Cops lying a out evidence in Colorado shooting

It is easy to kill with a gun. This is a fact. The 2nd ammendment is necessary because other guns exist. Gov. and law enforcement will always force 'order' by the point of a gun, so we should be able to at least attempt to match the aggression. However thugs, psychopaths, and tyrants(ie. bitchass cowards)will also force their misguided will with guns. Don't be so defensive.

My dear friend and training partner just watched the love of his life gunned down in front of him and her daughter for telling a car to slow down for speeding through her neighborhood. Skill? This lil bitch was 17 with 6 prior felonies and out on bond. I bet the first thing he did when he got out was go get his stupid coward ass a gun. Without that gun my friend could have destroyed everyone in the car. And even if he would of had a gun, sure he would of swiftly gained vengeance, but she would still be dead.

Just because we want to protect ourselves and our family, doesn't negate the fact that certain personality types are drawn to guns. Weak cowards are in this demographic. Why? Power. Unearned, easily attainable, and near total power. I also wish there were no guns. Because there are far too many dumbasses in our species.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mitchell C

If you think it takes no skill to kill someone then you are sorely mistaken.

What might of prevented this is if someone else in the theater had a firearm of their own on hand.

---

A dark theater where smoke/gas grenades were launch, and you think if more people had guns less people would have died? How would they be able to tell who was the original shooter? How many more people would have been killed/hurt with the extra bullets flying? What are the cops supposed to do when they see all these guys with guns?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mitchell C

Furthermore it's easy to say a gun is a cowards weapon when you aren't protecting your family.
If having a gun by the bed makes me a coward, then sign me up.

---

Are you with your family 24 hours a day? Even if you are with your family when the bullets start flying how will you stop them from hitting your family?

Statistically speaking your family would have a much lower chance of getting gunned down in their daily lives if almost no civilian had a gun.

Wake up! The NRA, gun manufactures and bought of politicians are filling their pockets while innocents die every day. How many people were shot down just today? How many this year so far?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spínola

A dark theater where smoke/gas grenades were launch, and you think if more people had guns less people would have died? How would they be able to tell who was the original shooter? How many more people would have been killed/hurt with the extra bullets flying?

---

Of course less people would have died. A madman shooting innocent unarmed people VS. armed, trained, citizens protecting their lives and loved ones.

Oh yeah, it was much better off since only the madman had a gun. That sounds enlightened.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spínola

What are the cops supposed to do when they see all these guys with guns?

---

Thank them? They probably would have arrested those hypothetical heroes since carrying a gun in your car in Aurora, CO is illegal. So even if a well-meaning citizen meant to take a gun to the theater, he would have been breaking his local laws to do so. Interestingly, that didn't stop the shooter. I can't imagine why.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spínola

Are you with your family 24 hours a day? Even if you are with your family when the bullets start flying how will you stop them from hitting your family?

---

My wife carries her own gun. I care about my family, so I care about prevention.

And when the bullets start flying, I'll be standing in their path like the three guys in CO who died shielding their girlfriends.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spínola

Statistically speaking your family would have a much lower chance of getting gunned down in their daily lives if almost no civilian had a gun.

---

Oh, to be sure. And statistically speaking, we would all have a higher chance of being fatter if the world was made of ice cream and tacos.

And just for kicks, who exactly do you qualify as having rights above those of a "civilian"? And who makes that decision?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spínola

Wake up! The NRA, gun manufactures and bought of politicians are filling their pockets while innocents die every day. How many people were shot down just today? How many this year so far?

---

They're keeping their pockets full by creating more and more gun regulations. Who do you think gets the money from the incredible taxes placed upon firearms and ammunition? Who do you think gets the money from concealed carry training and licensing? Who can charge almost whatever they want because of stringent rules and and a constant fear of disarmament creating a false demand? They're all on YOUR side. Give me a break.

If you truly want to stop the violence, the only option is to pull back all of these unconstitutional hurdles to personal armament and facilitate an environment where individuals take the responsibility of protecting themselves and their communities as a natural duty.

