A Wake-Up Call For Concealed Carry

July 23, 2012 by Sam Rolley

Gun control zealots seized on the tragic events that unfolded last week in an Aurora, Colo., movie theater where a disturbed gunman brutally opened fire on moviegoers, killing several and wounding dozens, as a reason for the banning of firearms in America.

But from people who do not wish to be left utterly defenseless in situations like what unfolded last week, there’s a different message: The world is full of mentally unhinged, immoral, desperate, criminal and sadistic beings capable of horrific things. And they don’t always use guns.

When there are no guns, they might use chainsaws.

Or they may use a sword.

Or a baseball bat.

Or they may just use their teeth.

Whether guns are made illegal, there will always be people with intent and means by which to harm and kill the unsuspecting. And even making guns illegal — like, say, how it’s been attempted with alcohol, marijuana, narcotics, prostitution, theft, murder, bribery, etc. — isn’t going to stop lawbreakers from acquiring them, just as illegality doesn’t deter murders, drug addicts, prostitutes and thieves.

So what is the answer? Vigilance.

Last Friday’s tragedy should serve as a wake-up call to all of those who have succumbed to the false sense of security that this comforting society provides. There are people out there who want to kill and who will kill if they are given even the slightest opportunity. These people seek out victims who are defenseless and vulnerable.

One armed person in the movie theater where James Holmes went on his psychotic killing spree would have had the opportunity to greatly level the playing field. But it is likely that the gunman knew the chance of any of his victims being armed was slight. After all, even the most staunch concealed carry advocate would likely deem a suburban movie theater as a place where a violent attack is unlikely to occur. And who wants to carry a sidearm to a movie, a place people go to escape the horrors of real life?

With attacks like Holmes’ increasing in frequency, Americans should learn how to properly use their firearms and take them everywhere. Here are some products to make a concealed carry weapon less cumbersome in daily life:

No bulk waist holsters from Versacarry.

Low profile concealed carry chest holsters.

Concealed carry purses.

Front pocket holsters for jackets and looser fitting pants.

Undergarments designed for concealed carry.

Casual and dress pants designed specifically for concealed carry.

There are countless other concealed carry options available that can be found by conducting a simple Internet search. With so many low-profile and convenient ways to carry a self-defense weapon, there is no reason any American who can legally concealed carry should leave the home unarmed.

Rate this:

Filed Under: Analysis, Conservative Politics, Liberty News, Staff Reports, Voices

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “A Wake-Up Call For Concealed Carry”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

http://www.facebook.com/barry.daughenbaugh Barry Daughenbaugh

Lets see a person uses a gun to cause mayhem death etc so we should bann all guns, so by that logic a person uses a car to cause mayhem death etc , so we should ban all cars? or someone uses a knife to cause mayhem death etc so we should ban all guns, or someone uses a baseball bat etc etc, sure doesnt sound like banning the instruments used does anything to stop the problem of people causing mayhem death etc.
I am absolutely positive that if even one person in that theater had been carrying a gun on their person, as is the right of every American citizen, then a lot less people would have been killed and injured.

Howard Roark

Absolutely correct. just like prohabition when people placed a moral judgement on an inanamite object. neither alcohol or guns are any more evil or good than a kitcken chair.
Howard Roark

I recently called a talk radio show and told the host that I own a model 1911 45 automatic and that I was going to complain to the Colt Firearms Co. that it is defective. The host why is that and I replied that I am constantly being told that guns kill but I have owned mine for years and it just sets in its storage place and it has never killed any one. ergo it must be defective.

Sanders

I recently saw a picture of 2 people holding signs at a street corner. One of the signs said something to the effect of, “Gun manufacturers are complicits in crime”. The other sign, carried by another individual, was just as accurate and it said, “Spoons made me fat”.

Flashy

Who says anything about banning guns? Lunatics on the board today stretching far flung fairy tales to create fear from ignorance, hate and anger

Senseless violence by someone having unfettered and liberal access to guns is not a good idea. Unfettered access to firearms by anyone is never a good idea. Lunatics having free access…yeah, as a good idea that ranks right up there with giving a six year old a loaded pistol and then sending them out to play with the local kids.

Opal the Gem

And here we have another inane trite post from Flushy the proven lier. A post full of unproven unsupported claims he has no intention of ever supporting.
Flashy

Opal…ya hear anything from anyone stating banning guns? Only from the lunatic pro gun fringe who make stuff up so they can demand more donations to fight the fiction.

But think about it…when hunting, you ever hear someone called or referred to as a “city hunter” or perhaps “buck fever”? Think about it…you feel safe with those yahoos eh?
E. Blake

Here is your gun ban nut jobs, this went out the day of the shooting, notice whoi is putting it out???
Dear MoveOn member,
We all woke up to the tragic news of the killing of at least 12 people and the wounding of many more at a late-night screening of the new Batman movie in Colorado.

Reports indicate that the disturbed individual who committed this horrifying act had a bulletproof vest, used some kind of gas canister, and had multiple guns when he opened fire in the crowded theater.1 A three-month-old is among the injured.2

We are immeasurably sad for those who lost their lives, those wounded, and their families—and for all those who experienced the horror of those terrible moments. Let our thoughts and prayers go out to them today.

We’re also so angry. From children’s lives lost in school shootings, to Trayvon Martin, the Representative Gabrielle Giffords attack, and this latest slaughter of innocents, we are not safe from gun violence.

Mayors Against Illegal Guns has been campaigning to put a stop to senseless gun violence like this with commonsense measures, like fixing gun checks to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people. They’ve started a petition in SignOn.org to demand action on ending gun violence.

Sadly, it often takes moments like these to bring politicians to their senses about guns. And while signing a petition seems so inadequate in the face of what happened last night, it’s important to do what we can. Today that means taking a small step toward preventing this kind of tragedy from happening again.

Sign the Mayors Against Illegal Guns petition to our leaders: “Join me in standing with the victims and families of the Aurora, Colorado shooting and pledge to end gun violence.”
Vicki

Flashy says:
“Who says anything about banning guns? Lunatics on the board today stretching far flung fairy tales to create fear from ignorance, hate and anger”

————————————————————
In a pre-taped interview with Bob Schieffer for CBS’s Face the Nation, Bloomberg argued the restrictions in place for gun control need to be more strictly enforced.

“My thoughts are these — pure and simple — weapons of war don’t belong on the streets. This is a powerful weapon. He had a hundred round drum,” – Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said on “Fox News Sunday.”

Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y., whose husband was killed in a 1993 shooting spree and is a proponent of the assault weapons ban, said there is one element that is consistent in mass murders at Virginia Tech, Columbine and Fort Hood. “They had a gun with large magazines,” she said.

Rep. Ed Perlmutter, a Democrat who represents the Aurora, Colo., district where the shooting took place, said he will work with McCarthy to bring debate into Congress.
“[S]hould we reinstate the assault weapons ban? I think we should, and I think that’s where it starts,” Perlmutter said on “Face the Nation.”

Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence released this statement: “This tragedy is another grim reminder that guns are the enablers of mass killers and that our nation pays an unacceptable price for our failure to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people.”

When Candy Crowley asked about what he thinks should be done with gun control laws, Colorado Governer Hickenlooper was hesitant to commit to backing reform. “Certainly we can – I’m sure we will try – to create some checks and balances on these things.

John McCain wants more proof gun control is the answer before he’ll support any new sort of regulations.
———————————————
So many examples to disprove Flashy. So little space

Flashy writes:
“Senseless violence by someone having unfettered and liberal access to guns is not a good idea. Unfettered access to firearms by anyone is never a good idea.”

Senseless violence by someone having unfettered and liberal access to BASEBALL BATS is not a good idea. Unfettered access to BASEBALL BATS by anyone is never a good idea.

Senseless violence by someone having unfettered and liberal access to KNIVES is not a good idea. Unfettered access to KNIVES by anyone is never a good idea.

Senseless violence by someone having unfettered and liberal access to HAMMERS is not a good idea. Unfettered access to HAMMERS by anyone is never a good idea.

Senseless violence by someone having unfettered and liberal access to HAT PINS is not a good idea. Unfettered access to HAT PINS by anyone is never a good idea.

Unfettered access to Ammonia and bleach by anyone is never a good idea.

Unfettered access to Propane by anyone is never a good idea.

Unfettered access to Gasoline by anyone is never a good idea.

Unfettered access to Hydrogen Peroxide by anyone is never a good idea.

Unfettered access to Flour by anyone is never a good idea.

Unfettered access to Sugar (just ask Mayor Blumeburg:) ) by anyone is never a good idea.

So many examples to show the lack of thought in remarks by Flashy. So little space
Charles Moore

Having been in the Military I mentioned this when the Fort Hood massacres were News. It happened because of Political Correctness, The results of an Investigation were released a few days ago. The FBI did not go after this Major because they didn’t want to hurt his career in spite of all the complaints etc. As for bringing guns on the base one is not allowed to do it. There are signs before the entrance to Military bases that ” Guns are not authorized:. I have a CCW permit and I am not allowed to take my weapon on base on my State. If I live or am stationed on base and have a weapon then they will store in in the Armory for me.
Vicki

E. Blake tells us of the insanity of Moveon.org by writing
“Mayors Against Illegal Guns has been campaigning to put a stop to senseless gun violence like this with commonsense measures”

Since the guns were legal to own and legal for the shooter to own (right up till he fired his first shot in the theater) what exactly do they have in mind for “commonsense”?

We have a pretty good idea. It is another disprove of Flashys claims.
Vicki

I found another example to disprove flashys statement. This one is so typically liberal that I wanted to bring it here.

Flashy says:
“Who says anything about banning guns? Lunatics on the board today stretching far flung fairy tales to create fear from ignorance, hate and anger”

Why none other than the esteemed film critic Roger Ebert. But wait till you hear his logic for more gun control.
“http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/07/20/nyt-quickly-gets-film-critic-roger-ebert-write-op-ed-gun-restrictions”

———————-
“In theory, the citizenry needs to defend itself. Not a single person at the Aurora, Colo., theater shot back, but the theory will still be defended…This would be an excellent time for our political parties to join together in calling for restrictions on the sale and possession of deadly weapons.
———————-

Apparently Mr Ebert is no better than any other liberal MSM host (or liberals who post here either) when it comes to simple research. OF COURSE no one shot back. They respected the wishes of the management of the theater.

Howard Roark

Never forget that the second amendment has nothing to do with having fire arms for hunting or self defense. the whole purpose is for calling forth the militia. Congress in the Militia act of1792 defined the militia as every able bodied man between the ages of 18 and 45. and at the time of being called each man would provide his own fire arm.

There are only two purposes that the malitia would be used. James Madison defines the first in one of his Federalist Papers where he states that the militia can be used to assist a legitimate Government to help repell invaders. Alexander Hamilton in one of his Federalist Papers discusses the second use of the militia. That use is to overthrow a tyrannical government as the opening of the Declaration of Independence says that we have the right and obligation to do.

Jonathan

There’s a third reason for the militia that isn’t used anymore: to serve in a law enforcement capacity. Many deadly force laws allow for use of deadly force in the prevention of a violent felony. For centuries, the local marshal/sheriff could call up and deputize citizens to bring outlaws to justice. Now, we pay people who have “specialized training” to protect us for insurance purposes, and as has been discussed elsewhere on this website, they do a bang up job of violating the rights of the citizenry.
Nancy in Nebraska

The second Ammendment provided for a well regulated militia but it also provided for THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms! “The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms Shall Not Be Infringed”! If someone is telling you that the second ammendment only provides for a militia, they are lying to you! READ IT!!!

HH

Amen Nancy n Neb…. AMEN!!!
Vicki

I love to torment liberals with facts. Let us amuse ourselves by taking the “only for the militia” argument of the liberals and seeing what happens.

———————————–
US CODE 10 USC § 311 – Militia: composition and classes:
The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
———————————-

Gee. Liberals. That would be a REALLY BIG portion of the law abiding population. Let’s start by no longer infringing on just that group.

I bet that is not what you had in mind when you wanted to disarm us.
phideaux

Vicki, with the passage of the equal rights laws women and those over 45 would now be included.
Vicki

phideaux says:
“Vicki, with the passage of the equal rights laws women and those over 45 would now be included.”

I know. But baby steps for the liberal. Get them used to reading the US Code before making them handle the addendum.

Rob

The Bill of Rights was ratified three years before the Militia Act of 1792. March 4, 1789. It’s the right of the people, along with the right to assemble, unless that is just for the militia as well.

Charles Moore

If the Bill of Rights grants the use of firearms then it doesn’t have to specify the legal use of firearms. At the time of the Bill of Rights people hunted to get food to put on the tabel for their families.
CZ52

“At the time of the Bill of Rights people hunted to get food to put on the tabel for their families.’

And many people still hunt to put food on the table for their families.

Flashy

Howard…in my opinion, the 2nd is to prevent a populace from being at the mercy of the State…my belief is because the british used armed presence to such a degree the rebels saw what arming the populace would do preventing abuse of power.

That being said…the one problem with the 2nd is the lunatic fringe who want to expand it to include “for any reason’, denying the majority the right to security and a safe society. For some reason, they insist it is their Right to place everyone in danger.

Nancy in Nebraska

Having a gun in your possession puts no one in danger!!! Gun registration prevents no killing. Anyone who wants a gun can get one either through theft or black market. Under the guise of protecting you, the government is taking away your rights. You may not care, BUT I DO!!!
Vicki

Above I commented about when flashy makes reasonable sounding but insane points.
This is one of them

Flashy writes
“That being said…the one problem with the 2nd is the lunatic fringe who want to expand it to include “for any reason’, denying the majority the right to security and a safe society. For some reason, they insist it is their Right to place everyone in danger.”

As pointed out IN the very amendment you reference it is necessary for the security of a free state that there be a well trained militia. There is no lunatic fringe trying to expand the right of a FREE people to keep and bear arms. It is the PEOPLE who will form the militia. It is in fact the people who ARE the militia. It is even the law (10 USC – 311) The right is fully expanded already. It is to keep the state of freedom by being able to resist with force those who would use force to oppress.

By denying the right of the majority to keep and bear arms YOU deny them the right to security and a safe society. The shooting in Colorado and every other successful mass shooting is the evidence.

The astute reader will notice that we are talking about ACTUALLY being secure and not flashy’s “feeling secure”
Flashy

Vicki and nancy..please re-rad what i wrote. I have no issue with the 2nd. It states quite clearly the Right to Bear Arms. What i did say was there is a lunatic fringe who thinks it pertains to being able to pack iron everywhere, without training, and without regard to the rights of others. See anywhere in the 2nd where it states you can pack a gun in a bar? in a school? In a public place? nope. And that was what i stated.

Go ahead and have guns. hand guns, rifles, long guns, short guns, big guns little guns…i don’t care. Put one on every table and desk in your house. go in the back yard and play target practice with your tonsils…i don’t care.

But the moment someone takes one off the premises of their property…it begins to intrude on my rights, safety and well being. And i in no way believe someone packing iron in public is a good thing. And for someone to have a firearm and not have a clue as to it’s operations, it’s parts, be trained in the use of the firearm, and show they have ‘situational awareness”, is sheer and utter lunacy.

If someone wants to carry a weapon off premises, and applies for a concealed weapons permit…unless they require it for work or for clear and demonstrated temporary need for immediate safety…such should be given only with the strictest adherence to gun safety, training, appropriate bond, and name and address published in a local paper so everyone knows and if there is reason to object.

To purchase a firearm? If from a licensed gun dealer, background checks, registration , a tax on the transaction to cover the costs, and proof of insurance.

If a private transaction? The Seller must report the sale within 48 hours of the sale, including name and address who he/she sold it to, the price, and the type of weapon.

Look at it this way. Gun nuts say they want to protect themselves against criminals. i want to protect myself against testosterone challenged gun owners packin’ in public.
Vicki

Flashys insane response.
“But the moment someone takes one off the premises of their property…it begins to intrude on my rights, safety and well being.”

Do you think there is some magical barrier between the private property and the public property? If you REALLY felt you were unsafe then you would at least be consistent and demand that no one have firearms.

You claim to support the 2nd amendment but then ignore the part about “…shall NOT be infringed”. Hoping Clinton will help you with the definition of “is”?
Vicki

Nancy in Nebraska says:
“Having a gun in your possession puts no one in danger!!!”

Well. Actually…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3kUD6W8QaQ

CZ52

“Never forget that the second amendment has nothing to do with having fire arms for hunting or self defense. the whole purpose is for calling forth the militia.”

