As many as 10 dead in shooting at Batman premiere in Denver: reports

[Peter Dow]

Election year? No appetite for gun-law reform? That's a shame.

It's a very bad joke to kill innocent people or to be a governor whose government allows anyone to get so much firepower for their own personal unsupervised use and allows that unnecessary fire-power to be used against defenceless citizens.

Photoshop: Compare the Colorado jokers

I actually support the 2nd amendment to the constitution of the USA - the right bear arms as part of a well-regulated militia.

The whole "well-regulated militia" part gets forgotten by the NRA and gun-rights nuts who want to take a good idea too far to the point that individuals can have way more firepower than they ever need for self-defence or to defend their own family in their own home.

To my mind, "well-regulated" would mean regulating against personal automatic weapons. Automatic weapons should be limited to organised police or community defence militia forces on duty. I would support say Church or University or town militias - who would be required to be insured to pay out compensation if any of their guns got misused.

For home defence, single shot shotguns or bolt-action hunting rifles is plenty. No-one needs a personal automatic or semi-automatic assault rifle at home. Such weapons should be held in militia arsenals and only used when militia personnel are on supervised duty.

I don't have all the details sorted out but I just think the laws are too slack right now and it's not what the 2nd amendment calls for.

I know your tactic it's not pro second amendment. The militia consist of the PEOPLE.
The second amendment does not say

A well regulated militia by congress being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

It says

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

Now why would the founders put control of the militia in the hands of the government if the second amendment was supposed to prevent tyranny of the government?

Regulate back then does not mean what it does today.

I never said it had to be "Congress" regulating but no-one is going to stop Congress, or the Supreme Court, or the Executive under the president, coming to a view about whether a particular militia is "well regulated" or not. Likewise, the states, the governor, the state legislature, state courts can come to a view about that too, as can county government. The people can have a view as well.

If a militia is really not well regulated - suppose the KKK set up a militia and they are back to their old tricks, hanging black people under fiery crosses - then government, representing the people, are going to say "hey the KKK militia is not well regulated, so their militia is unconstitutional, illegal so someone send the police, the army to arrest the KKK militia, seize their guns and bring them before the courts".

So my proposal is not about control. It is about a militia being of good standing with the authorities and the people. It's not about a tight leash, it's about basic standards that must be met, such as being insured to pay compensation if a militia's guns are ever misused.

Militias that get to decide for themselves if they are well regulated or not is not a runner I don't think. The people want someone they trust to stand back from a particular militia and take an independent view about whether it is "well regulated" or not.

 

[beagle9]

For what you're wanting, you don't need smart technology; you need a crystal ball.

"Sorry Mr. Beagle, but we can't sell you a gun. Your criminal background check came back clean, but our crystal ball says you will rob a 7-11 on December 19, 2022."

That's rediculous and you know it....What I am hearing here, is that gun owners want no part in any solutions being thought of, in order to help stop these sorts of crimes in the future, and they are willing to risk everything (even their country), just to not be inconvienenced by it all in the short term..

How will smart technology stop crime? Do you really think it will be possible to develop a gun that knows when its owner is going to use it for a crime? Nothing you have proposed is even possible, much less practical. We do not live in a world where you make up tech and somebody builds it the next day. Even if we did, someone else would build a way to disable it.

BMW designed an ignition system that is impossible to start without a smart key, it did not stop these guys.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DshK4ZXPU9o]Stolen BMW 1M Coupe in less than 3 minutes - YouTube[/ame]

If you ever come up with a solution you can argue that gun owners are being irresponsible. If all you can do is pretend we live in a technical utopia where it is impossible to thwart security measures all you will get from intelligent people is disdain.

I was sitting around this morning and thinking (i.e. being out of the debate for a second in order to reflect), and yes you are right in your quick analogy of my thinking upon the technology not yet being the key in this race, but I bet you that it will be the key to helping stop this sort of thing in the future, because gun owners and the opposing side will never come together on this issue, and so in the mean time people will again die by the hands of an idiot who will arm himself to the teeth found within such a free to all (no matter what) by definition of these gun shows that I see people writing about, along with an anciently run gun enviroment or society in which we are all living in, that allows a certain percentage of this sort of thing to get through or go on in America now, and for what ? Is it because of a refusal and/or a fear to finally begin to update/modernize or bring it all up to the 21st century where it all goes stale on such issues yet again and again? The shooter seems to have all the updates (best guns and best body armor) against a crowd that is like fish in a barrel when these criminal updates are used against them.

