WTF is wrong with people...

(CNN) -- A heavily armed gunman tossed tear gas into the darkness of an Aurora, Colorado movie theater Friday and then sprayed the audience with gunfire during an early morning screening of the new Batman movie, killing 12 and wounding 38 others, authorities said.

One of the injured was just 3 months old, according to hospital workers.

Police arrested a man believed to be the shooter in a rear parking lot of the theater, Frank Fania, a police spokesman, told CNN. The suspect was not immediately identified. Police said he was a man in his 20s from Aurora.

"He did not resist. He did not put up a fight," Fania said. Police seized a rifle and a handgun from the suspect, and another gun was found in the theater, he said.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/20/us/colorado-theater-shooting/index.html

And most theaters don't allow conceal carry - let alone open carry. Like fish in a barrel.

I just can't figure out why somebody would do something like this. There's been a lot of cases lately where some nut job has opened fire on a group of people. If you hate the world that bad then just go live in the boonies or off yourself, not a bunch of innocent people or kids. I'm not sure how much a concealed carry would have helped. A dark theater and mass panic, might have caused more injuries or deaths :(

DARK KNIGHT MOURNING

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8168/7609079120_2370fd2b3d.jpg

Sick sick sick sick sick. There's no way to put this to words...

And I think it makes it, is that this happened so (geographically) close to Columbine.

ok... i know i'm looking at the small issue while ignoring the big story... but who takes a 3-month old baby to a midnight movie premiere? -M

I just can't figure out why somebody would do something like this.

Don't try to figure out the logic of crazy people. Sadly, we have a society that glorifies violence (see Batman Rising – people paying to see other people killed and tortured because it is 'entertaining') and violent people are empowered to become even more violent.

ok... i know i'm looking at the small issue while ignoring the big story... but who takes a 3-month old baby to a midnight movie premiere? -M

The same type that took the 6 year old and 9 year old. We have a screwed up society that loves their violence. I wish more people would say to themselves - you know, maybe we shouldn't watch this sort of stuff because it is kind of having a bad effect on us as a people. Not to worry Hollywood, Batman Rising will still make $200 million.

And most theaters don't allow conceal carry - let alone open carry. Like fish in a barrel.

A conceal carry instructor told me you might get fined if you took a weapon into a prohibited place, but no-one would know unless you produced it to counter a threat to life. At that point who is going to complain if you carried where prohibited?

A conceal carry instructor told me you might get fined if you took a weapon into a prohibited place, but no-one would know unless you produced it to counter a threat to life. At that point who is going to complain if you carried where prohibited?

See George Zimmerman, or better yet Bernard Goetz.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernhard_Goetz


Bernhard Hugo Goetz (born November 7, 1947) is an American man best known for shooting four alleged muggers on a New York City Subway train,[2][3][4][5] resulting in his conviction for illegal possession of a firearm. He came to symbolize New Yorkers' frustrations with the high crime rates of the early 1980s. The incident occurred on a No. 2 train in Manhattan on December 22, 1984. It sparked a nationwide debate on race and crime in major cities, and the legal limits of self-defense.[4]

Goetz fired an unlicensed revolver five times, seriously wounding all four. He was dubbed the "Subway Vigilante" by the New York press, and was both praised and vilified in the media and in public opinion.

He surrendered to police nine days later and was eventually charged with attempted murder, assault, reckless endangerment, and several firearms offenses.

The same type that took the 6 year old and 9 year old. We have a screwed up society that loves their violence. I wish more people would say to themselves - you know, maybe we shouldn't watch this sort of stuff because it is kind of having a bad effect on us as a people. Not to worry Hollywood, Batman Rising will still make $200 million.

i have much less issue taking the 3 month old to the movie than i do the 6 and 9 year old

i have much less issue taking the 3 month old to the movie than i do the 6 and 9 year old

Then you are missing the bigger picture. No worries though, millions (of all ages) will go see "Violent Death Part 2" when it comes out. After all, it’s entertaining.

In case no one has figured it out - I am trying to point out that millions of people see violence (and the more graphic the better) as entertainment. We even give awards to the makeup guy that does the best job of making it look real.

A conceal carry instructor told me you might get fined if you took a weapon into a prohibited place, but no-one would know unless you produced it to counter a threat to life. At that point who is going to complain if you carried where prohibited?

I guarantee you produce a legally carried gun in a prohibited place - regardless if you are countering a deadly threat - you will face charges. You might get a slap on then wrist, but you will most likely lose your future ability to carry a weapon in public.

