Jump to content

Shooting Massacre at Dark Knight Rises Premiere


Ned

Recommended Posts

I take it you've never been hit by a bullet while wearing protective gear? (I haven't). The way a bulletproof vest works is that it keeps you alive...it doesn't make you invincible. I've heard getting shot while wearing a bulletproof vest describe as "being kicked by a horse". You'll be lucky if you don't have broken ribs....

 

So while someone with a gun may not kill him, they certainly might have been able to incapacitate him or even scare him away.

polvCwJ.gif
"It's not a rest for me, it's a rest for the weights." - Dom Mazzetti

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it's stereotyping at all to be afraid and suspicious of somebody who is carrying a gun. There is no need whatsoever, not at all, not one minuscule good reason to be carrying a gun in public, so when you do, people will think the worst. We don't live in the wild west, we live in a civilised society, and relaxed gun laws are the one thing keeping the danger up at the moment.

How about stopping a crazed gunman? That seems like a pretty good reason to me.

If even one person in that theatre had a gun there would probably be 1\5 of the casualties that there actually were.

 

Two wrongs don't make a right?

 

If there were more restrictive gun laws, he may not have been there at all in the first place to carry out the shootings.

 

However, to even do as you say, guns would need to be even more prevalent and that in turn would give the opportunity to have more lethal shootings. It's a real snowball effect which could have deadly consequences. The best way to stop it completely would be to have no legal guns.

 

In the long term, strict gun laws are the only sure-fire way to limit lethal shootings.

 

So while someone with a gun may not kill him, they certainly might have been able to incapacitate him or even scare him away.

 

Or they could have run scared due to being completely un-trained in the situation, could have missed the gunman and got themselves shot, or even worse accidentally shot one of the other innocent people panicking and running in a dark theatre.

 

In reality, civilians aren't rambo. The laws need to protect the people, not make the people need to defend themselves.

Want to be my friend? Look under my name to the left<<< and click the 'Add as friend' button!

zqXeV.jpg

Big thanks to Stevepole for the signature!^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The armour might not stop all the injuries, or even prevent them from escalating to the point where they will be life threatening if left untreated, but full SWAT ballistic armour against a 9mm or other small caliber hand gun would certainly allow you to be at least partially mobile and very alert even after taking multiple hits. If you had multiple people shooting at him, yeah, he'd probably go down. But with that kind of armour he would still be more than able to keep shooting long enough to kill whoever fired at him and probably everyone in his immediate vicinity. Even a large caliber handgun at close range would probably take several shots to make him go down immediately.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another thought about giving people guns to stop others from doing these shootings.

 

Does it not require the gunman to start killing before he can be effectively stopped? In the case in hand, somebody viewing the film would have taken at least a few seconds to take out their gun, line up a shot and take it, all while the gunman was killing people.

 

Along this line, the only thing more relaxed gun laws would do would be to lessen the dead, not prevent the killing.

Want to be my friend? Look under my name to the left<<< and click the 'Add as friend' button!

zqXeV.jpg

Big thanks to Stevepole for the signature!^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there were more restrictive gun laws, he may not have been there at all in the first place to carry out the shootings.

 

He had a smoke grenade. Those are illegal to own by civilians. Did the law stop him from obtaining and consequently using one? Furthermore, I can buy just about any weapon I want online, and have it shipped to me discretely (e.g., in parts) without being able to be traced at all. How does making guns illegal stop me from doing this? Oh wait, it doesn't. My morals and sanity prevent me (after all, I do not like guns personally).

 

I would also like to point out that drugs are illegal, yet look how easily obtainable they are... Guns would be no different if they were suddenly banned in the United States.

  • Like 1

ozXHe7P.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but full SWAT ballistic armour against a 9mm or other small caliber hand gun would certainly allow you to be at least partially mobile and very alert even after taking multiple hits.

Getting hit by a small caliber gun even in a bulletproof vest would still take the wind out of him, and would likely distract him long enough for lots of people to get down.

 

That said, I've read since the event that a very bright strobing flashlight would also provide that desired effect, I think everyone (regardless of belief on guns) would do well to look into that as personal protection.

99 dungeoneering achieved, thanks to everyone that celebrated with me!

 

♪♪ Don't interrupt me as I struggle to complete this thought
Have some respect for someone more forgetful than yourself ♪♪

♪♪ And I'm not done
And I won't be till my head falls off ♪♪

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there were more restrictive gun laws, he may not have been there at all in the first place to carry out the shootings.