Due to what (I guess) is the shooters dark held adolesence still kept, he lived out some sort of evil darknight fantasy character upon the good people of Colorado, and he did this with some gear that should have been impossible for him to have gotten his hands on, but there he was with it on, and worse carrying weapons of mass destruction in his hands, and no one has a clue?

How about the time we had the shoot out in California, where those two's guy's were set up in this same kind of manor when doing that shooting, the cops were helpless as so were the citizens in that situation as well, but here we are down to road aways from that incident, and so many simular shootings later, and people are still able to get these kinds of set up's and weaponry, in order to use on the cops and the good citizens of this nation.

The fact that we don't have that crystal ball you mention, means we should use what God has given us (our own minds), and we should use them in ways that will thwart or prevent more traggedies like this one in everyway possible. Look at the Lays potato chip corporation, they just ask the citizens to try and come up with a new flavors for them in a contest of sorts, do you think that we can't come up with a technology that could assist us in stopping this sort of thing someday ? I don't like the idea that my family or friends are like fish in a barrel, when trying to go out and enjoy themselves in America, but that is pretty much what people have become in America. Now who do we have to thank for that one ?

Yes it is true that the idiotic feds are but one player to blame in the destruction of our society, yet their are many more who are found in groups in this nation, that are to blame as well. This places the good citizens surrounded now by idiots who won't budge one way or the other, and this is all out of fear that it could or would lead to the final fall for anyone of them. Their are groups who are holding on but by a thread it seems anymore, and so there is so much that is being seen as expendable to them in order to hold on. I look at things this a way, how about updating or modernizing before the long stretching arm of the over reaching feds do something stupid yet again and again over these catostrophic issues? Just saying..

PS. the smart key worked in the video, they just pushed the car away...LOL You have no way of knowing how far they pushed the car before they probably gave up or rather they had a trailer waiting out of sight that they pushed it up on. The main thing is that the technology worked, where as before they would have driven the car away, but due to the new tech, they had to settle for pushing the car away. Anyway to slow down or make it far more difficult for criminals to do their thing, I see it as a major plus in my book, and you just added fuel to my fire with that video... B ) My wife even laughed when she saw them pushing that car away...LOL

 

[Peter Dow]

And for whence does that well regulated militia come from, you know the one that is suppose to keep government in check when it decides to become tyrannical and oppressive over and above the freedom and liberty of the citizens of this United States ? Could the government adress it's own problems from within, otherwise to point a gun to it's own head in order to straighten itself back out once over the edge to far ? The citizens have held the key to government staying in check thus far in various ways aforded to them by the constitution, and by laws in which the President swears by, and takes and oath to up hold, because in the freedom that the good citizens have in this nation, it doesn't allow the government to keep the citizens all nice and cozy into a little controlled box in which it may want to keep them if decides to go rogue finally.

Keeping government scratching it's head just a little bit is best for the good citizens of this nation, but the government flooding the pool with many concocketed potions coming in from all directions now, is forcing the American swimmers to one side of the pool, and ultimately into the box in which it wants them all into finally...

How does America keep the other nuclear nations at bay ? It is by keeping a healthy amount of weapons and technology available as a counter found as just one aspect of that situation, and it does this in order to keep it all on an even keel in the world. It's the same with us, where as if the government gets us anymore vulnerable than we already are, and then it is found that it has plans for this nation that no longer represents the will of the nation, then it can implement such plans without resistance at all coming from we the people if were not to agree with them. Our voting booth has been our best weapon to keep government in check so far in this nation, but what happens when that is no longer the case ? Who is the militia being spoken about in those prophetic words written so long ago?

Buddy see my reply 1104 to bigrebnc1775 as well but the militias I propose to be the only ones allowed to have automatic and semi-automatic guns (apart from the police, national guard, federal agents, US military etc.) would be associated with trusted organisations of the people. Who, for example?

Militias could be organised by - with examples

By political party - Democrats, Republicans
By church dominations - Catholics, Presbyterians, Baptist, Methodist, Jewish, Sunni Muslim, Shia Muslim, Hindu
By employers organisations or labour unions - Chambers of commerce, a university, students union, AFL-CIO, Change to win, Veterans

So that's who I would propose could set up a militia if they wanted to. Organisations that people already trust, the people would also trust to regulate their own militia well. They are probably already insured for their main activities so insuring their militia would be an add-on premium for their existing insurance.

The safeguard would be the usual law enforcement and legal organisations of government making sure that those trustworthy organisations stayed trustworthy even with a militia of their own.