Howard Roark, it is nieve at best to think the authors of the second amendment did not intend to include all then legal uses of a firearm in the Second Amendment. While it is true the primary intent was to provide for the militia’s arming they were well aware of the number of people who needed firearms to provide meat for their famioly. They were well aware of the need for the populace to be armen to protect themselves from criminals. They were well aware of the frequence of competitions with firearms for fun as well as training etc. etc. etc.. Since they were aware of all these legal uses for a firearm they would have intended them to be included in the Second Amendment as secondary reasons for owning firearms.

won5vin

the price of freedom is eternal vigilance and this includes voting for people who believe the Constitution is the supreme law of the USA.
DavidL

This situation, and this entire issue, is more complex than the article suggests when it states the following:

“One armed person in the movie theater where James Holmes went on his psychotic killing spree would have had the opportunity to greatly level the playing field.”

Think about it. You in a dark theater and tear gas is dropped in on you. Your eyes are stinging, your nose is running, and you are choking for air. Even though you are disorientated, perhaps not if you are John Wayne, you pull the gun you are packing. Fifteen other people are packing and do the same. Guns are pulled by all and shots fired. WHO IS THE GUN MAN?

The result? A circular firing squad erupts and Innocent persons are killed. Good citizens like Bob Livingston, Sam Rolley, Shaun Murray, DaveH, Vickie, MichaelJ, WilliamH, and all the people who write on this site. What should we say to make sense of this tragedy and to comfort the families of these dead? Should we say things like “They died protecting the second amendment”? “They were brave and caring people. It just didn’t work out for them this time”? “Right up until the very end, they were freedom loving people”? “Because of your loss, the NRA is giving a great discount on gas masks and shooting lessons”?

I would have no idea what to say anymore than many of us writing on this site I think. I would, however, say that it is not unreasonable to advocate that society come up with some kind of gun regulation solution that significantly improves the prevention rate of these wackos getting the gun in the first place. Simplifying the issue by always advocating the “one size fits all solution” of everyone packing, as well as throwing the zealot bomb, doesn’t help. I am a combat veteran, gun owner and competitive shooter. Closing the gun show loophole, and doing more thorough background checks is not zealotry, it’s common sense.

http://www.facebook.com/WizardKiller Mark Are Reynolds

if you think what you just stated is common sense, you are sadly mistaken.

DavidL

Which part? Please be specific and give us your analysis and solution to this incident.
Sanders

David,

I, among many on this site, appreciate your serevice to our country, BUT, There is no “gun show loophole”. You’ve been duped by the media. You need to quit paying tribute to the mass media in this country because they are poisoning your mind with their propaganda.
JeffH

“Closing the gun show loophole, and doing more thorough background checks is not zealotry, it’s common sense.”

1 – The term “gun show loophole” is nothing more than an anti-gun talking pointabout something that doesn’t exist. If it’s legal, it can’t be a loophole.

2 – “common sense” is another political code term used to remove or restrict out freedoms.

3 – Anyone who wishes to purchase a firearm or an explosive device must first pass the FBI National Instant Background Check System (NICS) in order to complete their purchase.

Nancy in Nebraska

I think if the gunman had someone shooting back at him, he might retreat or at least hesitate long enough for more people to escape. The fact that these people KNOW that their victims are helpless emboldens them!
Incredulous

I’m a CCW holder and have thought about what might have occurred in that theater. 1) it was DARK and NOISY (movie was playing). 2) People were screaming and running EVERYWHERE. 3) Tear gas was used. Now, granted, having a weapon may have been better than not having a weapon but given the sheer pandemonium going on in that theater, what “might” have occurred if someone pulled their CW? Innocent people being shot? The guy also had body armor and 9mm loads (a popular CCW load) wouldn’t have done anything. It’s so easy to pontificate about how brave and quick thinking we would be if put in the same position but for the average (and I am referring to AVERAGE) CCW holder, I think a reality check is in order.

It should raise the stakes for all of us that do carry. Train, train, train, and train.

Sanders

TRAIN, ABSOLUTELY! The best train of thought here would be to “aim small, miss small”. My CW weapon is my Glock 45 ACP with a rear sight lazer, which I have trained extensively to hit very small targets at up to 20 yds. Had I been there, packing, I would have put a round either in the middle of his neck or the middle of his gas mask.
Vicki

And either of those shots would have hurt a lot and certainly distracted the shooter. However as we learn more about the case we find that Charles Moores magic armor was nothing other than thicker clothing. Not anything like good ballistic armor.

Run liberals. Facts ahead.
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/07/22/fox-no-body-armor-for-aurora-theater-shooter/
Charles Moore

Vicki. Are you so stupid that you think that if you repeat something enough times that it will be true? The chances of a qualified shooter being in that theater at the time even if there were the existence of a CCW law was almost Nil. There is a big difference in shooting in a controlled environment at a still paper target etc and in a dark theater when the shooter is spraying it and lobbing grenades. What difference does it make if the armor was fake or not.Do you think that maybe the people in the theater might have had powers of Telepathy and would have known that?.
What is bothersome and scary is that you are a CCW holder. Did you get it from one of the States that are granting them to other States without participating in that actual State?You have proven my point that CCW holders on the average can lack common sense and be untrained.
Vicki

Charles Moore says:
“Vicki. Are you so stupid that you think that if you repeat something enough times that it will be true?”

Too funny coming from Charles Moore who has repeated many times in this thread that the magic body armor made the shooter as immune to the laws of physics as the shooter was to the laws of man. (you know the law against MURDER)

At least I haven’t called you stupid. I am content to let you to demonstrate.

Charles Moore” The chances of a qualified shooter being in that theater at the time even if there were the existence of a CCW law was almost Nil.”

Lower down in this thread you laughed at critical thinking. We see why.

Charles Moore: “There is a big difference in shooting in a controlled environment at a still paper target etc and in a dark theater when the shooter is spraying it and lobbing grenades.”

Interesting that you keep repeating non-existent grenades. Have you confused a report of tear-gas canisters with grenades?

Speaking of controlled environments the whole point of allowing CCW in the theater is not to place the CCW holder in an uncontrolled environment it is to remove the controlled environment from the SHOOTER.

Charles Moore the mind reader attempts to read my mind by saying:
“What difference does it make if the armor was fake or not.Do you think that maybe the people in the theater might have had powers of Telepathy and would have known that?.”

Since they did not have firearms it makes no difference. Had they had firearms I would hope they would shoot first and worry about the body armor after the shooter was neutralized. They might note that if the shooter appears to be wearing body armor the better tactical move would be to close and engage the neck and head but that is asking a lot of the not currently well regulated militia.

Charles Moore: “What is bothersome and scary is that you are a CCW holder.

Not as bothersome and scary as thinking that you might be one.

Charles Moore: ” You have proven my point that CCW holders on the average can lack common sense and be untrained.”

Interesting phrase. “on average can lack” The phrase actually has no possible meaning as there is no quantitative way to analyze it. It could mean all or none or anything in between. It reminds me of the rhetoric from politicians. Talking a lot and saying nothing.

Charles Moore

The survivors claimed that they thought it was part of the Premiere and was firecrackers etc. I would think that the theater using firecrackers etc in a theater would be illegal so why the thought?. Even if somebody else would have had a gun and a clear shot it would make no difference as the shooter was covered head to toe in body armor purchased on the Internet from a company that supplies it to Police and the Military.Anybody else with a gun would not have armor piercing bullets,

Vicki

Charles Moore writes:
“Even if somebody else would have had a gun and a clear shot it would make no difference as the shooter was covered head to toe in body armor…”

Just one more reason why law abiding citizens (and police) need armor piercing rounds.

And you have obviously no idea how much it hurts to be hit in the armor. It would have surprised him (one of the major tactical advantages of CONCEALED carry) and the law abiding citizen time to close the distance and apply one or more shots to the gas mask.

It would have given more people time to get out of the theater. More time for the police to get in. More time for other moviegoers to jump the shooter.

Btw this shooting clearly illustrates the accuracy of one of those sound bites that the liberals hate.

“When seconds count the police are only minutes away.”

Just think about how close the police happened to be and it still was a long response time for the victims.

JJ Swiontek

“I am a combat veteran, gun owner and competitive shooter. Closing the gun show loophole, and doing more thorough background checks is not zealotry, it’s common sense.”

First, thank you for your service to our country.

Second, “Closing the gun show loophole” means all person-to-person sales or gifts of firearms must go through a FFL (for a fee). Note: the Colorado shooter bought his weapons from gun stores.

Third, “doing more thorough background checks” means much more government intrusion as everyone will need to be personally checked by a government head-shrink to make sure you are “safe” (with a much higher fee). Also note: some head-shrinks really believe that if you even want a gun, then you must be crazy (and therefore should be denied a gun).

DavidL. The ultimate goal of gun control is the complete and total ban of civilian owned weapons. Please stop helping them.

Nadzieja Batki

I wouldn’t thank him for his millitary service. He would be the one doing everything possible to hinder our own men.
Charles Moore

He bought the body armor on the Internet. The news stated that it was from a company that supplies Police and the Military. I don’t know if this means that they are “Only” supposed to supply Military and the Police or they sell to anybody and primarily to the Military and Police.
Vicki

Charles Moore writes:
“I don’t know if this means that they are “Only” supposed to supply Military and the Police or they sell to anybody and primarily to the Military and Police.”

Of course they sell to anybody. It’s a free country. Oh wait. This is early 21st century. My bad.

————————————
For a TRULY free people the possession of ANYTHING created, grown, obtained without fraud or theft, can not be illegal.
———————————–

CZ52

DavidL closing the non existqant gun show loophole does NOT apply here. All of the shooters firearms were purchased at properly licsened gun dealers who followed the proper proceedures when selling him the guns. Also as the Mayor of Aurora said there is evidence he had been planning this for 6 months or more so he had plenty of time to aquire firearms either legaly or illegaly.

Vicki

One wonders if BATF told the dealers to go ahead with the sale.

vicki

DavidL writes:
“Guns are pulled by all and shots fired. WHO IS THE GUN MAN?”

Why the guy who fired first. Gee that was too easy. See the law abiding know that there is no reason to fire till they know who the shooter is. They might not even draw their firearms for just a tear gas canister thrown into the room.

Let’s have a little more fun with your “man of straw”. When the shooting starts the people lying down and the people running toward the doors are NOT going to be the shooter. Witnesses described how they saw the shooter because of the muzzle flashes. He was the one wearing a gas mask. CLUE. If they could see the shooter thru the teargas then one or more of the ccw holders could and would too.

“What should we say to make sense of this tragedy and to comfort the families of these dead? Should we say things like “They died protecting the second amendment”? “They were brave and caring people.”

Or just the obvious. They died protecting their loved ones and community from the mad dog in human skin.

Oh and the real point is that they would have had a CHANCE to defend themselves rather then being shot in the back as they ran away.
Isaac Davis

There is no “gun show loophole”. If you are who you say you are, a gun-rights supporter, then you’d know the truth. Do you think that the 30,000 people killed in automobile accidents every year warrants even MORE regulation that what is already in place for drivers? How DO you regulate common sense and mental stability? How do you tell people to have respect for both themselves and for everyone else, and hold them accountable? You cannot legislate human behavior, but apparently you seem to believe that laws are adhered to 100% of the time…if they could just get the wording exactly right…there, that fixed it. Do you know the true meaning of UNALIENABLE? Where do those “Shall Not Be Infringed” Rights extend from? When has a “gun-free” zone ever stopped an idiot intent on using a firearm to commit insane mayhem?
Nancy in Nebraska

Many many years ago, my father explained to me that gun registration was a very bad thing. Believe me when I say that my father never imagined that our own government would try to take weapons from its citizens. But he explained to me that with gun registration, the first place that an invading enemy would go was to where the gun registration records were kept. Then they would know exactly where to go, to get the guns which would make us helpless. He recognized from the very beginning of gun registration that it was a very dangerous thing. Now we are faced with a threat that my father could never have imagined. And that threat comes from our own government and the new world order that they have in mind for us! I believe that gun registration was part of the grand scheme from the beginning. They’re just waiting until everything else is in place. There is nothing that we can do to stop crazy people from random killings. There is nothing we can do to stop drug gangs and criminal organizations from getting and using guns. All gun control will do is stop law abiding citizens from having guns to protect themselves. I can’t see how that is a good thing! All it does is allow the criminal element (including the government) to control and slaughter innocent people!

Bimbam

Registration is both good and bad, but mostly bad.

Let me explain. If the enemy came and we had no registration they would just suspect every American had a weapon. That’s bad.

But if they looked up the registration base they would then know what house needs to be “attacked” or the owner hunted down. Meanwhile you will be spared from this if you did not register.

What’s the solution then? Kick liberals out of all positions of authority and remove gun registration. It’s not in the Constitution and should be removed immediately.

Require everyone to own a gun and train them how to use it. It’s actually in the Constitution to do that, except for the training part.

What happens if you don’t want a gun? You take the gun but we just don’t give the ammo, kay?
Vicki

Bimbam says:
“Registration is both good and bad, but mostly bad.

Let me explain. If the enemy came and we had no registration they would just suspect every American had a weapon. That’s bad.”

No. Thats Good. The enemy will be demoralized by the realization that they face an army 300 MILLION strong. “…Behind every blade of grass….”
Bimbam

No, you do not understand what I’m saying. The enemy will simply RAZE everything when they realize “behind every blade of grass”. SCORCHED EARTH POLICY!!!

How do you mow a lawn???? Do you pick at it one grass at a time???

You really do not understand WARFARE lady!!!!!
Charles Moore

Huh? Define the Enemy. I remember a more important statement. “When they came for the Catholics, I didn’t care as I wasn’t a Catholic”.” When they came for the Jewish people I didn’t care because I wasn’t Jewish” ” When they came for me it was too late”. Congress enacts Legislation . For the last twenty years the people have been returning 90% of the Incumbents to Congress. The people return 90% and then give them a 13% favorable rating” The Executive office is supposed to enforce the Legislation passed by Congress. This POTUS has trampled on the U.S. Constitution and has ignored Congress and has done things on his own. The U.S. Senate has to ratify this U.N Global Arms treaty. So far the news is that at least 57 Senators are against it so if this remains then it won’t be ratified. It is only an initial draft right now and there is some thought that if certain points such as “small arms” or taken out regarding the U.S. that it might have a better chance of being ratified. Who knows?
Vicki

Charles Moore writes:
“The people return 90% and then give them a 13% favorable rating” ”

Makes you wonder ‘what were they thinking’. Or what was the polling accuracy. Or how many dead people voted since they don’t (usually) respond to polls
Vicki

Bimbam says:
“No, you do not understand what I’m saying. The enemy will simply RAZE everything when they realize “behind every blade of grass”. SCORCHED EARTH POLICY!!!

How do you mow a lawn???? Do you pick at it one grass at a time???

You really do not understand WARFARE lady!!!!!”

Typically enemys do not have enough power to scorch the earth as you suggest. Also they rarely want just the mineral resources.

Perhaps you may find enlightenment in this book:
http://www.amazon.com/The-Art-War-Sun-Tzu/dp/0195014766

And there is of course the United States Army Field Manual of Military Operations (FM-3-0, sections 4-32 to 4-39) are[14]:
——————————————————————
Objective (Direct every military operation towards a clearly defined, decisive, and attainable objective)
Offensive (Seize, retain, and exploit the initiative)
Mass (Concentrate combat power at the decisive place and time)
Economy of Force (Allocate minimum essential combat power to secondary efforts)
Maneuver (Place the enemy in a disadvantageous position through the flexible application of combat power)
Unity of Command (For every objective, ensure unity of effort under one responsible commander)
Security (Never permit the enemy to acquire an unexpected advantage)
Surprise (Strike the enemy at a time, at a place, or in a manner for which he is unprepared)
Simplicity (Prepare clear, uncomplicated plans and clear, concise orders to ensure thorough understanding)
—————————————————————-

So many interesting variables. Probably why my parents insisted I learn to play chess.

Flashy

DaveidL…you can make sense and state the obvious, but the testosterone challenged folks who want to pack a gun where ever they feel like and place us in danger because “they have a right’…regardless of OUR Rights… they won’t listen nor consider the simplest concepts of common sense.

ya see…it’s their “right” and ours don’t matter…

BullZi

What “rights” of yours are being violated? The only one here without one thread of common sense is you flashy! No one would ever entertain any of your thoughts because you are a moron without one shred of intellect!
Vicki

“folks who want to pack a gun where ever they feel like and place us in danger because “they have a right’…regardless of OUR Rights… they won’t listen nor consider the simplest concepts of common sense.

ya see…it’s their “right” and ours don’t matter…”

Your right to feel safe is entirely in YOUR control. Be a man. Stop being afraid.

Btw having flashy whine about his rights being ignored is rather hypocritical when you read in his posts all the rights we are supposed to give up to keep him happy.
Charles Moore

I am a Military Veteran and have a CCW permit. As I stated in another post: Most people get their CCW permit after only a few hours of simple qualifications. I had to take a State qualified course that was about 10 times as long. Many then purchase a gun that is attractive to them and never take the time to purchase a weapon that is most compatible for them. Many do not ever shoot again, Many do not have common sense.

