Thread: Connecticut school shooting: Reports say more than 20 dead

Originally Posted by 4th and 26

If you want my honest answer I would go with a bomb or Molotov cocktail.
From a distance I would go with a rifle
Close range either a shotgun or Glock.


Top choice would be the fertalizer bomb.

Then you are a dumb ass...fertilizer (the kind that blows up whole buildings) is highly regulated and monitored...besides your own goal is kill people, not to make a political statement...

Molotov cocktail? You've been watching too many old WWII movies...

Shotguns are great for taking out a few people at close range, but they have limited mag size and reload like snails fucking...

From a distance? Shooting at distance is a skill...Whitman only managed 11 kills (from a distance) and he was a f'ing Marine...do you shoot better then a Marine?

A Glock...very good...now you're talking...nice mag size and speed but the stopping/kill power is a bit gimped...at least compared to a large rifle caliber...but up close and with a bit of aim, it will certainly get the job done...

The honest answer is it use exactly what that asshole in CT used...the right tool for the right job...

Originally Posted by loki520

Below are the theaters in that immediate area that were showing The Dark Knight Rises (there are theaters that weren't). This was opening night of that move, and each theater was full. I've included their posted, and known, weapons policies at the time of the attack. Some of these were closer to his home then Century, and at least one of them was only about a mile further and much larger:

Cinema Latino de Aurora/Aurora Plaza 8 Cinemas
Weapons Policy Not posted

Cinema Grill
Weapons Policy Not posted

Century Cinemark Theater -- where the attack occurred
No weapons allowed sign and enforced policy

Harkins Northfield 18 (Billed as the home of Colorado's largest auditorium)
Weapons Policy Not posted at the time of the attack (they have one now)

Aurora Movie Tavern
Weapons Policy Not posted

The Movie Tavern at Seven Hills
Weapons Policy Not posted

Regal Continental Stadium 10 & RPX
No weapons allowed sign, but policy states people who have their permit with them are allowed to carry.

UA Greenwood Plaza Stadium 12
No weapons allowed sign, but policy states people who have their permit with them are allowed to carry.

I don't believe that...you can search internet and find people complaining about the Harkins and the Regal theaters (Continental and UA Greenwood) and their no gun policy for years prior to the shooting...besides, posted policy or not, the first C in CCW is concealed is it not? That theater was "gun free" like our highways are "speeder free" since there are posted speed limit signs every so many miles...

At the time of the attack, there was only one "gun free zone" that was enforced with policy. Colorado law allows businesses to implement a gun-free-zone, but they must advise the general public of it since the state allows permitted CCW. If there is no posted opposition, it is assumed that CCW is allowed (as per the last two who actually have written policy to specifically allow it).

No they don't...The CO law does not place ANY requirements or limitations on businesses or owners of private property...posted sign or no sign, prior advisement or not, if a business owner or agent of that business says no to you carrying a gun on their property it's completely within their right to do so...

(5) nothing in this part 2 shall be construed to limit, restrict, or prohibit in any manner the existing rights of a private property owner, private tenant, private employer, or private business entity.

On the other hand, what does it REALLY matter? The guns didn't kill anyone, James Holmes did. I know we disagree on this, but the inanimate object isn't at fault.

Colorado is a "shall issue" state, meaning that unless there is signs of mental illness, or the applicant is a felon, they shall issue a permit to carry and/or legally purchase a weapon. And the signs of mental illness where there. It is physician/patient privilege that prevented his shrink from discussing the violent attacks that Holmes had discussed. Hell, they can't even use it as evidence AFTER the fact. Shrink's need to be able to have some input into this system without worrying about privilege. Could it have been stopped if the shrink was allowed to discuss? We won't know. Could it have been stopped if his classmate had spoken up? Who knows... Just like we will never know if it would have not occurred without his "assault" weapon. He also had a shotgun and two glocks (which he turned too after his "assault" weapon jammed). We know this was one crazy bitch.. he had rigged his apartment to blow if anyone entered. Using grenades.

We do, indeed, need to improve regulations. But restricting the weapon isn't going to change anything. There are already too many of them on the streets, their single most devastating function (semi-auto) is a capability found in most other weapons including those NOT being considered for a ban (i.e., non-revolver pistols), even an amateur can change a magazine in 2 seconds, and too many people are afraid a gun is going to come to life and kill them all by itself.

No...we need to TIGHTEN up the requirements on who can purchase and mental health, training and security all need to be a part of it. The weapon is irrelevant.

