow things up? Could it possibly be because it's a bit harder to get or build a bomb than it is to get a gun and ammunition?
 
2012-07-20 04:46:10 PM  
For those ragging on msnbc:

Their tagline is "THE place for politics." They report on news like this and wildfires and Syria but their daily principal focus is politics. In addition, they've got about five minutes of details at this point and a whole hour to fill at a time. The guest profilers can only ad lib for so long before it just gets ridiculous. Turning the discussion to public policy is natural if only to discuss how powerful the NRA and how stupid Gohmert is.
 
2012-07-20 04:46:11 PM  
lh5.googleusercontent.com
 
2012-07-20 04:47:08 PM  

spcMike: I still regret the day I was 50 ft from Louis Gohmert and didn't take that opprotunity to punch him in the face.


You have really long arms.
 
2012-07-20 04:47:27 PM  

you are a puppet: Did he explain how exactly this was an attack on judeo-christian values


I believe Louis Gohmert gets paid $20 every time he says "Judeo-Christian values" in public.

/brought to you by Judeo-Christian values.
 
2012-07-20 04:47:46 PM  

mongbiohazard: I don't see how it matters to the metaphor either way. ... . Even moreso when that scapegoat is inanimate and so can't even argue on it's own behalf, so you don't have to feel bad about misdirecting your anger at it.


For what it's worth, as a bleeding heart, namby pamby liberal commie socialist (I'm from Canada), I agree with you. However, I would have far warmer feeling about the NRA and the right wing in general about "gun control" and 2nd amendment issues if instead of being focused purely on the absolute god-given right of 'mericuns to bear arms, they'd have a different rhetoric when something like this happens. Personally, I think even if you're a card carrying member of the NRA the focus should be on how can you protect the 2nd amendment but keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill and criminals that use guns as part of their MO. That's a far more important thing to ponder than, "What if some dude had a 9mm tucked into his waistband?"
 
2012-07-20 04:47:50 PM  
Yes, because telling me that your god will allow me to get murdered if I don't do exactly what you say is going to convince me that God loves me and I should worship him.

/Douche
 
2012-07-20 04:48:43 PM  

mongbiohazard: magusdevil: You're absolutely right. If a person intentionally plows into a crowd of people with a car that was designed specifically for killing a crowd of people, you're metaphor would be dead accurate.


I don't see how it matters to the metaphor either way. They're both potentially destructive tools, which create large amounts of force - though the car certainly creates much more. In fact, the car is potentially the more destructive of the two I'd argue... but because the car is the one you're more familiar with that's the one that scares you less.

He also used tear gas to facilitate his murders too. Do you propose we outlaw tear gas as well because someone might hatch a scheme to use it - and a gas mask - to help him incapacitate people so he can stab a bunch to death? What if he'd barred the doors closed and used a simple mixture of ammonia and chlorine to kill them, should we then outlaw household cleaners? Ridiculous.

Any tool is just a TOOL. It's the human wielding it which causes calamity and human beings have proven to be able to be very creative with how we bring harm to others. But set that gun on a table, leave that car in the driveway, put that hammer on the ground.... and you can come back 1,000 years later and none of them will have killed anything at all.

This guy was very methodical with what he did, and the fact that he used tear gas in his attack pretty clearly shows that he was plenty willing to be creative with the tools he used. We should be glad that he didn't use bombs, because he certainly could have killed even more people that way. But in the end it's the killer who is responsible, and focusing on the specific tool employed is a complete exercise in futility and misdirection.

The only reason we do it is because we struggle to find something to blame, even if it makes no sense, because the alternative - facing the fact that we live in a world where one dedicated nutcase can kill some people if they really try is less satisfying then ...


1. No one buys a car with the intention of killing people with it, nor do they buy a car with the intention of using it to defend themselves from someone with a gun. False equivalency.

2. Yes, tear gas should be outlawed. Explain to us why the average citizen needs to be stocked up with tear gas? Tear gas is also specifically designed to disable large crowds, unlike ammonia, which you know, is specifically designed to clean windows.

3. These are not tools, they're weapons. They are different. While a tool can be used as a weapon, and in certain cases visa-verse, they are made with a primary function as a weapon or tool. Restricting deadly weapons means that there are less chances of deadly weapons being used against you and everyone else. Restricting tools would just be asinine.

Your argument is supremely weak here. This "guns don't kill people, people kill people" is one of the most pedantic arguments to be used by the pro-gun crowd.

NEWSFLASH: People do kill people, and people who die of gunshot wounds were killed by people with guns.
 
2012-07-20 04:50:04 PM  

BuckTurgidson: I believe Louis Gohmert gets paid $20 every time he says "Judeo-Christian values" in public.


The "Judeo-Christian Fairy" is going to be working overtime.

/Legend has it if you leave a "Good News Bible" under your pillow, in the morning you'll find that the Judeo-Christian Fairy will have left a very, very shiatty translation of the bible in its place as a reward.
 
2012-07-20 04:50:08 PM  

magusdevil: That being said, every single car in the US is licensed and registered.


lolololololol
 
2012-07-20 04:50:31 PM  
In the NRA dream world, all of the 300 people in the theater would be armed and defending their ground. So let's give each person (including the kids) a 9 mm with a 15-round magazine -- that's 4,500 rounds quickly fired in a dark, crowded, smoke-filled room where no one knows where the first shot came from.
Yeah, that will work out just fine...
 
2012-07-20 04:51:49 PM  
I never leave the house without 65lbs of C-4 strapped to my body. If some loon starts shooting, I'm taking everyone down.
 
2012-07-20 04:55:00 PM  

Jackson Herring: dericwater: Shooting at targets at a firing range is practice. Yeah, a lot of people have fun doing that. But I did specifically mention assault rifles, which aren't used in most hunting as well. So the only actual use of such guns are when aimed and used against other humans. Luckily, most people use that as often as they take out their $500,000 antique Model-T to drive to Costco for a BBQ purchase.

oh so you've never been to a range before is what you are saying


I have been to a range. First, you have to drive no faster than 3 mph once you pass the entrance. Everyone is behind the line during the 10 to 20 minutes of shooting. When the cease fire alarm goes off, all guns must be placed down, magazine emptied. Supervisors come by to check the guns are empty, then people get to walk over to see the targets they were shooting.

You see, it's all quite heavily regulated. Using a gun there is like driving on a track. How many accidents do ordinary folks get into driving cars on a track under trained eyes and assistance?

Now go into the real world. When people open fire not on a firing range, you're doing it wrong if it doesn't hit someone. See how that's the difference between a car and a gun? When a car is properly used in ordinary situations, people don't get killed. When a gun is properly used in ordinary situations (i.e., not in a firing range), people should get killed.
 
2012-07-20 04:55:04 PM  

JAYoung: In the NRA dream world, all of the 300 people in the theater would be armed and defending their ground. So let's give each person (including the kids) a 9 mm with a 15-round magazine -- that's 4,500 rounds quickly fired in a dark, crowded, smoke-filled room where no one knows where the first shot came from.
Yeah, that will work out just fine...


Not a new idea. Archie Bunker had a similar thought 40 years ago

Link
 
2012-07-20 04:55:22 PM  

NutznGum: I never leave the house without 65lbs of C-4 strapped to my body. If some loon starts shooting, I'm taking everyone down.


That's a young man's game. I found that if I carry more than 30lbs I sweat like a Gohmert.
 
2012-07-20 04:56:58 PM  

dericwater: ordinary situations


dericwater: i.e., not in a firing range


WHEN A CAR IS USED IN ORDINARY SITUATIONS (i.e., in a swimming pool) MANY PEOPLE ARE AT SEVERE RISK OF BEING INJURED
 
2012-07-20 04:57:14 PM  

Mercutio74: NutznGum: I never leave the house without 65lbs of C-4 strapped to my body. If some loon starts shooting, I'm taking everyone down.

That's a young man's game. I found that if I carry more than 30lbs I sweat like a Gohmert.


I used to carry a flame thrower but the fumes made me dizzy.
 
2012-07-20 04:59:22 PM  

NutznGum: Mercutio74: NutznGum: I never leave the house without 65lbs of C-4 strapped to my body. If some loon starts shooting, I'm taking everyone down.

That's a young man's game. I found that if I carry more than 30lbs I sweat like a Gohmert.

I used to carry a flame thrower but the fumes made me dizzy.


images.wikia.com
 
2012-07-20 05:02:41 PM  
Hi, FARK.com. I'm a scout with the NBA, and I'm looking for recruits with exceptionally long arms. Would anybody here happen to know someone who fits that description?
 
2012-07-20 05:03:01 PM  

doczoidberg: The worst part about all of this is that the release of Batman's triumphant final film has been all screwed up....
It feels weird being excited about seeing it now.


Just got back from it. It was very very good.

Go see it, and enjoy yourself.

In fact, I'll ask every farker to go to the movies this weekend. Go see anything. Because, fark that guy.
 
2012-07-20 05:03:56 PM  

imontheinternet: Hi, FARK.com. I'm a scout with the NBA, and I'm looking for recruits with exceptionally long arms. Would anybody here happen to know someone who fits that description?


Boy have you come to the right place! Let me tell you about this guy I know, really long arms but sounds like more of a boxer. You might be able to work with him though...
 
2012-07-20 05:05:00 PM  
For those who keep harping on what other armed patrons could or could not have hypothetically done, I'm given to understand that this theater disallows firearms in the property. If there were any CCW holders there, they would have left their weapons in vehicles or at home.
 
2012-07-20 05:05:36 PM  

doczoidberg: The worst part about all of this is that the release of Batman's triumphant final film has been all screwed up....


Well at least you've maintained your perspective.
 
2012-07-20 05:06:17 PM  

JAYoung: in a dark, crowded, smoke-filled room where no one knows where the first shot came from.


I think I've been to that strip club once.
 
2012-07-20 05:09:31 PM  

LasersHurt: Flab: the_geek: Petit_Merdeux: Exactly!

There would have been a lot of collateral damage, but they would be heroes that were killed by bullets of freedom!