Take this George Zimmerman in Florida.he wasn’t even on his neighborhood watch patrol gig. I think it is the same everyplace but In Florida a person with a CCW permit is not allowed to display it even in a threatening manner to discourage others unless your life or the life of somebody else is in imminent danger. None of those situations existed when Zimmerman spotted Martin and claimed he was acting suspicious. If it had been me and I thought somebody was acting suspicious then I would have called the Police and if I then stayed in the area I would have observed from a distance until that situation. If I had been walking down the Street and somebody started following me then I would have been apprehensive. The difference is that I have a gun and a CCW permit. I can pretty much guaranty you that if Zimmerman didn’t have a gun that he wouldn’t have got out of the car and followed Martin. Zimmerman showed no common sense when he took the watch patrols. decided to take a gun with him or follow Martin. Unfortunately there is no Law against Stupidity and lack of common sense.
Vicki

Charles Moore claims that Zimmerman acted irresponsibly the claims
” If it had been me and I thought somebody was acting suspicious then I would have called the Police and if I then stayed in the area I would have observed from a distance until that situation.”

Since from available reports Zimmerman acted as you claim you would are we to infer that you would act irresponsibly? If so then please surrender your permit and your gun to the authorities right now cause in the future (prior restraint) you MIGHT act irresponsibly.
phideaux

“I am a Military Veteran and have a CCW permit. As I stated in another post: Most people get their CCW permit after only a few hours of simple qualifications. I had to take a State qualified course that was about 10 times as long.”

I say you are a lier charles Moore. Judging from the majority of your comments you are about 1% less anti-gun than Flashy.

Pat Ridge

What’s it going to take before action is taken to stop??? A madman armed with a M60 killing 50 or 100 people.I wrote in a USA TODAY reply section many years ago after another gun nut went crazy in a McDonalds ( San Diego)killing 21 people most of them children stating this type of massacre will happen and again and nothing will done,sadly I was correct. Since I wrote that note I reckon over 100,000 Americans have been killed by gunfire,to think we invaded 2 countries because 3,000 Americans were killed on Sept 11 makes you wonder.As for the Aurora shooting it will be forgotten by next week and once again nothing will done and as long the NRA have the politicians in their pocket nothing will change. My prayers and condolences to the families of Aurora.

angelwannabe

What pray tell, exactly should be done?

http://www.facebook.com/WizardKiller Mark Are Reynolds

We should disarm everyone except the special knightly portion of the populace. The POLICE and MILITARY. Most of whom could get a job in the private sector so they decided to become glorified welfare recipients. I’d feel SOOOOO much safer if only “They” had guns….People…get a life!
http://www.facebook.com/WizardKiller Mark Are Reynolds

I meant COULD NOT get a job.
angelwannabe

Mark are R, I love how these gun banning nuts, go balistic in the aftermath of a tragedy…if somone is coming after me or mine, you can bet you azz Ill return fire, throw rocks, or use whatever I can make a weapon out at the time, I might die in the process, but I’ll go down fighting!

Nadzieja Batki

What’s your beef against the NRA?
Sanders

The NRA is in NO POLITICIANS POCKETS, you are in IDIOT. The NRA stands up against those who would otherwise dismantle the 2nd amendment because they know if not for this right, all other rights would perish. Read some history of some of history’s worst oppressive and murderous governments and you will find that most, if not all, of them disarmed their citizenry before unleashing hell on them.

This great organization, the NRA, does not donate to any politicians campaigns, but they will air their own opinions on some.

Ret Sgt

Absolutely correct.
Charles Moore

People need to read the account in Washington D,C where it was the Law that homeowners who owned a weapon had to have it locked up and unloaded. The ammunition for it had to be in a separate location. So if you had an intruder in your house then you would have to unlock your safe. . get the ammunition in another location. load your gun and hope that you did it before the intruder was in your house and killed you and your family. The NRA got it changed. Even then the Government fought it all the way to the U.S Supreme Court.

Charles Moore

Nonsense. The highest crime rate due to firearms is in Washington D.C. and Chicago Illinois that have the strictest gun control laws in the Country. Until a few years ago a homeowner in Wash D.C. if he/she owned a gun they had to keep it locked up in a safe and the ammunition in another location. If your hone had an intruder then you had to unlock the safe , retrieve the gun, get the ammunition from the other location and load the gun. By that time the intruder could be in your home and you and your family could be dead. The average citizen doesn’t have the resources to fight this and protect yourself. The NRA got this absurd law removed. The mother of the shooter in Colorado was interviewed by Police in California and she stated” You have the right person”. What does that suggest? I am watching this guy in court today and he has his hair dyed like the “Joker” in Batman.

The News also stated that he was attending College on a Federal Grant, HMMMMM
CZ52

An M60 is a machine gun. There is exactly ONE instance of a legaly owned machine gun being used in a crime. That ONE incident was a police officer using a department machine gun to commit a crime.

http://gillysrooms.blogspot.com GILLYSROOMS IN AUSTRALIA

Let me please first declare that IMO its too late to remove guns from your citizens in a safe and orderly fashion because the honest would give up the guns first and be at the mercy of the criminals and the insane.. Secondly your police services heads have got too much at stake in their power bases to want to reduce lawlessness no matter how caring they may appear to be politically…more crime means more demand for police, more power and more rules to control the public, your right to bear arrms has become your enermy but you wont believe me.
… looking at the history and statistics of these mass murders ….it would seem that most were not criminals before the killings,,,but they were mainly inane or had serious personality disorders trying to mimic something seen on TV…or suffering delusions of granduer, religious cults etc and some reacted to police being over enthusiastic in policing.

In an ideal gun free society where police and military only had guns and farmers still had shotguns for farming purposes but belonged to rifle clubs as a prerequisite to be able to buy rifles…then IMO opinion it would be less likely to have mass muder situations on the spur of the moment because these loonies where less likely to get guns at will by going to a gun shop and just buy one. Yes the big time crimes would still have guns…but again in my opinion…mostly used guns to kill each other over territory etc …so no great loss and yes there would be collateral killings but imo a great deal less than currently is the case. But as i said before..IMO .its much too late for the USA to even bother talking about limiting guns and your politicians already know this and are living with it as a big burden on your political ancestory a big mistake for modern times…but your stuck with it just like your stuck with your slavery ancestory. I dont have any answers for your problems now….thats your problem and good luck.

Australia is very different but many farmers still have lots of shotguns for vermin erradication and belong to sporting gun clubs and the majority of our citizen feel relatively safe in cinemas etc but if they feel unsafe in some suburbs they can just more to nicer more expensive areas or just avoid the problem spots at night. Its not easy to buy a gun but if a crim wanted one you still can get them illegally…but when people get angry …they tend to cool off by the time they get anywhere near a gun and think more clearly of the consequences, whereas in your country…most have a gun handy in a drawer or on their person at the time of their mental episode and crack up, pick up the gun and shoot first think about it later. . Some stats suggest 1 in 5 has some level of madness sometime during their lifetime…be it jealousy, or mental infirmity when older…enough to cause all manner of issues to escalate sooner into a killing or suicide or accident… Hope you can see the difference…adding to the debate and not telling you what to do either.

http://www.facebook.com/WizardKiller Mark Are Reynolds

No, it is not the “honest” that would give them up. It would be the RETARDS. Anyone willing to give up their means of protecting themselves from criminals in the populace or criminals in the government are nothing but ass kissing cowards. Oh, is that what most “Aussies” are?

http://gillysrooms.blogspot.com GILLYSROOMS IN AUSTRALIA

Mark Are Reynolds…you are a rude fool.

macawma

Well, Gilly, I have to tell you that I have first hand experience with the gun laws in AU as we own a farm there. AU’s gun laws SUCK!!! I can’t even (legally) carry a loaded rifle out on the property to kill wild dogs. Noooo, gotta get the ammo out of a separate locked container and then load as the quarry runs off, no doubt laughing in doggie chuckles. Not only that, but the time is coming when all the damn muslims that AU has allowed to migrate down under WILL rise up in jihad and the common citizen of AU will have no defense. Stupid, stupid gun laws, following the example of the Crown. Look where it’s gotten them…

Charles Moore

This used to be the Law in Washington.The Guns had to be locked up and the ammunition would have to be in a separate location. If one had a break in of their home then they would have to retrieve the gun then the ammunition and then load the gun. By that time the intruder could be in your house and kill you.
http://gillysrooms.blogspot.com GILLYSROOMS IN AUSTRALIA

Are you saying you needed a gun in Australia that bad? Our rules work very well here, even though not perfect, BUT as i stated before, it WONT work in the USA. Your are too scared of your neighbours, too paranoid….two paranoid people with guns creates a very dangerous situation.

HH

Sounds like Australian thinking to me……….. keep it down under please we don’t want that here! We’d be MUCH better off with NO gun control for competent US citizens!!!

http://gillysrooms.blogspot.com GILLYSROOMS IN AUSTRALIA

HH, I already said that the Australian system wont work in the USA…nor in Washington it cant work in any state when you have neighbours in other states without control. It cant work…its too late.

Anyone one know what happens in Canada?

Ray Pappas

May I remind everybody that there was another shooting in the same Aurora suburb only a few months earlier, but with another outcome. A deranged individual shot and killed the mother of a pastor in the parking lot of a church on April 22, but before he could continue, was shot dead himself by a conceal/carry citizen. Strangely, that news did not make it into the propaganda rags – WHY? I guess killing a criminal and preventing mass murder is not sexy enough for today’s reporters – or are they getting paid off to quash politically incorrect news?

Jonathan

It’s both. Unless some crazy kills lots of people, it won’t lead the evening news. And long has the media been in the pocket of the left.
HH

Not to pee on anyone’s fire but that “conceal/carry” citizen was actually an off duty police officer. MOST off duty LEO’s carry AND can carry where ordinary citizens can’t.

Chester

I seriously doubt that anyone armed with less than a 30.06 with armor piercing ammunition could have stopped this nut, as he was in full body armor. That protects all the easy kill spots. leaving only the head, and, as I understand, that would have been a bit of a hard shot as well, what with the gas mask and all. It wouldn’t have been impossible, but would have been a LOT harder.

HH

Yea Chester, but I’d have emptied all 15 rounds if my 9mm at his head tryin’………… AND hope I’d remembered to bring my extra clip with me in case none of the first 15 found their mark!!!

http://www.sweetsalesgirl.com/Kuurus/ Charles Johnson

Fire at the area between the helmet and shoulder.

OOOOPPert EEEEpert

I could be wrong, but I thought I read that it was illegal to carry a concealed gun in a movie theater in Colorado.

HH

It’s not against the law to carry in a theater in Colorado, it’s the owner of the establishment who decides if he/she wants patrons to carry in their business.
angelwannabe

Its only illegal if you get caught…..

HH

I really don’t think they could prosecute you even if you did get “caught”. I think all they could do legally would be to throw you out of the theater.
Jonathan

It is not illegal. However, if the private property owner says, “Leave my property with your weapon,” you have to leave, otherwise you risk tresspassing charges.
Sanders

It does, however, leave you wondering. If a concealed carrier had been in the theatre and stopped the lunatic with a well placed bullet, what would be his/her fate from the law. Would they be praised for their heroic action or would they have been jailed and prosecuted for carrying when the owners signs clearly stated “No guns allowed”?
Ret Sgt

If it’s your own life at stake…..it’s a no brainer.

robotech

with over 80 million guns in the USA, why hasn’t there been 80 million incidents like this one?
Because MOST people with firearms don’t have them to go out and commit mass murder, or even to commit a crime.
Most firearm owners are law abiding.
People buy them to have piece of mind (defense of life and property) for a hobby, to hunt, etc.
Although fewer in number, a majority of gun owners are responsible people who know that once the bullet leaves the barrel, you can’t take it back. It’s called personal responsibility.
A lot of us had parents (fathers) that taught us to use these tools properly, and to have respect for them.
So, out of 60 Million gun owners, a handful commit atrocities. This has happened since two cavemen lived next to each other. You don’t need a gun to kill your neighbor. You may need a gun to protect your neighbor.
But, as usual, these moonbat Liberals prove the old adage.
Conservatives don’t like something, they don’t have it.
Liberals don’t like something, they don’t want anyone else to have it.
Power freaks, each and every one.

robowang

Whoops, I meant that a lot of people have been taught to respect the firearm as a tool by fathers/grandfathers, on RARE occasion, a mother (and I mean RARE), Military and or some law enforcement entity.
Also, I meant that although fewer in number today than in the past years, people have been taught respect. BUT, the MAJORITY of firearm owners still have a respect for the firearms they keep.

Nadzieja Batki

Women are buying and training on weapons at this time in history. This is not reported except in NRA publications, WSJ, and on sites like this.
CZ52

Nadzieja while it is true the information on women and firearms isn’t reported nationaly it is reported on by some local stations and papers.

Sanders

Unfortunately, this doesn’t stop at the Liberals. There are many morons in the Republican field as well. Mayor Michael Bloomberg is one of the absolute worst of them. Granted there seems to be far more on the left side of the aisle than the right, but don’t fool yourself into thinking this is just a Liberal issue. Before you pull the lever when voting, make sure you have done your research into the history of who you are voting for.

Ret Sgt

Wise advice.
CZ52

Sanders, Bloomberg is a liberal. Just because he choses to call himself a Republican this year doesn’t change the fact he is an ever bigger government liberal.
Charles Moore

I agree. Bloomberg is not a Republican. He is a RINO at best. He is a Liberal.

Homer

GUNS never kill people, any more than lead pencils get bad grades on tests! Getting into your garage does not make you and automobile either! All citizens should use and own a firearm! HOWEVER: if there is a murder in cold blood, then capitol punishment is to be executed for the individual who perpetrates that crime!! GUN CONTROL is people control and that is what this govt is alllllll about!!

Nancy in Nebraska

Love it!!!

TOCB

The arguments the writer makes to support not banning guns, to me makes a better argument for banning guns. Ok, I am willing to not ban all guns, just military grade guns. Surely sensible people come to agreement on this.

Rob

There are two types of people. Those who hammer their guns into plows, Plow for the people who don’t WAKE UP!!!
http://www.facebook.com/WizardKiller Mark Are Reynolds

I want MILITARY GRADE guns to protect myself from someone who ignores the law and has a MILITARY GRADE gun. WTF is wrong with people like you? Dr. Susanna Hupp: on the second amendment https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1u0Byq5Qis
Nancy in Nebraska

The problem with banning military grade guns is this, if we ever need to defend ourselves from the government or the UN, we would be far outgunned. The main purpose of the second Ammendment was to provide for the defense of the citizenry. We will need an even playing field to defend ourselves.

Amused.

I’m sorry, Nancy. I love your romantic view that guns would protect us from our government, but that’s not really true any more.

Think about this: Saddam Hussein had tanks, guns, mortars, jets, copters, etc., and an army of 200,000 – 300,000. The coalition forces rolled them up in three weeks.

Yeah, I know…you’re a much better shot and much braver than all of those in the Iraqi army.

But let’s get really serious. Do you really think you’ll “defend yourself” against the US government by hiding behind rocks, living in bunkers, etc., in a full blown rebellion?

Are you more effectively armed than the guy who spent years stockpiling weapons? And even if you’re more motivated, I have no doubt that should the American army be called upon to put down a rebellion, they will do their duty for the elected government.

Remember the Whiskey Rebellion? Remember the Bonus Army?

If you think today’s minutemen/militia would stand a chance against the US Military, you are delusional. If you think that the military would “change sides” in meaningful numbers, you are even more delusional.
Nancy in Nebraska

Amused, guns are the best chance we’ve got! When the sh*t hits the fan, people will start to wake up, including the military. I’m not suggesting that it will be easy or fast. I’m suggesting that the spirit of the American people will EVENTUALLY rise up and they will take back the country. Guns, and especially “military” style guns will make it easier! No romance in that!!!
Michael J.

Amused,
Not so fast, the worlds super power of the day, the British, thought we’d be a push-over and you see how that turned out.
Michael J.

Amused,
I too was concerned about government firepower until I got the kinks worked out of the new fulton torpedos I mounted on my VTOL 4×4. The tricky part is remembering to disengage the cloaking device prior to launching the torpedos. It seems that the Flir can not see through the cloaking device and leaves me firing blind.

Nadzieja Batki

It appears that you don’t know what military grade weapons are. You would consider knives a military grade weapon just because Marines and Soldiers buy them.
Sanders

Hey TOCB,

You said, “Ok, I am willing to not ban all guns, just military grade guns. Surely sensible people come to agreement on this.”