We don't completely disagree on that - I am all for tighter requirements on who can purchase and the mental health issues...however, we completely disagree that weapon is irrelevant...all weapons can kill people, only some are specifically designed to do so, and do so on a grander scale then what is reasonable necessary...

Originally Posted by Wolfman

I don't believe that...you can search internet and find people complaining about the Harkins and the Regal theaters (Continental and UA Greenwood) and their no gun policy for years prior to the shooting...besides, posted policy or not, the first C in CCW is concealed is it not? That theater was "gun free" like our highways are "speeder free" since there are posted speed limit signs every so many miles...




No they don't...The CO law does not place ANY requirements or limitations on businesses or owners of private property...posted sign or no sign, prior advisement or not, if a business owner or agent of that business says no to you carrying a gun on their property it's completely within their right to do so...

(5) nothing in this part 2 shall be construed to limit, restrict, or prohibit in any manner the existing rights of a private property owner, private tenant, private employer, or private business entity.



We don't completely disagree on that - I am all for tighter requirements on who can purchase and the mental health issues...however, we completely disagree that weapon is irrelevant...all weapons can kill people, only some are specifically designed to do so, and do so on a grander scale then what is reasonable necessary...

I believe Loki's point, right or wrong, is that the killer chose a theater that had a posted "NO GUNS" sign/policy. Whether or not others had a policy is irrelevant if the public wasn't able to easily decern they did (the point he was making). If what he posted about the policies is correct, and the killer passed on a closer theater and a larger theater, there could be some credence to the idea that "gun free zones" become targets of choice.

From my standpoint, I don't know if that is true, but I will tell you that when my board considered changes to the security protocols at the schools, in the wake of Newtown, we did so in a closed meeting and would never dream of communicating to anyone the specifics of those protocols. And to answer the question before asked, yes, in VA all schools are gun free zones and are required to have those signs.

Reminds me of this:

Darrell Scott's address to the U.S. Congress
DARRELL SCOTT
Darrell Scott, the father of Rachel Scott, a victim of the Columbine School shootings in Littleton, Colorado left a U.S. Congressional Committee dumbfounded with his address. Here is an edited version of what Darrell Scott said.

“Since the dawn of creation, there has been a portion of both good and evil in the hearts of men and women. We all contain the seeds of violence and the seeds of loving. “The death of my wonderful daughter, Rachel Joy Scott, and the deaths of her heroic teacher and the other 11 children who died must not be in vain. Their blood cries out for answers. “One of the first recorded act of violence was when Cain slew his brother, Abel, out in the fields. The villain was the not the club Cain used. The true killer was Cain and the reason for the murder could only be found in Cain’s heart.

“In the days following the Columbine tragedy, I was amazed how quickly fingers began to be pointed at groups such as the National Rifle Association.

“I am not a member of the NRA. I am not a hunter. I do not even own a gun. I am not here to represent or defend the NRA, because I do not believe they are responsible for my daughter’s death.

“I am here today to declare that Columbine was not just a tragedy — it was a spiritual event which should force us to look for where the real blame lies.

“Much of the blame lies here in this room, (the U.S. Congress.) Much of the blame lies behind the pointing fingers of the accusers themselves.

“I wrote a poem expressing my own feelings.

“Your laws ignore our deepest needs,
“Your words are empty air.
“You’ve stripped away our heritage,
“You’ve outlawed simple prayer.
“Now, gunshots fill our classrooms,
“And precious children die.
“You seek for answers everywhere,
“Then ask the question ‘why?’
“You regulate restrictive laws,
“Through legislative creed.
“And yet you fail to understand,
“That God is what we need.”

“We all consist of three parts — body, soul and spirit. When we fail to acknowledge that third part of our make-up, we create a void which allows evil, prejudice and hatred to rush in and cause havoc.

“Spiritual influences were present in our educational systems for most of American history. Many major colleges began as theological seminaries. These are historical facts.

“What has happened to us as a nation? We have refused to honor God and, in so doing, we have opened the doors to hatred and violence. And, when something as terrible as Columbine occurs, politicians immediately look for a scapegoat like the NRA; they immediately seek to pass more restrictive laws and continue to erode our personal and private liberties.

“We do not need more restrictive laws. (The shooters), Eric and Dylan, would not have been stopped by metal detectors. No gun law will stop someone who spends time planning this type of massacre. The real villain lies within our own hearts.

“The young people of our nation hold the key. There is a spiritual awakening taking place. It will not be squelched.