And as such they would have been eligible for a full military funeral! *

Do you have even a single incident as evidence to suggest that legally armed citizens defending themselves or others resulted in a net increase in deaths (not including the deaths of bad guys)?

Have you been living under a rock for the past three months? Do the names George Zimmermann or Trayvon Martin ring any bells?

There are other cases, as well, of "Stand your ground" style laws resulting in shootings. Those shootings would not have otherwise happened. There was the guy who shot his neighbors for having loud music on, thinking he was "standing his ground" (on their property, when they were unarmed).


Or the guy in the SUV who nearly ran over a mentally challenged kid and then shot the kid dead when the kid yelled at him to watch where he was going.
 
2012-07-20 05:10:15 PM  

mongbiohazard: When someone intentionally plows in to a crowd of people with their car the response shouldn't be to eliminate cars or make them more difficult for people to own.


No, we put up a traffic barrier so that psychotics in cars can't easily plow through pedestrian areas.

Think of "gun control" regulations as an orange plastic barrel filled with sand.
 
2012-07-20 05:12:00 PM  

RINO: For those who keep harping on what other armed patrons could or could not have hypothetically done, I'm given to understand that this theater disallows firearms in the property. If there were any CCW holders there, they would have left their weapons in vehicles or at home.


Many theaters do that. The same reasons you can't bring a gun to a concert or a football game. Because more people are likely to die in the chaos.

I'm just surprised nobody was trampled to death.

But hey, Louie's right. Someone could have easily taken out a guy wearing body armor in a dark room full of screaming people with eyes and lungs full of tear gas.
 
2012-07-20 05:13:55 PM  

Mouldy Squid: LasersHurt: Flab: the_geek: Petit_Merdeux: Exactly!

There would have been a lot of collateral damage, but they would be heroes that were killed by bullets of freedom!

And as such they would have been eligible for a full military funeral! *

Do you have even a single incident as evidence to suggest that legally armed citizens defending themselves or others resulted in a net increase in deaths (not including the deaths of bad guys)?

Have you been living under a rock for the past three months? Do the names George Zimmermann or Trayvon Martin ring any bells?

There are other cases, as well, of "Stand your ground" style laws resulting in shootings. Those shootings would not have otherwise happened. There was the guy who shot his neighbors for having loud music on, thinking he was "standing his ground" (on their property, when they were unarmed).

Or the guy in the SUV who nearly ran over a mentally challenged kid and then shot the kid dead when the kid yelled at him to watch where he was going.


Exactly. I am a pro-gun-ownership dude, but there's no evidence that carrying them around and feeling like you're clear to shoot is a good thing. I think you should keep them at home. I also think you should be criminally liable for anything that happens with your gun, because it's your own stupid fault for not keeping a lethal weapon properly secured.
 
2012-07-20 05:15:32 PM  

LasersHurt: Mouldy Squid: LasersHurt: Flab: the_geek: Petit_Merdeux: Exactly!

There would have been a lot of collateral damage, but they would be heroes that were killed by bullets of freedom!

And as such they would have been eligible for a full military funeral! *

Do you have even a single incident as evidence to suggest that legally armed citizens defending themselves or others resulted in a net increase in deaths (not including the deaths of bad guys)?

Have you been living under a rock for the past three months? Do the names George Zimmermann or Trayvon Martin ring any bells?

There are other cases, as well, of "Stand your ground" style laws resulting in shootings. Those shootings would not have otherwise happened. There was the guy who shot his neighbors for having loud music on, thinking he was "standing his ground" (on their property, when they were unarmed).

Or the guy in the SUV who nearly ran over a mentally challenged kid and then shot the kid dead when the kid yelled at him to watch where he was going.

Exactly. I am a pro-gun-ownership dude, but there's no evidence that carrying them around and feeling like you're clear to shoot is a good thing. I think you should keep them at home. I also think you should be criminally liable for anything that happens with your gun, because it's your own stupid fault for not keeping a lethal weapon properly secured.


This! I am pro-responsible-gun-ownership as well and that puts me on the opposite side of the fence from the NRA.
 
2012-07-20 05:16:25 PM  

LasersHurt: I think you should keep them at home. I also think you should be criminally liable for anything that happens with your gun, because it's your own stupid fault for not keeping a lethal weapon properly secured.


Yes indeed. You have a right to do it, but with that right comes the responsibility to protect the public from your own potential bumbling incompetence or total lack of good judgement.
 
2012-07-20 05:16:43 PM  
Ok, I've got an idea.

You give suicidal people a spear gun and a job patrolling crowded events.

If someone goes nuts on a terror shooting spree, the suicidal guy with a spear gun runs up and harpoons the shooter.
 
2012-07-20 05:18:05 PM  

Flab: Flab: Alright, so: the NRA and Celeboutique have posted their "Ooops. Our bad." apologies. Is Gohmert now alone in the lead?

Amended: Gohmert and George Snuffleupagus are apparently still in the race.


Update: Snufflehupagus is out.

Can we give the Golden Douchebag to Gohmert, now?
 
2012-07-20 05:18:35 PM  

Mercutio74: LasersHurt: I think you should keep them at home. I also think you should be criminally liable for anything that happens with your gun, because it's your own stupid fault for not keeping a lethal weapon properly secured.

Yes indeed. You have a right to do it, but with that right comes the responsibility to protect the public from your own potential bumbling incompetence or total lack of good judgement.


I just never quite understood the arguments from people who are more than willing to point to responsible gun owners, but fight tooth and nail against any honest discussion of gun control. Responsible Gun use REQUIRES, by it's very nature, gun control.
 
2012-07-20 05:18:36 PM  

LasersHurt: "You know, the rest of us don't want to live in your old-west shootout world."


Believe me, neither do I. But clearly we already do. What I REALLY don't want is to live defenseless in an old-west shootout world.


LasersHurt: "And even ONE person shot by someone returning fire is too many."


Even if it saves several people from being shot by the original gunman? That's quite the moral stance.


LasersHurt: "This whole thing is just a masturbatory fantasy for gun owners."


Right, this is the stuff that gun owners' dreams are made of. Just like baseball players are driven by the fantasy of a bloody street fight so they can finally live free and swing that bat at the bad guy.
 
2012-07-20 05:19:44 PM  

Quasar: Codenamechaz: Quasar: "It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

He's got a point. I mean, establishing a crossfire in a dark room filled with tear gas seems like a reasonable alternative.

Are you suggesting it would be difficult to wound a target wearing a bullet proof vest and gas mask, wielding an assault rifle, shotgun and several pistols in the middle of a darkly lit theater while your eyes and lungs are being burned by tear gas?

I think if several heroic bystanders just started firing towards muzzle flashes, the situation would resolve itself rapidly.


Yes: EVERYONE would have been dead.
 
2012-07-20 05:20:26 PM  
spmkk:

Until you can prove, via statistics, that arming everyone would reduce the number of people shot, I will disagree with the idea. And since you can't prove that, I'm feeling pretty solid.
 
2012-07-20 05:23:53 PM  

LasersHurt: Mouldy Squid: LasersHurt: Flab: the_geek: Petit_Merdeux: Exactly!

There would have been a lot of collateral damage, but they would be heroes that were killed by bullets of freedom!

And as such they would have been eligible for a full military funeral! *

Do you have even a single incident as evidence to suggest that legally armed citizens defending themselves or others resulted in a net increase in deaths (not including the deaths of bad guys)?

Have you been living under a rock for the past three months? Do the names George Zimmermann or Trayvon Martin ring any bells?

There are other cases, as well, of "Stand your ground" style laws resulting in shootings. Those shootings would not have otherwise happened. There was the guy who shot his neighbors for having loud music on, thinking he was "standing his ground" (on their property, when they were unarmed).

Or the guy in the SUV who nearly ran over a mentally challenged kid and then shot the kid dead when the kid yelled at him to watch where he was going.

Exactly. I am a pro-gun-ownership dude, but there's no evidence that carrying them around and feeling like you're clear to shoot is a good thing. I think you should keep them at home. I also think you should be criminally liable for anything that happens with your gun, because it's your own stupid fault for not keeping a lethal weapon properly secured.


I compete in IPSC and IDPA (and a little 3 gun) up here in Canukistan so count me in the "responsible gun ownership" group. The idea that if I were an American and could just walk into a gun store and buy one, stick it in my belt and walk out frightens me. I know that I exaggerate, but it seems as if it is entirely too easy for psychotics to get firearms down south. And despite what you hear, it's not that hard to get a hand gun here either. You do, however, have to undergo training and testing before you get your license to acquire. Most of our gun crime is committed with illegal firearms (stolen/smuggled).
 
2012-07-20 05:25:59 PM  

spmkk: LasersHurt: "You know, the rest of us don't want to live in your old-west shootout world."

Believe me, neither do I. But clearly we already do. What I REALLY don't want is to live defenseless in an old-west shootout world.


LasersHurt: "And even ONE person shot by someone returning fire is too many."

Even if it saves several people from being shot by the original gunman? That's quite the moral stance.


LasersHurt: "This whole thing is just a masturbatory fantasy for gun owners."

Right, this is the stuff that gun owners' dreams are made of. Just like baseball players are driven by the fantasy of a bloody street fight so they can finally live free and swing that bat at the bad guy.


Are YOU volunteering to be the "one person shot" to save the rest of us? You're willing to take a bullet for the greater good?

Because I am not. I don't want to be shot by some fool returning fire because he thinks or even will save several other people. I'm not that noble. The only person I know offhand who IS that noble is currently in Afghanistan with many other similarly-minded people and that's why we honor them. But the rest of us...If you took it on yourself to shoot back at some armed madman and hit me by mistake, I'd sue your ass for reckless endangerment if I lived, and hope my family would likewise impoverish you if I died.
 
2012-07-20 05:26:42 PM  

Mouldy Squid: Most of our gun crime is committed with illegal firearms (stolen/smu ...


To be fair, most of ours is too. But there's been a push lately to expand the rights of gun owners to legally kill, and it's resulted in, ta-dah, unnecessary deaths. I'd rather every single gun death require a criminal investigation - it should be pretty farking hard to get away with killing someone under any circumstance, as far as I'm concerned.
 