A DA would be a fool not to charge someone in that case.

I guarantee you produce a legally carried gun in a prohibited place - regardless if you are countering a deadly threat - you will face charges. You might get a slap on then wrist, but you will most likely lose your future ability to carry a weapon in public.

A DA would be a fool not to charge someone in that case.

I have my concealed license but never asked this question when I was taking the class. Any idea of what type of charge you'd receive if you did take your concealed gun into a prohibited place and take out a guy like this? I know the public would praise you but legally it would be a different story. Has this scenario ever happened.

People take wee ones to late late movies for a couple of reasons
(a) sitter cancelled
(b) sitter not affordable
(c) poop for brains
(d) any combo of the above

I have my concealed license but never asked this question when I was taking the class. Any idea of what type of charge you'd receive if you did take your concealed gun into a prohibited place and take out a guy like this? I know the public would praise you but legally it would be a different story. Has this scenario ever happened.

This is one reason I got my conceal and carry and my CLEET license - more flexibility on where I can carry.

I'd have to lookup the exact charge but probably two or three violations would apply. Most likely you'd simply face the loss of your C&C license and some sort of deferred sentence.

I'm neither a conceal carry opponent nor an open carry opponent. All the same, if I'm in row 8, and a nut job storms in at the front of the theater, I have no interest in one or more folk from row 13 or further back trying to take down a moving target when my friends and I are twixt and tween the muzzle(s) and the nut job target.

What's really scary is how carefully planned out this was. Local news (I'm in Denver) are reporting that the shooters apartment is so booby trapped that it could take days to get in safely. The shooter also would have to have bought his ticket to the theater over a week ago as theaters have been sold out for the midnight showings of the move for a while now. Then there's how he did it...tear gassing the place to cop's couldn't get in to do anything without a gas mask. I was listening to the police communications from during the shooting. They were literally screaming at dispatch to get them some gas masks so they could get into the theater.

The shooter also would have to have bought his ticket to the theater over a week ago as theaters have been sold out for the midnight showings of the move for a while now.

I don't think he had a ticket. He came in through the emergency exit. Clearly though he had no intention of ever returning to his apartment.

I'm neither a conceal carry opponent nor an open carry opponent. All the same, if I'm in row 8, and a nut job storms in at the front of the theater, I have no interest in one or more folk from row 13 or further back trying to take down a moving target when my friends and I are twixt and tween the muzzle(s) and the nut job target.

He wasn't moving quickly from the reports we are hearing and even managed to stop once or twice to reload. I'll take a citizen trying to save me over simply hoping he doesn't get around to killing me or my wife.

---
---
---
---
I was listening to the police communications from during the shooting. They were literally screaming at dispatch to get them some gas masks so they could get into the theater.


eFuNDOQ3b-0

Published on Jul 20, 2012 by firefighterdispatch


Aurora movie theater shooting Police Audio 7/20/12
Audio used under a creative common license from Radioreference.com

The same type that took the 6 year old and 9 year old. We have a screwed up society that loves their violence. I wish more people would say to themselves - you know, maybe we shouldn't watch this sort of stuff because it is kind of having a bad effect on us as a people. Not to worry Hollywood, Batman Rising will still make $200 million.

You are acting as if this were a new phenomenon. It isn't. We have a gun-loving culture, pure and simple. And our love for violence, including "violent" sports (boxing, football) has been around for centuries. As the rowdy pioneers of this world, we have created a society that idolizes a "shoot 'em up" mentality. It's not just Hollywood that drives that. We buy young children "G.I. Joe" toys and have them go out and play "soldier." We teach children that "killing the bad guy" is always the best solution. We develop bullies by teaching children that "first is always best" and that if "you don't win, you are a loser." We teach children that people who are "different" (skin color, sexual orientation, mental disabilities, different accents, different religions) are inherently bad, and stand by willingly when those who are "different" are readily mocked and degraded as not being worthy of our society. We cling to an "eye for an eye" mentality that wants to vilify people and their actions before we look at the larger picture. Hollywood and the gaming industry have certainly contributed greatly to this, but our cultural love for violence dates many years prior, and unless there is a monumental shift away from our staunch individualism, and we allow ourselves to look at society in a broader stroke, this will continue, and it will not be the worst incident.

Guns are not the answer, even those held by responsible citizens with multiple certifications.

Kum ba yah...
(wait, I thought we were starting the drum circle now)...

