Aurora shootings

Started by Pilgrim, July 20, 2012, 09:42:34 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Dave W

Quote from: the mojo hobo on July 22, 2012, 11:06:40 AM
The second amendment has nothing to do with crime or the technology of weapons, it is all about the citizens having the right to defend themselves against the government, if the government oversteps it's powers.

^ ^ ^ This.

The next time you hear a government official complain, keep in mind that the second amendment was meant to protect us from them, not the other way around.

Quote from: Pilgrim on July 22, 2012, 05:37:19 PM
I think the temptation to get into a firearm discussion HERE is similar to what we will see acted out in other media.

But gents, this thread will be closed soon if it continues. 

Pointless to argue it here anyway, no new restrictions are going to be enacted because of this. It would be political suicide for most officeholders in most areas. And it wouldn't stop a deranged individual anyway.


Dave W

Quote from: Pilgrim on July 22, 2012, 10:33:34 AM
Dave, I also wonder about all the counseling and other opportunities that are announced after events like this.  
- Did we always really need them, but only have created this support over the past couple of decades?  
- Or perhaps are we as a people less stable and less capable of living through things like this and carrying on?

And why would someone react with anything but regret and sadness when something like the Aurora killings takes place hundreds of miles away? It puzzles me that anyone would need "counseling" for something which has no effect on them personally. It's almost like they're searching for a reason to need personal support.  I don't see why that would be needed...or why someone would pass emails around offering counseling to people in other locations.

...

IMHO the late great philosopher Jimmy Durante had the answer: ""Everybody wants ta get inta da act!" Much more media coverage today just breeds more of this. That's why you see it today. It's not needed by people who aren't personally connected to the victims, and it never was.

Aussie Mark

Quote from: gweimer on July 22, 2012, 06:17:11 PM
I believe he came in through the fire doors after the movie had started.

Oh dear - in this country, fire doors are required to be one way only, and alarmed.
Cheers
Mark
http://rollingstoned.com.au - The Australian Rolling Stones Show
http://thevolts.com.au - The Volts
http://doorsalive.com.au - Doors Alive

OldManC

There's speculation that someone let him in. I have no idea whether that was on purpose, but I did read a report today that police are searching for a person of interest in the case.

I'm another that feels bad for those who have any personal connection to this or any tragedy, but I agree that public mourning by perfect strangers adds a side show feel that seems odd to me.

Pilgrim

He entered the theater, bought a ticket and was dressed like everyone else.  Went in, sat down and once the movie started, got up and went out the fire exit - blocked the door so he could get back in - went to his car (parked next to the exit) and suited up, then re-entered.

For this reason, I expect fire exits to soon be alarmed and available only for emergencies.  I predict there will soon be no more exiting out the front of the theater.  As far as I'm concerned, that's the way it should have been before now.
"A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any other invention with the possible exceptions of handguns and tequila."

nofi

i hope no more knee jerk laws pop up because of this. every day in little ways we lose more personal freedoms. the sad fact is we can't protect ourselves from ourselves. :sad: :rolleyes:
"life is a blur of republicans and meat"- zippy the pinhead

gweimer

Quote from: nofi on July 23, 2012, 08:02:44 AM
the sad fact is we can't protect ourselves from ourselves. :sad: :rolleyes:

We can't even agree on how to do that, either.
Telling tales of drunkenness and cruelty

Dave W

A writer at a blog I subscribe to satirized people looking to blame something external: Aurora Tragedy Shines Spotlight On Medical Schools. I thought the reader comment by Robert White (July 20 @ 7:07 PM) was worth repeating:

IMHO all of these sorts of stories should begin coverage as something like

"Today in the area, some pathetic douchetard who was desperate to achieve a relevance he neither merits nor deserves acted out as it typical of the limp-dicked breed. The nation responds with derision and scorn appropriate to the feckless and pathetic cry for attention."

Then the case number should be announced, and all parties reported as suspects would be forever reported without name nor image simply as casenumber-stroke-one and casenumber-stroke-two and so on.

Finally, if convicted, the persons entire name should be stricken from all records and replaced with a prisioner ID number (sort of the information age equivalent of the Ancient Egypt treatment).

We have created, as a side effect of media sensationalism, a society where, to claim the title of "baddest ass you know" you had to out-do "columbine". Now you will have to out do "batman".

Before this cult of ultimate media infamy, the baddest kid you knew spray painted Floyd the Barber's door, so to top him you only needed to throw a brick through the window. That is "baddest ass" was a purely local rumor-grade infamy.

Now to stand out you have to stand out on a world-wide stage. That alone is a heck of a lot of pressure.

So if the wages of ass-hattery was anonymity and erasure, it wouldn't be something to strive for.

Think too of how different the world would have been if, on 9/12 the president came out with a speech about the tantrum thrown by a fading organization struggling for relevance on the world stage, that was now going to have to be found and spanked like the petulant child it has become? (etc)

The very tone of "this is the worst event-type-X since the last 'worst event-type-X' event from date Y committed by infamous party Z" creates an air of competitive inflation.

So to do the "outpourings" of various uninvolved parties creating the shrines of public misery. Yea its great that you have decided to be "shocked" or otherwise emotionally invested in something that not only didn't happen to you, but didn't happen to anybody you knew of before hand. You have made yourself collateral damage by constructing a personal emotional harm from a sad-sack event unrelated to you at all. How happy do you think that "splash damage" is making the attention-seeking pain-monger butthead?

If you do feel bad, then keep it -private-. If you go there and raise a shrine you are doing the opposite of discouraging future actors-out.


gweimer

Well said.  There are times when rewriting history, as the Soviets were prone to do, is a good idea.  I think it's a perfect thought, to erase the memories and identity of people who perform such horrible acts.  The cable shows are full of episodes about serial killers, intrigue and murder.  It was all my ex used to watch.  I finally couldn't take it anymore.   You can't go through life focusing and advertising the worst side of humanity.
Telling tales of drunkenness and cruelty