Under your “sensible people” theory, authorities would snowball this until the “sensible people” would be left with nothing but single shot break action guns. Certainly not enough fire power to protect ones self from a crazed lunatic who got their hands on a repeater firearm of any kind. Keep in mind that if any guns are outlawed, only the outlaws and police will own them. Don’t take my word for it, just look across the pond at England and Australia where all private firearms ownership has been outlawed. In these countries, the violent crimes against the law abiders has increased tremendously since they lost their rights to own guns. Then there are those who are unlucky enough to live in the inner city where gangs of thugs prey on the innocent. How would one stave off a gang with a single shot? Answer: They wouldn’t, they would just get dead.

http://www.sweetsalesgirl.com/Kuurus/ Charles Johnson

What makes you think they’d leave us even muzzle loaders? They’d outlaw all weapons that could fire a projectile!!

By George

It was quite obvious that the Colorado shooter was not in violation of concealed carry laws. It is also quite obvious that no patrons of the theater were armed with concealed carry weapons that might have stopped the carnage a bit earlier. Go figure!
dan

The question you have to ask your self is: Is concealed or open carry
and defense of life and property/liberty (inalienable) a right…or do you need to
ask permission. Free men have rights….slaves must ask their masters permission.
Your right to ask me to give up my right asks me to forfeit my liberty.
WilliamH

Watching interviews with various officials they stated that the theater was posted against concealed carry. Don’t know what the specifics of concealed carry laws are in Aurora, CO are, but people following the rules had a choice….. Follow the law / rules or be a lawbreaker. With few exceptions, I don’t deal with people who have no concealed carry signs.

http://www.facebook.com/WizardKiller Mark Are Reynolds

How can you be a “law breaker” when the ultimate law says….THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!

Nancy in Nebraska

Better watch out! International treaties supersede the constitution!
Nadzieja Batki

Semantics.
Arlene

I believe that refers to government control not private property control. Your choice would be to go into the private establishment or not.
Kinetic1

MAR,
The 2nd amendment, like the 1st regulates the government. Just as Sarah Palin should understand that her rights were not infringed by broadcasters unwilling to give her carte blanche to say whatever she wanted, you should understand that it is not a 2nd amendment violation when a business or household denies you the right to enter with your gun.

Average Joe

Nancy in Nebraska ,

If the Senate passes the International Small arms treaty, (in the words of Andrew Jackson) “now let them enforce it”.

It will be no easy task, NATO troops or otherwise and yes, it will be NATO troops on our Soverign soil…an Act of War. ( we will finally know how the rest of the world feels…invaded and occupied).
Does anyone not wonder why 80% of American troops are elsewhere in the world…rather than here…in America…Defending America? Or why the Police are becoming increasingly militarized? This is by design….prepping for the upcoming invasion of America by foreign forces…who will have no problem shooting American citizens.

We are on our own ladies and gentleman. There will be no troops backing us up. There will be no Police on our side. We have been put on notice. We are ( as Kate8 said yesterday) on RED ALERT!

Recognize the signs and be prepared for the worst. If it doesn’t happen, so much the better…but I would rather be prepared…than not be prepared.

“No people will tamely surrender their Liberties, nor can any be easily subdued, when knowledge is diffused and virtue is preserved. On the Contrary, when People are universally ignorant, and debauched in their Manners, they will sink under their own weight without the Aid of foreign Invaders.” ― Samuel Adams

“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” ― Samuel Adams

Best Wishes,
AJ

angelwannabe

If a concealed carrier was packing some heat the night of the theater shooting, the gunman may have have been stopped, before so many innocents died….
http://www.survivingurbancrisis.com/ Silas Longshot

As long as the public allows gun grabbing, rights infringing leftist morons to dictate that certain areas are gun free killing zones like theaters (company ‘rule’ only, here) schools, churches, malls and other targets of mass murder opportunities, then tragedy like this will occur time and time again. A single crazy this time, but watch for muslim terrorists to start the same thing they used to get away with in other countries…..taking over entire schools for hostages, attacking churches like they do today. Every instance has the common feature of being a gun free killing zone that’s supposed to ‘keep these things from happening’. These laws are useless, we didn’t need them before these events and we damsure don’t need them now.
Steve

I went to the movies yesterday afternoon. The theater had the “no guns” signs up on the doors and I respected their wishes and left mine in the car. Normally I do not even go into a business that has the sign but I weighed the risk and went in anyway. I once paid more for a new TV across the street from a store that had the “no guns” signs and called to let them know.

A lot of people carry their guns in anyways and I have done so as well. Do I risk going to jail? Yes. Am I willing to go to jail instead of being unprotected? Yes.

When seconds count the police are only minutes away. Even with all the police at the theater that night for crowd control it still one and a half minutes for them to respond.

HH

When someone’s shooting at you and you have no way to defend yourself one and one half minutes is an eternity!!!
http://www.facebook.com/WizardKiller Mark Are Reynolds

FINALLY! Someone with BALLS!

http://comcast roger

If there was a group of traiined and armed people watching the movie maybe less would of been killed. with the internet a crazy can figure out how to make a bomb with what they have under the kitchen sink so dont blame it on guns, if you want to kill there are better ways.

Gary L

Roger,
SSSSHHHHH. Are you trying to get the internet banned. LOL

Nancy in Nebraska

It’s coming, regardless!

JDH

Colorado is a concealed carry state, but this paricular movie theater chain bans firearms form any of its locations nationwide unless carried by uniformed police officers. If it were not for this policy, there would probably have been armed citizens in the audience.

Jonathan

Exactly the problem. Most shopping malls, sporting venues, and movie theaters forbid carry (concealed or open) inside the property. Private property owners can choose to allow or not per their state law. Nutcases like this guy know that places where weapons are prohibited and large groups of people congregate are prime targets for their evil acts. So, it leaves people with one of three choices: petition the owners of these places to allow open/concealed carry in their property OR don’t go to places like these where weapons carry is prohibited by the property owner(s).

Personally, I prefer to open carry (which is allowed in Pennsylvania) as it is more comfortable for me and I prefer to let others know I am carrying for my safety and that of other people around me. If some would-be bad guy sees me carrying and decides to not execute his planned mayhem at the risk of me ending his sorry excuse for a life, so much the better. And for those anti-gunners in the crowd who get their panties in a twist because I am carrying, well if you really don’t want me to protect you, then I won’t.

Jonathan

Should have been one in two choices.
http://www.facebook.com/WizardKiller Mark Are Reynolds

There are more than two choices…ALWAYS. My third choice would be to ignore the theater or mall prohibition. After all, I am not going to pull a gun out unless I NEED to. So who is going to know besides me and God?
Nancy in Nebraska

Mark, unfortunately you would go to jail! Even if you saved everyone in the theatre, they would charge you with a felony. We’re supposed to roll over and do whatever the gunman says. I will say this, if everyone were armed it would really cut down the robberies etc… Currently, the bad guys know that no one will try to stop them.
afdbghq

The third choice should have been to ignore the no gun policy and carried anyway. The criminal ignores such stupid laws so why not the law abiding citizen
Kinetic1

Jonathan and Nancy,
Were I the sort who would commit armed robbery or assault, the people with visible guns would be the first I would shoot. If I knew that everyone had a weapon, I might not be so bold about holding up a public building, but I would know to shoot on sight anyone who came in while I was robbing their home.
Charles Moore

You are correct. Different States have different Laws regarding CCW . There are some States that have also gone to open carry. It is a fact that Crime has gone down an average of 30% in States that went from no CCW permits to CCW permits. Criminals are going to take the path of least resistance and if they are going to be in a situation where somebody has a visible weapon then they are going to take them out first so as not to be a threat.

JJ Swiontek

Actually, Colorado is an open-carry state with conceal-carry-by-permit and open-carry is banned in Denver, Boulder, and several cities that believe local rules supersede state Constitution. And less than 1% of the population have permits.
Dale left coast

I would bet the Shooter knew there would be no guns in the theatre . . .
No guns policies are an invitation to disaster . . .

nc

Dale if everyone carries their gun to the theatre some guy will fart some night and five of those legally armed but mentally ill types will shoot him where sits! If you must have the gun you must have the urge!!
afdbghq

nc says:

Dale if everyone carries their gun to the theatre some guy will fart some night and five of those legally armed but mentally ill types will shoot him where sits! If you must have the gun you must have the urge!!

So by your reasoning, if you play violent video games then you must have the urge to actually kill people.

If you enjoy reading action books then you must have the urge to kill people and will ultimately act on your urge.

Your reasoning is as flawed as you mental capabilities. Please never get a weapon of any kind because you would be the first to immediately use it in any situation without first evaluating the circumstances.

Gary L

In the words of Archie Bunker, maybe they would feel better if instead of being shot they were pushed out of windows. I’d bet that these anti gun nut jobs are steadfast in the hope that these shootings occur so they can try to convince the masses of morons that taking guns away from law abiding citizens will fix everything. The real issue is not about guns as much as it is about CONTROL.

Ret Sgt

You are right, but for those who believe… no proof is necessary. For those that don’t… no proof is enough.
Rod

You see the horrible results in Colorado, but in gun free countries things like this and worse happen. Take Norway; a guy dressed as a policeman went to an island resort area and shot 80 people, mostly children. The police didn’t arrive for over an hour, he could continue shoot as many as he could find. Being “gun free” definitely has disastrous results; no defense of self or innocents. I have a concealed carry permit, and while I don’t carry all the time, I do carry when I’m out fishing or hunting or family outings. Gun free zones are an invitation for “crazies” to start shooting, they know they will have little or no opposition for some time. You can’t legislate against insanity, or the committed criminal; they’ll find some way to do an evil deed. That might include flying airplanes into crowded buildings, shooting up a school, attacking people in a restaurant with a knife, or stalking a politician, committing a robbery and so on. “Crazies” and criminals in every country will get whatever weapon they need to do what they want to do. As has been proven many times Government cannot stop this kind of person(s).
afdbghq

The liberals/left gun control freaks only see an opportunity to push for more stricter gun control laws as a result of this terrible tragedy. If they would really look at what happened they would see:

1) the theatre has a no guns allowed policy in place.

2) the shooter ignored the policy

3) the law abiding citizens obeyed the policy

4) the shooter knew he would not have to worry about anybody in the theatre shooting back at him

This incident only proves that no matter how strict the gun control laws are, the criminal will simply ignore the law and use a weapon to commit their crime regardless of how many and how strict the laws are.

Also more people die in automobile accidents every year than are killed by guns. Where is the outcry demanding that automobiles be outlawed?

More people are injured in bathtub accidents each year than are killed by guns each year. Where is the demand to outlaw bathtubs?

There are many more examples but no one is advocating outlawing or restricting any of these items.

Kinetic1

afdbghq,
Your right, the shooter knew he wouldn’t have anyone shooting back, but what if it had been more difficult to amass the sorts of weapons he was carrying? I have no problem with gun ownership or the right to get a CCW permit. Where I find issue is the ease with which anyone without a police record can go out and legally purchase weapons designed for combat. I love a nice Winchester 44 and I enjoy shooting my little AR7 back pack rifle, but why do you need an AR15 with a 100 round clip?

As for those of you using the tired old argument about banning cars and baseball bats, we get it; anything can be used as a weapon. The point is that these other products have a regular, useful purpose other than killing. I’m not suggesting that you give up your hunting rifle, or even a pistol bought for self defense, but why should it be so easy to purchase weapons who’s sole purpose is to get off as many rounds as possible in 60 seconds? Had this guy been limited to these more sane weapons the number of people shot would have been greatly reduced and, if they had allowed legal carry then an armed viewer would have had a much better chance of stopping him.
E. Blake

We should be able to buy these weapons, because we want to, we like to go out on the weeks and have fun with them! And all you are doing by letting them ban one single weapon, is letting the camals nose in the tent. Besides 1000′s of these weapons are owned across this country, and a couple of occupier types go out and do this crap,
and we all should pay for their crimes???

Michael J.

An armed society is a polite society, taking our guns will not make us safer. Humans were killing one another long before guns came along. After all, Cain used a rock to kill Able.

Flashy

“One armed person in the movie theater where James Holmes went on his psychotic killing spree would have had the opportunity to greatly level the playing field. ”

Ummm…that really makes me feel all safe and cozy. If some lunatic opens fire with an armory he was able to buy because of deranged people insisting on having free unfettered access to guns to satisfy a diminished testosterone level…or fanticizing about being Davy Crockett … in a crowded theatre…the toll of dead or injured would have doubled as the bullets flew everywhere.

Jehosaphat! Are y’all totally off the deep end?

I had a conversation about this subject the other day. And the guy said ‘yeah, but I need to have a gun to stop the bad guys. Did you hear about that armed robbery?”….when reminded it was on the east coast and he was on the west coast..that he ws never robbed nor ever thought he was in danger except when he put himself there…he remained insistent that “some lunatic’ will think he’s a super hero and try to stop someone…and he’ll have to jump in to gather the glory of stopping a crime.

Jeesh….lunacy. It cannot be described any other way.

Native Texan

Flashy, you would have a completely different viewpoimt if you had ever been in a situation such as this. I will repeat a truth that you seem to have missed. Guns don’t kill people; people kill people. I have owned at least one gun for over 60 years and have never worried about a situation such as this because I am prepared to deal with lunatics if the need arises. Your views are those of a naive sheep waiting to be preyed upon. Wake up, fool. Be prepared.
angelwannabe

Either your paid well or you lay awake at night thinking some of this stuff up flashy or whatevera your name is today…its A right to protect ourselves and property and to help those that cannot protect themselves….(your guns for glory tactics aren’t working, so throw that out!) and I’ll use what ever means I have to do so, whether I have permission or not!!!!…AS Someone stated above… free people DON’T NEED PERMISSION!
http://www.facebook.com/WizardKiller Mark Are Reynolds

“Jeesh….lunacy. It cannot be described any other way.”
Seems like you are doing a good job of describing yourself.
Ret Sgt

Each and every year there are thousands of incidents where peoples lives are saved and crimes are thwarted and/or stopped by citizens who are legally armed. Since this goes against the liberal agenda, it is rarely, if ever, reported by the mainstream media. FBI statistics show that the locales with the strictest gun laws have the highest incidence of gun related crimes and those open carry states have the lowest. These stats also show a firearm error rate by police nationwide at 11%, whereas the error rate for armed civilians is only 2%. Therefore, firearms are generally 5 times safer in the hands of civilians than in the hands of the police.

Gun-control laws don’t control guns, they disarm potential victims. Gun control is an ineffective tool in fighting crime because it leaves people vulnerable to criminals. Decades of such laws haven’t stopped crime or made us any safer. Criminals won’t be deterred by gun-control laws. Since the passage of the 1968 gun control act and similar laws, violent crimes, such as murder and robbery have risen drastically.

As a judge stated in the 1878 Arkansas case of Wilson v. State, “Common sense dictates that inanimate objects, such as guns, are not responsible for human behavior. We don’t hold a match responsible for arson or a camera responsible for pornography. We rightly hold the people who misuse these tools liable. The same should be true for guns.”

When you become emotionally attached to your opinions, you do not form them, they form you.
Wyatt

Native Texan , there is no reasoning with Flashy . No matter what argument you present he will twist it and turn it to his own point of view . The guy is a left wing Koolaid drinking drone . His posistion will always be the left wing control the people point of view .
The theater in question has a similar left wing policy and declared themselves a gun free zone . I suppose this is what they think is going to keep anyone from smuggling a weapon in . As it was the individual in question entered dressed as a normal movie goer , exited through a fire door which he propped open and went to his vehicle dressed in his body armor gas mask and kevlar helmet . Retrieved his weapons , and teargas cannisters then returned through the same door 15 mins later .
Would an armed citizen have made a difference , I can’t say . But had the thought that there was possibly an armed citizen in the theater might have given the shooter pause about committing his crime . And to those who do not know it , an off-duty police officer is required to be prepared for emergencies at all times . This means he must have a firearm on his person even when off duty . True , they are trained for response to this sort of situation and Joe Citizen is not . However one or two citizens who take their ownership of firearms seriously and have invested in the safety and proper response tactics may just well have stopped this guy body armor or not . Even a small caliber bullet can produce a hard and jarring blow to body armor . And a larger round can break ribs and inflict great pain . Had an armed individual been on hand to return fire a lot less people would not have been wounded and fourteen others might be alive .
Sorry to tell Flasher , that dispite what Hollywood , the gun grabbers Hillary and the left tell you , an armed puplic is a safe public and a polite public . You get in someones face and you may have to back it up . And if you research the history of the west . You find very , very few actual gunfights and shootouts , and they were mostly involving lawmen in the course of their duty .
And actually , having followed comments Flasher Boy makes on a wide variety of topics , I have come to the conclusion that if one were to say its dark out , he would argue its broad daylight . he is simply one of those disagreeable types who likes to create discord and unrest . Hmm , a lot like the shooter in Aurora . A better question to ask would be to ask , how does a collage dropout get the $20,000 or so dollars to make his equipment purchases over a four month period . and as it is reported that he only made four large purchases in that period how did it not raise some government eyebrows .
Sorry Flashy , but I have to suspect that even with all the gun grab laws in place , this demented shooter would have somehow gotten his arsenal and carried out his crime . It simply smacks of a much bigger plot and well thought out than a med student would come up with and better equipped that most SWAT teams . Be interesting to see what his trial produces . Or will the DOJ step in and wisk him away to a private local after his mock trial ? Gun Walking failed , the White House is in trouble with its record . What better than some distraction . Especially with a UN plot to disarm us vote coming up .
Think about that Flasher , especially when they try to take our government .
Firefight

“Ummm…that really makes me feel all safe and cozy. If some lunatic opens fire with an armory he was able to buy because of deranged people insisting on having free unfettered access to guns to satisfy a diminished testosterone level…or fanticizing about being Davy Crockett … in a crowded theatre…the toll of dead or injured would have doubled as the bullets flew everywhere.”