I don't think he had a ticket. He came in through the emergency exit. Clearly though he had no intention of ever returning to his apartment.

There was a report I read earlier that stated a witness saw someone take a phone call near the front of the theater, then leave out the emergency exit. Moments later the shooter came in. Of course it's too early to do anything but speculate at this point.

You are acting as if this were a new phenomenon. It isn't. We have a gun-loving culture, pure and simple. And our love for violence, including "violent" sports (boxing, football) has been around for centuries. As the rowdy pioneers of this world, we have created a society that idolizes a "shoot 'em up" mentality. It's not just Hollywood that drives that. We buy young children "G.I. Joe" toys and have them go out and play "soldier." We teach children that "killing the bad guy" is always the best solution. We develop bullies by teaching children that "first is always best" and that if "you don't win, you are a loser." We teach children that people who are "different" (skin color, sexual orientation, mental disabilities, different accents, different religions) are inherently bad, and stand by willingly when those who are "different" are readily mocked and degraded as not being worthy of our society. We cling to an "eye for an eye" mentality that wants to vilify people and their actions before we look at the larger picture. Hollywood and the gaming industry have certainly contributed greatly to this, but our cultural love for violence dates many years prior, and unless there is a monumental shift away from our staunch individualism, and we allow ourselves to look at society in a broader stroke, this will continue, and it will not be the worst incident.

Guns are not the answer, even those held by responsible citizens with multiple certifications.

garbage

garbage

Well that was a little rude.

I respect where Fritter is coming from, but I don't agree with every point. However, humans by nature are violent. Instead of having gladiators in an arena now we have football.

Responsibility comes down to the individuals though. This is going to raise the discussion on gun control of course but also violence in society. It'll get people worked up and at the end, there will still be 12 people dead for no reason. At some point we will need to evaluate to see if the general public really should be able to acquire guns like those used in shooting (AK-47) or if they finally need to be limited to your basic shotgun/rifle used for hunting. I come from a hunting family that supports the 2nd Amendment, but reason has to come into play at some point.

As far as violence in entertainment and society. We can scream and yell to tone it down, but society wants more. They love conflict, drama, and violence. I can't really say much considering I do enjoy my CSI, Game of Thrones, Dexter, and other shows that aren't all that tame. However I'm not really drawn to them for the violent part, but the story lines that go along side them (especially in GoT).

To each their own. This is going to be an emotional time for many and especially in their responses. Next time try to be more respectful in your reply.

garbage

i think you can articulate your disagreement in a more constructive way... that's not going to fly.


I guess there has to be a douche bag in every crowd.

...and comments like this really don't help.

-M

I'm neither a conceal carry opponent nor an open carry opponent. All the same, if I'm in row 8, and a nut job storms in at the front of the theater, I have no interest in one or more folk from row 13 or further back trying to take down a moving target when my friends and I are twixt and tween the muzzle(s) and the nut job target.

Agreed. I'll take my chances with one gun in a dark theater any day.

Here is a review of The Dark Knight from 2008. In light of recent events you should read this.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/2461820/Our-attitude-to-violence-is-beyond-a-joke-as-new-Batman-film-The-Dark-Knight-shows.html

garbage

Pray tell, then, where is your grand solution? I don't see you offering any refutation, simply a pithy one-word answer that in its own way only serves to prove my point. Violence starts with our thinking that violence is okay. It's not.

...and comments like this really don't help.

-M

Agreed. Edited my post.

FYI


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PezlFNTGWv4

You are acting as if this were a new phenomenon. It isn't. We have a gun-loving culture, pure and simple. And our love for violence, including "violent" sports (boxing, football) has been around for centuries. As the rowdy pioneers of this world, we have created a society that idolizes a "shoot 'em up" mentality. It's not just Hollywood that drives that. We buy young children "G.I. Joe" toys and have them go out and play "soldier." We teach children that "killing the bad guy" is always the best solution. We develop bullies by teaching children that "first is always best" and that if "you don't win, you are a loser." We teach children that people who are "different" (skin color, sexual orientation, mental disabilities, different accents, different religions) are inherently bad, and stand by willingly when those who are "different" are readily mocked and degraded as not being worthy of our society. We cling to an "eye for an eye" mentality that wants to vilify people and their actions before we look at the larger picture. Hollywood and the gaming industry have certainly contributed greatly to this, but our cultural love for violence dates many years prior, and unless there is a monumental shift away from our staunch individualism, and we allow ourselves to look at society in a broader stroke, this will continue, and it will not be the worst incident.