I really wish we lived in a society free from guns where people handled problems like men and not cowards. The unfortunate truth is that we don't.....therefore I strongly support the 2nd amendment right to bear arms and protect ones own family and property. This particular situation is very unfortunate but does nothing to change my opinion on the issue. In all reality, the more i look into it, the more I see timely events happening to persuade/brainwashing us to giving that right up. Given the history of our government, this would not surprise me one bit. Look at the events that brought us into WW1, 2, Vietnam, Iraq. All events that were either allowed or setup to happen in order to infuriate the public into sitting back and supporting/allowing reactions that otherwise wouldn't be. How we just allowed the Patriot Act to be rushed through without anyone even reading what it was. How our whole f'n Navy were stationed in one place....and we knew the Japanese were coming. I damn sure hope the people in congress do not start a domino effect of laws effectively eliminating one of the most vital rights in our country, though that sure seems primed to happen :(

this guy should be stomped in the streets

i'm all for the right to bear arms, but nobody needs a assault rifle for self defense, congress forgot to update the ban on assault rifles, no deer or elk wears a vest so only miliary and cops should be able to buy assault rifles. people forget that the germans created the first assault rifle in ww2 the stg sterm guverrer in order to wipe out whole squads on patrol. if this dude hadn't been able to legally buy a assault rifle from bass pro shop. he wouldn't have been able to kill so many people, the shotgun firing time would have given people time to escape or jump him at the reload point, the handguns would have ran out of ammo also giving windows of opportunity, but the assault rifle shoots about 100 rounds per minute and thats what he killed 12 and shot 70 people
with, NRA people need to stop being soo selfish & paranoid, no one wants to take there guns away just the assault rifles. notice England France & other western country's don't have thease problems happen every year like we do. the reason life is so cheap in 3rd world countries is because everyone even 12 year old kids walk around with AK's. if the NRA has it there way that's what america will be reduced to. GTA with the everyone strapped cheat code

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nathan Kelso

Of course less people would have died. A madman shooting innocent unarmed people VS. armed, trained, citizens protecting their lives and loved ones.

Oh yeah, it was much better off since only the madman had a gun. That sounds enlightened.

---

A shooting is a chaotic event, especially in a constricted space, full of people, dark and where smoke grenades were launched. People would just start shooting anybody that had a gun or looked threatening due to the panic and very low visibility. Also how many of the people that have guns have real quality training? Just recently a cop shot his son by mistake because he thought he was a burglar in his house. That was a police officer with years of experience on the job, and yet you expect civilians to perform in a crazy situation like this?!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nathan Kelso

Thank them? They probably would have arrested those hypothetical heroes since carrying a gun in your car in Aurora, CO is illegal. So even if a well-meaning citizen meant to take a gun to the theater, he would have been breaking his local laws to do so. Interestingly, that didn't stop the shooter. I can't imagine why.

---

Once they arrived at the scene and witnessed the chaos, they themselves would start shooting in fear of their own lives. How would they be able do identify the original shooter? They don't even know how many shooters there were.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nathan Kelso

My wife carries her own gun. I care about my family, so I care about prevention.

---

And your kids? do they carry guns themselves? How about your parents and grand parents? How about stray bullets? Are they wearing bullet proof vests? Will your wife hit the criminal or hit an innocent bystander? I believe that in your case she might have proper training, but do you think that applies to most gun owners?

Lowering the probabilities is prevention.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nathan Kelso

And when the bullets start flying, I'll be standing in their path like the three guys in CO who died shielding their girlfriends.

---

I admire your for that and hope that never needs to happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nathan Kelso

And just for kicks, who exactly do you qualify as having rights above those of a "civilian"? And who makes that decision?

---

It's not about having rights above those of a civilian, but a profession that requires them to be armed such as police officers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nathan Kelso

They're keeping their pockets full by creating more and more gun regulations. Who do you think gets the money from the incredible taxes placed upon firearms and ammunition? Who do you think gets the money from concealed carry training and licensing? Who can charge almost whatever they want because of stringent rules and and a constant fear of disarmament creating a false demand? They're all on YOUR side. Give me a break.

---

I would say that the people that are making the real money here are the gun manufacturers, the NRA, the lobbyists and the bought politicians.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nathan Kelso

If you truly want to stop the violence, the only option is to pull back all of these unconstitutional hurdles to personal armament and facilitate an environment where individuals take the responsibility of protecting themselves and their communities as a natural duty.