You mean like the incident in Ocala, FL where two black, masked men entered an internet cafe with a gun and a baseball bat with the intent of robing the place and the customers only to find out that there was one armed citizen who KNEW what he was doing? He managed to shoot both of the perps, placing them in the hospital without harming a single other person on the premisis. Moronic people like you who know absolutely ZERO about self defense are always spouting what they think is right and in fact you know NOTHING about reversing the flow of blood. That theater has a “No Guns on Premisis” policy. Did that make any difference to James Holmes? Hell no! Only the good, honest, law abiding citizens observed this restriction and what did it get them? Flashy, stop being so led by the nose and look at the reality. IF, and I say IF there had been even one concealled carrying citizen in that audience who deployed his firearm and actually returned fire, it would have at least neutralized the situation long enough to allow more people to get out of the theater. That would have been the surprise that Holmes would NOT have been expecting. My personal carry gun, a Glock 23, has the Crimson Trace grip laser on it. I would have aimed at his eyes for a head shot and it would have, at the very least, blinded him or drawn his attention away from the others and toward me while I attempted to neutralize the entire threat with my head shot. Believe me Flashy, people like this deranged James Holmes love people who think like you, who cower and hate people like me who are hell bent on ruining their plans.

P.S. My testerone level is just fine…….I am not deranged in my thinking. Only people like James Holmes and perhaps you, ARE. Davey Crockett died at the Alamo in a heroic stance for all men’s freedoms, something YOU will never understand and your assumption that the death toll would have doubled is testimony to your total lack of knowledge of dealing with such threats. Go get a gun, contact a self defense traning facility, go through the course. Then you will have some idea as to what the rest of us know.
ernest

flashys just one that thinks he knows whats best for all of us, he thinks that he is a lot smarter the the ones that drafted the constution and wants to correct all their mistakes.
TML

FLashy says, “…the toll of dead or injured would have doubled as the bullets flew everywhere.

Jehosaphat! Are y’all totally off the deep end?”

Bullets were already flying everywhere, genius. It would have been better to have some flying his direction. That wouldn’t have doubled the death toll, it would have added one very important one that started the whole thing.

It’s not off the deep end

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TufS87KZYg&feature=share
Wil

Seems more likely to me that hoplophobia is the result of diminished testosterone.Guns are loud and scary to the weak-minded.
romeyers

I started to take offence to this then noticed who it was and was going to ignore it, but then all you people did just what he wanted you to do, he’s a troll and you people always take the bait.
CZ52

“Your views are those of a naive sheep waiting to be preyed upon.”

No Texan, his views are the views he is paid to parrot by those who would eliminate ever more of our rights and freedoms.
Nadzieja Batki

romeyers, responding to Flashy is not necessarily being directed by him as much as he wishes it to be so. His posts are more of bragging to his Leftist handlers and buddies that he is a bright boy and has so much to say. The smaller the rooster the louder the crowing.
Dale left coast

Flash . . . once again you demonstrate you are pathetically uninformed. One guy in the first few rows with a gun could have fired numerous shots which may not have killed the loon but surely would have knocked him over and distracted his attention . . . a good shot could have put one between the eyes and ended the issue.
phideaux

Nadzieja and Flashy certainly crows loud. In fact one could draw the conclusion he crows so loud in an attempt to make up for his inadequacy in the “rooster” area.
Nadzieja Batki

phideaux, reread your post. I may need insulting at times but must you put me in the same catagory as Flashy.
Patriot1776

And just to add, if there had been a chance of at least one armed person in the theatre, this coward would probably not have attempted to go in. It takes no courage to walk into a room full of people that you know are not armed and shoot at them. This person doesn’t have that kind of courage. He wouldn’t shoot at someone that might shoot back.
DaveH

Yes Flashman, you are indeed a lunatic. Statistics show that the more guns there are in society, the less crime there is. But then, your handlers don’t want people to know that, do they?
http://www.johnlott.org/
DaveH

Jeesh, that was a load of fabricated fact, Flashman. Why don’t you tell us your sniper story again?
http://mgmnace.wordpress.com mgmnace

Flashy: I think that you get a bad rap and for the record, you are not always wrong, however this time you are way off the mark and I suggest you think about all of the reply’s you have received because each and every one of them are correct. Check those FBI stats you will see there are more compelling reasons for responsible concealed carry then not.

Responsible gun owners know that the 4th rule of gun safety is to be sure of the target and what is behind/around it. Responsible gun owners understand gun safety and don’t indiscriminately fire their weapons in all directions. Two or three armed citizens in that theater would have ended the incident before it got started regardless of the fact that he had body amour and Vicodin to protect him from gunfire.
Vicki

“The theater in question has a similar left wing policy and declared themselves a gun free zone . I suppose this is what they think is going to keep anyone from smuggling a weapon in .”

The theater in question believes that signs actually work. Kind of like this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7pGt_O1uM8
Vicki

romeyers says:
“…all you people did just what he wanted you to do, he’s a troll and you people always take the bait.”

Actually we are rarely talking to flashy. He is a paid or unpaid agent provocateur. What we do is ignore him when he sounds insane and respond to the insanity of his arguments when they might sound reasonable to other readers.

We have even asked that he not be banned from the site cause he is such a good example of the theory that liberalism is a mental disorder.

Either that or he is a conservative plant to try and make the liberal look bad. If so he is very good at it.
junkmail

walking around hoping the next crime victim is not me would not be pleasant. I am not a mark or a sheep. Reality is that if I am armed, I will defend myself, my family, or anyone near me from harm. If I get injured or killed, I went out living a full life and by my principles.
A little old lady with a concealed weapon can take out a criminal just as fast as I cold. The police will get there in about 15 minutes. I would rather be questioned by the police than have my family quizzed for my obituary
phideaux

Sorry Nadzieja I could have phrased it better.
http://www.facebook.com/jerry.sutton.3304 Jerry Sutton

Have you ever looked down the barrel of a gun from the wrong end….and felt so
helpless that you wet your pants. With the knowledge of having a conceal weapon,
I learned enough how to duck…draw weapon and discharge it at the bad guy before
he can even blink. Its called self-defense…you should try it. I feel safer.
Charles Moore

Again and Again. The standard 4 hour course for a CW permit with no firearm qualification on the range is a joke. it is possible for a person to get a CCW permit for years and never have fired a gun. All you have to do is keep renewing it by paying the license fee each time it expires. To say that “ANYBODY” sitting in a dark theater with a shooter spraying bullets and lobbing grenades could be taken out if somebody in the theater had a CCW permit is not correct.

focihasek

NRA must realize that that not enough to fight for gunl licencel for people who
believing it’s a status simbol, not an obligation to use it.Where were the NEA
members to stop the 5-6 mass murder case? Nobody need gun to show up
but don’t use it.NRA will earn my respect when a member s t o p a mass
murderer not enough to blackmail the legistration for no reason !!!

Nancy in Nebraska

NEA??? Would that be the National Education Association??? Or the National Endowment for the Arts??? ?????
Nadzieja Batki

You are very immature in your reasoning. To keep everyone safe in their homes and places of business, large portion of the population would have to be police and military and stationed in homes and businesses of the people to keep them safe from nutters.
It would be better if it was required (with fines attached) that people be trained on weapons of their choosing and have a required amount of ammo on hand for their own defense.
Wyatt

Might be nice if focihasek could post a coherant sentance and get his organizations correct . Perhaps we would understand his meaning.
CZ52

focihasek sounds like the third grade son or daughter of an extreem anti gun couple trying to repeat what mommy and daddy discussed last night.
Vicki

Nadzieja Batki says:
“It would be better if it was required (with fines attached) that people be trained on weapons……”

There was such a time. Liberals convinced the public to drop Selective Service around 1973. Come to think of it mass shootings became more common after that. And after the GCA of 1968. Co-incidence?
Michael J.

fosamax,
Your Osteo has corupted brain function, consult your physician.
Michael J.

Nadzieja Batki says:
“It would be better if it was required (with fines attached) that people be trained on weapons of their choosing and have a required amount of ammo on hand for their own defense.”

No, it is better the way it is with people making these decisions and keep the government out of it.
Kinetic1

Vicki,
Selective service did not teach all Americans, just those who didn’t have wealthy or powerful parents who could keep them out of the armed services.
Vicki

Kinetic1 says:
“Vicki,
Selective service did not teach all Americans, just those who didn’t have wealthy or powerful parents who could keep them out of the armed services.”

And which would you prefer? 99% trained or 1% (about what we have now) trained?
http://www.facebook.com/jerry.sutton.3304 Jerry Sutton

The NRA does not have to defend its-self. Its standing up for our rights for us to
defend ourselves. A nut will kill anyone with anything just to get his name on the
media…and if I needed help in the middle of the night, I’m on my own. The small
town cops are so busy writing tickets (its the only money-maker they have) that
they really wouldn’t know what to do. So, it is up to me to defend myself and my
family…and I can if I have a weapon. Without one, I’m helpless…and maybe I’ll
have to witness something happening to my wife, like Willie Horton…remember
him….set free by the gove of Mass….then continued his raping and killing.
Damn…I’ve had enough of you God-damned liberal democrats. I’m armed and
I feel safer.

Michael J.

Flashy,
You pink panty liberals reaction to these things is soooo predictable. Political Correctness has robbed you of your mascalinity. Three people in that theatre used their own bodies to shield their loved ones, you probably would have just melted into a puddle of pee. Man-up and grow a pair. Because right now your fear is more obvious than a banana in a bikini. If George Washington shared your lack of cahoneys, we’d still be speaking British!!!

Now run along, ya bother me!

Michael J.

According to some, there is something very different going on here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwuJh7wMWkY

http://www.facebook.com/WizardKiller Mark Are Reynolds

Very good possibility!
Nancy in Nebraska

I’ve read several other related things. You have to admit that it’s very convenient that this would happen NOW, just as the small arms treaty is getting so much attention. I don’t believe in coincidences. Another thing to look at: I read that the guns, body armor, ammo etc…that he had would cost around $20,000. Where did he get that kind of money? And he was a graduate student in neuro sciences? He was going to school on a federal grant or scholorship. I think we need to take a very hard look at this. Was mk ultra involved? I think that our current government is very interested in taking arms away from it’s citizenry. I think that the vast majority of sheeple will now think that it’s a great idea. I think that they are planning to disarm the people very soon. Look out!

nc

Nancy, I am writing a journal on things that may be happening “real soon” from things I have heard predicted here> You justed added being disarmed by the federal government! Could you be a little more specific than “real soon”!!!!!!! Would that be BEFORE or AFTER Obama calls off the November elections? Before or after he declares himself a dictator? Would that before or after he sends the first political prisoners to the FEMA camps? Would that be before or after the culminaton of the 1913 conspiracy? Would that be before or after the second coming? I hate being
“out of order” !!! I haven’t been at this site for all that long so if you have some other conspiracies that I may have missed please pass them to me.If you don’t mind, please put them in order from the next that will happen to the one after that> If any are more remote that that 1913 thiny don’t bother since I will be 77 in two weeks and probbly won’t be here to suffer the consequences what ever they are?1913 and we’re still waiting????
Charles Moore

I doubt that it has anything to do with the U.N. small arms treaty. The mother upon being interviewed by the Police stated that ” you have the right person”Now the Family has a Lawyer who says that the mother was only referring to him being her son. Nonsense. The first reaction would normally be ” There is no way my son is guilty of such an atrocity”.

Average Joe

These were my observations from Saturday,

Average Joe says:

July 21, 2012 at 2:37 pm

First,

My condolences to the victims and thier families, may God be with them in this, thier hour of need.

Now, down to business:

Hmmm….two .40 cal. handguns, a shotgun , an AR-15, bullet proof vest and helmet…all standard police / military issue…hmmmmm.

According to the articles that I’ve read (so far)…he bought 6000 rounds of ammo from…local shops… and…. the internet…hmmm… ( any ammo or firearms purchases made by internet order…must be delivered to a licensed local shop and picked up from the local shop the same as any other ammo or firearm puchases…it’s the law) sounds like liberal media hype to me to me. Next consider the apartment booby traps, the fact the he gave up without a fight and told authorities about those booby traps in his apartment…how strange is this behavior?

Considering everything that has been wriiten and portrayed by the media about the shooter ( an awful lot of info within a very short time about the perp)…I can see only one answer… the CIA… MK-Ultra program ( a sleeper agent). After all, they are getting ready to vote on the U.N. Small Arms Treaty…and they need something polarizing to justify thier votes…and this is a perfectly timed catastrophy…I smell government rats on the loose…. AKA the Devil is in the details…AKA a false flag attack….anyone who thinks otherwise, should probably look into: Operation Northwoods, the sinking of the Maine, the attack on the USS Liberty, the second Gulf of Tonkin attack (which never happened) just to name a few…to truly know what our government is capable of doing to it’s own citizens in order to achieve an agenda…and this agenda is total disarmament of the people of the world (except government, of course) and the subverting of the second amendment…which was written to prevent the tyranny of government.

A LITTLE GUN HISTORY

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. >From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
——————————

In 1911,

Turkey established gun control. >From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
——————————

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
——————————

China established gun control in 1935. >From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
——————————

Guatemala established gun control in 1964. >From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
—- ————- ————-

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
——————————

Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
—————————–

Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.

——————————

You won’t see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information.

Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens.

Take note my fellow Americans, before it’s too late!

The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind them of this history lesson.

With guns, we are ‘citizens’. Without them, we are ‘subjects’.

During WW II the Japanese decided not to invade

America because they knew most Americans were ARMED!

If you value your freedom, please spread this anti gun-control message to all of your friends.

The purpose of fighting is to win.
There is no possible victory in defense.
The sword is more important than the shield, and skill is more important than either.
The final weapon is the brain.

All else is supplemental.

SWITZERLAND ISSUES EVERY HOUSEHOLD A GUN!
SWITZERLAND ‘S GOVERNMENT TRAINS EVERY ADULT THAT THEY ISSUE A RIFLE TO.

As passed by the Congress:

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.

The statement: “A well-regulated militia, being necessary for the security of a free state,”
is often misunderstood to mean that you need to be in a militia in order to own firearms. Well, point in-fact, every male of draft age who is of sound body and mind is considered a member of the “unorganized militia” according to the law, but that’s irrelevant, because the second statement:
“the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”
is the important part. This statement is the crux of the amendment and ensures that the individual right to bear arms is not infringed upon. Now, the way this sentence is constructed (in total), the right of the people allows for the well-regulated militia. The militia is a byproduct of the right to bear arms, not a prerequisite. Here is the grammatical break down from the prof:

[ Copperud:] The words “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,” contrary to the interpretation cited in your letter of July 26, 1991, constitute a present participle, rather than a clause. It is used as an adjective, modifying ” militia,” which is followed by the main clause of the sentence (subject “the right,” verb “shall”). The right to keep and bear arms is asserted as essential for maintaining a militia.
In reply to your numbered questions:

[Schulman: (1) Can the sentence be interpreted to grant the right to keep and bear arms solely to "a well-regulated militia"?;]

[ Copperud:] (1) The sentence does not restrict the right to keep and bear arms, nor does it state or imply possession of the right elsewhere or by others than the people; it simply makes a positive statement with respect to a right of the people.

[Schulman: (2) Is "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" granted by the words of the Second Amendment, or does the Second Amendment assume a preexisting right of the people to keep and bear arms, and merely state that such right "shall not be infringed"?;]

[ Copperud:] (2) The right is not granted by the amendment; its existence is assumed. The thrust of the sentence is that the right shall be preserved inviolate for the sake of ensuring a militia.