Guns are not the answer, even those held by responsible citizens with multiple certifications.

having winners and losers in sports and in school in no way teaches or develops bullies......... i'm sure you would rather give trophies to every kid and maybe every student "deserves" the same grades .... winning and losing happens in life each and every day whether it be in a job interview, asking a girl out on a date, or trying to get a promotion. teaching kids about winning and more importantly about losing is very very key.

maybe you teach children that different is bad .. but "we" don't

the death penalty is good for those that choose to murder there is nothing in the "bigger picture" that changes that

our staunch individualism is what has made this country great for over 200 years drive to be better and succeed collectivism could be and would be the end of our great way of life

my thoughts on your post ..... or as i said before garbage

Those on BOTH SIDES trying to politicize this horrible event should be ashamed of themselves. Both sides are already pointing fingers.

Violent crime has been on a steady downward trend for more than a decade. If movies like this are having an upward effect on rates then it is negligible. We live in one of the safest times and places in the entire history of man. If you're going to advocate carrying guns as a solution to a few large shootings then how about we start advocating measures to stop the things that we are actually likely to face...

“Never underestimate the power of human stupidity.”
“I never learned from a man who agreed with me.”
“An armed society is a polite society.”

Robert A. Heinlein

Maybe the next time you are watching something (and by 'you' - I mean all of us) and there is a display of graphic violence we should just say I am turning it off (even if it has a really good storyline). If the storyline is great, why include the graphic violence? To paraphrase from Office Space - ask youself, is this good for the Humans.

ok... i know i'm looking at the small issue while ignoring the big story... but who takes a 3-month old baby to a midnight movie premiere? -M

Even worse - the six year old. At least the baby might sleep.

Even worse - the six year old. At least the baby might sleep.

Agreed.

Even worse - the six year old. At least the baby might sleep.

this

He wasn't moving quickly from the reports we are hearing and even managed to stop once or twice to reload. I'll take a citizen trying to save me over simply hoping he doesn't get around to killing me or my wife.

And let's not forget that, were it lawful to carry inside, the mere notion that someone in the dark might start shooting back might have deterred him from picking that particular venue.

Pray tell, then, where is your grand solution? I don't see you offering any refutation, simply a pithy one-word answer that in its own way only serves to prove my point. Violence starts with our thinking that violence is okay. It's not.

People have been playing soldier, cowboys and indians and with GI Joe dolls forever and we didn't see them behave like this on a regular basis. IMO, there is a vast difference between kids pretending bang, bang you're dead - now I get to be the Indian! vs. spending hours upon hours watching violent video games, having their own parents take them to violent movies, hip hop, glorification of gangsta violence at the end of a gun, etc. Most of the kids that used to play cowboys and indians and GI Joe got their role models from people in books and television who were the good guys. They weren't the ones who shot up the women and children - they were portrayed as brave, noble, courageous, kind to kids and puppies, etc. We've not only thrust our children into a world of violence, we've erased the lines between violence for violence sake vs. violence only as a last resort and only to protect. There's the problem.

And let's not forget that, were it lawful to carry inside, the mere notion that someone in the dark might start shooting back might have deterred him from picking that particular venue.

The "notion" probably would have done anything to a person in this mindset and as much planing. It probably would have been a bigger threat if a person who was carrying started opening fire and hit more in the cross fire.

The "notion" probably would have done anything to a person in this mindset and as much planing. It probably would have been a bigger threat if a person who was carrying started opening fire and hit more in the cross fire.

There has been some speculation that the shooter might have been playing out some scene from an earlier comic book or something along those lines. Who knows but with the planning he put into it, he obviously spent time thinking it through and may well have been fixated on that particular crime. That being said, I tend to think that someone who plans that much, short of some rigid fetish, probably would consider where he could get the maximum carnage before being brought down. I'd think he'd pick a place where people wouldn't be expected to be armed.

There has been some speculation that the shooter might have been playing out some scene from an earlier comic book or something along those lines. Who knows but with the planning he put into it, he obviously spent time thinking it through and may well have been fixated on that particular crime. That being said, I tend to think that someone who plans that much, short of some rigid fetish, probably would consider where he could get the maximum carnage before being brought down. I'd think he'd pick a place where people wouldn't be expected to be armed.

So you think if there were an armed patron in the theater he/she should have pulled their weapon and in the midst of a panic and people running in a panic they should have stated firing shots at the guy?