One final thought, the National Rifle Association could have a militia as well, but the same would apply to them - the NRA militia would need to be well regulated and be insured to pay compensation if any of their guns got misused. The NRA too would need to have militia armouries to keep their arsenal of semi-automatic and automatic assault rifles secured in - not kept at the homes of individuals as they would like. If the NRA could play by the new rules (which is just the old 2nd amendment but interpreted anew in this modern age of automatic rifles) then, sure, the NRA could have a militia too.

 

[Pho_King]

America has 10 times the population of Australia, you dolt.

So what! Lord have mercy on these types of defensive arguments.
America has two times the population of Japan but 1000% more gun deaths.
So, by your reasoning... who's the biased dolt now.

They have lost their own argument. Their gun culture is to blame for this, yet they refuse to do anything at all to save those lives which will be lost in the future due to yet another mass shooting.

Our "gun culture" is to blame for the Colorado shooting? That's odd. I blame the shooter. My dad owns a veritable arsenal of weapons. I certainly don't believe he had any part in this. You are a dope.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

....

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

...

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

...

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Election year? No appetite for gun-law reform? That's a shame.

It's a very bad joke to kill innocent people or to be a governor whose government allows anyone to get so much firepower for their own personal unsupervised use and allows that unnecessary fire-power to be used against defenceless citizens.

Photoshop: Compare the Colorado jokers

I actually support the 2nd amendment to the constitution of the USA - the right bear arms as part of a well-regulated militia.

The whole "well-regulated militia" part gets forgotten by the NRA and gun-rights nuts who want to take a good idea too far to the point that individuals can have way more firepower than they ever need for self-defence or to defend their own family in their own home.

To my mind, "well-regulated" would mean regulating against personal automatic weapons. Automatic weapons should be limited to organised police or community defence militia forces on duty. I would support say Church or University or town militias - who would be required to be insured to pay out compensation if any of their guns got misused.

For home defence, single shot shotguns or bolt-action hunting rifles is plenty. No-one needs a personal automatic or semi-automatic assault rifle at home. Such weapons should be held in militia arsenals and only used when militia personnel are on supervised duty.

I don't have all the details sorted out but I just think the laws are too slack right now and it's not what the 2nd amendment calls for.

I know your tactic it's not pro second amendment. The militia consist of the PEOPLE.
The second amendment does not say

It says

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

Now why would the founders put control of the militia in the hands of the government if the second amendment was supposed to prevent tyranny of the government?

Regulate back then does not mean what it does today.

I never said it had to be "Congress" regulating but no-one is going to stop Congress, or the Supreme Court, or the Executive under the president, coming to a view about whether a particular militia is "well regulated" or not. Likewise, the states, the governor, the state legislature, state courts can come to a view about that too, as can county government. The people can have a view as well.

If a militia is really not well regulated - suppose the KKK set up a militia and they are back to their old tricks, hanging black people under fiery crosses - then government, representing the people, are going to say "hey the KKK militia is not well regulated, so their militia is unconstitutional, illegal so someone send the police, the army to arrest the KKK militia, seize their guns and bring them before the courts".

So my proposal is not about control. It is about a militia being of good standing with the authorities and the people. It's not about a tight leash, it's about basic standards that must be met, such as being insured to pay compensation if a militia's guns are ever misused.

Militias that get to decide for themselves if they are well regulated or not is not a runner I don't think. The people want someone they trust to stand back from a particular militia and take an independent view about whether it is "well regulated" or not.

ONE MORE TIME Well regulated does not mean today what it meant when the second amendment was first written. It had nothing to do with government regulating it.
Well Regulate meant in the 18th century to be as expected in working order.
And one more thing, why would the founders put control of the militia in the hands of the government if the second amendment was supposed to prevent tyranny of the government?

 

[Katzndogz]

If the gun culture didn't clash head on with the PC culture, this would never have happened.

I just heard an interview with the owner of the gun range where Holmes practiced. The range owner saw that Holmes was losing his grip, but because no crime had been committed there was nothing he could do about it. We can't allow people to go around accusing others of being insane just because they are "different".