[Schulman: (3) Is the right of the people to keep and bear arms conditioned upon whether or not a well-regulated militia is, in fact, necessary to the security of a free State, and if that condition is not existing, is the statement "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" null and void?;]

[ Copperud:] (3) No such condition is expressed or implied. The right to keep and bear arms is not said by the amendment to depend on the existence of a militia. No condition is stated or implied as to the relation of the right to keep and bear arms and to the necessity of a well-regulated militia as requisite to the security of a free state. The right to keep and bear arms is deemed unconditional by the entire sentence.

[Schulman: (4) Does the clause "A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State," grant a right to the government to place conditions on the "right of the people to keep and bear arms," or is such right deemed unconditional by the meaning of the entire sentence?;]

[ Copperud:] (4) The right is assumed to exist and to be unconditional, as previously stated. It is invoked here specifically for the sake of the militia.

[Schulman: (5) Which of the following does the phrase " well-regulated militia" mean: "well-equipped," "well-organized," "well-drilled," "well-educated," or "subject to regulations of a superior authority"?]

[ Copperud:] (5) The phrase means “subject to regulations of a superior authority”; this accords with the desire of the writers for civilian control over the military.

[Schulman: If at all possible, I would ask you to take into account the changed meanings of words, or usage, since that sentence was written two-hundred years ago, but not to take into account historical interpretations of the intents of the authors, unless those issues can be clearly separated.]

[ Copperud:] To the best of my knowledge, there has been no change in the meaning of words or in usage that would affect the meaning of the amendment. If it were written today, it might be put: “Since a well-regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be abridged.”
[Schulman:] As a “scientific control” on this analysis, I would also appreciate it if you could compare your analysis of the text of the Second Amendment to the following sentence,
“A well-schooled electorate, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and read Books, shall not be infringed.”

My questions for the usage analysis of this sentence would be,

(1) Is the grammatical structure and usage of this sentence, and the way the words modify each other, identical to the Second Amendment’s sentence?; and

(2) Could this sentence be interpreted to restrict “the right of the people to keep and read Books” only to “a well-educated electorate” – for example, registered voters with a high-school diploma?]

[ Copperud:] (1) Your “scientific control” sentence precisely parallels the amendment in grammatical structure.
(2) There is nothing in your sentence that either indicates or implies the possibility of a restricted interpretation.

Got it? Good.

The police will always be there in minutes…when seconds count.

An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may
have to back up his acts with his life.
Robert A.
Heinlein

Before the liberal, anti- gun dweebs start whining and calling me names…quite frankly, I don’t care about your opinions…I’ve considered the source….and realize that you folks are quite simply…. delusional.

As well as:

Average Joe says:

July 22, 2012 at 12:59 pm

Kate8 ,
The whole unemployed thing kinda bugged me as well ( I didn’t comment on that,at the time I posted,I felt that I was long winded as it was)….how does an unemployed person buy all of this weaponry, ammo and tactical gear? It just doesn’t make any sense to me.
Also, I read all of your links yesterday and found it odd that they issued an alert about possible Theater shootings in May…the same time that this person supposedly started buying all of these goodies….quite odd in my opinion.

.40 cal. glock pistol @ $400-500 each times two $800 – $1000
Remington Model 870 shotgun @ $630 – $1000
Colt Model AR-15 @ $1500- $2000
3000 rounds of .40 cal. ammo @ $15 per 50 round box= 60 boxes @ $15 ea.=$900
300 rounds .12 ga. shotgun shells ( per 25 round box)@ $7.15= 12 boxes @$7.15 ea=$85.80

3000 rounds .223 cal. ammo @ $133 per 300 round box= 10 boxes @ $1,330

So far, bare minimum, we have:
$800
$630
$1500
$900
$85.80
$1,330……

Total $5245.80

This does not include tactical gear (ie. BP vest, helmet, ammo pouches extended magazines, bomb making ingredients and so forth)….grand total after adding these things is somewhere between $8000 – $10,000
I do not recall hearing that he was on unemployment (only that he was having problems finding a job after graduation), but if he was, how did he pay for all of this, while paying his rent, utilities, food and other nessessities on unempolyment? Answer: Someone was supplying it to him.

Best Wishes,

AJ

JJ Swiontek

“( any ammo or firearms purchases made by internet order…must be delivered to a licensed local shop and picked up from the local shop the same as any other ammo or firearm puchases…it’s the law)”

Not so. In Colorado (as in most of the United States), delivery of ammo can be made directly to your front door. The exception is New Jersey, California, and (maybe) Massachusetts.

And any purchases via credit card is a delayed payment that he has no intention of repaying.
RFP

Wow! Now you are someone who did their research, unlike that moron on the News who said the shooter was a member of The Tea Party….what an arse….. Thanks for the great information
CZ52

JJ Swiontek you are correct about the ammunition. He was correct about the firearms having to go through a dealer.
Robert

This is very good information for us that I had forgot about & for keeping our 2nd Ammendment strong.
I think every gun owner should have thier gun visible & be armed @ all times for everyones protection. Also be able to go in or anywhere you choose. This act would, I think make the criminal think twice. I too think there’s more to these actions & timing that don’t add up & more maneuvers by the New World Order in our faces.
glocker

Not that it matters in this case, but California allows for the home delivery of ammo. There is no middleman ie. picking it up at a licensed dealer. I think you are being generous regarding prices, on the average we pay about 10% more. Lastly buying the weapons and sundries if purchased with a credit card explains how he was able to afford it. The only part that does not make sense is why would he warn the police about the booby-traps? Of course he may be mad as a hatter and not sensible at all based on his other behavior, or was it just professional courtesy?….
Average Joe

glocker,
You are correct, I was being generous with prices. I went to several different sites online and used the lowest prices I could find based on buying in bulk quantities. I did the same for the armaments.
According to reports that I have heard and read, the weapons were purchased through two online outlets, so they had to be picked up locally…which seems silly to me ( since they could be bought locally for about the same price and not have to have it shipped). It almost seems as if someone is TRYING to leave a longer paper trail.

Best Wishes,
AJ
http://mgmnace.wordpress.com mgmnace

Thanks for the info AJ.
Speak2Truth

Consider the effectiveness of Scopolamine to turn a person into a politically useful monster.

I was horrified to hear of Hillary Clinton and her Secret Service people partying it up in a brothel in Colombia where the stuff is commonly used by spies, criminals and so on…

But THIS guy – so very convenient, since the exposure of Operation Gunrunner robbed the Left of using its deadly results as a propaganda tool against American gun ownership.
JeffH

JJ Swiontek, ammunitions purchases can be delivered directly to the buyer in most states without restrictions but there are a few states, counties and cities that do have restrictions in place…know your state laws.
http://www.facebook.com/jerry.sutton.3304 Jerry Sutton

A really good piece Average Joe….it is certainly worth forwarding to everybody. It
wouldn’t do any good sending it to any liberal or socialist democrat…they’re tooooo
brain-dead to understand.

Vicki

With more than 60 million gun owners in the US if the world is full of really bad people as Sam says, I observe that there are only a very few in the US or there would be a lot more stories about it. And a LOT more dead people.

There is, of course, the issue of abortion. But that isn’t caused by guns or gun owners either.

Chester

Vicki, will NOT say abortions are NOT caused by gun OWNERS. Have known far too many country lads who knocked girl up, then paid out the wazoo to help her eliminate the problem. And YES, those country boys most definitely ARE gun owners. The biggest CAUSE of abortion is all the laws regarding how to make contraception hard to get and harder to use. Also, for your benefit, how many drug stores in YOUR area carry the morning after pill, another abortion preventer? Or are they all owned by conscientious objectors? Seems like too many people want the birth control pill banned because it “prevents the fertilized egg from implanting”, which they call abortion, and that is the whole deal with the morning after pills, too. If you are going to jump on the anti-abortion bandwagon, like so many of the right, we can continue this discussion at a later date.

Vicki

Chester says:
“Vicki, will NOT say abortions are NOT caused by gun OWNERS.”

Chester has an interesting but irrelevant point. Some abortionists may well be gun owners.
The people who pay them may be gun owners too but the abortionist is the one who causes the abortion.

I should have said “…But that isn’t caused by most guns or most gun owners either…”

I have never heard of an abortion using a gun as the tool. Usually such abortions are properly labeled as MURDER of the unborn person. Ironic actually.

DaveH

Sam says — “The world is full of mentally unhinged, immoral, desperate, criminal and sadistic beings capable of horrific things”.
Yep, and many of them are leading our country.

http://httpaol.com sean murry

you got that right dave.

E. Blake

English Warning To Americans: DONT GIVE UP YOUR GUNS!
http://wramsite.com/video/video/show?id=3567481:Video:1343246&xgs=1&xg_source=msg_share_video
Bucky Roo

In reality I’m not a gun enthusiast, don’t own one and probably never will but I do realize one thing.. If guns are banned, only criminals will have guns and who are the worst criminals in our society today? You got it, our own g’ment. Do Not Allow The Feds To Take Away Your Right To Bear Arms!!

http://northwoodsmomblog.blogspot.com/ Tanya

So true.
Sirian

Absolutely! Now what will come of the Armed Trade Treaty? Another door opened? Take advantage of a crisis? Sound familiar? Hillary is grinning . . . Wait and watch.

Nadzieja Batki

The scenario in Aurora, CO created by this nutter will not benefit Hillary Clinton and her anti gun crowd.

http://www.facebook.com/WizardKiller Mark Are Reynolds

They are only “leading” because we have not tired them and hung them….YET.

http://www.facebook.com/WizardKiller Mark Are Reynolds

That is TRIED. This place needs an edit capability.
E. Blake

They question here is who is going to hang who first???
Do you call this reviewing a bill???
We all need to be prepared for these morons, they think their lives have more value than us lowly slaves…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KaztexKNf_o&feature=share

Bill Roberts

1) Why do they always seem to strike in areas where concealed weapons are prohibited?
2) Why do cities ( Chicago, Washington DC, etc.) with the most firearm restrictions have the most gun violence?
3) Do venues that restrict self-defense assume liability?
4) How much time do have to respond to a violent situation?
5) Has the government, education system, or the media offered any suggestions on how to respond?
6) How do the Israel’s prepare for these types of events?
7) Who is responsible for your family’s safety?
8) Mexico does not allow personal fire arms. How is that working out for them?
9) Which governments have killed the most of their people? (estimated @ 50 Million in the last century)
10) Did they disarm them first?
11) How would you learn how to defend yourself?
12) Who do you believe is currently in charge of the earth? (Hint: Prince of the air)

skippy

Bill, your question #3 is right on point! Will the victims sue the theater since they were not permitted to enter with a firearm? (I assume it IS posted out front)
Charles Moore

I have a permit to carry a concealed weapon. It would have made no difference in that theater. The guy was covered from head to toe in body armor. The news reported that he bought the body armor on the Internet from a company that supplies them to the Military and the Police. . So why was the body armor sold to him? Another news article stated that when the mother of the shooter was interviewed in California that she said “You have the right person”. So is this another case such as Arizona where there was no only indications of Aberrant behavior but his college wrote letters to the shooter and his parents that he would no be allowed to return unless cleared by a Mental Health official. Yet nobody followed up. Another problem is people with an Agenda using the incidents for Political excuses. At least one main stream Media outlet immediately said the shooter was a member of the Tea Party in Colorado. A simple check would have verified that the last name was the same but they were not the same person

Some people should not be allowed to obtain a CCW permit. Take George Zimmerman in Florida. A person is not allowed to display their weapon or put themselves in that position unless their life or the life of somebody else is in imminent danger. This situation did not exist when Zimmerman saw Martin while driving his car. If it would have been myself and I observed suspicious activity then I would have called the Police. I would have observed in my vehicle from a distance until such situation would have happened.
Vicki

Charles Moore says:
“I have a permit to carry a concealed weapon. It would have made no difference in that theater. The guy was covered from head to toe in body armor.”

Your permit should be revoked you have no need of it as you would not use it for its intended purpose.

Charles Moore: “The news reported that he bought the body armor on the Internet from a company that supplies them to the Military and the Police. . So why was the body armor sold to him?”

Cause it is not illegal. And body armor does not prevent the intense pain of being shot. So you would have made a difference had you been there and bothered to draw and fire your weapon. He would have been distracted by the pain giving you time to close the distance and others time to escape.

I notice that you have spent a lot of time in this thread pushing the internet sales element. That tells me that you are being paid to get folk upset about internet sales so that the government can demand more control of the internet. Either that or you are one of the “folk” that the MSM is trying to get riled up to demand more government control of the internet.

Charles Moore: “Another problem is people with an Agenda using the incidents for Political excuses.”
Quite true. There were a long list of incidents including Mayor Bloomberg, the attempt by liberal media hosts to implicate the Tea Party and a host of others.

Charles Moore: “Some people should not be allowed to obtain a CCW permit. Take George Zimmerman in Florida. A person is not allowed to display their weapon or put themselves in that position unless their life or the life of somebody else is in imminent danger.”

Interestingly Mr. Zimmerman (allegedly) did EXACTLY what you claim he should do yet you claim he is an example of someone who should not be allowed to exercise his fundamental right to carry the best tool for personal defense. Or don’t you think that someone larger and stronger than you beating you over the head with a sidewalk constitutes a clear and present danger to your life.
http://yahoo gator

a thinking person with common sense should know all the answers. i suppose that was the reason for your questionaire. i imagine there are quite a few who take the ‘obamanews anti-gun propaganda’ as gospel.
those same people who rely on ‘uncle sugar’ to provide their sustenance; then wonder where the food and water is after a hurricane, and why don’t the police stop the raping and robbing.
the answer to #6, the Israeli’s carry weapons EVERYWHERE, they are ALL welltrainedin self-defense of ALL kinds, and woe be the person that walks in a classroom to cause harm,cause the teacher can shoot!!
http://yahoo gator

its good the troops that faced hitler didn’t say ‘damn they got armor lets run’. not relevant? yes, it is relevant. combat takes many forms, but what it takes to win is attitude. there is always a weakness in your opponent, you find it, you exploit it, you win or you lose, but you DON’T cower in the corner and wait for your turn to die!
take MR. WILLIAMS, in Florida. HE didn’t cower in the corner, NO, HE drew his .380 semi-auto pistol and sent the would-be robbers/killers running! different circumstances? sure, but that 71 YEAR-OLD MAN, STOOD AND FOUGHT!! a TRUE AMERICAN HERO!
would he have done the same in a dark theater? yes, he would, and possibly with the same results! he may have also died, but he at least would have bought some time for the others.
GET SOME GUTS AMERICA! REMEMBER FLIGHT 93!!
http://yahoo gator

zimmerman was an idiot. he at first did what his neigborhood watch states you do, watch and report; however when he was told by the 911 operator to stand down, he didn’t. this led to the confrontation with trayvon williams, which got trayvon killed and will ultimately lead to zimmermans death.
of course trayvon was not the lawabiding 7 yearold the media would like you to think; he was a tatted-up gangbanger, the likes of which you would not want prowling around your neighborhood. its ‘hoods’ like him that force people to put up burgler bars, and buy shotguns.
Charles Moore

Nonsense. Zimmerman is an Idiot. For about a hundred dollars a year one can purchase Self Defense Insurance. Zimmerman put himself in this absurd neighborhood watch position with a gun and did not purchase it. He was not on watch patrol when he claims he spotted Zimmerman who he now claims was acting suspicious. There is Video of Martin inside the Store purchasing the items and Martin is not acting suspicious. Zimmerman did not call the Police until he exited his vehicle and started following Martin. Zimmerman Lied about his Funds at his first Bond hearing and also his U.S,Passport. Martin has no record except for cutting school and smoking M.J. Zimmerman could not have known even this.
David

Charles Moore – you really need to get your facts straight before mounting your high horse. The shooters Mom went on the news to correct the selective quoting, she was referring to herself when she said “you have the right person”. Seems like another case of selective quoting just like they did with Zimmerman – “he’s suspicious, he’s black”.

Speaking of which you claim Zimmerman displayed his gun in public. Wrong, his gun showed as a result of Trayvon’s ground and pound. Once he saw the gun, and threatened to kill Zimmerman there was only one option.

Whether firing back would have ended the massacre or not it’s a better option than the “shooting fish in a barrel” situation that occurred. I’d rather go down fighting than crying for help.

And yes I have a Florida carry permit.
Charles Moore

Nonsense. Florida Law requires that in order to display a weapon then the life of the CCW holder or somebody else must be in imminent danger. Zimmerman would not have exited that car if he did not have a gun in that area. The imminent danger did not exist when Zimmerman exited his car. We know that Zimmerman and his wife lied about their Funds and used Funds designated for his Defense for personal reasons. His own Lawyers stated he was “Untruthful ” on National T.V. sand that the promised not to do it again. Zimmerman turned in a U.S. Passport that he had declared “Lost” and kept the one that replaced it. Nobody knows what actually happened .Zimmerman has proven that he is “NOT” credible. He is facing 20 years in Prison iin Florida at the minimum if he s convicted of a any crime while firing a gun. I suggest that you need to forward your evidence to the Zimmerman Defense attorneys that Zimmerman s telling the truth. Zimmerman created the scenario when he exited the car and followed Zimmerman and Zimmerman has proven not to be credible regardless of what happened later., If I was coming from a store and somebody started following me then I would be apprehensive and I have a gun and a CCW permit. it was a Stupid move on that part also. There was no way that Zimmerman could have known whether Martin had a gun or not.
Vicki

David says:
“The shooters Mom went on the news to correct the selective quoting, she was referring to herself when she said “you have the right person”. Seems like another case of selective quoting just like they did with Zimmerman – “he’s suspicious, he’s black”.”

