AGS Steam Games

Forums → WEPR → Shooting at a batman movie in Colorado

118 34520
kyhree1359
offline
kyhree1359
5 posts
Nomad

so i heard that a guy dressed up as baine and killed a bunch of people.
I dident even know there was a batman movie out.

  • 118 Replies
partydevil
offline
partydevil
5,129 posts
Jester

...I murder three random civilians with a knife? I don't remember doing that?


i don't remember saying anything like that.
you just come up whit this non-sense.

I guess I can start to ignore yours now then.

finaly..
pickpocket
offline
pickpocket
5,952 posts
Shepherd

the robber does not have a knife but a gun like EVERYONE els has.
he comes in knowing the family also hs a gun. so he starts of shooting right away to not get shot homeself. and we have a (few) murder(s).

*else
*has
*off
*himself
It would have to be illegal as some one with a criminal back round cant get a gun. And most common house robberies are done with knives or nothing at all. Maybe, MAYBE the occasional handgun but thats it.

switzerland is not the usa.

Its like you dont hear me (figuratively). You say that the swiss have guns and we all know that nothing violent hardly ever happens their. Why because, as I have already said, NO ONE WILL ROB A HOUSE WERE THEY KNOW SOMEONE IN THE HOUSE HAS A GUN UNLESS THEY REALLY WANT TO DIE. Im not saying that Switzerland is in the USA, I know that (Im sure you thought it was a break through but no.). What Im saying is that they are an example.
but a very great amount can't be trusted whit it.

*with
You know every single american citizen to know that as a fact, or do you just assume that we are 80% kill crazy?
I know multiple gun owners and none of them have killed people. Some hunt but thats it.

for your point of view nothing because you do the same all the time.

*from
You know what we are referring to. The message gets across either way.
[/quote]"Lets see. I am poor, I have a free gun, but everyone is armed and may be able to shoot me. Logically, I should COMMIT MASS MURDER! That will get me money!".

THANK YOU!

[quote]instead the family should co-operate whit the robber. give what he wants and stay alive. then call the cops who are going to investigate the robbery.

Right, the family should totally just let the guy kill them and let him take the tv. We arent spineless. Heck, kids have stopped robberies by themselves. Its not hard as long as your smart about it. Most of the time the robber wont shoot either, as then he will be charged with murder. Digging the hole deeper.
but a very great amount can't be trusted whit it.
then you can trow up the card that you can test them befor handing out. but whit such a great amount of guns in public they sure can steal a few from... let's say a mom in the shoping mall leaving her bag unguarded. or whatever other way there are millions...

*with
*throw
*before
*with
*shopping
...Why? How would he know that their is a gun inside the woman's purse? And what idiot would leave their purse behind with A FRICKING GUN INSIDE IT? The only way to buy guns is to go to a place that sells them and you pay the price. But first, they need ID and they do a background check. Unless your a mexican drug lord, then obama gives you guns. But thats another argument.
No one simply stumbles upon a gun everyday. And do tell me, how many guns have you seen clearly in public that didnt belong to a cop?

Last thing
instead the family should co-operate whit the robber. give what he wants and stay alive. then call the cops who are going to investigate the robbery.

But before that you said...
the robber does not have a knife but a gun like EVERYONE els has.
he comes in knowing the family also hs a gun. so he starts of shooting right away to not get shot homeself. and we have a (few) murder(s).

So according to you, the family shouldnt try and fight back and should do what the robber says. But the robber will kill them all so they dont have a chance to. That totally makes sense.

Isnt it lovely how far off topic we got?
pickpocket
offline
pickpocket
5,952 posts
Shepherd

Screw it, you guys know what im saying.

partydevil
offline
partydevil
5,129 posts
Jester

your also very good in turning and twisting words.
here i also see no point to comment on.
by the time i turned all those falls conclusions right again, the day will be over. and i have more things to do then that.

pickpocket
offline
pickpocket
5,952 posts
Shepherd

your also very good in turning and twisting words.
here i also see no point to comment on.
by the time i turned all those falls conclusions right again, the day will be over. and i have more things to do then that.