---

We clearly disagree on this. The U.S. is the most armed society in the world by far, with 90 guns per 100 people, and they are no where near the safest one.

I am not trying to attack you here, we just disagree on what is the best way to keep our families and friends safe. We both are trying to keep them as safe as possible so much respect to you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scott Philips

I really wish we lived in a society free from guns where people handled problems like men and not cowards. The unfortunate truth is that we don't.....therefore I strongly support the 2nd amendment right to bear arms and protect ones own family and property. This particular situation is very unfortunate but does nothing to change my opinion on the issue. In all reality, the more i look into it, the more I see timely events happening to persuade/brainwashing us to giving that right up. Given the history of our government, this would not surprise me one bit. Look at the events that brought us into WW1, 2, Vietnam, Iraq. All events that were either allowed or setup to happen in order to infuriate the public into sitting back and supporting/allowing reactions that otherwise wouldn't be. How we just allowed the Patriot Act to be rushed through without anyone even reading what it was. How our whole f'n Navy were stationed in one place....and we knew the Japanese were coming. I damn sure hope the people in congress do not start a domino effect of laws effectively eliminating one of the most vital rights in our country, though that sure seems primed to happen :(

---

Seen the UN Arms Treaty that will probably be signed on the 27th of this month? Any thoughts on it? The people in support of this treaty supposedly say it will not affect our rights as gun owners. And of course the ones that do not support it think it's just another step towards taking away our rights. I do not think the majority of Americans will tuck their tails and turn over their weapons much like other people have done in other countries. I know I will not. I know the people that live around me will not. I actually think there would be lots of needless bloodshed if it came down to being forced to turn in our guns. I may kinda think far out when it comes to stuff like this but there are some really passionate folks in the US when it comes to gun rights and I really think if it came down to it it could start some type of "war" of some sort. There are endless arguments on this topic... pros and cons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spínola

A shooting is a chaotic event, especially in a constricted space, full of people, dark and where smoke grenades were launched. People would just start shooting anybody that had a gun or looked threatening due to the panic and very low visibility. Also how many of the people that have guns have real quality training? Just recently a cop shot his son by mistake because he thought he was a burglar in his house. That was a police officer with years of experience on the job, and yet you expect civilians to perform in a crazy situation like this?!

---

The problem is that you don't see it from the perspective of carriers. I know many, and one defining trait is that they view their guns and ccw permits as serious responsibilities. They have training, practice regularly, and are mentally prepared to protect themselves and others in a hostile encounter.

Yes, a theater is dark and the tear gas would make the scene confusing, but let's look at the information we have from the attack. He was fully decked out in tactical regalia and using an assault rifle. So he wasn't exactly trying to be inconspicuous. Also, we have numerous reports of eye witnesses seeing the attacker and reacting. From these descriptions alone we can see that a citizen with a firearm could make the competent decisions necessary to halt the attack.

The scenario you're projecting is a vision of chaos where a theater full of wannabe John Waynes pull out their pieces and start blasting each other. That's just completely unrealistic. And in the unlikely event that it occurred, it would still be infinitely more promising than a lone gunman in a room with a bunch of targets. They are lucky he didn't lock the doors and tell them to line up.

Sadly, this is the only type of gun-related news that gets much publicity. "Madman Slaughters Innocents" makes for better headlines than "Armed Citizen Stops Madman Before He Can Slaughter Innocents". Probably just a symptom of our violent nature. In any case, the latter headline is incredibly more common than the former. Lives are saved every day by responsible, law-abiding citizens.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spínola

And your kids? do they carry guns themselves? How about your parents and grand parents? How about stray bullets? Are they wearing bullet proof vests? Will your wife hit the criminal or hit an innocent bystander? I believe that in your case she might have proper training, but do you think that applies to most gun owners?

---

I don't quite understand the point you're trying to make. That you can't be protected by a gun all the time? I acknowledge that. But are you saying that just because something might happen in a way you don't expect, you shouldn't be prepared for anything? That's like a woman saying "You know, a man trying to rape me might be too strong to stop, so I shouldn't even try learning self defense."