Very interesting. Was that NBC perchance? Do you have a link to your cite. It would be useful in discussion with liberals about how someone “should have known” that he was crazy. This is the flavor of the reports that make it seem like she did know.
Charles Moore

Nonsense. The usual response of a close family would be ” There is no way my child could have committed such an atrocity”. Why does the family need to hire a Lawyer to run interference for them?Why couldn’t the mother just say that this is what was meant by the response. Last I checked the Family had a Lawyer and the son had a “Public Defender”.
Vicki

Charles Moore the mind reader says:
“July 24, 2012 at 11:56 am

Nonsense. The usual response of a close family would be ” ”

Into profiling I see.
CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

“Bill Roberts,”

CITIES LIKE CHICAGO HAVE THE WORST GUN VIOLENCE BECAUSE NEGRO MALES ARE DETERMINED TO OWN GUNS, TOO. NEGRO MALES WITH NO CRIMINAL RECORD ARE MISTREATED IN GUN SHOPS. NEGRO MALES WITH CRIMINAL RECORDS ACQUIRE “ADVANTAGEOUS” ILLEGAL GUNS. COMMITTING CRIMES WITH “CLEAN-” ILLEGAL GUNS HAS RESULTED IN SEVERAL NEGRO MALES FREELY WALKING THE STREETS. YOU WOULD BE SURPRISED AT THE NUMBER OF HOMES WHERE “EX-CONS” LIVE, IN WHICH GUNSHOTS ARE FIRED IN CELEBRATION OF New Year’s Day AND Fourth of July.
Charles Moore

One of my Nephews is going to the University of Chicago Law school on a full Scholarship.He was told not to go within a few blacks of the campus at the risk of his own life. The campus itself has a large presence of police.State Senator Obama when he was a State Senator of Illinois sponsored Legislation only for Retired Police Officers to be able to carry a concealed weapon in order to get the endorsement of the Illinois Police unions in his run for U.S. Senator. In all the States where they have gone from no permits to permits there has been a 30% reduction in shootings on the average. I see on the news yesterday where the applications for gun permits has increased by 43% in Colorado.
Chester

Charles, you are wondering WHY the Aurora shooter’s family got a lawyer, right? First, they ARE a fairly well to do family, or their son would never have gotten a degree in neuro-science. Second, there are nuts like you out there who would like nothing better than to sue them for a few million dollars just because they “should have known” that their son was GOING TO KILL SOMEONE. If you have some money and you probably already have a lawyer you deal with on a halfway regular basis, it is only good sense to make arrangements for a bit more protection from money hungry, lawsuit happy lawyers who could care less about the facts of the case. And yes, there ARE some out there who fit that description, just as there are some who would defend you.
Charles Moore

You need to check your facts. I have seen nothing about the wealth of the Family. It has been announced that the shooter was attending the Colorado University on a Federal Grant so there is no evidence that the Parents are linked to paying for his tuition,One of my nephews graduated from the University of Texas at Austin with Honors. He had a perfect score on the LSAT. He is now attending the University of Chicago Law School on a full scholarship. No cost. He also had an offer from Harvard but not a full Financial Scholarship.it is very difficult to get a Federal Grant in Neuro Science.One has to be pretty sharp but there is no evidence that the Parents are wealthy and supported the shooter.

What we do know is that the Family has retained a lawyer. This Lawyer is running interference for them and only mentioned that “they love their son”. So if they are wealthy then why does the son still have a Public Defender? It is a simple question. There is a gag order where the shooter attended school and with anybody with which he had a close contact. Why is this? Who requested the gag order?Nobody requested a gag order concerning the shooter in Arizona who had problems. You are going to find out that the shooter in Aurora had unstable behavior somewhere along the line and it was ignored because people did not want to get involved. didn’t want any possible Liability or the family ignored it etc. Nobody wakes up overnight and loses it and decides to have a massacre.
Jim Coppock

re: “Prince of the air”

Has anyone considered that IF the guy was majoring in Neuroscience that he could (possibly) have been investigating occult influences on the human mind?

Dabbling in the occult has been shown to “open the door” to demonic influences/possession with devastating results.
Charles Moore

What evidence is there that he was dabbling in the occult?Neuro is “Nerve”. It doesn’t suggest the occult.

John Southwell

here here!

John the Libertarian

Reply to Charles Moore: 1st he was covered with body armor… HOWEVER, he had a gas mask on which meant a head shot WOULD have taken him out… also, I am moved that some of the victims were close enough to feel the hot ejected cartridges fall on their head(s)… why no flight 93 response? if there’s a high probability of your imminent death anyway & you’re that close, why not try wrestling with the monster to at least avert the death of others… maybe if someone had tried, the delay could have caused others to jump forward to minimize the losses as was done in Tucson when Con. Giffords was shot… it’s time for all of us to realize this can happen anywhere, anytime and learn the lesson to be prepared to ACT and TAKE ACTION IMMEDIATELY as the passengers did on flight 93… it’s THE ONLY way to stop these monsters… I’ll bet if he was wrestled, taking the gas mask off or better, breaking his neck with a rapid twist, the fatality count would have been far lower… cowering in fear NEVER STOPS THE MONSTERS
Charles Moore

Read the account. He was covered in head to toe with body armor. His head was covered by a “Ballistic Helmet”. This means that the gas mask was over the ” Ballistic Helmet”. The body armor on the head ie the ballistic helmet has to have openings so you can see and breathe .Tear Gas etc can get into these openings. The gas mask was used to cover these openings while allowing him to be able to see and breathe. Unless you had a weapon with armor penetrating bullets or were extremely lucky then you would have become a target.
Nadzieja Batki

Charles Moore, if someone fired back at the shooter, there would have been a hesitant moment of surprise, someone else would have taken that moment to slam into him and set him on his arse.
Vicki

Charles Moore says:
“Read the account. He was covered in head to toe with body armor. ”

Body armor is NOT magic. Being hit by gunfire in body armor hurts. A LOT. Being hit in the eye socket of the gas mask WILL surprise the shooter and mess up vision. Being shot in the ballistic helmet WILL ring his bell. The shooter will be distracted. Most body armor does not protect the arms or legs. So many targets, so little ammo. The shooter might even bleed out in spite of the armor. For sure the shooter will be more interested in running away at that point. They are obviously cowards cause they choose to shoot up a movie theater rather than a police station.
Rick

Charles Moore First of all there is nothing that is total covering in body armor. The helmet goes over the gas mask but that mask is not even bullet resistant. It is rubber and plexiglass.aeough power to at least knock the wind out of him.nd a helmet only covers the top sides and back of the head.And depending on the caliber a .357, a .40, or .44, a .45 will have enough power to knock the wind out of someone body armor or not. And if there were several they could have pinned h8im down and gave people the opportunity to escape. anything is better than just letting it happenAnd one well placed shot could have ended it all.
Charles Moore

Again. You are watching too many old fast draw Westerns and CSI. I am a Military Vet and have been a CCW permit holder for 10 years. Qualifying for a CCW permit is a joke in most cases and takes a few hours. People then go buy a gun that is attractive or because they think it is “Cool”. One needs to own a gun that it compatible with them. One can go to a gun shop with an indoor range and rent a gun. Here it is $10. All one has to do is buy the ammunition. If they want to try 10 guns then it is $100 plus the cost of the ammunition. A head shot is the most difficult one to make. It is even more difficult when somebody is shooting up the Place and is lobbing grenades. The Body Armor makes it even more difficult. When I bought my gun I wanted one with stopping power and a light weight. I ended up with a 9MM Taurus made out of Titanium that was comfortable to shoot and adapted to me. This is not usually the case. A person gets a CCW permit in a few hours and then buys a gun.
Kinetic1

Let’s get a grip here folks. We’re talking about a dark theater, an action movie with plenty of shooting and bombing, smoke bombs and a theater full of frieghtend people looking for cover. If anyone in the theater was carrying, how much good could they have done. Yes, a hit might have distracted Holmes for a second, but what are the chances of a hit in this situation? What are the odds that more innocents would have been shot by a second shooter, even if they were only trying to hit Holmes. It’s easy to talk a good tale about how brave you would be, but you can never truly say until you are in the situation.

As for those of you calling for a group of “flight 93 heroes”, these folks didn’t have time to plan an attack. You can’t rush a guy in the front of a packed theater spraying bullets with a semi automatic weapon and expect to get very far. Plenty of people protected those around them. Plenty of people pulled children to the ground and covered them with their own bodies. Several people began treating the wounded even before the gunfire stopped. There were plenty of heroic people, some of whom died as a result of their concern for others, but all you can do is criticize those who were in the thick of it and didn’t jump the killer. I have a couple of guns and I’m not suggesting that we need to ban all guns, but I’m sick to death from hearing from those of you who think a cwp is your personal “future hero” certificate.
Vicki

Good news for Charles Moore.

The body armor wasn’t so you can stop worrying and just shoot.
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/07/22/fox-no-body-armor-for-aurora-theater-shooter/
Charles Moore

You are delusional and clueless. You have never answered my posts about your absurd theories and any information published after the fact would not have been known at the time. Are you really that dense?
Vicki

Kinetic1 says:
“Let’s get a grip here folks. ….. Yes, a hit might have distracted Holmes for a second, but what are the chances of a hit in this situation? ”

About 1/2 as good as a hit during target practice according to experts on firearms training. (see frontsight for details)

Since the shooter did not have a real bullet proof vest a hit would do far more than distract for a second. http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/07/22/fox-no-body-armor-for-aurora-theater-shooter/

Had there been anyone else with a gun I would hope that they would not sit around wondering if the armor were real or just a costume.
Kinetic1

Vicki,
Got it, the vest was a phony. That just leaves us with a dark, crowded theater full of smoke from several smoke bombs, hundreds of panicked people and a lunatic spraying bullets. So if your accuracy is reduced by 1/2 of what you were able to pull off on the range, your chances of hitting an innocent still are pretty good. And supposing that 1/2 accuracy number is based on range vs real, we must then assume that you took courses in night time and low light shooting, but if you didn’t? Does that reduce your accuracy by another 10%? 25%?

Look, I accept the idea that an armed and well trained gun owner may have been able to reduce the carnage, but he/she may have added to it as well. All I’m saying is that this is real life. This is not a movie where the hero jumps up on his seat, dodges a dozen bullets and makes the kill shot on his first try. This situation would have been greatly improved if they had just placed an alarm on the back door and investigated when it was propped open. I’m pretty sure that seeing a man suiting up and arming himself would have prompted a locked door and a call to the police well before the first shot could be fired.
Charles Moore

Again and Again. What was the chance that a well trained gun owner would be in the theater at the time? About Nil , So why even waste time on it?
E. Blake

Charles Moore, you would be amazed at how many well trained gun owners there are in this country, Hunters hit moving targets, police, security, and then you have your we like to unload a bunch of mags, just for fun. I guarantee you you pass by a marksman shooter quite often.
Charles Moore

Again. The fact that a person has a CCW permit does not make them qualified. In order for a person to be carrying a gun in that theater legally meant that they had to be able to get a CCW permit in that City. Shooting at a paper target in a controlled environment or at at animal that can’t shoot back is a lot different then shooting at a shooter in a darkened theater that is not only spraying the theater with bullets but is lobbing grenades
E. Blake

And it is mentality like this that people are dead…
Vicki

Kinetic1 says:
“Got it, the vest was a phony. That just leaves us with a dark, crowded theater full of smoke from several smoke bombs, hundreds of panicked people and a lunatic spraying bullets. So if your accuracy is reduced by 1/2 of what you were able to pull off on the range, your chances of hitting an innocent still are pretty good.”

Actually no. your chances of missing the shooter might be pretty good but the innocent are not in any real danger from you. They are lying on the floor or running away from the shooter leaving him with little cover and only fake body armor. As to your description of the theater, you offered no proof so you have no real idea of what it was like in there. At least my description fits both the facts that witnesses have testified and common sense.
Charles Moore

Nonsense . Your claims have always been Naive and they were based on reports that the vest was real. Now you want to change it??????
Kinetic1

Vicki,
I don’t know where you are getting your information, but mine comes from videos interviews with people who were in the theater. One man said that the gunman came in through the exit door (down near the screen). Paraphrasing, he said “It was about 10 minutes into the movie and I thought the shots were just part of the movie, we all did. But after the first 4 shots started to see people fall. My girlfriend and I waited, then we thought he was done, but he started shooting again. When we saw him coming up the steps we ran for the back exit.”

I’ve seen the movie and much of the early scenes are dark and noisy. This was a big preview and tickets were sold out, so you know there were well over a hundred people in the theater. Police have said that a 100-round drum magazine was recovered at the scene and that such a device would be able to fire 50 to 60 rounds a minute, so a spray of gunfire is a fairly accurate description. One person in the theater tweeted;
“a little shaken up at the moment. all i can remember is hearing noises and seeing smoke in our auditorium.” A viewer in the adjacent theater said it was near the end of the first big action scene when people around him began to cough from the smoke coming from the next theater and he could hear screaming. He said “from the sound of it there could have been 4 people shooting. There were definitely multi calibers going off.”
As for the smoke, he said “I don’t have asthma, but I’m still having trouble breathing.”
This was a guy in theater 8. Imagine how the smoke must have been for those in theater 9.

So, the shooter is down at the front, bullets are flying, people are screaming, coughing from the smoke and looking for cover or escape. You are seated in, lets say the middle section. If you wee in the middle of the row some people in front of you would be hitting the floor, but since it’s a packed house some would have to try for the isles. Unless you are right up there in the front rows near the isle where the gunman is, many of the people who are “running away from the shooter” are running towards you! Is that really “leaving him with little cover”? Now you’re shooting and the crowd hears shots coming from the back of the theater as well. Do they know that you are defending them and not his partner? Now people turn to run away from you as well. Don’t you think there might be that much more chaos, that much more opportunity for the innocent to be caught in the cross fire?

This is a theater, not an open field. There is only so much room to run or hide. This idea you have of a group of panicked individuals in a cramped theater clearing the way for you to get a shot without interference is more out of touch with reality than anything I have described or eye witness reports.
Vicki

Charles Moore says:
“You are delusional and clueless. You have never answered my posts about your absurd theories and any information published after the fact would not have been known at the time. Are you really that dense?”

Without knowing who “you” is it would be difficult for the person to know if they have or have not answered your posts about your (Charles Moore) absurd theories.

Since all of this post of yours is full of ad-hominem attack I am not sure that anyone would bother.
Vicki

Kinetic1 writes:
“Now you’re shooting and the crowd hears shots coming from the back of the theater as well. Do they know that you are defending them and not his partner? Now people turn to run away from you as well. Don’t you think there might be that much more chaos, that much more opportunity for the innocent to be caught in the cross fire?”

Don’t you just love the liberals men of straw. All to justify why CCW should not be allowed. All to justify taking firearms away from the People so they can not defend themselves from monsters like the Aurora Shooter.

Kinetic1 writes: “This is a theater, not an open field. There is only so much room to run or hide. This idea you have of a group of panicked individuals in a cramped theater clearing the way for you to get a shot without interference is more out of touch with reality than anything I have described or eye witness reports.”

Do you really think that the panicked individuals are in Pedesis? They are running for the exits. As any good CCW holder knows you wait till you have a clear shot and backstop. If you have tactical training you know to move often while waiting. The shooter will be distracted from you by all the other moving people. Move toward a clearing area keeping in as much cover or concealment as possible. Then you shoot to neutralize the threat.

This law abiding citizen knew how to do it. He didn’t have any cover but he did wait till the shooter turned away.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/surveillance-vid-shows-71-year-old-concealed-carry-holder-opening-fire-on-would-be-robbers/
Kinetic1

Vicki,
“Do you really think that the panicked individuals are in Pedesis?”

First let’s get this straight, I am not arguing against CCW permits. If you have a legitimate reason and the proper training (which I believe is not truly required at this time) then it’s fine with me. I’m not even saying that an armed citizen can’t stop or reduce the loss of life in a shooting. My argument has to do with this idea that every situation where a crowd is attacked by gunmen could be solved by someone in the crowd carrying their own weapon.