2012-07-20 05:29:33 PM  

Mouldy Squid: LasersHurt: Mouldy Squid: LasersHurt: Flab: the_geek: Petit_Merdeux: Exactly!

There would have been a lot of collateral damage, but they would be heroes that were killed by bullets of freedom!

And as such they would have been eligible for a full military funeral! *

Do you have even a single incident as evidence to suggest that legally armed citizens defending themselves or others resulted in a net increase in deaths (not including the deaths of bad guys)?

Have you been living under a rock for the past three months? Do the names George Zimmermann or Trayvon Martin ring any bells?

There are other cases, as well, of "Stand your ground" style laws resulting in shootings. Those shootings would not have otherwise happened. There was the guy who shot his neighbors for having loud music on, thinking he was "standing his ground" (on their property, when they were unarmed).

Or the guy in the SUV who nearly ran over a mentally challenged kid and then shot the kid dead when the kid yelled at him to watch where he was going.

Exactly. I am a pro-gun-ownership dude, but there's no evidence that carrying them around and feeling like you're clear to shoot is a good thing. I think you should keep them at home. I also think you should be criminally liable for anything that happens with your gun, because it's your own stupid fault for not keeping a lethal weapon properly secured.

I compete in IPSC and IDPA (and a little 3 gun) up here in Canukistan so count me in the "responsible gun ownership" group. The idea that if I were an American and could just walk into a gun store and buy one, stick it in my belt and walk out frightens me. I know that I exaggerate, but it seems as if it is entirely too easy for psychotics to get firearms down south. And despite what you hear, it's not that hard to get a hand gun here either. You do, however, have to undergo training and testing before you get your license to acquire. Most of our gun crime is committed with illegal firearms (stolen/smu ...


What are the protections against and penalties for straw purchasing?
 
2012-07-20 05:31:05 PM  

spmkk: Believe me, neither do I. But clearly we already do. What I REALLY don't want is to live defenseless in an old-west shootout world.


Most gun related crime isn't the kind where the shooter says, "Partner, I'ma gonna draw my shootin' iron. You better be ready."

Even if we lived in an open carry world, a criminal that intends to use a gun will still... 100% percent of the time... get the drop on any law abiding citizen they see. In fact, carrying a gun will just likely get you shot pre-emptively so that the criminal could move onto crowd control in a robbery situation. Or I guess, they could take a kid or a woman hostage and make them give you your guns so that you're just left with the choice of either trying to shoot around the hostage or give your six shooter to the bad guy.

Probably the only way carrying a gun would be of any use is a situation like the 70 year old dude's story up thread. You're a witness to a crime, not outnumbered by more than one or two baddies, there aren't a lot of innocents standing around near the bad guys, and the criminals aren't paying any mind to you whatsoever. In short... good farking luck.
 
2012-07-20 05:32:55 PM  

LasersHurt: Mouldy Squid: Most of our gun crime is committed with illegal firearms (stolen/smu ...

To be fair, most of ours is too. But there's been a push lately to expand the rights of gun owners to legally kill, and it's resulted in, ta-dah, unnecessary deaths. I'd rather every single gun death require a criminal investigation - it should be pretty farking hard to get away with killing someone under any circumstance, as far as I'm concerned.


Huh? But...they already are. Just like how suicides are always initially treated as a homicide investigation.
 
2012-07-20 05:34:55 PM  

RINO: LasersHurt: Mouldy Squid: Most of our gun crime is committed with illegal firearms (stolen/smu ...

To be fair, most of ours is too. But there's been a push lately to expand the rights of gun owners to legally kill, and it's resulted in, ta-dah, unnecessary deaths. I'd rather every single gun death require a criminal investigation - it should be pretty farking hard to get away with killing someone under any circumstance, as far as I'm concerned.

Huh? But...they already are. Just like how suicides are always initially treated as a homicide investigation.


Well, I mean that in contrast to "Stand your ground" type laws. I know they do generally investigate it accordingly, but those laws are giving more and more leeway to shooters.
 
2012-07-20 05:35:18 PM  

RINO: LasersHurt: Mouldy Squid: Most of our gun crime is committed with illegal firearms (stolen/smu ...

To be fair, most of ours is too. But there's been a push lately to expand the rights of gun owners to legally kill, and it's resulted in, ta-dah, unnecessary deaths. I'd rather every single gun death require a criminal investigation - it should be pretty farking hard to get away with killing someone under any circumstance, as far as I'm concerned.

Huh? But...they already are. Just like how suicides are always initially treated as a homicide investigation.


No, they're not, depending on the state's "Stand Your Ground" laws. It took months and a massive public outcry to get the Sanford police to open a homicide investigation into the Trayvon Martin shooting.
 
2012-07-20 05:37:11 PM  

Fry's 100th Cup of Coffee: Yeah, gun control. I went there. Control the f*cking guns already. The rest of the civilized world does it and they haven't been taken over by the Cowboys Gang yet. I'm sick and tired of this frontier mindset that the GOP and NRA folks have that we simply HAVE to be walking commandos. Does anyone really think we'd be safer with 250+ million people walking around absolutely strapped for combat? It's ridiculous.



Yes, by all means....take my rights away. Yeesh.

And if we're nominating the biggest idiot of the day, I would like to nominate Michael Bloomberg for using this tragedy as a political opportunity as soon as he could. Neither Obama or Romney did that.
 
2012-07-20 05:38:38 PM  

Basily Gourt: SacriliciousBeerSwiller: Basily Gourt: Yep, not like people in the media aren't exploiting this for all it's worth.

Yeah, curse the news media for being all newsy. Farking bastards, right?

Furthermore, how DARE they exploit this as a "gun issue". Next thing you know, they'll be reporting on airport/airline safety whenever someone tries to blow up a plane. THE NERVE!

And there's the problem in a nutshell. Instead of digging deep and trying to find out what the fark is really happening to our society, arseholes on BOTH sides (that's right) try to sidetrack the conversation using a convenient scapegoat.


So gun massacres are in no way related to guns?

Gawd forbid we start talking about what is really wrong with society today. Neither the dems or repubs want to have that conversation out in the open. The torches and pitchforks might come out.

Please, educate us on what is really wrong with society today. Also, explain how it leads to gun violence that is no way connected to guns.
 
2012-07-20 05:39:18 PM  

Mouldy Squid: The idea that if I were an American and could just walk into a gun store and buy one, stick it in my belt and walk out frightens me.


I'm not sure why - because I dont know of any state where you can walk in to a gun store, purchase a firearm and walk out. The only exceptions to that are some states allow you to cash and carry if you have your CCW which requires a background check, fingerprints and in a lot of areas, a couple of references and a character interview with your local sheriff to go along with a CCW class. Mine cost me upwards of $250-$300 to get in photos, classes, documents, trips to various agencies and what not.

I purchased both of my pieces in FL and the store required an extra $50 or so for the FFL, and background check. The American gun market is not mogadishu.
 
2012-07-20 05:39:35 PM  

The_Sponge: And if we're nominating the biggest idiot of the day, I would like to nominate Michael Bloomberg for using this tragedy as a political opportunity as soon as he could.


Why does Gohmert get a pass?
 
2012-07-20 05:39:59 PM  

LasersHurt: Mouldy Squid: Most of our gun crime is committed with illegal firearms (stolen/smu ...

To be fair, most of ours is too. But there's been a push lately to expand the rights of gun owners to legally kill, and it's resulted in, ta-dah, unnecessary deaths. I'd rather every single gun death require a criminal investigation - it should be pretty farking hard to get away with killing someone under any circumstance, as far as I'm concerned.


I don't doubt that the greater amount of firearms deaths are by illegal guns, but unless I am greatly mistaken, the mass shootings seem to have been done by people who acquired their firearms legally. To be honest, the École Polytechnique de Montréal shootings here in 1989 were done with legally acquired firearms, but the Canadian government swiftly (for Canada anyway) enacted reforms that were meant to specifically keep people like Lavine from being able to easily access firearms.

Yeah, some of the restrictions are a bit onerous, but as a enthusiastic gun owner, I think Canada has it just about right.
 
2012-07-20 05:40:07 PM  

Basily Gourt: Yep, not like people in the media aren't exploiting this for all it's worth.

[farm8.staticflickr.com image 388x1024]http://">



Is that for real? Wow...Larry King is more senile than I thought.
 
2012-07-20 05:41:15 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: The_Sponge: And if we're nominating the biggest idiot of the day, I would like to nominate Michael Bloomberg for using this tragedy as a political opportunity as soon as he could.

Why does Gohmert get a pass?



He doesn't get a pass....I was just nominating another airhead....Subby already took care of mentioning Gohmert.
 
2012-07-20 05:42:54 PM  

LasersHurt: "spmkk:

Until you can prove, via statistics, that arming everyone would reduce the number of people shot, I will disagree with the idea. And since you can't prove that, I'm feeling pretty solid."


I'm glad you asked. I encourage you to read about the town of Kennesaw, GA, which has seen a 50% crime reduction and zero murders in the 30 years since enacting a law that requires residents to be armed. I also urge you to read about citizen gun ownership vs. violent crime in places like Switzerland and Israel.


magusdevil: "I am pro-responsible-gun-ownership as well and that puts me on the opposite side of the fence from the NRA."


Know how I know that you are completely oblivious to what the NRA actually does?
 
2012-07-20 05:43:01 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: Basily Gourt: SacriliciousBeerSwiller: Basily Gourt: Yep, not like people in the media aren't exploiting this for all it's worth.

Yeah, curse the news media for being all newsy. Farking bastards, right?

Furthermore, how DARE they exploit this as a "gun issue". Next thing you know, they'll be reporting on airport/airline safety whenever someone tries to blow up a plane. THE NERVE!

And there's the problem in a nutshell. Instead of digging deep and trying to find out what the fark is really happening to our society, arseholes on BOTH sides (that's right) try to sidetrack the conversation using a convenient scapegoat.

So gun massacres are in no way related to guns?

Gawd forbid we start talking about what is really wrong with society today. Neither the dems or repubs want to have that conversation out in the open. The torches and pitchforks might come out.