I'm not doing that whatsoever. I'm quoting you and what you say goes against what you say. You think that we all will kill each other when given guns, but you are incredibly wrong. Anyways, basically what you just said is "oh your right, but I'm going to make you sound wrong and give up." because it actually makes perfect sense.
Deth666
offline
Deth666
653 posts
Nomad

We're sort of brainwashed to think of guns in a bad way. What if someone at the theater had a Concealed carry and stopped the gunman? I don't own any "assault weapons" or anything like that but I own a few handguns and a couple rifles. I carry a handgun on me and feel a lot safer because of it. I think that anyone who is against guns should first use, carry, and own some guns instead of blindly making a decision. It's like the ban on switchblade, gravity and butterfly knives. Why are they so much more dangerous than regular knives or a pipe or a baseball bat that they need to be banned? Because in every Hollywood movie and in the news criminals are portrayed as carrying them.

I was outside of a convenience store late at night and a guy grabbed my shoulder from behind and said he wanted my money. I spun around, pushed him back without thinking and drew my gun. The guy pretty much ran away before I drew my gun out all the way. I think I pissed myself. I didn't even get a look at him or if he had a gun, knife or anything.

I can't speak for criminals in other countries, but here in America if a person breaks into your house while your at home, they intend to murder you. If they're the more respectable thief (the kind that doesn't commit murder) they wait until their sure your not home. Its not like in the movies where they just tie you up or something stupid like that.

I saw some statistics a few years ago that listed the number of deaths from car accidents, drinking, etc. At the top of the list was medical malpractice deaths. Medical malpractice kills 15 times more people than guns do every year. Your doctor is more dangerous than a loaded gun. Not really relevant but I think its funny.

HahiHa
offline
HahiHa
8,256 posts
Regent

We're sort of brainwashed to think of guns in a bad way.

We're sort of brainwashed to think of them in a good way too. They're more of a necessary evil, if ever, than something good. But gun lobbyists are doing a great job to sell their stuff; after all it's one of the most profitable markets.

Seems you have a different experience, but around here, thieves break into your house to steal your valuables, while your sleeping; not to murder you. It has happened that the house owners were brutalized in their bedroom too. But thieves almost never use guns. Same as people who aggress you on the streets. They got knives, yes, but rarely guns.

On the other hand, people carrying their gun around all day, get more assurance, lower inhibition threshhold, and instead of giving someone the finger, shouting their anger out or beating you up, might as well shoot. I have heard of such cases in America, though I guess they are very rare. But my point is, it might be worth a thought to inquire whether normal people have guns because of the criminals, or criminals have guns because of the normal people.
thepyro222
offline
thepyro222
2,150 posts
Peasant

I'm on the fence on what to think of guns... I think we need to restrict the heavy weapons like assault rifles and stuff like that, but if people really want an AK-47 that bad, they're going to get it. Especially if they're going to be as bat- guano crazy as the guy in Colorado.
The problem with the second amendment is that everyone takes it out of context. According to Law.Cornell.eduthe second amendment says "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 way I interpret that is like this:
In order to keep their homes safe from invaders, civilians, if necessary, can form a militia. If this forming of a militia is necessary, then civilians also have the right to have weapons as well.
I don't think that means that everyone has the right to carry around a pair of Mac 10's just because, I think that the second amendment was put in place so that people could, if needed, form a militia in case they needed to defend their homes.
But on the other hand, I think that people should have guns. I think that if more reliable people were trained, registered with the Government, and carried around a handgun, I believe that it would cut down on a ton of crime. It would discourage some people of robberies, murders, and that kind of stuff.
But, this is a double- edged sword. If more people have guns, then we could see a lot more arguments get violent, quick. If more people had guns, I think that these "occupy X" protests could be bloodbaths.