Now, to answer your question, no I think they were in a packed theater. This theater had a seating capacity of about 300, so it could have been a single isle theater, in which case good luck. Let’s just assume it was a traditional 2 isle theater. You make it sound like they were all waiting in the isle to run for the door. You must know how tight it is in those seating rows. It’s hard enough to walk down these rows, let alone running in panic. And what if there are people who dropped to the floor? You can’t go around them.

Based on timelines like this (http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/world_news&id=8743134) there was a 7 minute window between when the shooting began and the police took the shooter into custody back in the parking lot. Let’s give the shooter 2 minutes to return to his car, leaving about 5 minutes inside. Give the viewers some time to realize that what’s going on is not part of the film and we’re down to maybe 4 to 4 1/2 minutes. The shooter discharged 2 smoke bombs and then walked up and down the isle shooting at random. If he is moving about, causing those people who hid in the seating to try and scramble to the isle, how long would it be before you could find a good vantage point with zero chance of hitting an innocent? It’s just not as simple as some of you folks make it out to be.
E. Blake

Here is a good reason to be an armed citizen, be cause things like thi are on the rise:
Black mobs now have soundtrack for violence

Highly produced music giving the beat, literally, to national mayhem
http://www.wnd.com/2012/07/the-soundtracks-of-racial-violence/?cat_orig=us

And there is never a cop around they make sure of it!
Vicki

Kinetic1 writes
“My argument has to do with this idea that every situation where a crowd is attacked by gunmen could be solved by someone in the crowd carrying their own weapon.”

So for our entertainment please recount 3 situations where a crowd is attacked by gunmen that could have been solved without someone in the crowd carrying their own weapon. Be prepared to explain why this solution was desirable (for people other than the gunmen) and for bonus points why it was more efficient. Extra credit if it is a real event rather than a man of straw.

Additional credit given if you provide statistics showing how many of each type of solution including someone in the crowd carrying their own weapon.
http://www.ifonlyphotos.com Alex Frazier

Charles Moore et al.

First of all, body armor mostly protects your vitals. I own some, and so does a friend of mine. It will prevent a direct shot to the heart, but it won’t stop a shot to the shoulder, throat, face, hip, etc. Depending on the armor, a shot from the side will be effective. In many ways, it’s not too dissimilar to football padding. It’s just smaller and made of metal. It’s purpose is to decrease the likelihood of a fatal wound. The guy was not wearing plate mail armor. A moment of care would have put the perpetrator on the ground. It wasn’t needful to kill him in order to stop the threat. A shot to the hand or arm would have accomplished the task.

Secondly, if there had been concealed carry citizens armed in that theatre, some of them would have known how to shoot competently. Part of responsible gun ownership is practicing at the range. I shoot a 1-inch spread at 20 yards, and I’m not a prodigy.

Third, the presence of defensive firearms in that theatre would have changed the outcome drastically. I personally would have given the man a reason to run for cover.

Guns are a good thing. Guns are the great equalizer. With a gun, even a grandmother can stand up to a 250 lb. thug. This unfortunate incident had nothing to do with guns. The man told the police that he was “going to kill someone” that day. He already had alternate plans set up. His apartment was rigged with traps and explosives. He left his door unlocked, and he set a timer so his stereo would come on by itself. The plan was for someone, whether police or neighbor, to assume he couldn’t hear them knocking, open the door, and get blown to pieces. The guns he used in the theatre were just one tool of many that the man used that day. The problem was the maniac, not the tools used by the maniac.

And based on the increase in permit applications, I’d have to say that plenty of people would agree that the best defense is to arm themselves, not to waste time with the useless endeavor of trying to disarm the lawless.
Charles Moore

Are you related to CZ? I do not live in Colorado. So i did a search on “Colorado CCW permits”. The first website it brought up was one that advertised ” four hours of intensive training”. No firearms qualification was required for it. It then stated that if you were a beginner that there was another ten hour course for shooting at a range. I have a CCW permit in my State. It was good for 5 years. When the 5 years was about to expire I received a notice for renewal. I called to make sure but there was no requirement to qualify with a firearm or even take a written test. All I had to do was fill out some short paper work and submit a passport size photo with the date written on the back. So the fact that a person in the theater may have had a CCW license does not mean that they were qualified with a gun or practiced regularly at a range. I do so on a regular basis. All of the Gun dealers in my City also enable you to rent most small firearms for $10 plus the cost of ammunition for it. So if you want to try out ten guns then it cost you $100 plus the ammunition for them. I went with my son recently ans he tried out some Glocks to see which one he liked the most plus a few others. The Armor is then the next step. I took a completely different course as I worked for the State. it was 10 times as long as the one required for a CCW license in this State. . Since it was ten times as long then all I had to do was pay the license fee. I did so even though I wasn’t seeking one at the time. So it is possible that if I went through the regular short CCW course that I could have a CCW permit and not have been to a range etc for at least ten years. The odds are that most people in that dark theater where the shooter was spraying it with bullets and lobbing grenades would have been a qualified shooter just because they had a CCW permit are slim and none. A poster here that claims they live in Colorado posted that the gun laws there are crap.

Sarah R.

Why don’t they try banning violent video games or violent movies. I really don’t remember when murder and mayhem, blood and guts and chopping off heads became entertainment. These are the things that should be banned not guns. Guns don’t kill people people kill people.

Kinetic1

Sarah R.
Since recent studies have shown violent game play leading to a decrease in violent crimes, I don’t see much point in a ban. I don’t like these games and we don’t have them in our home, but they seem to serve as a vent for some people’s aggressions.
E. Blake

Might I suggest you get some, and use them as learning tools, for protection from lunatics and flash mobs, and fbi funded shooters…
CZ52

Sources Kinetic1 I have not heard of those studies.
Kinetic1

CZ52,
Sorry about that. Here is an article from back in 2008 (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/05/080514213432.htm)
and here is another from 2011(http://gantdaily.com/2011/09/30/study-violent-video-games-reduce-real-violence/).
Happy research!

ONTIME

Point taken and noted…..
john

In a gun-controlled theater, no one had a chance. Seem to me that this is a prelude of what is to happen if the US sinks the 2nd amendment like obama wants it.

Vicki

Not a very well gun controlled theater. The shooter had a rifle, shotgun and pistol in there.
Oh wait. It was probably gun control liberal style.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7pGt_O1uM8
Kinetic1

john,
Without resorting to the lies and distortions offered up by the NRA and FOX News, please grace us with some examples of the Obama administrations efforts to deny you your 2nd amendment rights.
Charles Moore

You can’t be serious. Obama s from Chicago Illinois . State Senator Obama in order to get the endorsement of the Police Unions for U.S. Senator sponsored Legislation that granted Retired Police officers and only Retired Police officers the right to carry a concealed weapon. He was also in favor of the Wash D.C. law that forced homeowners to keep an unloaded weapon locked in a safe and the ammunition for it in a separate place. He was against it only after SCOTUS reversed it because of the NRA. Do you really think that Hilliary is doing the U.N small arms treaty on her own. Fast and Furious has been going on for 11 months and both Holder and Obama have claimed that Obama had nothing to do with it at when it is announces that Holder would be accused of Contempt then Holder writes a letter to Obama for help and Obama declares Executive privilege ,
John Woodbury

@ Kinetic1, try Fast and Furious or the New World Order’s UN arms treaty. But then you only read lamebrain media outlets, right?
Kinetic1

John,
There is a theory that FAF is about gun control, but no evidence that it has anything to do with your rights. As for the Small Arms Treaty, it’s amazing how the pro gun lobby keeps talking about Clinton signing a treaty that hasn’t even been drafted yet. And again, the “fact” that it is all about ending your 2nd amendment rights is just theory; nothing factual to base it on. In fact, the treaty would have to be ratified by the Senate before it was truly accepted, and even then it would not supersede the Constitution. But hey, thanks for playing!
Vicki

Kinetic1 says:
“John,
There is a theory that FAF is about gun control, but no evidence that it has anything to do with your rights.”

Warning. Evidence ahead. Liberals are advised to run away.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-31727_162-57338546-10391695/documents-atf-used-fast-and-furious-to-make-the-case-for-gun-regulations
Kinetic1

Vicki,
How does a law “That would require some U.S. gun shops to report the sale of multiple rifles or “long guns.” restrict your right to own a gun? How would this “sink the 2nd amendment”?
Vicki

Kinetic1 says:
“How does a law “That would require some U.S. gun shops to report the sale of multiple rifles or “long guns.” restrict your right to own a gun? How would this “sink the 2nd amendment”?”

Were it only to be thus but I have already posted to flashy how many are demanding additional gun prohibition laws.

Let us look for a moment however at just your question.
Reporting of multiple sales for SOME U.S. Gun shops. The law already requires ALL U.S. gun shops to report ALL sales. http://www.ehow.com/about_5492109_national-instant-check-system.html

Gun shops (Actually FFL’s so this includes even gun show vendors) must also keep 4473 forms on every purchase. These forms are required to be sent to the Federal Government if the shop closes. Thus you see that not only do we have a required report of EVERY sale not just every sale of multiple firearms we also already have de-facto registration.

Now lets see what happens with gun registration data.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2608785/posts

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/8/31/200747.shtml

http://www.themindoftefft.com/blog/2009/06/11/first-they-register-your-guns-then-they-confiscate-them/

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/757440–fiorito-the-cops-came-and-took-my-gun?bn=1

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr/13/39we-want-them-registered39/

http://www.stephenhalbrook.com/registration_article/registration.html

There are more examples if you wish.
Chester

Vicki, he didn’t carry his weapons in through the front door, so no one had a chance to stop him there. I do agree with one of the other posts on here that there should have been an alarm on that emergency exit door, so it would have sounded as soon as the door was opened, then could only have been reset by someone physically going back to that door and flipping a switch or something similar. Seriously, those doors should be alarmed, and the police called to investigate any time one of them is opened without prior notice from the theater. Granted, there are times when the cleaning crew will want to use those doors because they are closer to where they unload the trash, but that would NOT be happening during the time a movie was running.
Charles Moore

Vicki is clueless. You can’t tell her anything. I listed the places a CCW could not carry in my State and she said it was B.S. She makes absurd statements and when challenged changes the subject instead if responding to the question. She has been told several times that that shooter did nor carry the guns through the front door and came in and then went out the emergency door. His car was parked near it and he suited up and came back in the emergency door that he had somehow propped open.

I doubt that alarm on the door would have made a difference. People might care now for a while but would have probably ignored it and thought that somebody was lazy and just using it etc. You can’t lock these doors. The Police can’t respond to a theater every time an emergency door is opened. Decades ago they used to have Ushers in a theater that helped you find a seat and monitored them. But then decades ago you didn’t have all these problems.
phideaux

Chester, a better question would be why was the alarm on that door off and who turned it off. I doubt very seriously there was no alarm on the door because if there was not the theater would have 5+ non-paying customers for every paying customer.
Vicki

Charles Moore says:
“I listed the places a CCW could not carry in my State and she said it was B.S.”

This statement is false. I challenge you to prove otherwise.

Charles Moore: “She makes absurd statements and when challenged changes the subject instead if responding to the question.”

Projecting again are you.
Present a question and we can see if it is even a valid one.

Charles Moore: “She has been told several times that that shooter did nor carry the guns through the front door and came in and then went out the emergency door. His car was parked near it and he suited up and came back in the emergency door that he had somehow propped open.”

Told? By whom? And where (be precise) have I EVER said otherwise.

Note to other readers I did gather all the info Charles listed from reading the sparse accounts after the shooting so his claim is intended to make you believe (without any proof) that I somehow said that the facts were other than what he stated I had been told several times. It is an interesting tactic to try and smear the credibility of a debate opponent. Politicians use it all the time.

E. Blake

Well all I have to say to that is “GOOD LUCK!”
DICK ACT of 1902… CAN’T BE REPEALED (GUN CONTROL FORBIDDEN) – Protection Against Tyrannical Govern

http://www.knowthelies.com

The Dick Act of 1902 also known as the Efficiency of Militia Bill H.R. 11654, of June 28, 1902 invalidates all so-called gun-control laws. It also divides the militia into three distinct and separate entities.
Aveteran2

Dave H, how right you are. As you probably know the Wash DC cadre have approval to conceal carry and may elect to have arm guards escort them in public. They say, “do as I say not as I do!”
Speak2Truth

The mentally unhinged “leaders” of our country still claim “gun free zones” are good for us – despite the Columbine massacre (after Clinton’s “Gun Free School Zones” law), this theater massacre and so many others.

Americans are waking up and carrying to defend themselves and others, like that 71 year old man who opened fire on the two armed thugs in the internet cafe a few days back. However, if you do carry, it is very important to get PROPER TRAINING to ensure you will win the gunfight and not be a hazard to innocent bystanders.

GunTrainers.net provides a free zip code search for instructors near you.

If you are going to carry, do so responsibly.
mark

Many more are daily contributors to this site. Some even write the articles if you want to call these propaganda screeds, articles.

phideaux

mark the worst written of these articles is better than anything you have posted here.

darkwitch52

Thank you for the Truth. We have a corrupted government out to take away every Americans freedoms. From all my research this was a false flag operation so Obama,Hillary Hilter Clinton,and the NWO can use the UN to take our guns away from us. America needs to wake-up and understand our Freedoms,Liberty,The Constitution and Bill of Rights are under attack this very moment in time….

E. Blake

And not to be off subject, but I am concerned about what they are up to while we are busy here. “Never let a good crisis go to waste” God only knows what they are doing…

http://www.facebook.com/jerry.sutton.3304 Jerry Sutton

This is also in response of E.BLAKEs remark from the English….don’t give up our
guns and he is so right. Remember all those dumbasses a few years ago when they
turned in any gun for money. Some were very old and worth thousands and the
idiots only got a few huindred or what-ever it was. You know how it is….stupid is as
stupid does. Well, they can have my guns…are part of it…from the muzzle-end of
my AR-15. Its time America stood up again…the right America…not the leftist or
socialist America…..they don’t get it…America is NOT a socialist country….like the
democrats want it to be.
Jim Starrett

The announcement on this site indicates that ” the government is planning on “BANNING”
weapons ( guns ). The truth is that the aim is to exert “CONTROL” over certain kinds of weapons like AR 15′s and other military arms that fire a continuous and highly lethal
quantity of rounds. I can’t imagine the police in this country not agreeing with the effort
to control. The facts indicate that the police are unanimously in agreement with this aim.
JIM

E. Blake

No, I think banning guns is there goal, one piece at a time. If we allow…
Sneaky Dems Attempt Gun Control In CyberSecurity Bill

Read more: http://freedomoutpost.com/2012/07/sneaky-dems-attempt-gun-control-in-cyber-bill/#ixzz21w1hILWy

Hughze

Well said DaveH, well said.

Charles Moore

And who put them in office?

Jack Stutzman

Something that’s crazy is that we have senators like D. Feinstein who had a concealed carry permit, carried a gun and thought it was ok for her but not for us. She claims she doesn’t carry anymore. She also claims she has had training in handling a firearm, but photos of her with her finger on the trigger of a gun indicate otherwise. I’d like to know it she has a registered gun at home. She is a good example of an elitist. Maybe she has lost the ability to make rational decisions based on facts. We have many more people that waste our tax money on bills to take away our guns and they have statistics that gun control doesn’t work. Are they possessed by something that has taken away their common sense? Can’t they look at past history? They have an agenda that is not to stop crime, it’s to take our freedom and destroy our way of life. I believe that they don’t care how many lives are lost to get their way. It’s time that we the people, wake up and remove these traitors from office. We need to vote for the ones that believe in the American way and do what we want, not what the U.N. or any other country wants. We don’t need King Obama or who ever he is. Let’s put a stop to this before it’s to late. Let them know we aren’t going to take it anymore. Vote them out of office! They could go live in Mexico where guns are illegal, see how that works out for them!

Charles Moore

I am not aware of the Gun Laws in California but they used ti be pretty much gun control oriented.It would not make any difference since she is a U.S. Senator.I do know that when Obama was an Illinois State Senator and was running for U.S.Senator and wanted the endorsement of the Illinois Police Unions that he sponsored Legislation that allowed Retired and only Retired Police to carry a concealed weapon.

It is called “Ethical Dualism”. The Elite are entitled to things that are not available to the masses.

A Wake-Up Call For Concealed Carry

Rate this:

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “A Wake-Up Call For Concealed Carry”

Headlines From Today's Issue

More from this category

Featured Articles

Popular Articles

Contributing Writers

All Categories

A Wake-Up Call For Concealed Carry

Rate this:

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion: View Comments to “A Wake-Up Call For Concealed Carry”

Headlines From Today's Issue

More from this category

Featured Articles

Popular Articles

Contributing Writers

All Categories

Welcome to PersonalLiberty.com,America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “A Wake-Up Call For Concealed Carry”

Welcome to PersonalLiberty.com,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!