“We do not need more religion. We do not need more gaudy television evangelists spewing our verbal religious garbage. We do not need more million-dollar church buildings being constructed while people’s basic needs are being ignored.

Darren Scott, concluded his speech to a quiet, dumbfounded U.S. Congressional committee, this way:

“As my son, Craig, lay under that classroom table in that school library and saw his friends murdered before his very eyes — he did not hesitate to pray.

“I defy any law or any politician to deny him that right.”





http://catholiceducation.org/article...on/cc0053.html

Originally Posted by BearStuff

I believe Loki's point, right or wrong, is that the killer chose a theater that had a posted "NO GUNS" sign/policy. Whether or not others had a policy is irrelevant if the public wasn't able to easily decern they did (the point he was making). If what he posted about the policies is correct, and the killer passed on a closer theater and a larger theater, there could be some credence to the idea that "gun free zones" become targets of choice.

From my standpoint, I don't know if that is true, but I will tell you that when my board considered changes to the security protocols at the schools, in the wake of Newtown, we did so in a closed meeting and would never dream of communicating to anyone the specifics of those protocols. And to answer the question before asked, yes, in VA all schools are gun free zones and are required to have those signs.

This idea and situation that many, many places in our society are "gun free" is nothing new...schools, public buildings, churches, sporting events, theaters, restaurants, etc, have always been gun-free places...it is only because of the proliferation of firearms, though the corrupt and dishonest mantra that "more guns makes us more safe," that we are now being made more and more aware that these "signs" and laws/polices are in place...if you are looking for causation, look to what has changed, not what has always existed... this idea of that "gun free zones" are all of sudden something novel and unheard of before is nothing but NRA propaganda... Loki is simple throwing up a shinny, irrelevant distraction to the real issues...

Originally Posted by 4th and 26

How many people died at Virginia Tech a few years ago? Do you really need an assult weapon to kill people or just a couple of hand guns?

You're right, high caliber, high capacity semi-automatic pistols need to be ban as well...

It doesn't take rocket science to kill people with any means possible.

Why use "rocket science" when something you can buy at Walmart is specify designed to do the job...i.e. kill people...

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/n...wtown/1797755/

NEW HAVEN, Conn. (AP) — A New Haven attorney is asking permission to sue the state for $100 million on behalf of a student who survived the mass shooting at a Newtown school.
The Hartford Courant reports (http://cour.at/Tvo5v9) that attorney Irving Pinsky filed notice Thursday with Claims Commissioner J. Paul Vance Jr. The state has immunity against most lawsuits unless permission to sue is granted.
Pinsky said the 6-year-old student, identified as "Jill Doe," was in her classroom at Sandy Hook Elementary School on Dec. 14 when "the horrific confrontation" with Adam Lanza came over the loudspeaker.
FULL COVERAGE: Connecticut School Shooting
FULL COVERAGE: Connecticut School Shooting Victims
Lanza killed 20 first grade students and six adult staffers at the school before killing himself.
Pinsky said the student has been traumatized by the killings, and accused the state of failing to protect students from "foreseeable harm."

This shit bothers me on so many levels:

1.They arent suing some faceless corporation, they are suing the STATE, which means IF (i know its unlikely to work, but IF) they get the judgement, that money is coming from the taxpayers.

2.Its not even the family of a VICTIM that is suing, its the family of a SURVIVOR that is. Having their kid alive should be reward enough, but no, I guess all the donations, charity and counseling their kid is getting isnt enough for this family, they apparently need $100 Million.

3.I dont blame the kid, she doesnt know what a lawsuit is, so its her parents who are trying to turn this tragedy into a lottery ticket.

4. Foreseeable harm? On what fucking planet was this tragedy foreseeable? WTF.

We seriously need some tort reform in this country.

Originally Posted by Jimmors

We seriously need some tort reform in this country.

QFT!!!

And you know that if this moves forward, it won't be the only one. Who knows how many survivor families will jump on this if permission is given?

Almost as bad... 8 fucking Sailors (out of almost 10k deployed and another 5k responding) suing TEPCO for lying about radiation levels during the humanitarian operation (Operation Tomodachi) in Japan after the Tsunami/Earthquake. Dudes... you were floating on the USS RONALD REAGAN. It's the world's largest 24/7 operational radiation detection device. You can't sue the USN (lawful order, etc, etc, etc.) so you're going to sue the Japanese electrical company who operated the nuke reactors? Good luck dickheads. Nothing like having the work of over 15k personnel tossed to the wind so you can pursue some bullshit lawsuit.