Even worse - the six year old. At least the baby might sleep.

perhaps... i was just thinking that the time, the noise, the crowds, the lines and all the other craziness that goes along with a new movie premiere isn't a great environment for a 3 month old.

-M

perhaps... i was just thinking that the time, the noise, the crowds, the lines and all the other craziness that goes along with a new movie premiere isn't a great environment for a 3 month old.

-M

I've been a fan for a while of theaters having a "no minors after 10pm" rule, like many of them used to. I also don't mind paying more for it, which is why I'll pay for the balcony at the Warren. If AMC or Harkens did just one showing a night that was kid free, and cost $2 more a ticket, I bet it would sell out.

1917

Maybe the next time you are watching something (and by 'you' - I mean all of us) and there is a display of graphic violence we should just say I am turning it off (even if it has a really good storyline). If the storyline is great, why include the graphic violence? To paraphrase from Office Space - ask youself, is this good for the Humans.

Very good point IMHO.
It’s time to ask for more wholesome video entertainment from the TV & film industries.

Very good point IMHO.
It’s time to ask for more wholesome video entertainment from the TV & film industries.

Or better parenting from the baby boomers?

Or better parenting from the baby boomers?

Since there will always be bad parents ….. Both

garbage

This is incendiary of you. FritterGirl was making a good point, and this is all you have?

So anything other than "America is #1!!!!" or "There is nothing wrong in America, we are a perfect country the way we are," is garbage.

Not enough people pay to go see more wholesome movies... Doris Day and Rock Hudson's days are gone. Hollywood makes movies that people want to go see and pay money for.

Or better parenting from the baby boomers?

Did bad parenting result in people who make a movies that have graphic violence? Did bad parenting result in a population of people that want to go see graphic violence? Did bad parenting result in a gun man that shot people at a theater who there to watch a movie about murder and torture? Or were you just talking about people who took their kids to see it?

Not enough people pay to go see more wholesome movies... Doris Day and Rock Hudson's days are gone. Hollywood makes movies that people want to go see and pay money for.

Yes and no. Hollywood producers, actors, and writers have their own agendas. Product placement isn't just for products. It is for 'ideas' as well. But your point is well taken about people paying to go see it, and I am saying - start thinking twice before you do and ask yourself, is this good for the Humans.

Since there will always be bad parents ….. Both

The baby boomers are well into their grandparent stage - for the most part, blame their clueless children.

Those on BOTH SIDES trying to politicize this horrible event should be ashamed of themselves. Both sides are already pointing fingers.


Its comforting for people to be able to point to a cause and blame some external force for violence and tragedy rather than accept that sometimes awful things happen and sometimes its just because somebody is an awful person. Its difficult for a decent person to comprehend how someone else could not be a decent person and often insist that the person must have somehow been corrupted by some external force. Natural and personal bias tends to cause the external force of choice to be either current cultural scapegoat, or whatever an individual has personally chosen as destructive.

So you think if there were an armed patron in the theater he/she should have pulled their weapon and in the midst of a panic and people running in a panic they should have stated firing shots at the guy?

I was discussing why he might - or might not - have chosen the venue. But, yeah, considering the carnage, I think a patron firing back in the midst of a panic would have been the better scenario. The patron might have accidently shot one or two but who knows how many could have been spared - about 78 injured and 12 or so dead at last count. Not ideal but being in a movie theater with someone gunning down men, women and children with no push back doesn't strike me as the better option. At that point, your choices aren't safely sit there vs. run the risk of accidently being shot by a patron. Your choices at that point are probably being deliberately gunned down by someone actively trying to kill you and your family vs. perhaps accidently getting shot by a patron in a panic situation and a killer who would be far more likely to be going into defensive mode than he would have if no one fought back - thus a safer situation for most of the patrons. No guarantee but at that point, you are playing the odds to survive.

Once you have someone actively trying to slaughter everyone in huge numbers - including children - I think it is a little bit of a stretch to be more concerned that someone might get caught in a crossfire than that patrons sitting there might be the shooter's next victim. He didn't stop until he was ready and as I read the reports, the theater was quiet other than the dying once he stopped.

Oslo.

Did bad parenting result in people who make a movies that have graphic violence? Did bad parenting result in a population of people that want to go see graphic violence? Did bad parenting result in a gun man that shot people at a theater who there to watch a movie about murder and torture? Or were you just talking about people who took their kids to see it?

Actuslly if you look at the links between violence in media and violence in an individual it breaks down in households that are more stable. Good parents + violent movies= no significant link.