Please, educate us on what is really wrong with society today. Also, explain how it leads to gun violence that is no way connected to guns.


People are just too violent! If only people were less violent, we could have all the guns we wanted and never use them!
 
2012-07-20 05:43:28 PM  

Mouldy Squid: LasersHurt: Mouldy Squid: Most of our gun crime is committed with illegal firearms (stolen/smu ...

To be fair, most of ours is too. But there's been a push lately to expand the rights of gun owners to legally kill, and it's resulted in, ta-dah, unnecessary deaths. I'd rather every single gun death require a criminal investigation - it should be pretty farking hard to get away with killing someone under any circumstance, as far as I'm concerned.

I don't doubt that the greater amount of firearms deaths are by illegal guns, but unless I am greatly mistaken, the mass shootings seem to have been done by people who acquired their firearms legally. To be honest, the École Polytechnique de Montréal shootings here in 1989 were done with legally acquired firearms, but the Canadian government swiftly (for Canada anyway) enacted reforms that were meant to specifically keep people like Lavine from being able to easily access firearms.

Yeah, some of the restrictions are a bit onerous, but as a enthusiastic gun owner, I think Canada has it just about right.


I meant Lapine. And Fark ate my link. Ecole Polytechnique shootings.
 
2012-07-20 05:44:42 PM  
So basically I've been wondering when something like this was going to happen again.... just shows that no matter how much emphasis we put into AIRPORT security, there are always easier ways to do massive amounts of harm to people if that's your goal.

Doesn't matter what religion, race, creed, or whatever the psycho is.... if you want to do massive amount of damage... why go to an airport anymore?

/waiting for the TSA for movie theaters now
//going to be harder to smuggle candy in
///I'm sorry sir, you can only bring in 3 oz cokes into the theater now.
 
2012-07-20 05:45:18 PM  

Mouldy Squid: LasersHurt: Mouldy Squid: Most of our gun crime is committed with illegal firearms (stolen/smu ...

To be fair, most of ours is too. But there's been a push lately to expand the rights of gun owners to legally kill, and it's resulted in, ta-dah, unnecessary deaths. I'd rather every single gun death require a criminal investigation - it should be pretty farking hard to get away with killing someone under any circumstance, as far as I'm concerned.

I don't doubt that the greater amount of firearms deaths are by illegal guns, but unless I am greatly mistaken, the mass shootings seem to have been done by people who acquired their firearms legally. To be honest, the École Polytechnique de Montréal shootings here in 1989 were done with legally acquired firearms, but the Canadian government swiftly (for Canada anyway) enacted reforms that were meant to specifically keep people like Lavine from being able to easily access firearms.

Yeah, some of the restrictions are a bit onerous, but as a enthusiastic gun owner, I think Canada has it just about right.


True, most of the mass shootings have been, but they were also committed by maniacs. That's a tough line to walk - how can you really prevent them from purchasing them, aside from requiring psychological screenings for every purchase? And is that an appropriate test, or going too far?

Realistically, I don't think there's much you can do about maniacs who legally purchase, then use them for crimes, without impinging on the freedoms of the rest of the legal buyers.
 
2012-07-20 05:45:45 PM  
Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) said Friday that the shootings that took place in an Aurora, Colo. movie theater hours earlier were a result of "ongoing attacks on Judeo-Christian beliefs"

Uh, what? He's claiming that because of perceived slights against Christians, this guy shot a bunch of innocent people who had nothing to do with the debate?

Why, I do believe you religious types have been maligned. Indeed you are the all-embracing paragons of peace.
 
2012-07-20 05:45:51 PM  

o5iiawah: Mouldy Squid: The idea that if I were an American and could just walk into a gun store and buy one, stick it in my belt and walk out frightens me.

I'm not sure why - because I dont know of any state where you can walk in to a gun store, purchase a firearm and walk out. The only exceptions to that are some states allow you to cash and carry if you have your CCW which requires a background check, fingerprints and in a lot of areas, a couple of references and a character interview with your local sheriff to go along with a CCW class. Mine cost me upwards of $250-$300 to get in photos, classes, documents, trips to various agencies and what not.

I purchased both of my pieces in FL and the store required an extra $50 or so for the FFL, and background check. The American gun market is not mogadishu.


I'm sure he was thinking of a gun SHOW, not a gun store. No waiting period, no background check. Yeehaw. Let's get us some guns, boys.
 
2012-07-20 05:45:57 PM  
Has anybody asked Michelle Bachman for her opinion yet?
 
2012-07-20 05:46:06 PM  

spmkk: LasersHurt: "spmkk:

Until you can prove, via statistics, that arming everyone would reduce the number of people shot, I will disagree with the idea. And since you can't prove that, I'm feeling pretty solid."

I'm glad you asked. I encourage you to read about the town of Kennesaw, GA, which has seen a 50% crime reduction and zero murders in the 30 years since enacting a law that requires residents to be armed. I also urge you to read about citizen gun ownership vs. violent crime in places like Switzerland and Israel.


I encourage you to read an article about the difference between correlation and causation.
 
2012-07-20 05:46:52 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: So gun massacres are in no way related to guns?


Not really. They're the sign of a sick mind who wants to go out and kill people. If they can't get guns, they'll use bombs, swords, whatever, just to kill people like they want. If you REALLY think the lizard jews are out to get you and you're the chosen one, you'll drown people in your tub and go joyriding through a school bus line.

HotWingConspiracy: Please, educate us on what is really wrong with society today. Also, explain how it leads to gun violence that is no way connected to guns.


The incredibly shiatty perspective the country has on mental health issues - and the unwillingness to address them among ourselves - is one of the leading problems. People tend to know when someone's totally farked up, but nothing is done about it until after the fact, when they just give really awkward interviews. The raw medical issues as well - cost and other barriers to entry - are pretty significant as well.

I wouldn't be surprised in the least if expansion of the health care bill to have an equally substantial effect on the mental health industry would be much more effective than spending twice that on gun laws/enforcement.
 
2012-07-20 05:47:33 PM  
A perverted country produces perverts. James Holmes is a classic amerikan product just like the massacred country of Iraq ( or Vietnam if you want to go back 40 years ). If you want to go back further look into the rape of Iran by amerika in 1953. Look into the Sand Creek massacre ( of Indians ). "The evil in America is very old" - William Burroughs.
 
2012-07-20 05:48:35 PM  

spmkk: LasersHurt: "spmkk:

Until you can prove, via statistics, that arming everyone would reduce the number of people shot, I will disagree with the idea. And since you can't prove that, I'm feeling pretty solid."

I'm glad you asked. I encourage you to read about the town of Kennesaw, GA, which has seen a 50% crime reduction and zero murders in the 30 years since enacting a law that requires residents to be armed. I also urge you to read about citizen gun ownership vs. violent crime in places like Switzerland and Israel.


magusdevil: "I am pro-responsible-gun-ownership as well and that puts me on the opposite side of the fence from the NRA."

Know how I know that you are completely oblivious to what the NRA actually does?


The NRA opposes licensing gun owners, the registration of guns and closing the gun-show and private-sale loopholes that allow buyers, who cannot pass a background check, to purchase any guns they want.
 
2012-07-20 05:49:15 PM  

magusdevil: I bet if an average of 31 homicides per day were committed using cars as the weapon of choice, it would, in fact, be harder to get a car than it is now.



There are a hell of a lot more homicides per day by car than 31. And I'd argue that there's little practical difference between a drunk driver plowing in to a family and killing them, and some drunk idiot firing in to a neighborhood and killing someone. Except of course that it's even easier to kill more people with the car. And which one happens several orders of magnitude more often? In fact, without even Googling a source I'd bet you that drunk drivers commit homicide on a FAR more vast scale then all shootings each year.

And I don't see anyone trying to ban cars, do you? Of course not. We ALL use cars. We're used to them, so no one wants them taken away even though they kill massive farkloads of people each year. Even though many people intentionally use them to murder other each year. Even though even more people negligently kill people with them each year. They're incredibly dangerous things.

But not everyone uses guns, not everyone is used to them, so it's a lot easier to feel justified in calling for the banning of something that doesn't matter to you personally, and would only impact other people.

qorkfiend: mongbiohazard: But in the end it's the killer who is responsible,

That doesn't mean it should be trivial for the killer to acquire and use said tools.

Why don't more people blow things up? Could it possibly be because it's a bit harder to get or build a bomb than it is to get a gun and ammunition?



That also doesn't mean it should be any harder for the other 99.999% of people who are NOT mass murderers to get them. Or the 99% of people who aren't the regular kind of murderers. Should it be harder for me to get a car because (WAY more) people drive drunk and kill people? Should we ban every product that is misused by someone? That won't solve the problem because the fundamental underlying problem is that people are imperfect, and some of those imperfect people are downright FARKED.

Sorry, but life isn't perfect. When you can come up with a reliable method of weeding out just those who are going to commit mass murder I'll be all ears. Until then, no. I'm not willing to abdicate a fundamental right based on the knee-jerk emotional response to a rare situation which gets national headlines in a huge country.
 
2012-07-20 05:50:04 PM  

LasersHurt: spmkk: LasersHurt: "spmkk:

Until you can prove, via statistics, that arming everyone would reduce the number of people shot, I will disagree with the idea. And since you can't prove that, I'm feeling pretty solid."

I'm glad you asked. I encourage you to read about the town of Kennesaw, GA, which has seen a 50% crime reduction and zero murders in the 30 years since enacting a law that requires residents to be armed. I also urge you to read about citizen gun ownership vs. violent crime in places like Switzerland and Israel.

I encourage you to read an article about the difference between correlation and causation.


I'd be more supportive of gun ownership rights if we had mandatory military service like the Swiss and Israelis do.
 
2012-07-20 05:50:33 PM  

magusdevil: spmkk: LasersHurt: "spmkk:

Until you can prove, via statistics, that arming everyone would reduce the number of people shot, I will disagree with the idea. And since you can't prove that, I'm feeling pretty solid."

