American state of mind.

I hear everyone grieving over the colorado incident, and I agree, its sad. But what is equally or even more sad is the state of mind of the every day American. What was it, 200 people in the theater and not a single person fought back. Not one. Americans, it would seem, would rather lay there and die than fight back and give themselves and those around them a chance at life. The guys that just sat there and wrapped up their girls just to get shot messed up bad. One guy threw his baby down, left his wife and other daughter, and jumped in his car and sped away by himself. This is where we are? They aren't just sheeple, they are true sheep. It's disgusting.



"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."

John Stuart-Mill


I agree that this quote is not a perfect fit to this situation, but I think you would all have to agree that you get my point. How can anyone call themselves a man and have to rely on someone else to protect him and his family. Take care of yourselves guys. Stay fit and protect your family in every way possible. It's a dangerous world out there and we are far to comfortable. The same folks that call us paranoid are the ones being slaughtered. Stay alert. Stay alive.

dali lambone said:

The same folks that call us paranoid are the ones being slaughtered.

Click to expand...

And its the same folks that think the government is the end-all be-all of everything.

--> it was a ritual- human sacrifice- for corporate Hollywood.

http://lewrockwell.com/adams-m/adams-m21.1.html

It appears that others are noticing the same thing as well.

This was actually the second shooting in that town this year. The first, that happen in April, was at a church. The shooter was only able to kill one person before a member of the congregation drew his own firearm and killed the shooter.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/24/suspect-in-colo-church-sh_n_1450313.html

http://denver.cbslocal.com/2012/04/22/2-shot-outside-aurora-church/#.T5WjZzkp8hQ.facebook

http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/cr...-shootings-one-widely-known-the-other-ignored

Feel free to widely post these articles whenever you see someone trying to use this incident to push their anti-firearm agendas!

I generally boycott the propaganda news networks (PNNs) when they set up the circus tent on stories like this, but my wife for whatever reason leaves it on in the background as she does other stuff around the house. Listened to some CNN anchor interviewing Stephen Baldwin (why him?) as a supposed gun rights advocate agreeing that we needed more government gun controls. Apparently purchasing 6,000 rounds of ammo should be grounds for men in black to come knocking on your door. What a farce the cable news is.

PMBug said:

I generally boycott the propaganda news networks (PNNs) when they set up the circus tent on stories like this, but my wife for whatever reason leaves it on in the background as she does other stuff around the house. Listened to some CNN anchor interviewing Stephen Baldwin (why him?) as a supposed gun rights advocate agreeing that we needed more government gun controls. Apparently purchasing 6,000 rounds of ammo should be grounds for men in black to come knocking on your door. What a farce the cable news is.

Click to expand...

I know a good number of avid shooter that average 100 rounds down range a week. They are doing nothing wrong, but 6,000 rounds is barely a years supply to these guys.

Had an interesting conversation on G+ with another gun guy over the weekend.

Neither of us would have been carrying in such a "safe" venue. It's not like even an ultralight is comfortable in a movie theater seat for hours. Then again, neither of us would have been at a midnight showing of a kids movie in the first place. Food for thought -
First, all the spree shootings were in legally gun-free zones. Now they are still are in actual gun-free zones. Guess we should all carry more often?

The real refutation to these guys (not that facts matter to some belief systems) is that realistically, the bad guys always can get guns - cocaine was completely illegal last I checked - how's that working out again? So the only question is do the good guys have them too. You might not like the real world that this implies - but it's what's out there and you can't quit the game or legislate it away - we have human nature to deal with here, and zero attempts to change that have ever worked.

Let's just make spree killings illegal! Oh, wait.

Gun carrying citizens would absolutely be the great equalizer in this situation, but given the circumstances, attack with anything, even a fist. Hell, throw the Twizzlers if you have to. There has to have been a way to move on this guy, if only some one had the will.

Odd that this tragedy happened right before Obama signs that treaty with the UN regarding gun control.

Looking at the firearm laws of Colorado:
http://www.coloradoceasefire.org/munilaws.htm

Aurora specific:
"Aurora

1. "Dangerous weapon" includes firearm
2. Revocation of license for furnishing a firearm to a minor or someone under the influence.
3. Window displays cannot include firearms with barrels less than 12 inches long.
4. Unlawful to carry concealed "dangerous weapon"
5. Unlawful to discharge firearms, unless by law enforcement on duty or on shooting range.
6. Unlawful to possess firearm while under the influence of intoxicant
7. Unlawful to have loaded firearm in motor vehicle.
8. Unlawful for a juvenile to possess a firearm."


