10 shot dead at Batman showing in Denver

Daemos

It's a sad state of affairs that when I heard 'mass shooting in America', my first thought was 'oh, again?'

What a sad end to what should have been a great day for everyone there

RIP

Witcher

old hippy wrote: »

Because then you get an armed populace which increases fear and retaliation and innocent bystanders. No thanks.

So the populace in a country like the US with a high rate of firearms ownership and people willing to use them on others should be unarmed and vulnerable to events such as this? Makes sense.

mike65

Blay wrote: »

It makes sense in some ways, if there are guns out there and people willing to use them for the wrong reasons then why should person A not have one to protect themselves?

I think its been shown that those who own guns are more likely to get shot as they pose a threat that they otherwise wouldn't.

Also suggesting that a gun battle in a dark enclosed area is the best way to stop a gun toting killer behind a plume of smoke is retarded - instead of 12 dead there would probably be twice that.

old hippy

Blay wrote: »

So the populace in a country like the US with a high rate of firearms ownership and people willing to use them on others should be unarmed and vulnerable to events such as this? Makes sense.

Why stop there, they need armed militias and gated communities, too. Just to make sure.

Duffy the Vampire Slayer

Not sure if its been posted, but its highly relevant.

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

Jesus Shaves

Nodin wrote: »

Yep. Jack the Ripper and Albert Fish's Xtravision account shows multiple hirings of Evil Dead II.

link?

MadsL

omgitsthelazor wrote: »

It's an incorrect stat, you're actually 5 times more likely in the US. The homicidal rate is 5 times higher over there, the violent assault rate among youths 12 times higher.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=countries+by+homicide+rate

Nonsense -

USA 4.7 per 100,000
Europe 3.5 per 100,000

From your link!!


http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/statistics/Homicide/Globa_study_on_homicide_2011_web.pdf


Estonia has a worse homicide rate than the US

previous user

danniemcq wrote: »

oh aye, sure look at Canada. Way to polite to spoil movies but just as many guns and nowhere near as many deaths!

I always thought Canada was a heck of a lot safer than America, what the hell is goin on with people?

Witcher

old hippy wrote: »

Why stop there, they need armed militias and gated communities, too. Just to make sure.

:rolleyes: Right, discussion over.

No matter what we think people still carry firearms in the US for their protection be it right or wrong.

Manic Moran

old hippy wrote: »

Because then you get an armed populace which increases fear and retaliation and innocent bystanders. No thanks.

It is interesting to make a comparison between States which, for example, have few prohibitions on an armed populace (eg Vermont all but allows you to carry pretty much any gun, anywhere, any time without a license) to States which have far stricter controls, such as California where I, an Army officer with a great security clearance, am not permitted to carry anything bigger than a Swiss Army knife.

Every time there is a move by a State to make it easier for people to carry firearms, there are those who bring up a parade of horribles, blood flowing on the streets, etc, yet it has never happened, and we have about 20 years of data to draw upon now.

The bottom line is that allowing people to be armed on a daily basis does not make the violent crime rate worse, and usually doesn't make the violent crime rate better. It does, however, have a direct effect on the vulnerability of the individuals who choose to be armed.

I think its been shown that those who own guns are more likely to get shot as they pose a threat that they otherwise wouldn't.

So what? It's my choice to bring a gun, it's my choice to produce it. If I'm using as firearm, it's because I -already- think life is at risk, so from my perspective I'm certainly no worse off because of it. At least it's a variable under my own control, and the 'threat I pose that I otherwise wouldn't' could prove quite viable.

old hippy

Blay wrote: »

:rolleyes: Right, discussion over.

No matter what we think people still carry firearms in the US for their protection be it right or wrong.

And when everyone is tooled up, a utopian age of peace and goodwill follows?

MadsL

old hippy wrote: »

And when everyone is tooled up, a utopian age of peace and goodwill follows?

Nah, have to legalise pot as well to make that happen.

Manic Moran

And when everyone is tooled up, a utopian age of peace and goodwill follows?

