New Batman Movie

[tubeswell]

Motive anyone?

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-574 ... ontentBody

Maybe he just didn't like the movie?

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nati ... 5167.story

Sad business whatever it is. I wonder whether they will change gun laws after this?

No wait,... it can't be the fault of the gun laws can it? Its the people that are crazy. Nothin' wrong with the gun laws.

[Blue Monster 65]

Motive? He's nuts.

Gun Laws? No change.

Outcome? Another story will dominate the news next week.

[Enzo]

Oh, there is no shortage of people trying hard to spin this off in their various directions. The public radio folks were going on and on about how it was an assault weapon, a SEMI-AUTOMATIC!!!!! A caller suggests that the choice of weapon was not the problem. OH YEAH? HE COULDN'T HAVE KILLED SO MANY PEOPLE WITH A KNIFE!!!!! He could have tossed a pipe bomb across the theater...

I am no gun fan, but neither am I anti-gun. It appears the shooter here had amassed a lot of firepower, but all of it was legal. I think if someone wants to commit mayhem, they will find a weapon. I think there is plenty of good reason to have reasonable gun laws, but I doubt any laws would have made much difference here.

I recall when McVeigh blew up the Murrah building, there was talk of banning fuel oil and ammonia.

[Enzo]

I'll have to check with Fox News. I am pretty sure this is all Obama's fault.

[Blue Monster 65]

You're probably right.

[tubeswell]

While it is 'true' that crazed homicidal maniacs will find mass murder weapons if they really want to, it is also 'true' that, the easier it is to obtain weapons, then the easier it will be for crazed homicidal maniacs to obtain them. I daresay that if you ran enough variables, you could probably find some sort of statistical correlation about that hypothesis that puts 'ease of obtaining weapons' as a significant contributing factor.

[Blue Monster 65]

You're probably correct, but that doesn't mean anything will change here. Many others have made that same argument, but ... well ... it doesn't change our minds.

[tubeswell]

Let me put it this way - if you have a child in your house running around with a carving knife threatening your other children, what would you prefer to do?

a) remove the knife from the child and make it difficult for the child to get the knife?

b) call the police and hope they get there in time to deal with the situation?

c) stand their stroking your whiskers and saying to yourself "hmmm, no matter whether I remove the knife from the child or not, if the child is determined enough, they will get a knife and threaten the other kids, so I might as well just let nature take its course?"

[Lance]

Too bad Aurora, CO isn't one of the towns that requires its citizens to all carry guns. (yeah, we have a few of them in the USofA) This would have been a much smaller, far less tragic incident.

[Blue Monster 65]

Well, first of all, none of my children would be running with a knife, as they know better and there's not a history of mental illness in my family. And if one of the other kids in the neighborhood tried that, I'd put them down quickly - one way or another. Take that as you will.

That said, I'm not arguing with you. I'm just saying that no matter what, the general consensus of the American population isn't going to change due to this incident, or any others any time soon.

There are two groups of people here who scream at each on either side of the argument, and each seems just a little less rational than the other. Go figure that one out and you'll know what the rest of us deal with. If we could find a reasonable middle ground, we wouldn't know it in a lifetime.

That's the reality in America, I'm afraid.

[Lance]

Here's an article on one of them, where they've had mandatory gun ownership for 30 years now.:

Gun Ownership Mandatory In Kennesaw, Georgia --- Crime Rate Plummets

[Superluminal]

Colo. is a conceal carry state. Yet in the theater were signs posted that no guns were allowed. It would have been illegal for a person with a permit to carry a firearm on private property if the property owner forbids it. Whatever your feelings about guns, would you really want to advertise your home or business as a gun free zone?

[Lance]

Whatever your feelings about guns, would you really want to advertise your home or business as a gun free zone?

You got THAT right.

Even if I don't, would you risk it?

[Enzo]

No point in advertising your home that way, but a business has to think in terms of clientele. If they attract more patrons by making them feel less threatened by guns (it's a family place approach) than they drive away by irritating the gun owners, then they will do it. If a no guns policy drives away half the patrons, they won't do it for long.

In a dark movie theater, gunfire erupts, I am not so sure I;d feel very secure when all the CCW people around me whip out the weapon and start firing "back."