I don't have kids, and it's illegal for a child to possess or protect themselves with a pistol. However, a responsibly trained child with a firearm wouldn't be a travesty. The point is that guns are equalizers. It doesn't matter how big and strong a threatening person might be; a gun changes the entire dynamic of predator and victim. A woman, an elderly person, even a child. They all become the equal of the assailant, or more likely, with the training they've probably undertaken, superior to the assailant. A nation of armed women is a nation without rape, think on it.

Your assumption is that if guns were illegal, there would be less crime. But killing a bunch of people in a theater is also illegal. The guns are inconsequential to the crime. To outlaw firearms would only outlaw the right of the peaceful citizen to defend his or herself.

You'll see that in allegedly "progressive and forward-thinking" countries like England where guns are banned, the violent crime rates are much higher than in America. They still have all the rapes, robberies, and violence that we do. Just less women shouting "Back the fuck off, or I'll shoot!" Conversely, communities in America with a strong gun culture are among the safest in the nation.

Are most gun owners properly trained? I don't know. Concealed carriers though? Yes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spínola

It's not about having rights above those of a civilian, but a profession that requires them to be armed such as police officers.

---

But who decides who gets to be a police officer? A halo doesn't come with a badge. What you are doing is giving one person the power of coercion, complete control over another with the threat of violence as a deterrent to resistance. You are giving a person a right that you are denying to another. That very action creates a stratification of classes. The armed man, the complete man. And the denied man, the "civilian", the subhuman. What should a professed "peace officer" be if not our equal? Are we so low as to be stripped of our claws in a modern world with evils no less ruthless than in the world of our primal ancestors?

Our miscommunication is due to an incongruity of cultural and societal perspectives. I am an American. I research my history and heed the warnings of wise Americans who came before. I believe in individual liberty, the ideal that built this country even though its spirit now flickers around me. Please read the text of my 2nd Amendment and the second paragraph of my Declaration of Independence. And when you read them, don't just see the words; see the actions and events that led to creating them and the importance that was placed within them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spínola

I would say that the people that are making the real money here are the gun manufacturers, the NRA, the lobbyists and the bought politicians.

---

Yes. They're making tons of money. But not for the reasons you believe. It is the strict control of guns that stems the flow of wealth. They rely on the War on Guns as much as our "justice" system relies upon the War on Drugs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spínola

We clearly disagree on this. The U.S. is the most armed society in the world by far, with 90 guns per 100 people, and they are no where near the safest one.

---

Again, that's a skewed perspective. You're linking guns themselves as a catalyst to violence. Violence exists independently of firearms, which are merely tools with which it is dispensed. Violence, on the street or in the home can be categorized.

Robbery/Burglary - On the streets, it is mostly a symptom of poverty.

Murder - 1. Occurs as a companion to the former, 2. Domestically between family members or friends, 3. As a result of gang/drug disputes (a symptom of failed Prohibition), or 4. Perpetrated by sociopaths

Rape - Imagined inferiority and a lust for dominance wins over its conflict with virtue and morality, a symptom of cultural decay.

Coercion - Power corrupts, they say.

--Guns can be used in all of these forms of violence, and the quick and simple solution seems to involve taking guns away, as if it would solve these issues. In reality, the righteous solution to these societal ills is wholly more complicated than that. In order to reduce its proliferation, you must combat the root of each problem. That course of action isn't as glamorous or as controversial as blaming it on the guns, which of course, are not the problem but part of the answer.

I see a lot of people say "I wish guns didn't exist, but..." That kind of reactionary pontification is pointless. Guns do exist, and we must deal with it. Guns have changed nothing. Before them were swords and arrows, which were no less dangerous to the unarmed. And like in modern times, commoners in oppressed societies were most always forbidden to bear arms. Weapons are a symbol of power. The question is, who should wield power and who shouldn't? In my mind, everyone has that natural right, gifted them by their very existence as freethinking individuals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spínola

I am not trying to attack you here, we just disagree on what is the best way to keep our families and friends safe. We both are trying to keep them as safe as possible so much respect to you.

---

And respect to you for honoring my beliefs and for having a civil discussion about a subject with the potential to go wrong quickly. My right to have free and open conversations like this is also dearly important to me, and that's another reason why my right to keep and bear arms is even more important. Because every other right we have is just a collection of words without the power to protect them.

i think this is just a case of a person snaping however i love how the media has ran with the story to try to push the whole anti gun movement