An armed society is a polite society is a phrase which probably came about for a reason

However, since we know we're not in a utopian age of peace and goodwill right now, I don't see how giving individuals a fighting chance (literally) against what we can consider the forces of evil is a bad thing.

old hippy

Manic Moran wrote: »

An armed society is a polite society is a phrase which probably came about for a reason

However, since we know we're not in a utopian age of peace and goodwill right now, I don't see how giving individuals a fighting chance (literally) against what we can consider the forces of evil is a bad thing.

Well, I don't believe in "evil" but I don't reckon having everyone tooled up is the answer, either. That massacre would have resulted in a helluva lot more casualties had everyone been armed.

Da Shins Kelly

When I think of how excited everyone was in the theater I was in last night and then think about all those poor people all feeling the same excitement as us and then getting cut down like that...it just makes me really sad.

Suryavarman

Interesting article from the Huffington Post today related to the shooting. Although mass shootings are more common in America lately, single victim shootings are down.

Article:

Single-victim gun killings have dropped more than 40 percent since 1980, according to 2010 FBI crime data. But the total number of people dying in attacks that claimed four or more victims has climbed from an average of 161 a year in the 1980s to 163 between 2006 and 2008, according to FBI statistics.

Duggys Housemate

MadsL wrote: »

Wanna try a source for that?

Era, you could do this stuff yourself.

in 2011 there were 103 homicides in Oakland. Oakland has a population of about 400,000. Northern Ireland has a population of about 1.8 M, and that ratio has about been the same for the last 40 years i.e. about 4.5 to 1. The number of killings in Norn Ireland would have had to be therefore, about 450 per year to match the Oakland per capita rate.

Which maybe it was for one of those years. Not all. If Norn Iron had a killing rate of 450 per year, it would be 13,500 over the 30 years of the troubles, and you listed about a 1000-2000.

Suryavarman

old hippy wrote: »

Well, I don't believe in "evil" but I don't reckon having everyone tooled up is the answer, either. That massacre would have resulted in a helluva lot more casualties had everyone been armed.

You don't know that. For all we know, if one or two people had their guns we might only have 2 or 3 dead along with the gunman.

Duggys Housemate

Suryavarman wrote: »

You don't know that. For all we know, if one or two people had their guns we might only have 2 or 3 dead along with the gunman.

Or 300 as everybody starts shooting.

MadsL

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

Era, you could do this stuff yourself.

in 2011 there were 103 homicides in Oakland. Oakland has a population of about 400,000. Northern Ireland has a population of about 1.8 M, and that ratio has about been the same for the last 40 years i.e. about 4.5 to 1. The number of killings in Norn Ireland would have had to be therefore, about 450 per year to match the Oakland per capita rate.

Which maybe it was for one of those years. Not all. If Norn Iron had a killing rate of 450 per year, it would be 13,500 over the 30 years of the troubles, and you listed about a 1000-2000.

I listed direct numbers of deaths linked to paramilitary activity in the 70s. You are comparing that to Oakland(!) in 2011?

The point I'm making is that paramilitary activity in NI and RoI killed far more than the nutjobs that some people on this forum are using to tar all Americans with the same brush. Typical thoughtless knee-jerk reactions without thinking about the needless deaths in Ireland and the UK. That's my point.

Manic Moran

Or 300 as everybody starts shooting.

There have been a number of instances where personnel who are not members of the local constabulary have been present at incidents with their own firearms, be it the University of Texas or the New Life Church.

I am at a loss to think of any wherein this has resulted in an increased death toll (or even just resulted in the responding police shooting the wrong person), but perhaps you can link me to some to support your proposition.

Mickeroo

Manic Moran wrote: »

An armed society is a polite society is a phrase which probably came about for a reason

However, since we know we're not in a utopian age of peace and goodwill right now, I don't see how giving individuals a fighting chance (literally) against what we can consider the forces of evil is a bad thing.