In conclusion, guns are a necessary evil. We can't live with them, and we can't live without them. I honestly believe we should stick with swords and axes.

xNightwish
offline
xNightwish
1,608 posts
Nomad

Sometimes I wonder how citizens in other countries without legalized guns keep theirself saves. Know what I mean. Why can other countries ban guns but America can't. I mean the Constitution is pretty old and I think they should tweak it to modern life.

dragonhunter577
offline
dragonhunter577
6 posts
Nomad

There should not be gun control. If even Just one person there had a concealed carry permit, so many people wouldn't have died; if they took our guns away then something else just like this will happen and there will be nothing we could do about it. Other countries that banned guns have higher crime rates, because the bad people dont turn in their guns, leaving us defensless. besides, if that guy didn't shoot all those people, he would have bombed them or something. Next time that happens, someone needs to be there with a gun to protect people

dragonhunter422
offline
dragonhunter422
130 posts
Nomad

the movie theater in colorado was in a "gun free zone"
but now they want to make more "gun free zones".
that is just sad.

dragonhunter422
offline
dragonhunter422
130 posts
Nomad

Why can other countries ban guns but America can't.

because we arnt stupid enough to give up our guns!
Australia gave up their guns, and look what happened to them- their crime rate rose 42.2 percent! In a bun ban, the normal citizen will obey the law and give up their guns, while the criminals keep their firearms. Do you know what happens then? people cant defend themselves! do you want this to happen to America? I sure dont!
HahiHa
offline
HahiHa
8,256 posts
Regent

If even Just one person there had a concealed carry permit, so many people wouldn't have died; if they took our guns away then something else just like this will happen and there will be nothing we could do about it.

How many shootings have been prevented by someone randomly carrying a gun at the right moment? Zero, to my knowledge. He obtained his guns legally, like any other. If he can, others can too.

In Colorado gun sales have gone up by over 40 percent after the Aurora shooting. People are scared and buy guns to protect themselves. Now I don't know what this will help any of them, really. Americans think the more weapons they own, the safer they are, but who walks around with several guns daily? Shootings don't happen in your home, they happen in public places and public security has to be increased, not useless gun collections. Maybe before starting to regulate guns, the US should overthink their mentality and think whether it really makes sense, or is just lobbying by the rifle associations.

I would have to ask if there really is a proven link between civil gun possession and crime rates. If there is, I admit that it would be risky to regulate guns more in countries like the US who have like the most guns among the civil population than any country. But I ask again, what is the reason of what? Do civilians have guns because of the criminals, or criminals have guns because of the civilians? One should investigate if maybe a progressive tandem legislation should be instored, progressively restricting guns and increasing the efforts of confiscating illegal guns from criminals. But I guess this is unthinkable under current economic conditions.
EnterOrion
offline
EnterOrion
4,220 posts
Nomad

How many shootings have been prevented by someone randomly carrying a gun at the right moment?


Two million plus crimes are prevented yearly by concealed carry permit holders and people in their home. More than 150 take it a step beyond and kill the assailant.

Quite a lot, I'd imagine.

but who walks around with several guns daily


Several? Few people. I'm pretty sure that's illegal in some places. Many people, however, carry one gun, and a few have a backup just in case, usually a smaller pocket pistol in .380 or 9mm.

or is just lobbying by the rifle associations.


You, know people do make up rifle associations. It's not just one guy with a lot of money, but millions of people.

I would have to ask if there really is a proven link between civil gun possession and crime rates


There is. Russia, for example, once almost completely outlawed civil possession. With every relaxing of the laws, their crimes rates plummeted, especially home invasions. In Kennesaw, Georgia, the crime rate dropped 73% after mandatory gun possession was passed into law.

There is a link, a very strong one.

Do civilians have guns because of the criminals, or criminals have guns because of the civilians?


Civilians have guns because they're fun and useful for defense, and criminals have guns because they're terrifying, and more importantly, protect them from other criminals. It's not correlative.

One should investigate if maybe a progressive tandem legislation should be instored, progressively restricting guns and increasing the efforts of confiscating illegal guns from criminals.


The efforts are already well underway. Restricting guns won't affect the criminal population in America as it does in other countries. We're already one of the most heavily armed societies on earth, and restricting guns was a job to be done in the 1800s. It's far too late. The mindset is ingrained, and the population has a gun for every man, woman, and child.
EmperorPalpatine
offline
EmperorPalpatine
9,439 posts
Jester

How many shootings have been prevented by someone randomly carrying a gun at the right moment? Zero, to my knowledge.

Watch this. There are many more like it.

Shootings don't happen in your home

Watch this.

Also, it happens in convenience stores and other places of business all the time.
This.
This.
This.
And this.
Showing 76-90 of 118