I'm glad you asked. I encourage you to read about the town of Kennesaw, GA, which has seen a 50% crime reduction and zero murders in the 30 years since enacting a law that requires residents to be armed. I also urge you to read about citizen gun ownership vs. violent crime in places like Switzerland and Israel.


magusdevil: "I am pro-responsible-gun-ownership as well and that puts me on the opposite side of the fence from the NRA."

Know how I know that you are completely oblivious to what the NRA actually does?

The NRA opposes licensing gun owners, the registration of guns and closing the gun-show and private-sale loopholes that allow buyers, who cannot pass a background check, to purchase any guns they want.


They also oppose any honest discussion of gun control, and ANY change in the law which isn't explicitly more right to have more guns in more places. They're an emotions-based group that uses fear to keep the outer systems in line.
 
2012-07-20 05:51:35 PM  

qorkfiend: I'd be more supportive of gun ownership rights if we had mandatory military service like the Swiss and Israelis do.


Hmmmm... there'd probably be less military adventurism too. Could you imagine being pro-Iraq war if you had a 17 yr old son or daughter?
 
2012-07-20 05:52:20 PM  

magusdevil: The NRA opposes licensing gun owners, the registration of guns and closing the gun-show and private-sale loopholes that allow buyers, who cannot pass a background check, to purchase any guns they want.



1) A license to exercise one of my most important rights? No thanks.

2) Given the fact that registrations can be used to take firearms away, no dice. Just look at what happened to gun owners in California who once owned certain SKS models.

3) If I want to sell a firearm to a friend of mine, I should be able to do so without a bunch of red tape. Just like when a friend sold me a handgun back in 2008.
 
2012-07-20 05:53:52 PM  

The_Sponge: magusdevil: The NRA opposes licensing gun owners, the registration of guns and closing the gun-show and private-sale loopholes that allow buyers, who cannot pass a background check, to purchase any guns they want.


1) A license to exercise one of my most important rights? No thanks.

2) Given the fact that registrations can be used to take firearms away, no dice. Just look at what happened to gun owners in California who once owned certain SKS models.

3) If I want to sell a firearm to a friend of mine, I should be able to do so without a bunch of red tape. Just like when a friend sold me a handgun back in 2008.


See, this attitude is what makes me worry. One of your "Most important rights" is a deadly weapon, whenever and wherever? You're convinced that a registration will be used to come and take your guns? It's rote paranoia.
 
2012-07-20 05:54:21 PM  

LasersHurt: They also oppose any honest discussion of gun control, and ANY change in the law which isn't explicitly more right to have more guns in more places. They're an emotions-based group that uses fear to keep the outer systems in line.



For all their faults, at they are better than the Brady Campaign.....an emotions-based group that seeks to restrict our rights.
 
2012-07-20 05:54:41 PM  

The_Sponge: Fry's 100th Cup of Coffee: Yeah, gun control. I went there. Control the f*cking guns already. The rest of the civilized world does it and they haven't been taken over by the Cowboys Gang yet. I'm sick and tired of this frontier mindset that the GOP and NRA folks have that we simply HAVE to be walking commandos. Does anyone really think we'd be safer with 250+ million people walking around absolutely strapped for combat? It's ridiculous.


Yes, by all means....take my rights away. Yeesh.

And if we're nominating the biggest idiot of the day, I would like to nominate Michael Bloomberg for using this tragedy as a political opportunity as soon as he could. Neither Obama or Romney did that.


Wow, what a typically distorted response. I said we should control the guns, not take your rights away. Like a lot of people, I don't have a problem with normal citizens who have no criminal record picking up handguns and shotguns, etc. We do tend to have a problem with people like you who equate ANY attempt and restricting deadly weapons ownership and availability as repealing the 2nd amendment.

Regular people don't need tear gas, AK-47's, RPG's, grenades, and god knows whatever else military ordinance gives you an erection for your oft repeated claim of innocent "home defense". I get that they're fun to take to the range, but let's not kid ourselves about what we need versus what we want.
 
2012-07-20 05:54:50 PM  

The_Sponge: 3) If I want to sell a firearm to a friend of mine, I should be able to do so without a bunch of red tape. Just like when a friend sold me a handgun back in 2008.


Why? The rest of us have the right to life, which we're protecting by trying to prevent you from selling your gun to someone who is not legally allowed to own one.
 
2012-07-20 05:55:15 PM  

LasersHurt: See, this attitude is what makes me worry. One of your "Most important rights" is a deadly weapon, whenever and wherever? You're convinced that a registration will be used to come and take your guns? It's rote paranoia.



How is it paranoia when registrations were used to take away firearms in California?
 
2012-07-20 05:55:16 PM  

sprawl15: HotWingConspiracy: So gun massacres are in no way related to guns?

Not really. They're the sign of a sick mind who wants to go out and kill people. If they can't get guns, they'll use bombs, swords, whatever, just to kill people like they want. If you REALLY think the lizard jews are out to get you and you're the chosen one, you'll drown people in your tub and go joyriding through a school bus line.


So you're honestly saying that gun massacres have nothing to do with guns. Noted.

HotWingConspiracy: Please, educate us on what is really wrong with society today. Also, explain how it leads to gun violence that is no way connected to guns.

The incredibly shiatty perspective the country has on mental health issues - and the unwillingness to address them among ourselves - is one of the leading problems. People tend to know when someone's totally farked up, but nothing is done about it until after the fact, when they just give really awkward interviews. The raw medical issues as well - cost and other barriers to entry - are pretty significant as well.

I wouldn't be surprised in the least if expansion of the health care bill to have an equally substantial effect on the mental health industry would be much more effective than spending twice that on gun laws/enforcement.


There are plenty of mental people that never commit gun massacres. Plus we have no idea what this guy's deal is yet. Just yesterday he was a grad student and responsible gun owner.
 
2012-07-20 05:55:32 PM  
Late to this one, but Brian Ross and ABC "News" went so far off the deep end, no one will ever come close to them. Going on a TEA Party page, finding a similar name, then accusing that person of being the shooter was the most asinine thing I've ever seen.
 
2012-07-20 05:55:51 PM  

The_Sponge: LasersHurt: They also oppose any honest discussion of gun control, and ANY change in the law which isn't explicitly more right to have more guns in more places. They're an emotions-based group that uses fear to keep the outer systems in line.


For all their faults, at they are better than the Brady Campaign.....an emotions-based group that seeks to restrict our rights.


No, they're just as bad. Maybe they could try to be honest about gun rights and ownership for once? That would be a refreshing change of pace.
 
2012-07-20 05:56:05 PM  

qorkfiend: What are the protections against and penalties for straw purchasing?


If by straw purchasing, you mean private sales? You must have a valid Possession and Acquisition License to purchase both firearms and ammunition. All restricted firearms (handgun/semi-auto rifle etc) must be registered with the Federal Firearms Program. There is always a paper trail for legally purchased arms, and in theory the RCMP know where any restricted firearm is at any time. When a restricted firearm is sold privately, the registration papers must change hands and the Chief Firearms Officer's office must be informed of the change of ownership so that the registry is updated. Since the Firearms Act allows the RCMP (or other police) to inspect your firearms at any time, you had better have your ducks in a row and your registration papers matching your guns.

Now, of course, this doesn't mean that everyone does this all the time, but the punishments can be quite severe. You can be fined, jailed and have your "right" to own firearms removed permanently.

None of this applies to non-restriced long arms any more though. Hunting rifles, shotguns etc no longer require registration. You are still required to have your PAL even if the firearm is not restricted. Possession of a firearm without a valid PAL is a felony.
 
2012-07-20 05:56:05 PM  

The_Sponge: 2) Given the fact that registrations can be used to take firearms away, no dice. Just look at what happened to gun owners in California who once owned certain SKS models.


You've brought this up before, and have been slapped down before. The only people who had their guns taken away were those who refused to get them registered through three amnesty periods. And in that case, the guns weren't "taken away" in any way that involved registration, the firearms were just illegal to own.

HRUERHERUIHEREHRERHERERRR
 
2012-07-20 05:56:39 PM  

The_Sponge: LasersHurt: See, this attitude is what makes me worry. One of your "Most important rights" is a deadly weapon, whenever and wherever? You're convinced that a registration will be used to come and take your guns? It's rote paranoia.


How is it paranoia when registrations were used to take away firearms in California?


One specific type of weapon. You can still have lots of others. It's the "any control is bad" mentality.
 
2012-07-20 05:57:06 PM  

shotglasss: Late to this one, but Brian Ross and ABC "News" went so far off the deep end, no one will ever come close to them. Going on a TEA Party page, finding a similar name, then accusing that person of being the shooter was the most asinine thing I've ever seen.


That's not actually what happened. We can look at the actual quote:

ROSS: There's a Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colo., page on the Colorado Tea Party site as well, talking about him joining the tea party last year. Now, we don't know if this is the same Jim Holmes. But it's Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colo.
 
2012-07-20 05:57:16 PM  

LasersHurt: The_Sponge: LasersHurt: See, this attitude is what makes me worry. One of your "Most important rights" is a deadly weapon, whenever and wherever? You're convinced that a registration will be used to come and take your guns? It's rote paranoia.


How is it paranoia when registrations were used to take away firearms in California?

One specific type of weapon. You can still have lots of others. It's the "any control is bad" mentality.


sprawl15: The_Sponge: 2) Given the fact that registrations can be used to take firearms away, no dice. Just look at what happened to gun owners in California who once owned certain SKS models.

You've brought this up before, and have been slapped down before. The only people who had their guns taken away were those who refused to get them registered through three amnesty periods. And in that case, the guns weren't "taken away" in any way that involved registration, the firearms were just illegal to own.

HRUERHERUIHEREHRERHERERRR


Also, this - dunno why I forgot that.
 
2012-07-20 05:57:36 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: There are plenty of mental people that never commit gun massacres.


wtfamireading
 
2012-07-20 05:58:01 PM  

LasersHurt: "They [the NRA] also oppose any honest discussion of gun control, and ANY change in the law..."


...because it's an issue of constitutional rights. That's like complaining that the ACLU opposes any "honest discussion" of free speech control, and ANY change in the law surrounding the 1st Amendment.
 