Most societies were armed in the past and in comparison we do live in a utopian age of piece and good will.

Just to be clear I don't have a major opinion on gun laws as such, but I genuinely think the need to walk around armed every day has never been smaller. Certainly in Europe at any rate.

Duggys Housemate

MadsL wrote: »

I listed direct numbers of deaths linked to paramilitary activity in the 70s. You are comparing that to Oakland(!) in 2011?

The point I'm making is that paramilitary activity in NI and RoI killed far more than the nutjobs that some people on this forum are using to tar all Americans with the same brush. Typical thoughtless knee-jerk reactions without thinking about the needless deaths in Ireland and the UK. That's my point.

Nonsense. The per capita rates of killing in Oakland have in fact, decreased, over the last few years, like most of America, so the rate would have been higher in the past. It was 100 a year when I live in San Fransciso about 6 years ago - they reported it every time it hit 100, about November. Maybe in 1976 it was 90 a year but very high per capita.

The numbers that the Northern Irish problem would have had to have killed in the 30 years of the troubles would therefore have to have been about 12-15 thousand proportionately. The rate in Oakland is 3-4 times higher than northern Ireland at it's height and it is far from the most violent American city.

Duggys Housemate

Manic Moran wrote: »

There have been a number of instances where personnel who are not members of the local constabulary have been present at incidents with their own firearms, be it the University of Texas or the New Life Church.

I am at a loss to think of any wherein this has resulted in an increased death toll (or even just resulted in the responding police shooting the wrong person), but perhaps you can link me to some to support your proposition.

If we can find a shooting in darkened room where everybody was as armed as the perpetrator maybe we would have the stats.

Anyway, do you think this guys easy access to arms made his killing spree more, or less possible. Would he have been as effective with a knife and some pepper spray?

Da Shins Kelly

MadsL wrote: »

I listed direct numbers of deaths linked to paramilitary activity in the 70s. You are comparing that to Oakland(!) in 2011?

The point I'm making is that paramilitary activity in NI and RoI killed far more than the nutjobs that some people on this forum are using to tar all Americans with the same brush. Typical thoughtless knee-jerk reactions without thinking about the needless deaths in Ireland and the UK. That's my point.

Also, it's probably worth remembering that what was happening in Northern Ireland was a civil war. Even if the casualties in Northern Ireland were higher, those are casualties inflicted in a time of conflict. Needless deaths, yes, most deaths are, but it was a different world and environment in which those deaths occurred. This is peace-time in the US, they are not engaged in civil war. It's a gun-control problem (which neither Obama nor Romney have addressed in their statements about the incident). I agree with not tarring everyone with the same brush - people here are horrified by this - but something is wrong. I don't know how they could go about fixing things here with regards to guns, the problem is so far gone, but something needs to be done about it. No one wants to rub anyone the wrong way though, not coming up to election time.

MadsL

Da Shins Kelly wrote: »

Also, it's probably worth remembering that what was happening in Northern Ireland was a civil war. Even if the casualties in Northern Ireland were higher, those are casualties inflicted in a time of conflict. Needless deaths, yes, most deaths are, but it was a different world and environment in which those deaths occurred. This is peace-time in the US, they are not engaged in civil war. It's a gun-control problem (which neither Obama nor Romney have addressed in their statements about the incident). I agree with not tarring everyone with the same brush - people here are horrified by this - but something is wrong. I don't know how they could go about fixing things here with regards to guns, the problem is so far gone, but something needs to be done about it. No one wants to rub anyone the wrong way though, not coming up to election time.

But is no more a American problem any more than terrorism is an Irish problem. Rampage killings happen everywhere, and the US is not top of that list in terms of numbers.

The way some people carry on you would think this happens every week.

Tym

Which maybe it was for one of those years. Not all. If Norn Iron had a killing rate of 450 per year, it would be 13,500 over the 30 years of the troubles, and you listed about a 1000-2000.

Eh, you did say Oakland was more dangerous than Norther Ireland during the troubles, so only the years of the troubles in both "states" should matter.

