Another Movie Theatre Shooting

[EvilMonkey]

A 62-year-old man with a gun in each hand fired at four people – including a 1-year-old boy – before a civilian with a concealed carry permit returned fire and wounded the shooter, cops told FOX19.

Saved many lives.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/07/27/cinci...oncealed-carry/

[caulfield12]

Saved many lives.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/07/27/cinci...oncealed-carry/

 

 

And what's the ratio of successful interventions compared to the situations where someone else at the scene is shot by the civilian/good guy shooter?

 

I'm guessing nobody has that useful statistic.

[Boopa1219]

Trainwreck was pretty good.

[StrangeSox]

Lol

[EvilMonkey]

And what's the ratio of successful interventions compared to the situations where someone else at the scene is shot by the civilian/good guy shooter?

 

I'm guessing nobody has that useful statistic.

I would imagine it is pretty low, because if it happened, you know that MDA and other gun control idiots would be trumpeting it all over the interwebs as loud as they can shout. Strangely you don't hear that very much.

[illinilaw08]

Thing is, folks, we Americans have a right to do what Tex has suggested. I mean, he's not going to shoot in the theatre unless he has a good shot at the son of a b**** killer. The killer happens to be in the row right ahead of Tex, bam, Tex ends the problem and is a hero. I mean don't we Americans have the right to protect ourselves? If Tex starts shooting indescriminately and kills somebody, then Tex goes to jail for involuntary manslaughter as well.

 

Gregg, there are many reports of friendly fire killing troops in recent history (including Pat Tillman). Our military engages in tremendous amounts of training in high pressure and high stress situations, yet they are not infallible in difficult situations. This narrative that the "good guy" with the gun has the training and the ability to properly assess and remove the threat is not supported by any evidence.

 

The point here - it's a very dangerous assumption to say that firearm owner X is "not going to shoot unless he has a good shot."

 

Note, I'm not anti-firearms. I don't begrudge people using firearms for home protection (though I question the utility of this one, I understand why people feel that way), hunting, protection of livestock/crops, and sport. But when people carry a deadly tool like that out into public, that's when I start to question the societal value...

 

 

[illinilaw08]

I would imagine it is pretty low, because if it happened, you know that MDA and other gun control idiots would be trumpeting it all over the interwebs as loud as they can shout. Strangely you don't hear that very much.

 

I'm curious as to what makes someone a "gun control idiot." I'm also curious whether you think that any of the gun lobby are likewise "idiots."

 

That snark aside, there aren't really any relevant studies that I'm aware of on either end of the spectrum regarding the value or the cost of firearms.

[EvilMonkey]

I'm curious as to what makes someone a "gun control idiot." I'm also curious whether you think that any of the gun lobby are likewise "idiots."

 

That snark aside, there aren't really any relevant studies that I'm aware of on either end of the spectrum regarding the value or the cost of firearms.

I would classify the Moms Demand Action as idiots. You can oppose guns or favor gun control without lying thru the backing of a billionaire hell bent on getting rid of guns while maintaining his own personal police force, armed with guns.

 

And snark aside, if there were any number of those, MDA would be screaming about it with all the might the Bloomberg dollars could muster. You know it.

[greg775]

Gregg, there are many reports of friendly fire killing troops in recent history (including Pat Tillman). Our military engages in tremendous amounts of training in high pressure and high stress situations, yet they are not infallible in difficult situations. This narrative that the "good guy" with the gun has the training and the ability to properly assess and remove the threat is not supported by any evidence.

 

The point here - it's a very dangerous assumption to say that firearm owner X is "not going to shoot unless he has a good shot."

 

Note, I'm not anti-firearms. I don't begrudge people using firearms for home protection (though I question the utility of this one, I understand why people feel that way), hunting, protection of livestock/crops, and sport. But when people carry a deadly tool like that out into public, that's when I start to question the societal value...

I personally would never carry a loaded gun, but if society keeps going downhill ... and these incidents become commonplace, I might reconsider. Like Tex said, he wants to have the right as a law abiding citizen to blow away the Colorado movie theatre killers of the world. I understand what you are saying. I'd also hate to get shot by some guy who was trying to shoot bad-guy Holmes.

[caulfield12]

I would classify the Moms Demand Action as idiots. You can oppose guns or favor gun control without lying thru the backing of a billionaire hell bent on getting rid of guns while maintaining his own personal police force, armed with guns.

 

And snark aside, if there were any number of those, MDA would be screaming about it with all the might the Bloomberg dollars could muster. You know it.

 

 

How is that any different from when the Koch Brothers or Rupert Murdoch pretty overtly funds similar organizations with right-wing agendas that have innocuous sounding names such as Moms Demand Lower Taxes....or pretty much anything associated with the Tea Party these days, if it still exists.

 

You have your MDA (not Muscular Dystrophy Association, that's not the best choice for them), we have our Joe The Plumbers that are beyond idiocy because they don't even realize they're being used.

[EvilMonkey]

How is that any different from when the Koch Brothers or Rupert Murdoch pretty overtly funds similar organizations with right-wing agendas that have innocuous sounding names such as Moms Demand Lower Taxes....or pretty much anything associated with the Tea Party these days, if it still exists.

 

You have your MDA (not Muscular Dystrophy Association, that's not the best choice for them), we have our Joe The Plumbers that are beyond idiocy because they don't even realize they're being used.