2012-07-20 05:58:10 PM  

shotglasss: Late to this one, but Brian Ross and ABC "News" went so far off the deep end, no one will ever come close to them. Going on a TEA Party page, finding a similar name, then accusing that person of being the shooter was the most asinine thing I've ever seen.


Yeah, thinking it might be a guy with the same name from the same place is "off the deep end."

It was bad reporting, sure, but "off the deep end" is off the deep end.
 
2012-07-20 05:58:42 PM  

Mouldy Squid: qorkfiend: What are the protections against and penalties for straw purchasing?

If by straw purchasing, you mean private sales? You must have a valid Possession and Acquisition License to purchase both firearms and ammunition. All restricted firearms (handgun/semi-auto rifle etc) must be registered with the Federal Firearms Program. There is always a paper trail for legally purchased arms, and in theory the RCMP know where any restricted firearm is at any time. When a restricted firearm is sold privately, the registration papers must change hands and the Chief Firearms Officer's office must be informed of the change of ownership so that the registry is updated. Since the Firearms Act allows the RCMP (or other police) to inspect your firearms at any time, you had better have your ducks in a row and your registration papers matching your guns.

Now, of course, this doesn't mean that everyone does this all the time, but the punishments can be quite severe. You can be fined, jailed and have your "right" to own firearms removed permanently.

None of this applies to non-restriced long arms any more though. Hunting rifles, shotguns etc no longer require registration. You are still required to have your PAL even if the firearm is not restricted. Possession of a firearm without a valid PAL is a felony.


That answers the question, yeah; I was thinking more about people with valid PALs buying firearms for the express purpose of selling them to people without PALs.
 
2012-07-20 05:59:11 PM  

spmkk: LasersHurt: "They [the NRA] also oppose any honest discussion of gun control, and ANY change in the law..."

...because it's an issue of constitutional rights. That's like complaining that the ACLU opposes any "honest discussion" of free speech control, and ANY change in the law surrounding the 1st Amendment.


No, it's nothing like that at all. Every topic should be open for discussion. This childish "NUH UH BUT THEY STARTED IT" shiat is dumb.
 
2012-07-20 05:59:24 PM  
The right to ingest bath salts? One of my most important rights. If anyone tries to take this right from me then the libs will have hell to pay. I'm going to go sell some to a friend now. I am the Joker.
 
2012-07-20 06:00:06 PM  

spmkk: LasersHurt: "They [the NRA] also oppose any honest discussion of gun control, and ANY change in the law..."

...because it's an issue of constitutional rights. That's like complaining that the ACLU opposes any "honest discussion" of free speech control, and ANY change in the law surrounding the 1st Amendment.


This idea that constitutional rights are sacrosanct and beyond discussion is insane. If anyone thinks we hit the pinnacle of culture 200 years ago, please fark off.
 
2012-07-20 06:00:08 PM  

Fry's 100th Cup of Coffee: Regular people don't need tear gas, AK-47's, RPG's, grenades, and god knows whatever else military ordinance gives you an erection for your oft repeated claim of innocent "home defense". I get that they're fun to take to the range, but let's not kid ourselves about what we need versus what we want.



1) It's spelled "ordnance".

2) I think it is amusing that you would lump in a rifle with explosive devices as a way of engaging in hyperbole. By the way, were you thinking of actual AK-47s that are capable of full-auto, or were you thinking of sem-auto AK variants?
 
2012-07-20 06:00:50 PM  

The_Sponge: magusdevil: The NRA opposes licensing gun owners, the registration of guns and closing the gun-show and private-sale loopholes that allow buyers, who cannot pass a background check, to purchase any guns they want.


1) A license to exercise one of my most important rights? No thanks.

2) Given the fact that registrations can be used to take firearms away, no dice. Just look at what happened to gun owners in California who once owned certain SKS models.

3) If I want to sell a firearm to a friend of mine, I should be able to do so without a bunch of red tape. Just like when a friend sold me a handgun back in 2008.


Know how know you don't know what "responsible-gun-ownership" means?
 
2012-07-20 06:00:51 PM  

shotglasss: Late to this one, but Brian Ross and ABC "News" went so far off the deep end, no one will ever come close to them. Going on a TEA Party page, finding a similar name, then accusing that person of being the shooter was the most asinine thing I've ever seen.



I hope ABC News fires his ass.
 
2012-07-20 06:01:07 PM  

mongbiohazard: And I don't see anyone trying to ban cars, do you? Of course not. We ALL use cars. We're used to them, so no one wants them taken away even though they kill massive farkloads of people each year. Even though many people intentionally use them to murder other each year. Even though even more people negligently kill people with them each year. They're incredibly dangerous things.


What are cars built to do? What are guns built to do? Why persist with this shiat comparison?

But not everyone uses guns, not everyone is used to them, so it's a lot easier to feel justified in calling for the banning of something that doesn't matter to you personally, and would only impact other people.

Not getting shot at by some farking freak matters to me personally. And a ban wouldn't work, but the hurdles to get a gun should be high so only the truly responsible can get one. I'm talking dozens of hours of training, mental health checks, all of it.
 
2012-07-20 06:01:46 PM  

sprawl15: The_Sponge: 2) Given the fact that registrations can be used to take firearms away, no dice. Just look at what happened to gun owners in California who once owned certain SKS models.

You've brought this up before


It's a gun thread. The odds that The_Sponge will bring up CA within 3 posts is pretty much 100%. If this thread makes 500 posts, he'll mention cigars.
 
2012-07-20 06:02:45 PM  
www.opednews.com

Suprise, surprise, surprise!
 
2012-07-20 06:03:04 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: What are cars built to do? What are guns built to do? Why persist with this shiat comparison?


Because 'danger to society' should be the measurement of danger to society, not 'how scary they look'. Eating shiatty food is much more dangerous to society than idiots with guns, yet the latter is emphasized grossly out of proportion to its impact.
 
2012-07-20 06:03:04 PM  

magusdevil: Know how know you don't know what "responsible-gun-ownership" means?



I do and I am one, but thanks for playing.

sprawl15: The_Sponge: 2) Given the fact that registrations can be used to take firearms away, no dice. Just look at what happened to gun owners in California who once owned certain SKS models.

You've brought this up before, and have been slapped down before. The only people who had their guns taken away were those who refused to get them registered through three amnesty periods. And in that case, the guns weren't "taken away" in any way that involved registration, the firearms were just illegal to own.

HRUERHERUIHEREHRERHERERRR



They were taken away after California played games with the registration laws. So do you want to keep losing this argument, I should I stop being awesome?
 
2012-07-20 06:03:16 PM  

sprawl15: HotWingConspiracy: There are plenty of mental people that never commit gun massacres.

wtfamireading


You want to blame shiatty mental health care, no? That's what I took away. Just being crazy doesn't lead to gun violence.
 
2012-07-20 06:04:23 PM  

shotglasss: Late to this one, but Brian Ross and ABC "News" went so far off the deep end, no one will ever come close to them. Going on a TEA Party page, finding a similar name, then accusing that person of being the shooter was the most asinine thing I've ever seen.


Really??? WOW!! I'd really like to see that transcript!!!
 
2012-07-20 06:06:18 PM  

you are a puppet: The right to ingest bath salts? One of my most important rights. If anyone tries to take this right from me then the libs will have hell to pay. I'm going to go sell some to a friend now. I am the Joker.


Some men just want to watch the world derp.
 
2012-07-20 06:08:30 PM  

The_Sponge: How is it paranoia when registrations were used to take away firearms in California?


You can still own an SKS in California.
 
2012-07-20 06:08:56 PM  

sprawl15: HotWingConspiracy: What are cars built to do? What are guns built to do? Why persist with this shiat comparison?

Because 'danger to society' should be the measurement of danger to society, not 'how scary they look'.


Who is applying the scary look standard?

Cars are built for transport. Guns are built for killing. Hand guns are built for killing people. It's a shiat comparison.

Eating shiatty food is much more dangerous to society than idiots with guns, yet the latter is emphasized grossly out of proportion to its impact.

I would have to disagree. The impact of frequent gun massacres on a society is far more damaging than having to look at fat people. The psychological impact alone. I mean, we've got members of congress angrily asking why the victims weren't armed, and it's not satire. We're in a farked up place.
 
2012-07-20 06:09:00 PM  

qorkfiend: Mouldy Squid: qorkfiend: What are the protections against and penalties for straw purchasing?

If by straw purchasing, you mean private sales? You must have a valid Possession and Acquisition License to purchase both firearms and ammunition. All restricted firearms (handgun/semi-auto rifle etc) must be registered with the Federal Firearms Program. There is always a paper trail for legally purchased arms, and in theory the RCMP know where any restricted firearm is at any time. When a restricted firearm is sold privately, the registration papers must change hands and the Chief Firearms Officer's office must be informed of the change of ownership so that the registry is updated. Since the Firearms Act allows the RCMP (or other police) to inspect your firearms at any time, you had better have your ducks in a row and your registration papers matching your guns.

Now, of course, this doesn't mean that everyone does this all the time, but the punishments can be quite severe. You can be fined, jailed and have your "right" to own firearms removed permanently.

None of this applies to non-restriced long arms any more though. Hunting rifles, shotguns etc no longer require registration. You are still required to have your PAL even if the firearm is not restricted. Possession of a firearm without a valid PAL is a felony.

That answers the question, yeah; I was thinking more about people with valid PALs buying firearms for the express purpose of selling them to people without PALs.


That is a major felony. Since the restricted firearms have a paper trail, if that gun is used in the commission of a crime (and the police find the gun), whoever bought it originally is in a world of hurt. There would be several offences you could be charges with in that case: illegal trafficking of firearms, conspiracy to commit [crime], reckless endangerment etc, not to mention never ever being able to own any kind of gun ever again.

It is more likely that the guy with the PAL would report the gun "stolen" after selling it to his buddy, but he'd better hope his buddy never gets caught with it. And you don't really want to have to report your firearms as stolen. All kinds of questions get asked and you might find it a bit difficult to renew your licenses. Improper storage of a firearm is also a felony.
 