Anyway, do you think this guys easy access to arms made his killing spree more, or less possible. Would he have been as effective with a knife and some pepper spray?

The Osaka school massacre?

How about petrol and a match? Or a homemade flame thrower? (even if he blew himself up it wouldn't have been good). Or petrol bombs?

Da Shins Kelly

MadsL wrote: »

But is no more a American problem any more than terrorism is an Irish problem. Rampage killings happen everywhere, and the US is not top of that list in terms of numbers.

The way some people carry on you would think this happens every week.

Sure, it doesn't happen as frequently as people may think, but it's still a problem. And anyone who thinks that there isn't a problem in the US with guns is just burying their heads in the sand.

MadsL

Tym wrote: »

Eh, you did say Oakland was more dangerous than Norther Ireland during the troubles, so only the years of the troubles in both "states" should matter.



The Osaka school massacre?

How about petrol and a match? Or a homemade flame thrower? (even if he blew himself up it wouldn't have been good). Or petrol bombs?

Biggest school massacre ever in the US was in 1927 and he used a car bomb, 44 dead and 58 injured. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Tech_massacre

MadsL

Da Shins Kelly wrote: »

Sure, it doesn't happen as frequently as people may think, but it's still a problem. And anyone who thinks that there isn't a problem in the US with guns is just burying their heads in the sand.

Describe what you think is the problem with legally held firearms? How does that compare to say, Switzerland?

Manic Moran

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

If we can find a shooting in darkened room where everybody was as armed as the perpetrator maybe we would have the stats.

It is unlikely that we will ever see practicable legislation which includes ambient light levels, noise levels, or percentages of armed personnel as criteria. Any suggestions as to the practicality of legalising one thing or prohibiting another need to look at the larger issue.

Anyway, do you think this guys easy access to arms made his killing spree more, or less possible. Would he have been as effective with a knife and some pepper spray?

Oh, easily more possible. Do you think someone's access to alcohol made driving drunk and killing someone more or less possible?

The problem with saying that 'if he didn't have access to a gun, he couldn't have a killing spree' is the counter-effect on how many cases of defensive gun uses could not have taken place because the citizens did not have a firearm to defend themselves with. How many thousands of people are killed in mass kilings with firearms, vs how many thousands of people use a firearm legitimately when in fear of their safety?

token101

MadsL wrote: »

More than one, yes.

Hungerford, UK
Dunblane, UK
Cumbria, UK
Kauhajoki, Finland.
Tuusula, Finland.
Emsdetten, Germany,
Erfurt, Germany

Fair enough, but Hungerford was in the 80s, Dunblane in the 90s, Cumbria was in the 2010s. Even if there was 5 in the last decade; the US averages 20 mass shootings a year. Link: http://www.bradycampaign.org/xshare/pdf/major-shootings.pdf

Duggys Housemate

Tym wrote: »

Eh, you did say Oakland was more dangerous than Norther Ireland during the troubles, so only the years of the troubles in both "states" should matter.

FFS, unless you can prove that Oakland's per capita murder rate has declined since the seventies or eighties then my point not only stands, but is amplified.

And obviously if we move out of the years of the troubles for Northern Ireland the ratios massively diverge, from 3-1 to 10/20-1.


I will go and find Oakland's murder rate in the seventies, because I tend to link to stuff, as I did for the 2011 figures.


We will then work out the rate and compare to Northern Ireland, be very surprised if Oakland is not higher.

The main point about 2011, is that per capita in 2011, Oakland has more killings than Northern Ireland during the average years of the troubles. Thats hardly changed since the seventies.

