1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Police: 13 dead; 58 injured in Colorado theater shooting

Discussion in 'The OT' started by Unknown, Jul 20, 2012.

  1. Jul 20, 2012 #1 of 714
    Unknown

    Unknown Godfather

    358
    0
    Oct 16, 2007
  2. Jul 20, 2012 #2 of 714
    MysteryMan

    MysteryMan Well-Known Member DBSTalk Club

    8,446
    514
    May 17, 2010
    USA
    Now the anti gunners will use this to pass more useless gun control.
     
  3. Jul 20, 2012 #3 of 714
    tenpins

    tenpins AllStar

    103
    1
    Jan 19, 2010
    Colorado
    Incomprehensible. Pray for those Killed and injured and their friends and families. So incredibly sad.
     
  4. Jul 20, 2012 #4 of 714
    Nick

    Nick Retired, part-time PITA DBSTalk Club

    21,864
    189
    Apr 23, 2002
    The...
    It would have been lovely if someone in the audience was totin', drew his gun and nailed the SOB on the spot, saving lives and preventing additional injuries.

    There is a better argument for packin'.
     
  5. Jul 20, 2012 #5 of 714
    SayWhat?

    SayWhat? Know Nothing

    6,259
    133
    Jun 6, 2009
    ^^ Guess you missed the part about the body armor.

    One nut firing into a crowd is bad enough. The last thing you want is several people firing in a crowd.
     
  6. Jul 20, 2012 #6 of 714
    SayWhat?

    SayWhat? Know Nothing

    6,259
    133
    Jun 6, 2009
    http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/dark-knight-rises-paris-premiere-352435
     
  7. Jul 20, 2012 #7 of 714
    Nick

    Nick Retired, part-time PITA DBSTalk Club

    21,864
    189
    Apr 23, 2002
    The...
    No, you guessed wrong. I didn't miss a damn thing! Body armor does not fully cover the body, but regardless, a couple of 9mm or .38 calibre slugs fired into a vest will stop or disrupt the shooter.
    You're wrong, there. The first thing I want is for the shooter to be stopped asap.

    Are you inferring that if you were in that theater and you were packing, you would NOT have acted in self-defense, and to protect others and save lives?
     
  8. Jul 20, 2012 #8 of 714
    SayWhat?

    SayWhat? Know Nothing

    6,259
    133
    Jun 6, 2009
    a couple of 9mm or .38 calibre slugs fired into a vest will stop or disrupt the shooter.

    Didn't do much good in North Hollywood. Even trained snipers are taught to go for body shots. Head shot are more by luck in most cases. The TV/Movie sniper takedowns with headshots are only when the target is stationary and the sniper can take time to set the shot up.

    And do you REALLY want a bunch of Joe/Jane Citizens cracking rounds off in several directions while people are scattering? Maybe even some that haven't pulled a trigger since they bought?
     
  9. Jul 20, 2012 #9 of 714
    Nick

    Nick Retired, part-time PITA DBSTalk Club

    21,864
    189
    Apr 23, 2002
    The...
    You have failed to answer my question and you are attempting to cloud the issue, a tactic typically employed by liberals who support the repeal of the Second Amendment. Further, I am appalled at your implied unwillingness (refusal?) to act to save yourself and very possibly save the lives of others.

    Since you refused to respond to the question in my previous post, I will no longer engage with you in this discussion.
     
  10. Jul 20, 2012 #10 of 714
    SayWhat?

    SayWhat? Know Nothing

    6,259
    133
    Jun 6, 2009
    You edited your post while I was posting.

    Acting in self-defense does not mean putting others at risk by firing into a crowd of scattering people. It would be different if you could get a clear shot at close range with no one else in the field of fire, or if you could simply tackle the guy.
     
  11. Jul 20, 2012 #11 of 714
    runner861

    runner861 Icon

    859
    0
    Mar 20, 2010
    One thing that will be determined is how did this suspect get the gun, and what was his background. I am not sure that one person packing in the crowd would have been able to do much. This type of situation, like in North Hollywood in 1997, really takes a SWAT team to bring down. And another person shooting can pose dangers to other people nearby and another person shooting can confuse law enforcement as to who the true shooter is. Not to say that another armed person couldn't have possibly ended the situation, but it is extremely unlikely.
     
  12. Jul 20, 2012 #12 of 714
    SayWhat?

    SayWhat? Know Nothing

    6,259
    133
    Jun 6, 2009
    Apparently his mother isn't surprised:

    Also, the helmet lets out the possibility of a casual headshot from any sidearm that any spectator may have had.

    http://abcnews.go.com/US/mass-shoot...14-people-dead/story?id=16817842#.UAlqsKKDpRI
     
  13. Jul 20, 2012 #13 of 714
    SayWhat?

    SayWhat? Know Nothing

    6,259
    133
    Jun 6, 2009
    They may be more focused on the tactical gear since that is more tightly regulated. Many states prohibit possession of body armor by civilians.
     
  14. Jul 20, 2012 #14 of 714
    Doug Brott

    Doug Brott Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    28,939
    72
    Jul 12, 2006
    Los Angeles
    Sad news indeed ...
     
  15. Jul 20, 2012 #15 of 714
    Blankman2k5

    Blankman2k5 Legend

    104
    0
    Oct 20, 2010
    The sad part is some shady dealers at trade shows sell them "under the table". I am all for the 2nd amendment but I feel that the "gun control" we need is preventing people with violent criminal covictions and certain mental defects from getting the weapons.
     
  16. Jul 20, 2012 #16 of 714
    Rich

    Rich DBSTalk Club DBSTalk Club

    26,992
    522
    Feb 22, 2007
    Piscataway, NJ
    Just got this in my mail.

    Whatever people say about Mayor Bloomberg and Commissioner Kelly, they do react quickly.

    Rich
     
  17. Jul 20, 2012 #17 of 714
  18. Jul 20, 2012 #18 of 714
    Laxguy

    Laxguy Honi Soit Qui Mal Y Pense.

    15,340
    577
    Dec 2, 2010
    Winters,...
    Horrible.

    In an attempt to divert from the terrible event, how bout this:

    Very strange use of "in lieu of". "In light of " would be correct.
     
  19. Jul 20, 2012 #19 of 714
    Rich

    Rich DBSTalk Club DBSTalk Club

    26,992
    522
    Feb 22, 2007
    Piscataway, NJ
    Yeah, "in lieu of" means "in place of".

    Rich
     
  20. Jul 20, 2012 #20 of 714
    Rich

    Rich DBSTalk Club DBSTalk Club

    26,992
    522
    Feb 22, 2007
    Piscataway, NJ

Share This Page