2012-07-20 06:09:22 PM  

The_Sponge: Fry's 100th Cup of Coffee: Regular people don't need tear gas, AK-47's, RPG's, grenades, and god knows whatever else military ordinance gives you an erection for your oft repeated claim of innocent "home defense". I get that they're fun to take to the range, but let's not kid ourselves about what we need versus what we want.


1) It's spelled "ordnance".

2) I think it is amusing that you would lump in a rifle with explosive devices as a way of engaging in hyperbole. By the way, were you thinking of actual AK-47s that are capable of full-auto, or were you thinking of sem-auto AK variants?


Thanks for the tip. As for number two, I don't think it really matters. And, while we're trading corrections, lumping an AK-47 in with explosives when talking about deadly weapons that the average citizen has no real need for in terms of "home defense", isn't hyperbole.

Feel free to disagree, but don't act like you couldn't see my point through all that dodging and swerving you just pulled.
 
2012-07-20 06:09:24 PM  

spmkk: LasersHurt: "They [the NRA] also oppose any honest discussion of gun control, and ANY change in the law..."

...because it's an issue of constitutional rights. That's like complaining that the ACLU opposes any "honest discussion" of free speech control, and ANY change in the law surrounding the 1st Amendment.


Maybe you should read the whole 2nd amendment sometime. It's not that long.
 
2012-07-20 06:09:31 PM  

LasersHurt: One specific type of weapon. You can still have lots of others. It's the "any control is bad" mentality.



California has banned other models as well.
 
2012-07-20 06:10:39 PM  
www.blogcdn.com
 
2012-07-20 06:11:43 PM  

sprawl15: The_Sponge: 2) Given the fact that registrations can be used to take firearms away, no dice. Just look at what happened to gun owners in California who once owned certain SKS models.

You've brought this up before, and have been slapped down before. The only people who had their guns taken away were those who refused to get them registered through three amnesty periods. And in that case, the guns weren't "taken away" in any way that involved registration, the firearms were just illegal to own.

HRUERHERUIHEREHRERHERERRR


Attorney General Bill Lockyer decided on Tuesday to drop an appeal of a suit brought against the California Department of Justice by Handgun Control, Inc.

Former Attorney General Dan Lungren appealed a July 1998 ruling by a San Francisco superior court judge that he violated the state's Assault Weapons Control Act (AWCA) by allowing the registration of firearms after the March 1992 deadline prescribed in the law. The decision by AG Lockyer to drop the appeal paves the way for the Department of Justice to proceed with plans to force gun owners, who both registered firearms after the deadline AND who abided by the law as interpreted by the Attorney General, to turn them in.

Lockyer intends to ask the state legislature to appropriate funds to compensate those who have turned in their firearms. Gun owners who are affected by the Attorney General's decision will receive notification of their status from the DOJ and will have 90 days to comply. Those who do not comply within that time period will be identified from the registration list concerning the confiscation of their firearm(s).

http://nrawinningteam.com/confiscation/dropappeal.html



At the very least, can you agree that the ban should have never happened in the first place?
 
2012-07-20 06:13:03 PM  

sprawl15: HotWingConspiracy: What are cars built to do? What are guns built to do? Why persist with this shiat comparison?

Because 'danger to society' should be the measurement of danger to society, not 'how scary they look'. Eating shiatty food is much more dangerous to society than idiots with guns, yet the latter is emphasized grossly out of proportion to its impact.


Personally I think Gun Control is largely ineffective and counterproductive. However comparing them to cars and fast food is pretty silly.
 
2012-07-20 06:13:48 PM  

The_Sponge: LasersHurt: One specific type of weapon. You can still have lots of others. It's the "any control is bad" mentality.


California has banned other models as well.


Oh, so you can't have guns in CA then?
 
2012-07-20 06:13:58 PM  
Oh, and to clarify my above post. The abolition of the long arms registry has made it more difficult to track non-restricted firearms, so the dude with the PAL could easily sell a non-restricted gun to his buddy without a PAL. However, only 3% of gun crimes in Canada are committed with non-restriced long arms so the police don't really consider this hypothetical situation to be a paramount problem. Besides, it's not like shotguns and hunting rifles are hard to find in Canada (especially in the west).
 
2012-07-20 06:15:01 PM  

magusdevil: Know how know you don't know what "responsible-gun-ownership" means?



Oh really? Because I have never broken any state or federal gun laws since I've owned firearms since the age of 18. Never mind the fact that I have never pointed a firearm at a single person.
 
2012-07-20 06:17:13 PM  

The_Sponge: sprawl15: The_Sponge: 2) Given the fact that registrations can be used to take firearms away, no dice. Just look at what happened to gun owners in California who once owned certain SKS models.

You've brought this up before, and have been slapped down before. The only people who had their guns taken away were those who refused to get them registered through three amnesty periods. And in that case, the guns weren't "taken away" in any way that involved registration, the firearms were just illegal to own.

HRUERHERUIHEREHRERHERERRR

Attorney General Bill Lockyer decided on Tuesday to drop an appeal of a suit brought against the California Department of Justice by Handgun Control, Inc.

Former Attorney General Dan Lungren appealed a July 1998 ruling by a San Francisco superior court judge that he violated the state's Assault Weapons Control Act (AWCA) by allowing the registration of firearms after the March 1992 deadline prescribed in the law. The decision by AG Lockyer to drop the appeal paves the way for the Department of Justice to proceed with plans to force gun owners, who both registered firearms after the deadline AND who abided by the law as interpreted by the Attorney General, to turn them in.

Lockyer intends to ask the state legislature to appropriate funds to compensate those who have turned in their firearms. Gun owners who are affected by the Attorney General's decision will receive notification of their status from the DOJ and will have 90 days to comply. Those who do not comply within that time period will be identified from the registration list concerning the confiscation of their firearm(s).

http://nrawinningteam.com/confiscation/dropappeal.html


At the very least, can you agree that the ban should have never happened in the first place?


So all they had to do to keep their guns was register by a certain date. And they couldn't even get their shiat together enough do that? And you think these people are responsible enough to own guns... that certainly explains your position.
 
2012-07-20 06:18:52 PM  
"It does make me wonder, with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying a gun that could have stopped this guy more quickly?"

Wow. It used to be Republicans only blamed rape victims. Now they're blaming all victims.

Stay classy, you pieces of sh*t.
 
2012-07-20 06:20:48 PM  

LasersHurt: The_Sponge: LasersHurt: One specific type of weapon. You can still have lots of others. It's the "any control is bad" mentality.


California has banned other models as well.

Oh, so you can't have guns in CA then?



Oh for fark's sake. So if California only allowed people to own bolt action rifles, that would be totally okay in your book because people are still allowed to own guns in the Golden State, right? I have lived in both California and Washington, and it's really obvious that Washington has better gun laws.

And a whole lot of good CA's gun laws have done, considering that their firearms death rate is slightly higher than WA's:

http://www.statemaster.com/graph/cri_mur_wit_fir-death-rate-per-100-0 0 0/
 
2012-07-20 06:22:54 PM  

The_Sponge: LasersHurt: The_Sponge: LasersHurt: One specific type of weapon. You can still have lots of others. It's the "any control is bad" mentality.


California has banned other models as well.

Oh, so you can't have guns in CA then?


Oh for fark's sake. So if California only allowed people to own bolt action rifles, that would be totally okay in your book because people are still allowed to own guns in the Golden State, right? I have lived in both California and Washington, and it's really obvious that Washington has better gun laws.

And a whole lot of good CA's gun laws have done, considering that their firearms death rate is slightly higher than WA's:

http://www.statemaster.com/graph/cri_mur_wit_fir-death-rate-per-100-0 0 0/


Does California only allow bolt action rifles? No. They allow lots and lots of guns. You can have tons of them. All manner of guns await you.
 
2012-07-20 06:23:20 PM  

The_Sponge: Never mind the fact that I have never pointed a firearm at a single person.


So, you only pray on married people, huh? Bastard.
 
2012-07-20 06:24:52 PM  

magusdevil: So all they had to do to keep their guns was register by a certain date. And they couldn't even get their shiat together enough do that? And you think these people are responsible enough to own guns... that certainly explains your position.



Apparently you missed that part that people were abiding by the law (post 1992 registration) as interpreted by the AG at the time.

And you still missed my question as to whether you agree with the ban.

And if you're fine with the way they worked the law, how about banning abortions for anyone who fails to pre-register for one? Would that be cool?
 
2012-07-20 06:25:07 PM  

The_Sponge: magusdevil: Know how know you don't know what "responsible-gun-ownership" means?


Oh really? Because I have never broken any state or federal gun laws since I've owned firearms since the age of 18. Never mind the fact that I have never pointed a firearm at a single person.


Well I've never broken any laws while drinking. So despite the fact that I get black out drunk on a daily basis I must be a responsible drinker.
 
2012-07-20 06:25:16 PM  

LasersHurt: luckcat: I dunno, this online store might be the frontrunner:

[img.gawkerassets.com image 640x360]

ChancesAre910: I dunno, Celeb Boutique is giving them a run for their money.

Occam's razor, they probably just saw the word trending and didn't do any research. That said, ick.


That's my guess too. They saw the hash tag and didn't look at the tweets themselves. Overzealous staffer and all..

pretty fking stupid of who ever wrote it
 
2012-07-20 06:25:33 PM  

The_Sponge: magusdevil: So all they had to do to keep their guns was register by a certain date. And they couldn't even get their shiat together enough do that? And you think these people are responsible enough to own guns... that certainly explains your position.


Apparently you missed that part that people were abiding by the law (post 1992 registration) as interpreted by the AG at the time.

And you still missed my question as to whether you agree with the ban.

And if you're fine with the way they worked the law, how about banning abortions for anyone who fails to pre-register for one? Would that be cool?


FALSE EQUIVALENCY, HOOOOOOOOOO

*bugles*
 
2012-07-20 06:25:39 PM  

The_Sponge: LasersHurt: The_Sponge: LasersHurt: One specific type of weapon. You can still have lots of others. It's the "any control is bad" mentality.


California has banned other models as well.

Oh, so you can't have guns in CA then?


