Mass Shooting at DK premiere in CO!

[GroobySteven]

It has been supposed by some on this forum that the Second Ammendment, being 221 years old, is outdated and has no legal bearing in the modern day. Since there is apparently some sort of expiration date placed on pieces of legislation, how about we go ahead and get rid of the rest of the Bill of Rights?

You got it. If it's out of date, or no longer relevant then it should be AMENDED. Something tells me they've done that before, right?

[Stavros]

Why has the theatre not been scrutinized for not having security to the point that a clown with assault weapons and body armor can waltz right into a film in progress? Shouldn't they have had people watching the theatre entrances? Why were there no metal detectors or uniformed guards at the front door? Wouldn't a stationed parking attendent at the lot have seen a man with guns and been able to call 911 before he had made it inside?

In fact why have theatres that gather so many people into a dark confined space at all, surely that's just a giant bullseye for mass murderers, why aren't all films placed directly to dvd for watching in the safety of ones own home?

I think you will find that he must have cased the cinema complex before, as he broke in through a rear entrance, and probably knew which was the quietest zone in the parking area.

Going to the cinema is a way of getting out, and unless you have a 65" screen at home with wrap around sound, 3D and so on, the experience just isn't the same. Particularly with a film shot in IMAX like The Dark Knight Rises -its the kind of film I would pay to see in an IMAX for the experience. Shooters go berserk in shopping malls, should we now buy everything online?

[Stavros]

According to Stavros, the lilly-livers, and the English, the Second Ammendment has nothing to do with individual rights to firearm. Instead only certain select persons (chosen by the government, I suppose) are allowed to join the militia and as such only they are entitled to possess and own firearms. As such, the First and Forth Ammendments have nothing to do with individual liberties and instead are only applied to select groups.


It has been supposed by some on this forum that the Second Ammendment, being 221 years old, is outdated and has no legal bearing in the modern day. Since there is apparently some sort of expiration date placed on pieces of legislation, how about we go ahead and get rid of the rest of the Bill of Rights? I mean the other nine ammendments are 211 years old too, so they've gotta be just as outdated and out of touch with modern concerns. And what about the Constitution, we should get rid of that too, it's even older - and, hey, old has got to go. I guess that laws should only be valid for the length of time that the generation who wrote them is still in the majority of elected government positions. Once enough of the old geezers are voted out of office, then any laws they passed and signed are no longer valid.

You have not understood some of the points I have been making: on the one hand the context of 1791 when the US had only reluctantly created a Standing Army, not believing the central government should do this -indeed Congress at one point had no tax raising powers to fund an army -the pre-existing militias in the states were seen as the foundation of local security in a Union where power was devolved away from the centre, one of the strongest and enduring elements of America's revolution that sets it apart from the Revolutions in, say, France, Russia and China.

Again, the context of the weapons themselves follows: not as many Americans had guns in 1791 as today, and the guns were average or if anything old-fashioned muskets. One of my cardinal points is that whether or not you believe the 2nd Amendment confers rights on an individual or a collective (I lean to the latter but that's my interpretation), the USA in 2012 does allow individuals to purchase firearms subject to certain conditions which vary from state to state.

But as President Obama has stated: do you want people to carry battlefield weapons on your streeets? This is why you have to reconcile the intentions of an Amendment passed in 1791 with the reality of 2012, if not in the principle, then in its operation: do you really need an AK-47 to secure your apartment?

[Stavros]

You got it. If it's out of date, or no longer relevant then it should be AMENDED. Something tells me they've done that before, right?

18th Amendment to the Constitution -the prohibition of alcohol, January 1919

21st Amendment to the Constitution -repeal of Amendment 18 -Dec 1933.

[trish]

some verifiable stories and an opinion:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/26/op...?smid=pl-share

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/26/op...?smid=pl-share

[GroobySteven]

GUN OWNERS or those that support the purchase and ownership of assault type/automatic guns.
Where would you draw the line on weaponry? Any gun that that military currently uses? Types of ammos? Grenades or grenade launchers? Where is the line?

[Dino Velvet]

I think you will find that he must have cased the cinema complex before, as he broke in through a rear entrance, and probably knew which was the quietest zone in the parking area.

Going to the cinema is a way of getting out, and unless you have a 65" screen at home with wrap around sound, 3D and so on, the experience just isn't the same. Particularly with a film shot in IMAX like The Dark Knight Rises -its the kind of film I would pay to see in an IMAX for the experience. Shooters go berserk in shopping malls, should we now buy everything online?

I definitely don't want my local AMC to turn into LAX. Just going to the picture show. Leave me alone.

[MrsKellyPierce]

I still don't think any US citizen needs a gun that shoots off 60 rounds in less than a minute. Sane or Not or no criminal background. That should be for military/police officials only.

Everyone is capable of insanity, and not to mention this guy had no criminal background!

[Faldur]

GUN OWNERS or those that support the purchase and ownership of assault type/automatic guns.
Where would you draw the line on weaponry? Any gun that that military currently uses? Types of ammos? Grenades or grenade launchers? Where is the line?

All you wish to know can easliy be found..

http://www.atf.gov/publications/firearms/

[loren]

do you want people to carry battlefield weapons on your streeets?

What is a battlefield weapon? Virtually every firearm on the market either was at some point or is directly descended from a "battlefield weapon".

I have a question for you; do you view the First and Forth Ammendments as individual rights, or are they only applied to collective groups?

GUN OWNERS or those that support the purchase and ownership of assault type/automatic guns.
Where would you draw the line on weaponry? Any gun that that military currently uses? Types of ammos? Grenades or grenade launchers? Where is the line?

I wouldn't exactly feel comfortable if someone were walking down the street with a stinger or a dragon for that matter. I, personally, would never own a full-auto. It's a waste of ammo, anything more than 7-10 rounds per and you're just wasting lead (In the Korean War, approx. one million rounds were fired for each casualty.) Now some would argue, I'm not in this group, that there should be no limit whatsoever. I don't really believe in owning full-auto (that's just my view), however some States allow such ownership with special licensing and permits.

Did you know that technically according to the (thankfully) expired "assault weapons" ban, my reproduction single shot, black powder, muzzleloading, .58 cal Enfield Rifled Musket is an assault weapon? Because it has a bayonet.