 

[beagle9]

Our gun culture (the majority found as the good part of it) is not the problem, but rather a refusal to keep up with what is changing in America, becomes a huge problem for our freedom loving gun culture these days.. The bad guy's are using every freedom that we have had in this nation now against us, as they have been granted access to it all without having to show character, responsibility, and integrity anylonger, and this because we don't know how to keep the bad guy's at bay anymore, but why is this you suppose ? It's because of the federal government shooting off into a different directions all the time now, and this in order to accomodate anything and everything in a sic and twisted way for America as is proven now in retrospect. It is what has gotten us all into this pickel these days, by allowing and then placing by force "people" who are anti-American, anti-specific race, anti-American culture etc. all over the place in this nation anymore. We now have to lock our doors, bolt up our windows, fear leaving the security of our homes, fear government who forced all this mess upon us, and to top it all off the government upset the balance/economy in which has created more internal enemies because of mis-management of this nations business and so on and so forth. Follow the trails people, just like the government does when looking for terrorist and money trails and so on and so forth, just follow the trails.

 

[JoeB131]

If the gun culture didn't clash head on with the PC culture, this would never have happened.

I just heard an interview with the owner of the gun range where Holmes practiced. The range owner saw that Holmes was losing his grip, but because no crime had been committed there was nothing he could do about it. We can't allow people to go around accusing others of being insane just because they are "different".

Why not?

When the range owner and his mother knew there was something off about this guy, and no one did anything about it, that's a failure in our system.

 

[Katzndogz]

If the gun culture didn't clash head on with the PC culture, this would never have happened.

I just heard an interview with the owner of the gun range where Holmes practiced. The range owner saw that Holmes was losing his grip, but because no crime had been committed there was nothing he could do about it. We can't allow people to go around accusing others of being insane just because they are "different".

Why not?

When the range owner and his mother knew there was something off about this guy, and no one did anything about it, that's a failure in our system.

Yes indeed, it is a failure of political correctness. We no longer have a method anyone can use to identify the loon. This isn't the Minority Report.

 

[beagle9]

If the gun culture didn't clash head on with the PC culture, this would never have happened.

I just heard an interview with the owner of the gun range where Holmes practiced. The range owner saw that Holmes was losing his grip, but because no crime had been committed there was nothing he could do about it. We can't allow people to go around accusing others of being insane just because they are "different".

Maybe a pshyco analysis should be required as a test for gun owners once a year in the nation now, just like renewing a drivers license or other updating certifications in which we do hold, and for which has to be updated regulary ?

Maybe we should (as someone said earlier), require a liability insurance policy to be held by the gun owner or gun owners of serious assault weapons now. Hec this alone might would subtract from the amount of peope whom want to own such weapons in the future, especially younger people that are seemingly the most dangerous these days. Price it all out of reach from the young people through certification requirements and liability policies in which changes the game on this big time, especially if wanting to own and operate an assault weapon (AR-15's) & gear for example within this united states as a citizen. Wasn't it not long ago, that the police were becoming outgunned and out matched in weaponry in this country, until measures were brought to again put the police back on top of these situations ? Isn't there a major problem down in Mexico, where the drug lords are stronger than the military and the government in that nation now ? I say we vote in a government that is not undermining this nation and it's security as we have seen, and then slowly work our way back off of the plank in which the government has now walked us all out on. I am for freedom in everything possible as well in this nation, just as long as certain things are not being exploited by the bad guy's under those very freedoms in which they are using to kill us with, and all because our government see's us as the enemy instead of the bad guy's anymore, especially when empowering people in this nation by way of our government in which they are doing this and have been doing this for quite sometime now, and in which has created what we see now going in this nation to date.

 

[Peter Dow]

ONE MORE TIME Well regulated does not mean today what it meant when the second amendment was first written. It had nothing to do with government regulating it.
Well Regulate meant in the 18th century to be as expected in working order.

Joker Holmes slaughtering people in Colorado, is not a sign of a well regulated militia "in working order".

All the other incidents of crime and murder committed by people with legally held weapons is not a sign of a well regulated militia "in working order".

"The militia", such as it is, is not being well regulated by the current slack gun laws. "The militia", such as it is, is not "in working order".

On the contrary, "the militia" is not in good working order. Guns in the hands of citizens need better laws, laws which are enforceable.

So "the militia", such as it is, needs better regulating by better laws and it needs to be put into better "working order" so as to keep the people safe.

If you think things are working well buddy then tell that to the families and loved ones of the victims of the Colorado Batman premiere shooting because they won't agree.

And one more thing, why would the founders put control of the militia in the hands of the government if the second amendment was supposed to prevent tyranny of the government?

The US Constitution is all about government of the people, by the people, for the people, right?

So ideally, "the government" would be "the people". The danger, what other countries have, is government by the state, by the monarch, by the elite, and the people can go to hell. That's what the constitution is designed to defend against.

The constitution and the law is something we can all read. So we all can have a view as citizens if we think the state is breaking the constitution or the law.

