News Stories

[Mr. DJ]

Originally Posted by kyp275

'cause they tend not to have the training to effectively use precision weapons, thus shotguns becomes the weapon of choice.

but but but...DOOM was a killing simulator!

[kyp275]

Originally Posted by Mr. DJ

but but but...DOOM was a killing simulator!

Nope, but it is a clear sign that whomever made the statement doesn't know anything about actual marksmanship :P

[mangamuscle]

Originally Posted by kyp275

The problem is that Pandora's box has been opened a long time ago. Gun Control is never going to work unless you can invent a magical device that can track down every single gun in the country, and then you'd have to invent the same thing for knifes, then fertilizers, then bows, then sharp pointy objects, then blunt objects.

:facepalm: No one in his right mind has mentioned such a far fetched idea as to track each and every firearm. But you CAN track down mass production devices AND skilled gusmiths (really, how many of any of the two there are? a few dozen of thousands at best). You can even limit your tracking to the ammuniion producers, any firearm without them is just an expensive piece of metal.

Does gun make it easier to kill people? yes. Will banning them fix the problem? not in your wildest dreams.

I disagree, making firearms illegal (or making drugs legal) in the USA WILL solve the violence problem in my country, no ands, ifs or buts (and also help yours).

[kyp275]

Originally Posted by mangamuscle

:facepalm: No one in his right mind has mentioned such a far fetched idea as to track each and every firearm. But you CAN track down mass production devices AND skilled gusmiths (really, how many of any of the two there are? a few dozen of thousands at best). You can even limit your tracking to the ammuniion producers, any firearm without them is just an expensive piece of metal.

and that would take away the hundreds of millions of firearms already in existence how? and if you don't, how will the elimination of production achieve anything? Ammunition producer? do you even realize how many people make their own ammo?

Originally Posted by mangamuscle

I disagree, making firearms illegal (or making drugs legal) in the USA WILL solve the violence problem in my country, no ands, ifs or buts (and also help yours).

ROFL, the only thing that's going to solve the violence problem in your country is if the people in your country decides to do something about it. Even if you cut off every single gun from the US to Mexico, you think the cartels would just go "oh noes we are doomed!!1!!1", or just get more guns from south america, which they already do? You realize that there IS such a thing as arms dealer right?

[GundamFan0083]

Originally Posted by mangamuscle

I disagree, making firearms illegal (or making drugs legal) in the USA WILL solve the violence problem in my country, no ands, ifs or buts (and also help yours).

No actually it won't.
The violence in your country is due to YOUR DRUG GANGs, the US government selling them guns, and South America.

The actual reason Mexico has the problems it does is the drugs, not anything else.
If the US legalized drugs for recreational purposes, the flow of money to Mexican Cartels would vanish, and they wouldn't be able to afford guns.
That is the best way to stop that problem.

As a side note:

Why does every single one of these events bring out the stupid in so many journalists?

Was the Batman movie shooting imitated from scene in 1986 comic?
http://washingtonexaminer.com/batman...rticle/2502701

[mangamuscle]

Originally Posted by Mr. DJ

If someone wants something bad enough, they will find a way to get it.

Originally Posted by GundamFan0083

I think it would be much easier for criminals to obtain their weapons from the government (like they do here in the US and they do in Mexico) through corrupt politicians, military personnel, and the police.

Let's not confuse a few dozen (make it a hundreds if you want) of old weapons that might be get from local army/law enforcement with the thousands of firearms and the hundred of thousands of ammunition packages that cross the border each year. The scale is so different as to try to invade hawai with a dozen well armed men _-_

[kyp275]

Originally Posted by GundamFan0083

If the US legalized drugs for recreational purposes, the flow of money to Mexican Cartels would vanish, and they wouldn't be able to afford guns.
That is the best way to stop that problem.

But where do you draw the line? I'm all for legalizing marijuana, but cocaine, lsd, meth? That's over the line IMO.

[GundamFan0083]

There is no confusion:



Only 12% of the guns used by the Cartels are of US origin (that they know of), the rest are of foreign sources since you cannot buy machineguns or grenades in the USA over the counter at a gun store.

That's the problem with this shooting in the Colorado theater, the national media is acting like this guy went full auto with an AR-15 (which is impossible since it is semi-auto only).
Many idiots online are calling it an AK-47, which is another weapon you cannot buy here in the US as a full-auto weapon at a gun store.