MadsL

Fair enough, but Hungerford was in the 80s, Dunblane in the 90s, Cumbria was in the 2010s. Even if there was 5 in the last decade; the US averages 20 mass shootings a year. Link: http://www.bradycampaign.org/xshare/...-shootings.pdf

You asked for just one, I gave you plenty. Here are other spree killings outside the US. Stop with the myth that this is an American problem, it happens all over the world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spree_killer#List_of_spree_killers

btw - the Brady campaign is hardly an independent source, you might also want to balance that with the numbers of crimes prevented by gun carrying citizens.

token101

MadsL wrote: »

You asked for just one, I gave you plenty. Here are other spree killings outside the US. Stop with the myth that this is an American problem, it happens all over the world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spree_killer#List_of_spree_killers

You gave a few stretching as far back as the 80's. Happens everywhere, but seemingly a lot more in America. But sure it's all just a conspiracy to get people's guns. Is the Brady campaign factually incorrect? FFS if everyone is carrying guns then obviously there's going to be more crimes carried out!

MadsL

token101 wrote: »

You gave a few stretching as far back as the 80's. Happens everywhere, but seemingly a lot more in America. But sure it's all just a conspiracy to get people's guns. Is the Brady campaign factually incorrect? FFS if everyone is carrying guns then obviously there's going to be more crimes carried out!

There are 300 million people in the US, of course it happens more than other countries!

Switzerland the highest rate of gun ownership in Europe. Crime rates are not higher. Try thinking about it.

token101

MadsL wrote: »

Switzerland the highest rate of gun ownership in Europe. Crime rates are not higher. Try thinking about it.

Edit: Just more than half of what the US has. Try thinking about that.

goose2005

MadsL wrote: »

There are 300 million people in the US, of course it happens more than other countries!

Switzerland the highest rate of gun ownership in Europe. Crime rates are not higher. Try thinking about it.

Actually Serbia does.

How many thousands of people are killed in mass kilings with firearms, vs how many thousands of people use a firearm legitimately when in fear of their safety?

Very few, and even fewer. Seriously, if you want to protect yourself, get a dog. Or a good lock on the door.

MadsL

token101 wrote: »

Edit: Just more than half of what the US has. Try thinking about that.

So spree killings happen more in the US??

The top 10 of recent spree killings. Just two in the US.

2011 Norway attacks Norway 2011 Anders Behring Breivik 77
Uiryeong massacre South Korea 1982 Woo Bum-kon 57
Port Arthur massacre Australia 1996 Martin Bryant 35
Virginia Tech massacre United States 2007 Seung-Hui Cho 32
Pozzetto Massacre Colombia 1986 Campo Elías Delgado 30
Tsuyama massacre Japan 1938 Mutsuo Toi 30
Cave of the Patriarchs massacre Hebron,West Bank 1994 Baruch Goldstein 29
 Killeen Texas Shootings United States 1991 George Hennard 23
Tian Mingjian incident China 1994 Tian Mingjian 23
Dunblane massacre United Kingdom 1996 Thomas Hamilton 17

MadsL

goose2005 wrote: »

Very few, and even fewer. Seriously, if you want to protect yourself, get a dog. Or a good lock on the door.

And when the door is busted open and the dog poisoned should I be allowed to defend my wife or not?

token101

MadsL wrote: »

So spree killings happen more in the US??

The top 10 of recent spree killings. Just two in the US.

2011 Norway attacks Norway 2011 Anders Behring Breivik 77
Uiryeong massacre South Korea 1982 Woo Bum-kon 57
Port Arthur massacre Australia 1996 Martin Bryant 35
Virginia Tech massacre United States 2007 Seung-Hui Cho 32
Pozzetto Massacre Colombia 1986 Campo Elías Delgado 30
Tsuyama massacre Japan 1938 Mutsuo Toi 30
Cave of the Patriarchs massacre Hebron,West Bank 1994 Baruch Goldstein 29
 Killeen Texas Shootings United States 1991 George Hennard 23
Tian Mingjian incident China 1994 Tian Mingjian 23
Dunblane massacre United Kingdom 1996 Thomas Hamilton 17

The US is still the most prominent name on that list! Just click on the year tab and go through the number of US shootings in the last decade.

MadsL wrote: »

And when the door is busted open and the dog poisoned should I be allowed to defend my wife or not?