 

He had a smoke grenade. Those are illegal to own by civilians. Did the law stop him from obtaining and consequently using one? Furthermore, I can buy just about any weapon I want online, and have it shipped to me discretely (e.g., in parts) without being able to be traced at all. How does making guns illegal stop me from doing this? Oh wait, it doesn't. My morals and sanity prevent me (after all, I do not like guns personally).

 

I would also like to point out that drugs are illegal, yet look how easily obtainable they are... Guns would be no different if they were suddenly banned in the United States.

 

THANK YOU. Trying to make and enforce effective gun control in the U.S. would cause a huge political shit storm, and ultimately would not be effective because people could still get a hold of guns. You'd want a time machine in order to implement effective gun control laws.

 

As for what being shot in a bullet proof vest would do to you - that really depends on the person and how much adrenaline they have. A strong, well built person with a large amount of adrenaline running through them should easily be able to shrug off having their bulletproof vest get shot.

 

Also, I loved reading about the theatre asking people who have guns to leave. If an employee at the theatre of the shooting politely asked the gunman to leave because said employee noticed the gunman had a gun, that employee probably would have been shot.

Squab unleashes Megiddo! Completed all quests and hard diaries. 75+ Skiller. (At one point.) 2000+ total. 99 Magic.
[spoiler=The rest of my sig. You know you wanna see it.]

my difinition of noob is i dont like u, either u are better then me or u are worst them me

Buying spins make you a bad person...don't do it. It's like buying nukes for North Korea.

Well if it bothers you that the game is more fun now, then you can go cry in a corner. :shame:

your article was the equivalent of a circumcized porcupine

The only thing wrong with it is the lack of a percentage for when you need to stroke it.

 


7ApdH.png
squabharpy.png
Poignant Purple to Lokie's Ravishing Red and Alg's Brilliant Blue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, as much as I think the US would be better off without firearms I don't think it can be done.

Matt: You want that eh? You want everything good for you. You want everything that's--falls off garbage can

Camera guy: Whoa, haha, are you okay dude?

Matt: You want anything funny that happens, don't you?

Camera guy: still laughing

Matt: You want the funny shit that happens here and there, you think it comes out of your [bleep]ing [wagon] pushes garbage can down, don't you? You think it's funny? It comes out of here! running towards Camera guy

Camera guy: runs away still laughing

Matt: You think the funny comes out of your mother[bleep]ing creativity? Comes out of Satan, mother[bleep]er! nn--ngh! pushes Camera guy down

Camera guy: Hoooholy [bleep]!

Matt: FUNNY ISN'T REAL! FUNNY ISN'T REAL!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the topic of an armed civilian accidentally hitting a bystander, all you need is a few people with guns to fire some shots into the ceiling. If anything, it would make the gunman think twice, unless of course he was drugged up and oblivious to his surroundings.

Working on max and completionist capes.

2435/2475

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And now because the media is gushing over this maniac's foresight in using body armor, the majority of future psychopaths will likely remember and buy swat armor and the like.

At least, that's what I fear.

The only difference between Hitler and the man next door who comes home and beats his kids every day is circumstance. The intent is the same-- to harm others.

[hide=Tifers say the darndest things]

I told her there was a secret method to doing it - and there is - but my once nimble and agile fingers were unable to perform because I was under the influence.

I would laugh, not hate. I'm a male. :(

Since when was Ireland an island...? :wall:

I actually have a hobby of licking public toilet seats.

[/hide]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, I loved reading about the theatre asking people who have guns to leave. If an employee at the theatre of the shooting politely asked the gunman to leave because said employee noticed the gunman had a gun, that employee probably would have been shot.

 

In this instance, that would probably be the case, yes.

 

But I really didn't mean that at all... I think most people who read my post would have gathered as much. :P On your average day, if someone walked into the theatre and they had a concealed weapons permit (they just carry a handgun on them for protection) and say, the corner of their shirt lifted up and revealed the gun... I doubt that person would randomly whip their gun out and shoot me or any of my employees if I asked them to leave.

 

I clearly didn't mean someone should have walked up to someone who was busy massacring people and asked them politely to put their gun away.

glut.gif
2tchvHp.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the topic of an armed civilian accidentally hitting a bystander, all you need is a few people with guns to fire some shots into the ceiling. If anything, it would make the gunman think twice, unless of course he was drugged up and oblivious to his surroundings.

I'd think they'd just start shooting at the guys with guns. Maybe grab a person as a human shield.

lighviolet1lk4.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the topic of an armed civilian accidentally hitting a bystander, all you need is a few people with guns to fire some shots into the ceiling. If anything, it would make the gunman think twice, unless of course he was drugged up and oblivious to his surroundings.

I'd think they'd just start shooting at the guys with guns. Maybe grab a person as a human shield.