So whether we're talking about Mexico, or Columbine, or now Aurora, we are not speaking of military weapons but rather civilian look-a-likes that shoot like hunting rifles not military guns.

Here is some more info on the shooter:
Colorado theater shooting suspect was neuroscience Ph.D student (PHOTO)

http://sg.sports.yahoo.com/blogs/loo...160848135.html

@kyp275
I would agree, but just legalizing marijuana, hash, and peyote would go a long way in reducing the wallet size of the Cartels.

[Vexx]

Mangamuscle, you keep saying the perp was suicidal -- there's actually no evidence he was. The neuroscience majoring student appears to want to be around to watch the results of his cowardice.

My condolences to anyone who knew any of the people hurt or killed by this little cesspool of evil. (Most of the damage appears to have been from a shotgun, with only one AR-15 round blamed for one injury, and some from the Glock pistol). Of course, given the way he got into the theater, he could just as easily have lobbed two or three jacked up molotovs and done even more damage.

However, I am actively wondering about his mental background for this reason:

(snippet from Raw Story article, author's words):

But a big question that arises is—did he have a documented history of mental illness? Good chance of it. If he did—should he have been allowed to own guns? Especially, as reported, a version of the AK-47–which he used in the theater? I can answer that last question.
The answer, as far as I’m concerned, is flatly… no.
The NRA, of course, resists the “intrusiveness” of firm, clear rules exposing a person’s psychological problems to the vetting process for gun ownership.

This is why I dropped my NRA membership in the early 90s... they have become a catalyst for this kind of mayhem by refusing to consider *any* responsible protocols for gun ownership (like mental disease, integrated background checks, etc). To me, "well regulated militia" in the US means there should be mandatory Civil Defense participation and practice for anyone who owns a gun.

[mangamuscle]

Originally Posted by GundamFan0083

No actually it won't.
The violence in your country is due to YOUR DRUG GANGs, the US government selling them guns, and South America.

Your information good sir is correct, yet incomplete. Truth is the mexican goverment is fighting a WAR with the drug mafia, and like any other war, if your opponent does not have an equivalent (or even superior) weapon and ammunition supply, they will lose, they might get them from somewhere else, but the mere fact that it will cost them more money means they will get less weapons than before, it will not be feasible (or profitable) to wage war and then they choose peace. At the moment the drug lords weapons are below those of the army, but above anything local law enforcement has, the ideal would be to reduce their weaponry to the levels of local law enforcement.

Originally Posted by kyp275

But where do you draw the line? I'm all for legalizing marijuana, but cocaine, lsd, meth? That's over the line IMO.

I understand whay you feel, but TBT it has been already probed that when any substance becomes legal people consume the presentation with less dosage, meanwhile when an addictive drug is made illegal people keep increasing the concentration. If you want I can search the link (I linked it in this forum a few weeks ago, yet I post too much on this forum ^^; ). So any substance in high concentration is very bad, not only meth, lsd or cocaine (which BTW, was part of the original coca cola formula, in low concentration obviously).

TBT, because these whole drugs fiasco amphetamines are now illegal in my country, and I have to admit I miss the little rush I got from the medication every time I got the flu (but fear not, I have never been a meth addict).

[Cosmic Eagle]

Originally Posted by GundamFan0083

I've been looking all morning to see what kinds of guns this nutcase used.

I have finally found them:

Authorities recovered four guns -- a rifle similar to an AR-15, a shotgun and two Glock handguns, a senior official with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms familiar with the investigation told CNN

Just by looking at that and knowing this shooting was happening in a smoke filled, dark room (the theater), I can say that the weapon that probably killed the most people was the shotgun.
It fires a spray and has the most chance of hitting.
The AR would be all but useless under those conditions.

Well he could spray the AR....Looks like most missed or him tried aiming with it though...

7 is nowhere near of 50 and I bet that if that japanese guy had had access to firearms he would no doubt have killed a lot more people, jeez, I can think of a simple KISS plan to kill MILLIONS for the cheap using half my brain, these peoples are mere nutjobs, not evil masterminds.

Just wondering...how cheap is cheap to you in that scenario?