Oh for fark's sake. So if California only allowed people to own bolt action rifles, that would be totally okay in your book because people are still allowed to own guns in the Golden State, right? I have lived in both California and Washington, and it's really obvious that Washington has better gun laws.

And a whole lot of good CA's gun laws have done, considering that their firearms death rate is slightly higher than WA's:

http://www.statemaster.com/graph/cri_mur_wit_fir-death-rate-per-100-0 0 0/


That doesn't really show much of anything. According to your definition Arizona has better gun laws and they rank fifth on the list.
 
2012-07-20 06:26:41 PM  
GOP is nothing but a bunch of dog whistlin' partisans. You don't even know what you are mad about anymore do you? It's sad your leadership doesn't have the guts to purge your village idiots lest you lose some federal and or state congressional seats. Zero scruples. Maximum pandering.
 
2012-07-20 06:27:00 PM  

magusdevil: The_Sponge: magusdevil: Know how know you don't know what "responsible-gun-ownership" means?


Oh really? Because I have never broken any state or federal gun laws since I've owned firearms since the age of 18. Never mind the fact that I have never pointed a firearm at a single person.

Well I've never broken any laws while drinking. So despite the fact that I get black out drunk on a daily basis I must be a responsible drinker.


I pay my court ordered child support every month, I must be a responsible parent.
 
2012-07-20 06:27:49 PM  

LasersHurt: Does California only allow bolt action rifles? No. They allow lots and lots of guns. You can have tons of them. All manner of guns await you.



So what? They don't allow as many as my state does. And if I moved to California tomorrow with all my firearms, I would be committing a crime.

Link

CAUTION: Some varieties of semiautomatic pistols cannot be brought into California by new residents because they have been classified as Assault Weapons, see California Assault Weapons below.
Failure to report imported handguns as required could result in criminal prosecution for violation of Penal Code Section 12072(g), a misdemeanor, with a possible penalty of up to six months imprisonment in the county jail, or by a fine not exceeding $1,000, or by both such imprisonment and fine. In addition, the importer should expect forfeiture of handguns not reported.


Just wonderful.
 
2012-07-20 06:28:24 PM  

The_Sponge: magusdevil: So all they had to do to keep their guns was register by a certain date. And they couldn't even get their shiat together enough do that? And you think these people are responsible enough to own guns... that certainly explains your position.


Apparently you missed that part that people were abiding by the law (post 1992 registration) as interpreted by the AG at the time.

And you still missed my question as to whether you agree with the ban.

And if you're fine with the way they worked the law, how about banning abortions for anyone who fails to pre-register for one? Would that be cool?


How about banning abortions by anyone who fails to register with the medical boards? Oh wait, that's a thing? I guess you don't have a point then.
 
2012-07-20 06:28:33 PM  
So can we all agree that Gohmert is a douchebag?
 
2012-07-20 06:28:47 PM  

magusdevil: o5iiawah: Mouldy Squid: The idea that if I were an American and could just walk into a gun store and buy one, stick it in my belt and walk out frightens me.

I'm not sure why - because I dont know of any state where you can walk in to a gun store, purchase a firearm and walk out. The only exceptions to that are some states allow you to cash and carry if you have your CCW which requires a background check, fingerprints and in a lot of areas, a couple of references and a character interview with your local sheriff to go along with a CCW class. Mine cost me upwards of $250-$300 to get in photos, classes, documents, trips to various agencies and what not.

I purchased both of my pieces in FL and the store required an extra $50 or so for the FFL, and background check. The American gun market is not mogadishu.

I'm sure he was thinking of a gun SHOW, not a gun store. No waiting period, no background check. Yeehaw. Let's get us some guns, boys.


There are background checks at the gun show. I've gone through them a few times now. And there isn't a waiting period from a normal FFL either, at least not in my state.
 
2012-07-20 06:29:25 PM  

The_Sponge: LasersHurt: Does California only allow bolt action rifles? No. They allow lots and lots of guns. You can have tons of them. All manner of guns await you.


So what? They don't allow as many as my state does. And if I moved to California tomorrow with all my firearms, I would be committing a crime.

Link

CAUTION: Some varieties of semiautomatic pistols cannot be brought into California by new residents because they have been classified as Assault Weapons, see California Assault Weapons below.
Failure to report imported handguns as required could result in criminal prosecution for violation of Penal Code Section 12072(g), a misdemeanor, with a possible penalty of up to six months imprisonment in the county jail, or by a fine not exceeding $1,000, or by both such imprisonment and fine. In addition, the importer should expect forfeiture of handguns not reported.

Just wonderful.


Why do you hate state's rights?
 
2012-07-20 06:29:31 PM  

Bob16: A perverted country produces perverts. James Holmes is a classic amerikan product just like the massacred country of Iraq ( or Vietnam if you want to go back 40 years ). If you want to go back further look into the rape of Iran by amerika in 1953. Look into the Sand Creek massacre ( of Indians ). "The evil in America is very old" - William Burroughs.


Man, that dude was a prophet considering he died in 1997. I had never heard that quote from him but I am familiar with this one.....

After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn't do it. I sure as hell wouldn't want to live in a society where the only people allowed guns are the police and the military.
William S. Burroughs
 
2012-07-20 06:30:47 PM  

Fart_Machine: That doesn't really show much of anything. According to your definition Arizona has better gun laws and they rank fifth on the list.



Exactly....maybe it's proof that gun control doesn't work....given that the gun laws in WA and AZ aren't that far apart, and did you notice that Washington, DC is at the top of the list.
 
2012-07-20 06:31:01 PM  

The_Sponge: LasersHurt: Does California only allow bolt action rifles? No. They allow lots and lots of guns. You can have tons of them. All manner of guns await you.


So what? They don't allow as many as my state does. And if I moved to California tomorrow with all my firearms, I would be committing a crime.

Link

CAUTION: Some varieties of semiautomatic pistols cannot be brought into California by new residents because they have been classified as Assault Weapons, see California Assault Weapons below.
Failure to report imported handguns as required could result in criminal prosecution for violation of Penal Code Section 12072(g), a misdemeanor, with a possible penalty of up to six months imprisonment in the county jail, or by a fine not exceeding $1,000, or by both such imprisonment and fine. In addition, the importer should expect forfeiture of handguns not reported.

Just wonderful.


Again, there are some limits there. Are we arguing that any limits are an infringement upon your freedom? You can still arm yourself to the teeth legally in CA if you want to, there are just some rules.
 
2012-07-20 06:31:29 PM  

Fart_Machine: So can we all agree that Gohmert is a douchebag?



Yeah, he acted like an ass.
 
2012-07-20 06:32:58 PM  

magusdevil: Why do you hate state's rights?



States don't have the right to go against federal law.

If you are fine with CA's gun laws, then you would be okay with Bible Belt states banning abortion and gay marriage, right?
 
2012-07-20 06:33:23 PM  

the_geek: Petit_Merdeux: Exactly!

There would have been a lot of collateral damage, but they would be heroes that were killed by bullets of freedom!

And as such they would have been eligible for a full military funeral! *

Do you have even a single incident as evidence to suggest that legally armed citizens defending themselves or others resulted in a net increase in deaths (not including the deaths of bad guys)?



No I don't . Yet I still can see that a gunfight in a dark theater filled with teargas is not going to end like some Tom Clancy novel.
 
2012-07-20 06:33:27 PM  

RINO: There are background checks at the gun show. I've gone through them a few times now. And there isn't a waiting period from a normal FFL either, at least not in my state.


YMMV. I know each state is different. Across the river in NJ, you need a permit for each handgun purchased,
 
2012-07-20 06:33:31 PM  

Avery614: Bob16: A perverted country produces perverts. James Holmes is a classic amerikan product just like the massacred country of Iraq ( or Vietnam if you want to go back 40 years ). If you want to go back further look into the rape of Iran by amerika in 1953. Look into the Sand Creek massacre ( of Indians ). "The evil in America is very old" - William Burroughs.

Man, that dude was a prophet considering he died in 1997. I had never heard that quote from him but I am familiar with this one.....

After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn't do it. I sure as hell wouldn't want to live in a society where the only people allowed guns are the police and the military.
William S. Burroughs


Are you familiar with this one...

Watch me shoot this apple off my wife's head, don't worry I've done it a million... oops.
William S. Burroughs
 
2012-07-20 06:33:45 PM  

LasersHurt: Again, there are some limits there. Are we arguing that any limits are an infringement upon your freedom? You can still arm yourself to the teeth legally in CA if you want to, there are just some rules.



I'm arguing that THEIR limits are an infringement upon my freedom.
 
2012-07-20 06:34:22 PM  

vpb: CliChe Guevara: sillydragon: I dunno, the original Fark thread on the shooting had some pretty good ITGs and "I carry a large weapon in a holster to make up for the tiny one in my pants" folks.

Not all CCW people are ITG's. I often carry a compact but efficient weapon in a holster to protect the compact but efficient one in my pants. Not all gun owners are nutters, we roll our eyes at those guys too.

No, but there seem to be quite a few who think using a gun in real life is just like the movies.


Probably almost exactly the number that have never actually had to use them in real life unfortunately. People who have don't look forward to that, ever.
 
2012-07-20 06:34:47 PM  

magusdevil: Well I've never broken any laws while drinking. So despite the fact that I get black out drunk on a daily basis I must be a responsible drinker.


Dude I know black out drunks, trust me you're committing felonies, (defecating in mailboxes, and pissing ON a cop car are the 2 most recent for the asshats I know) you just don't remember them.

/which of course means they didn't happen
 
2012-07-20 06:35:07 PM  

Petit_Merdeux: No I don't . Yet I still can see that a gunfight in a dark theater filled with teargas is not going to end like some Tom Clancy novel.



I'm a huge supporter of concealed carry, but a dark theater filled with gas or smoke is not a good scenario for those with CCW permits.
 
2012-07-20 06:36:01 PM  

Petit_Merdeux: No I don't .


But off the top of my head, there is the Gabby Giffords shooting, where an armed patriot almost shot one of the guys subduing the gunman.

And that was in broad daylight.

After the gun