In summary, you can not legally carry a loaded firearm in your car to get to the theater. You can not carry a concealed firearm, but if you tried to open carry you would not have been allowed in the theater since that theater chain prohibits firearms on their property.

In these type of cases, I wish you could sue the property owner for preventing you from being able to defend yourself due to anti-firearm rules.

this was exactly my thinking - if ONE single sane person in that theater had his gun on him - there is a big chance, he would kill that crazy piece of shit very early, preventing such a huge tragedy.

...you should see the look on my work colleagues' faces, when I tried to reason that way with them, that this case is PRECISELY what supports gun owning rights, why it should be broadly accepted & 100% legal for any responsible adult to carry the weapon.


On the other note - in cases like that, one person attacking the shooter, might be enough, to unleash the wide attack on him. This is called "social justification" (if I translate it properly, only have read that stuff in Polish), and is a sociological phenomenon: in extreme situations, people (by large) do not know how to react, and they instinctively sought the assurance in "what others are doing". Which forms closed circle, because every one else is also paralyzed and looking for the clues from the others. This is why people can step over a guy who collapses on the street - because they simply do not know what to do, and nobody else is doing anything about that, so they instinctively follow the crowd. Oddly enough, if there wasn't a crowd, but 1/1 situation, most people instinctively will help straight away. But it was experimentally proven, that even if one person starts doing the right thing, then it opens the floodgates and people follow his example, and start helping.

So, simple, pragmatic things to do in such case - just like you guys said - attack him, as "safely" for yourself as you only can. Start with giving clear orders and organize people around you - like, "you, sir, in a black coat, call 911. You sir, sporty type, you come with me, we try to get him from behind, everyone else, do the diversion, drive his attention to you from safe distance." Once they start acting, it might very well be enough to organize the crowd.

Some thing, if you feel you might be having stroke or heart attack in public - you might only have seconds before you are out, use them well - be direct, look in people's face, tell them what to do, that you are probably collapsing, they need to call 911 and make sure yuou are safe b4 paramedics arrive.

And let's hope, it never happens to us.

I belong to an organization, called VCDL, which is VA's version of NRA, but on steroids. Most of the above quoted laws are *illegal*, and can be challenged and tossed out, that's what VCDL does in VA. (Virginia Citizens Defence League)

However, the non-law - firearms not permitted on private property by owner - cannot be challenged as such - it's a basic right of property owners to make rules like that (and pay the consequences if they result in harm to people they encourage or allow to be there!).

You can, however, sue them and likely win if those other laws get tossed out. It's a two step process - you have to get rid of the bad laws first, otherwise, when you sue on the non-law - you're admitting to breaking the others and that's not going to help your suit.

But in the "people's republic of CO", good luck getting something like VCDL going, to get those bad - federally illegal - laws tossed out. VCDL takes localities to court on them and always wins, since that's just like what AZ tried to do - usurp federal laws, in their case on immigration enforcement - and lost.

We've won time and time again in VA on junk like that - federal law that allows carry takes precedence, period. So public places that try to make more restrictive laws are going to lose the instant someone takes them to court about that - we've pulled down a whole lotta "no guns in this park" and similar signs here.

I'm not sure why gun shootings like this are that big news, seems a day doesn't go by when something like this happens in Iraq but much worse.

Iraq attacks kill 36, wound 100
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-wo ... 21f5o.html

I know it's "our people" vs "their people" but if you have emotion about humans you don't know you would think it would apply to the whole human species? Or is it because it happens in places we think are safe like cinemas? It boggles my mind, I think every public thing is unsafe and go prepared the best I can whilst understanding the risks.

Obama is openly using drones to kill women and children now, and I haven't heard a peep yet on the news, except that one sixteen year old american citizen he killed was a "terrorist".

Nope...
Remember Fukishima where the wave killed 10,000+ (maybe 12,000) yet it's the reactor which might have killed a couple and might kill a couple more (rad exposure over years) that gets all the news? That's just another example, they abound. 12k deaths by natural causes? Off the news radar in 2-3 days.