 

Eh, probably so, but you shouldn't be carrying a gun unless you are willing for something like that to happen. Besides, the gunman would have a tough time picking out a civilian with a gun if the guy is halfway smart about it. If you are too scared to take some shots at the gunman, then by all means go lie down on the floor and unload into the ceiling.

Working on max and completionist capes.

2435/2475

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there were more restrictive gun laws, he may not have been there at all in the first place to carry out the shootings.

 

He had a smoke grenade. Those are illegal to own by civilians. Did the law stop him from obtaining and consequently using one? Furthermore, I can buy just about any weapon I want online, and have it shipped to me discretely (e.g., in parts) without being able to be traced at all. How does making guns illegal stop me from doing this? Oh wait, it doesn't. My morals and sanity prevent me (after all, I do not like guns personally).

 

I would also like to point out that drugs are illegal, yet look how easily obtainable they are... Guns would be no different if they were suddenly banned in the United States.

 

THANK YOU. Trying to make and enforce effective gun control in the U.S. would cause a huge political shit storm, and ultimately would not be effective because people could still get a hold of guns. You'd want a time machine in order to implement effective gun control laws.

 

The reason they are so easy to get in the first place is because of the crap gun laws. Guns are so widespread in the US that they can probably be gotten by anybody at this stage who has a mental illness. The country seems so blasé about guns that it's dug its own grave.

 

With stricter gun laws, the supply chain is cut. Not every gunman would be stopped, as illegal firearms are available in every country. However, when the culture of the country (such as the UK) makes guns into a bad thing, getting hold of guns through illegal channels becomes harder. For one, guns wouldn't be as present in society, so the sight of one immediately rings alarm bells, possibly tipping off police. Two, with less of them being sold legally, there is less chance in them getting into the wrong hands and into the illegal channels. Three, with guns being illegal, children grow up with the knowledge that they are a bad thing and not something to aspire to have (in most cases anyway).

 

Again, as I have said, the US has got itself in such a crap place with guns it will take a long time to sort things out. But the longer the gun laws stay in place, the worse it will get and possible get to a stage where it is impossible to fix.

Want to be my friend? Look under my name to the left<<< and click the 'Add as friend' button!

zqXeV.jpg

Big thanks to Stevepole for the signature!^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there were more restrictive gun laws, he may not have been there at all in the first place to carry out the shootings.

 

He had a smoke grenade. Those are illegal to own by civilians. Did the law stop him from obtaining and consequently using one? Furthermore, I can buy just about any weapon I want online, and have it shipped to me discretely (e.g., in parts) without being able to be traced at all. How does making guns illegal stop me from doing this? Oh wait, it doesn't. My morals and sanity prevent me (after all, I do not like guns personally).

 

I would also like to point out that drugs are illegal, yet look how easily obtainable they are... Guns would be no different if they were suddenly banned in the United States.

 

THANK YOU. Trying to make and enforce effective gun control in the U.S. would cause a huge political shit storm, and ultimately would not be effective because people could still get a hold of guns. You'd want a time machine in order to implement effective gun control laws.

 

As for what being shot in a bullet proof vest would do to you - that really depends on the person and how much adrenaline they have. A strong, well built person with a large amount of adrenaline running through them should easily be able to shrug off having their bulletproof vest get shot.

 

Also, I loved reading about the theatre asking people who have guns to leave. If an employee at the theatre of the shooting politely asked the gunman to leave because said employee noticed the gunman had a gun, that employee probably would have been shot.

 

I'd have no clue how to get hold of a weapon. If a really had to, I would probably try breaking into a gun club's house or something, so would still get hold of a "legal" gun.

 

On all recent shooting sprees here, the shooters got their guns from parents or close relatives. We've also had two I think where no guns and were involved, and no one died.

 

Gun control laws are a federal issue in the US, right? That's what would make effective gun laws a lot more difficult. I am still of the opinion gun laws could work for the US too, they just need some time until enough weapons are removed from the cycle. Of course, if you can just get a firearm in the next state...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there were more restrictive gun laws, he may not have been there at all in the first place to carry out the shootings.

 

He had a smoke grenade. Those are illegal to own by civilians. Did the law stop him from obtaining and consequently using one? Furthermore, I can buy just about any weapon I want online, and have it shipped to me discretely (e.g., in parts) without being able to be traced at all. How does making guns illegal stop me from doing this? Oh wait, it doesn't. My morals and sanity prevent me (after all, I do not like guns personally).

 

I would also like to point out that drugs are illegal, yet look how easily obtainable they are... Guns would be no different if they were suddenly banned in the United States.