[kyp275]

Originally Posted by Cosmic Eagle

Well he could spray the AR....Looks like most missed or him tried aiming with it though...

"spraying" with the AR just makes it ineffective.

Matter of fact is, firearms are not the most deadly weapon of choice if your goal is to inflict maximum casualty, as they require some semblance of proficiency on the part of the operator to be effective.

explosives are far more effective in that regard, and can be rather easily acquired.

[Cosmic Eagle]

Well depends on the range and how packed the theatre is.

[kyp275]

Originally Posted by Cosmic Eagle

Well depends on the range and how packed the theatre is.

Considering it's the midnight showing of TDKR, if the theater I went to is any indication, "packed" would be an understatement :P

Also, it's not so much the range, but rather the potency of the explosive, amongst other things.

[mangamuscle]

Originally Posted by Vexx

This is why I dropped my NRA membership in the early 90s... they have become a catalyst for this kind of mayhem by refusing to consider *any* responsible protocols for gun ownership (like mental disease, integrated background checks, etc). To me, "well regulated militia" in the US means there should be mandatory Civil Defense participation and practice for anyone who owns a gun.

But TBT if checking your mental well being becomes mandatory for the average joe to own (and keep) his hunting rifle, they will soon have an epihany, politicians in office should ALSO be check for their mental health in a regular basis and I it would be a fallout similar to when movies stopped being mute, many will simply renounce before being check.

As a side comment, a local politician that has lost twice (in second place) his run for the presidency in Mexico is no doubt (sadly leftist here love hime) nuts, so I do not think it is a problem only in the USA.

Originally Posted by Cosmic Eagle

Just wondering...how cheap is cheap to you in that scenario?

As george bush said about his implication in skulls and bones "and that is all I will say on that matter".

[Cosmic Eagle]

Originally Posted by kyp275

Considering it's the midnight showing of TDKR, if the theater I went to is any indication, "packed" would be an understatement :P

Also, it's not so much the range, but rather the potency of the explosive, amongst other things.

No...I mean for the AR...

[kyp275]

Originally Posted by mangamuscle

they might get them from somewhere else, but the mere fact that it will cost them more money means they will get less weapons than before

Which is why they source most of their weapons from elsewhere. There are so much cheap AK variants produced all over the world, it doesn't make sense to try to smuggle in expensive ARs from the US. Sure, the ARs are more accurate, but I doubt the cartels does much long range precision sniping.

Originally Posted by mangamuscle

it will not be feasible (or profitable) to wage war and then they choose peace.

and no weapons ban will do that

Originally Posted by mangamuscle

I understand whay you feel, but TBT it has been already probed that when any substance becomes legal people consume the presentation with less dosage, meanwhile when an addictive drug is made illegal people keep increasing the concentration.

That's besides the point, some stuff just shouldn't be legal.

Originally Posted by mangamuscle

But TBT if checking your mental well being becomes mandatory for the average joe to own (and keep) his hunting rifle, they will soon have an epihany, politicians in office should ALSO be check for their mental health in a regular basis and I it would be a fallout similar to when movies stopped being mute, many will simply renounce before being check.

Nothing like being assumed to be crazy without cause right?

Originally Posted by Cosmic Eagle

No...I mean for the AR...

Gotcha. Range wouldn't be an issue in this scenario... with that many people, the chance for a lucky hit is obviously greater, but still not very good.

[mangamuscle]

@kyp275

Seems you are too emotional about this since you did not read clearly most of what I wrote

[kyp275]

Originally Posted by mangamuscle

@kyp275

Seems you are too emotional about this since you did not read clearly most of what I wrote

Of course, since I disagree with you, it must be because I'm being too emotional and not understanding you clearly, as everything you say must be right!

Or you can actually participate in an honest debate by actually responding to the points I made, perhaps this one I raised earlier:

"How would you take away the hundreds of millions of firearms already in existence now? and if you don't, how will the elimination of production achieve anything?"

[AnimeFan188]

More on the Colorado Shooter story:

"Aurora, Colo., police and FBI officials told Denver NBC affiliate 9News Friday
morning that the suspect in the early Friday movie theater mass shooting
has "booby-trapped" his apartment with a sophisticated setup of flammable
devices that could take authorities days to disarm."

See:

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/...150431578.html