The reason any of this gets in the news is pre-existing agendas by people with power over what gets into the news. They gleefully (ghoulishly?) jump on any tragedy that can be used to support their already existing agenda and try to use suffering to promote their cause. Facts be damned. Morality? They don't give a shit, or self-justify by deluding themselves that their agenda is moral, rather than just controlling others behaviour for their own ends.

Since when has news been about facts? It's about selling advertising and politics. Period.

The difference between stopping a would be mass murderer yourself and waiting for the police to do it:
http://dailyanarchist.com/2012/07/3...n=Feed:+dailyanarchist/blog+(Daily+Anarchist)

His results showed:
14.3 deaths when stopped by police
2.3 deaths when stopped by a civilian

This is in part because police don't stop them - they merely clean up after. I happen to have a bunch of eyewitness accounts of the Va Tech massacre. The cops just sat outside till Cho ran out of ammo...chickenshit all the way.

How come the MSM isn't reporting the witnesses that said there was another shooter and that the smoke screens came from 2 different directions, and that someone answered a phone and opened the back door for him? Who drugged him up for the courtroom appearance and why?

The whole thing was staged and managed by people who want to destroy the 2nd amendment and put TSA in theaters and malls.

I have been watching the circus surrounding the shooting incident with the orange haired idiot, and find myself wondering when the hell people will learn that an armed society is indeed a polite one. When we look back at the wild west days, the truth of it is this; there were significantly fewer violent crimes simply because everyone had either a sidearm or a rifle. Period.

If we as a society were all permitted to open carry a sidearm, or a slung rifle, there would be far, far less crime. In the inner city, the thugs know that you will most likely be unarmed and vulnerable, and so will strike you in small gangs of three or four to overpower you. In my area, I would say that 85 percent of the folks are armed and that around 25% concealed carry. The folks "on the other side of the tracks" know this and rarely fuck with us on this side of the tracks.

That said, just a few miles east of here, we have some public housing complexes and some rent subsidized housing [section 8] which consists of state/county owned tenements and several blocks of duplexes and three plexes that long ago abdicated to the section 8 crowd as a result of being surrounded by government slums. Needless to say, nearly 95% of all gun crimes, violent assaults and rapes occur in this small area of our small city. If I were mayor, I would figure out a way to cordon off this area and overwhelm the area with beat cops and armed and deputized citizens. You have to fight fire with fire in my view, and by taking guns away from law abiding folks, you merely give the upper hand to the criminals who could give a shit less about your gun laws.

In my opinion, the people who would ban firearms are the real criminals here, because they empower and enable those who would use guns whether they are legal or not.

I want to know why his hair is such a goofy orange? Is is clariro red #53?

Maybe he's just a fan...

I was wondering where I put that!! hahaha

"I want to know why his hair is such a goofy orange? Is is clariro red #53? "


excellent Penn (-;

but look at the composite pic in this article -

http://the2012scenario.com/2012/07/denver-shooting-appears-to-be-an-organized-operation/

this lad is the son of a well respected scientist -

James Holmes’ father, Robert Holmes – who is the Senior Lead Scientist at Fair Isaac Corporation in San Diego, according to his Linked In profile – is about to testify before the US Senate inquiry into the Libor scandal.

Click to expand...

rblong2us said:

"I want to know why his hair is such a goofy orange? Is is clariro red #53? "


excellent Penn (-;

but look at the composite pic in this article -

http://the2012scenario.com/2012/07/denver-shooting-appears-to-be-an-organized-operation/

this lad is the son of a well respected scientist -

Click to expand...

Why does this smell like some kind of a set-up?

rblong2us said:

James Holmes’ father, Robert Holmes – who is the Senior Lead Scientist at Fair Isaac Corporation in San Diego, according to his Linked In profile – is about to testify before the US Senate inquiry into the Libor scandal.

Click to expand...

...holly CRAP!!! This is some fecking "coincidence", isn't it?!?

bushi said:

...holly CRAP!!! This is some fecking "coincidence", isn't it?!?

Click to expand...

the bit about the father about to testify cannot be substantiated and could easily be someone with an agenda trying to make a point ........

Why would a scientist testify to the senate about libor anyway?

Supposedly, he's the lead systems (ie. algorithm) designer for FICO (the credit scoring agency).