I don't recall Joe the Plumber getting a cushy 6 figure job running what pretends to be a grassroots moms against gun movement that is really ran by a pr exec and bloomberg, BOTH of which have armed sucurity. If I recall Joe didn't try to pretend to be something he wasn't (except when he tried to pretend he could be a candidate for public office, I guess).

[StrangeSox]

iirc his name wasn't actually Joe and he wasn't a licensed plumber

[caulfield12]

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/03/opinion/...col-left-region

 

GOP candidates and gun control...

[EvilMonkey]

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/03/opinion/...col-left-region

 

GOP candidates and gun control...

Republican candidates prefer to focus on the mental health of mass shooters as the decisive issue, not easy gun access, as if both issues should not be forcefully pursued by sensible public leaders. -- Well, Democrats don't seem to be too focused on the mental health part, so why don't you go berate them some for that and come back later. In fact, the gun lobby itself has been pushing for NICs reform, including adding all mental health information needed to keep guns from unqualified people.

 

“This is a controversial issue. I am well aware of that. But I think it is the height of irresponsibility not to talk about it.” -- And by talk about it she means shut up while I lecture you about why you are wrong and evil.

 

After the recent shooting deaths at a Louisiana movie theater by a man who obtained his gun out of state, Gov. Bobby Jindal, a Republican presidential candidate, proudly pointed to his state’s recently joining the federal watch list that attempts to track mentally troubled people who should be denied guns. But his state had ignored the list for years and remains one of the lowest in spending on mental health care. -- But they DID join the list. The fact that they previously had not is moot.

 

While short on sensible gun safety prescriptions,--- I know it is an opinion piece, but what may be sensible to a gun fearing liberal may not be sensible to a 2nd amendment loving gun owner. or those in between.

 

and former Gov. Jeb Bush of Florida, who signed the reckless Stand Your Ground law that has been used to reduce gun owners’ culpability in shootings. -- it did nothing of the sort. And all but one of the cases in Florida since then, where the media has been screaming 'stand your ground! Stand your ground!' have been self defense, wherre SYG never came into play.

[Balta1701]

And all but one of the cases in Florida since then, where the media has been screaming 'stand your ground! Stand your ground!' have been self defense, wherre SYG never came into play.

Just to stress, this continues to be a false statement in the specific Trayvon Martin case that threw a light on those laws in Florida and elsewhere. Although the defense never requested nor received a "Stand your ground" hearing, the specific text of "Stand your ground" was included in the judge's convoluted instructions to the jury. They were specifically told to consider that "Zimmerman had no duty to retreat" in that case in the judge's instructions. While there was no hearing, the SYG law and its exact text came into play in that case without one.

[EvilMonkey]

Just to stress, this continues to be a false statement in the specific Trayvon Martin case that threw a light on those laws in Florida and elsewhere. Although the defense never requested nor received a "Stand your ground" hearing, the specific text of "Stand your ground" was included in the judge's convoluted instructions to the jury. They were specifically told to consider that "Zimmerman had no duty to retreat" in that case in the judge's instructions. While there was no hearing, the SYG law and its exact text came into play in that case without one.

And it was ruled self defense, not syg.

[Balta1701]

And it was ruled self defense, not syg.

Because "Self Defense" had the SYG text built into it by the judge.

If George Zimmerman was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in any place where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

One of the jurors also referenced that law/standard in comments after the trial in explaining their vote, FWIW.

[Jenksismyhero]

Because "Self Defense" had the SYG text built into it by the judge.

One of the jurors also referenced that law/standard in comments after the trial in explaining their vote, FWIW.

 

They're intertwined, so I don't think there's an issue providing that instruction. SYG is just a subset of self defense law.

[Balta1701]

They're intertwined, so I don't think there's an issue providing that instruction. SYG is just a subset of self defense law.

Then don't say "SYG never came into play." The judge obviously had the ability to include that clause as it is Florida law, however the claim that it didn't come into play is verifiably false. It just didn't take the form of a SYG hearing.

[EvilMonkey]

They're intertwined, so I don't think there's an issue providing that instruction. SYG is just a subset of self defense law.

Let him nitpik, makes him feel better. And we know it is all about the feelz.

[Big Hurtin]

Breaking right now, another theater shooting. This time in Tennessee. Gunman has been killed.

[Brian]

Had a gun and a hatchet.

 

Guess we should try and control hatchets now! Hahahaha smh

[greg775]

Had a gun and a hatchet.

 

Guess we should try and control hatchets now! Hahahaha smh

What the f*** is going on?? Why all these cowards going into movie theatres and blasting away? I guess the reason these wackos haven't started killing people in sporting venues on Game Day is they know they'll get caught with so many people around. They'd never get out of the stadium without getting caught.

I'm thinking Tex is right. I want to be armed when I go see a movie. Some asshole wants to take a hatchet to me in the dark theatre, I should be able to shoot him.

Odds are starting to be pretty good if you go to a lot of movies you might get killed. Nobody can deny there now is a risk when you go to a movie.

 

So now we have to hear about this latest f***brain and his life story. I wish we'd just not identify him unless he's part of a terrorist group we need to know about. Making these killers popular is really bad/sad.

Edited August 6, 2015 by greg775

[Brian]

I love going to the movies but if I start getting patted down and going through metal detectors every time, I'd stop going so often

[bmags]

Had a gun and a hatchet.

 

Guess we should try and control hatchets now! Hahahaha smh

 

Interestingly enough, turns out he did not have a gun, but an air soft pellet gun, a hatchet, and pepper spray.

 

Nobody died (except himself) but there was one "superficial" arm injury.

 

Your joke was hilarious though.