So you are right. The constitution is asking you to have a view as to whether the militia is well regulated or whether innocent people are getting shot up. You decide buddy.

 

[beagle9]

If the gun culture didn't clash head on with the PC culture, this would never have happened.

I just heard an interview with the owner of the gun range where Holmes practiced. The range owner saw that Holmes was losing his grip, but because no crime had been committed there was nothing he could do about it. We can't allow people to go around accusing others of being insane just because they are "different".

Why not?

When the range owner and his mother knew there was something off about this guy, and no one did anything about it, that's a failure in our system.

Yes indeed, it is a failure of political correctness. We no longer have a method anyone can use to identify the loon. This isn't the Minority Report.

I agree with your PC analysis here, as being a problem in which the government has fallen victim to..

 

[thanatos144]

Leave it to the progressives to piss on the dead and try to use them for the fascist means.

 

[beagle9]

ONE MORE TIME Well regulated does not mean today what it meant when the second amendment was first written. It had nothing to do with government regulating it.
Well Regulate meant in the 18th century to be as expected in working order.

Joker Holmes slaughtering people in Colorado, is not a sign of a well regulated militia "in working order".

All the other incidents of crime and murder committed by people with legally held weapons is not a sign of a well regulated militia "in working order".

"The militia", such as it is, is not being well regulated by the current slack gun laws. "The militia", such as it is, is not "in working order".

On the contrary, "the militia" is not in good working order. Guns in the hands of citizens need better laws, laws which are enforceable.

So "the militia", such as it is, needs better regulating by better laws and it needs to be put into better "working order" so as to keep the people safe.

If you think things are working well buddy then tell that to the families and loved ones of the victims of the Colorado Batman premiere shooting because they won't agree.

And one more thing, why would the founders put control of the militia in the hands of the government if the second amendment was supposed to prevent tyranny of the government?

The US Constitution is all about government of the people, by the people, for the people, right?

So ideally, "the government" would be "the people". The danger, what other countries have, is government by the state, by the monarch, by the elite, and the people can go to hell. That's what the constitution is designed to defend against.

The constitution and the law is something we can all read. So we all can have a view as citizens if we think the state is breaking the constitution or the law.

So you are right. The constitution is asking you to have a view as to whether the militia is well regulated or whether innocent people are getting shot up. You decide buddy.

I as a single well regulated millitia member of the United States of America ( whom being in well working order found in mind body and soul), where as I am also a good person for which the government and the citizenry does not have to fear, and should not have to fear, know that the government as is found within this countries activities, has led to some pretty bad things as a result of government intervention into to many areas of the nation that it should have stayed out of.. Having governments new progressive ideology or new self found rule as is being found operating above and beyond the people, and not for the people in representation of them anymore, has since led it to operating over and above what the constitution for America had laid out for them to always protect and to uphold. It isn't being rightfully upheld anymore in a lot of key areas, and that has become a major problem that has led to many a problem that we are seeing today in America, so citizens open your eyes and Unite is all one can do now.

 

[Againsheila]

The Swiss have the right idea about firearms » Evansville Courier & Press

Wish Switzerland would let us immigrate.....

 

[Peach]

The Swiss have the right idea about firearms » Evansville Courier & Press

Wish Switzerland would let us immigrate.....

Both the Swiss law, and firearm bans, are restrictions on liberty. Neither is an answer to the horror of mass killings, had the Colorado killer not had firearms, he could have used bombs, such as were found in his apartment. And as he was wearing a helmet, armor, throat & groin protection, there is little chance any person shooting at him would have made any difference.

 

[Mr. Jones]

=bigrebnc1775;5667219
ONE MORE TIME Well regulated does not mean today what it meant when the second amendment was first written. It had nothing to do with government regulating it.
Well Regulate meant in the 18th century to be as expected in working order.
And one more thing, why would the founders put control of the militia in the hands of the government if the second amendment was supposed to prevent tyranny of the government?

What he said.^^^
Gun grabbers are just as looney as the shooters in these cases, as they tend to think that an inanimate object has a mind of its own and thus does the killing.

What if the killer waited in the parking lot until the movie was over in a Ford Expedition, then, mowed them down, back and forth. I suspect 50 -70 people could get hit with the same number of casualties. Maybe run a few over leaving the scene on nearby streets for good measure as well..
Would you then hear cry's for outlawing large SUV's, or regulating them near large crowds?
How about a call to ban alcohol altogether, as that substance kills more people then mass shooters...Oh wait we already tried that, and it didn't work out too well did it...
Dumb-asses..