 

THANK YOU. Trying to make and enforce effective gun control in the U.S. would cause a huge political shit storm, and ultimately would not be effective because people could still get a hold of guns. You'd want a time machine in order to implement effective gun control laws.

 

The reason they are so easy to get in the first place is because of the crap gun laws. Guns are so widespread in the US that they can probably be gotten by anybody at this stage who has a mental illness. The country seems so blasé about guns that it's dug its own grave.

 

With stricter gun laws, the supply chain is cut. Not every gunman would be stopped, as illegal firearms are available in every country. However, when the culture of the country (such as the UK) makes guns into a bad thing, getting hold of guns through illegal channels becomes harder. For one, guns wouldn't be as present in society, so the sight of one immediately rings alarm bells, possibly tipping off police. Two, with less of them being sold legally, there is less chance in them getting into the wrong hands and into the illegal channels. Three, with guns being illegal, children grow up with the knowledge that they are a bad thing and not something to aspire to have (in most cases anyway).

 

Again, as I have said, the US has got itself in such a crap place with guns it will take a long time to sort things out. But the longer the gun laws stay in place, the worse it will get and possible get to a stage where it is impossible to fix.

 

You don't know much about gun laws. I could not personally obtain a gun legally because of mental illness. The person in question had no history of it. However, I could easily obtain one online from dark recesses of the internet. Regardless of what country I live in! Furthermore, we have a big problem to the south of us. It's a big country called Mexico and the drug cartels would soon fine, in the case of strict gun laws, a much more profitable endeavor than drugs...

 

I would also like to outline that in much of rural United States, guns are a necessary defense against wild life.

ozXHe7P.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I live in Canada, and I could get a hand gun within 48 hours if I really wanted too. Recently a kid in Jr. High was expelled for having a gun at school, and that was in a good neighbourhood. If gun control laws don't work here, there is no way they will make the US any safer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 hours is too long. It's a 20 minute drive and I can walk out of the store in under 30 minutes with one. (Assuming I'm 21)

 

I had my dad buy my revolver for me, and it took 10 minutes to do the paperwork, 15 minutes for it to get approved, and a few more minutes to make the purchase, have stuff explained to us, etc.

 

Had a really heated discussion with the department head - who is also my boss - about gun control. He's of the opinion that guns in the hands of civilians would have equaled more deaths in the Colorado incident because people would just be wildly shooting and that they would assume that each other is the actual gunman. -.-

Working on max and completionist capes.

2435/2475

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which is possible. In the confusion, anything can happen...

 

But I personally think (and hope) that people will legal guns know what they're doing and will have the thought to at least aim...

polvCwJ.gif
"It's not a rest for me, it's a rest for the weights." - Dom Mazzetti

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 hours is too long. It's a 20 minute drive and I can walk out of the store in under 30 minutes with one. (Assuming I'm 21)

 

I had my dad buy my revolver for me, and it took 10 minutes to do the paperwork, 15 minutes for it to get approved, and a few more minutes to make the purchase, have stuff explained to us, etc.

 

Had a really heated discussion with the department head - who is also my boss - about gun control. He's of the opinion that guns in the hands of civilians would have equaled more deaths in the Colorado incident because people would just be wildly shooting and that they would assume that each other is the actual gunman. -.-

That's probably true.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How exactly would you prepare for a live fire exercise where someone is shooting back though? It's already been conclusively proven that your shooting range accuracy has about as much to do with your live fire accuracy as the batting average of your next door neighbor. A shooting range just means you can aim a gun, but has no correlation to your ability to transfer this skill to a super high stress situation. The closest thing I can think of that might actually help with that would be paintball and airsoft, though neither of those have the potential for death that an opposing assult rifle presents.

 

Add in a freaking smoke grenade and yeah, if you have multiple shooters, it is not unreasonable to assume that people probably would have started shooting at everyone else who was shooting, and probably wouldn't have hit each other, but rather anyone near them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes that is true, but I think it's unlikely that someone would apply for a concealed carry permit unless they are skilled enough to handle their weapon and are willing to use it.

Granted, we are talking a life and death situation here with terrible conditions from the smoke/gas and dark room, so maybe my point is moot.

 

Hmm, the smoke grenade adds a layer of complexity to this situation. Might someone who is coughing (heavily) accidentally shoot an innocent? Yes, that is fairly likely, but still, I think this can be likened to the Good Samaritan law. Goodness knows that everyone is in peril, so can you fault a (hopefully) experienced gunman for accidentally shooting a civilian? They are clearly trying to help out.

 

Yes, I realize that law generally applies to medical personnel, but there is a correlation to be had.

Working on max and completionist capes.

2435/2475

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.