Are you being chased by the Russian Mafia? If not, there's no words for that sentiment really other than :pac:

Cianos

MadsL wrote: »

So spree killings happen more in the US??

The top 10 of recent spree killings. Just two in the US.

2011 Norway attacks Norway 2011 Anders Behring Breivik 77
Uiryeong massacre South Korea 1982 Woo Bum-kon 57
Port Arthur massacre Australia 1996 Martin Bryant 35
Virginia Tech massacre United States 2007 Seung-Hui Cho 32
Pozzetto Massacre Colombia 1986 Campo Elías Delgado 30
Tsuyama massacre Japan 1938 Mutsuo Toi 30
Cave of the Patriarchs massacre Hebron,West Bank 1994 Baruch Goldstein 29
 Killeen Texas Shootings United States 1991 George Hennard 23
Tian Mingjian incident China 1994 Tian Mingjian 23
Dunblane massacre United Kingdom 1996 Thomas Hamilton 17

The only country to appear twice in the list. Not a great example for your argument.

Suryavarman

token101 wrote: »

Are you being chased by the Russian Mafia? If not, there's no words for that sentiment really other than :pac:

Wasn't there a case in the US last year where a single mother had her dog poisoned and her house broken into and then protected herself by shooting the people breaking into her house?

token101

Suryavarman wrote: »

Wasn't there a case in the US last year where a single mother had her dog poisoned and her house broken into and then protected herself by shooting the people breaking into her house?

And how many cases have there been where people have been killed by their own guns?

K-9

Don't know much about mass killings statistics but why in the name of God are people comparing the North to US stats?

Suryavarman

token101 wrote: »

And how many cases have there been where people have been killed by their own guns?

Dunno.

B.A._Baracus

For the life of me I have no clue as to why this thread is 50 pages long


It was some random nutjob. So why go on about gun laws this, mass killings that. It was just some random nutjob.

No different if someone walked into st stephens green park tomorrow and started killing people.

meoklmrk91

Suryavarman wrote: »

Wasn't there a case in the US last year where a single mother had her dog poisoned and her house broken into and then protected herself by shooting the people breaking into her house?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2082716/Sarah-McKinley-Teen-mom-shoots-dead-intruder-Justin-Shane-Martin-looking-prescription-drugs.html

Manic Moran

goose2005 wrote: »

Very few, and even fewer. Seriously, if you want to protect yourself, get a dog. Or a good lock on the door.

Correct on the number of mass killings, but incorrect on the latter. The most conservative estimate is over 100,000. The most generous estimate is 2.5 million.

See this Dept of Justice report, which goes over the large discrepancy between the two and splits the difference. It concludes aproximately 1.5 million defensive gun uses per year.
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/165476.pdf

The data is now 15 years old, but there are more guns on US streets now, not less.

The mathematics behind assessing defensive gun uses is long and there are a number of websites which attempt to sort out the differences, but the bottom line is a lot of Americans legally use their firearms for defence.

MadsL

K-9 wrote: »

Don't know much about mass killings statistics but why in the name of God are people comparing the North to US stats?

290 odd people killed in the top US spree killings of the last 30 years compared to over 2000 dead in the sectarian campaigns. But the US is a "sick society"

And how many cases have there been where people have been killed by their own guns?

A very small number.

# of unjustified gun deaths, provided by the Violence Policy Center, for 2011:
Total: 54

Out of those 54 gun deaths, there were:
Gun accidents, suicides, negligent discharges, etc: 17
Murders, involved in illegal activities, drive-by-shootings, etc: 31
Actual unjustified shootings: 2 (of with all 2 cases are still pending)
One incident where the CCW-Licensees shooting was ruled justified, but the attacker shot back, killing the CCW-Licensee - which somehow is counted as unjustified shooting by the VPC

token101 wrote:

Are you being chased by the Russian Mafia? If not, there's no words for that sentiment really other than

That pretty much seals the deal that you know FA about the US. Best stick to Canada, eh?