Mass shooting in Aurora, CO (At Batman Film Premiere)

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan


And, had I been in that theater, would have shot him before he got very far.

you are clearly demonstrating that you are delusional to think that had you been in the theatre you would have been some sort of saviour for the poor souls who got killed and were incapable of defending themselves.

Originally posted by SUICIDEHK45
reply to post by miniatus

 

I'm thinking the "tear gas grenades" were more of an IED made with black powder and pepper spray. They might not have been as effective as an actual tear gas cannister.

Well the news reports are saying tear gas canisters.. I guess we won't know the facts until it's presented.. either way, a dispersal of pepper spray wouldn't be pleasant either.

I'm just starting to wade through the posts and this seems so Surreal almost like the panic during the `38 radio broadcast of the Martian invasion.. We know that the movie contained a scene where terrorists shot up a packed sports stadium and now we are hearing about Warner Bros pulling a violent gangster trailer.

Can't draw any firm conclusions yet other than the obvious anti terrorism implications but then again there are so many pages of on topic comments to read through.

Originally posted by JustMike
Whatever the reasons behind this mass murder, it's an awful situation.

Now here's something weird: I first learned of this on SkyNews (on digi satellite channel) a good half hour ago. So after seeing how bad it looked I switched over to CNN International, figuring they'd be all over it, and -- not a darned word!

Not kidding: while SkyNews was broadcasting details of the possible casualties, plus what the shooters were wearing, how they used tear gas first etc etc, CNN was showing a program where they were discussing any possible "link" between the "Bane" character in the new Batman movie and Romney's company called Blain. (NOT in connection to the shooting, I emphasize!)

Then, after giving Rush Limbaugh's take on it all they interrupted their story to say something like "We are just getting word of a shooting at a theater in Denver during a screening of the new Batman movie..."

The presenter said very little. They showed some footage of ambulances at the scene, went to a break and then on to another scheduled program -- about Damascus and what's going on there.

And as I post, on CNN International they STILL are only running a line at the bottom of the screen and are not doing any live reporting from Denver at all.

Something strange is going on here. If you are getting live (on the scene) reports from CNN USA, well we aren't getting them on CNN International yet!

Mike

edit on 20/7/12 by JustMike because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by senselessness

Originally posted by paratus
71 total people being shot

I think that is wrong. 71 people were not shot.

Just quoted from the live press release, unless they misspoke or I misheard...

reply to post by theabsolutetruth


That has to be wrong... I think someone misheard, or misspoke. I was listening and didn't hear that.

Originally posted by zeeon
reply to post by miniatus

 

I don't support more Gun control but I do agree with your post. In bootcamp they give us a sample of tear gas. It's a part of basic training. You enter a room with gas masks on, then they fill the room with tear gas. They make everyone take off their mask, inhale for about 3 minutes - then you have to state your rank, name, SSN, and your company number (for Navy bootcamp). So it would be like - Seaman John Doe, 123-45-6780, Company 456.
Each person in the row (about 5 to 10 I believe) have to do it completely before you are allowed to leave.

It's extremely difficult. Alot of guys were puking their guts out. You can't see anything - your eyes literally fill up and you can't and/or don't want to open them. You literally have to just blurt out your info and hope the next guy can do it as well.

So in essence I believe you are correct in that it would be highly unlikely for someone without a gas mask in an enclosed environment subject to tear gas to clearly, fatally shoot an assailant in body armor. Just don't see that happening.

Didn't know they did that in the states as well, they do it in the British army, been there myself... And I've got to agree, a tonne of that stuff in a confined space is horrendous.... I couldn't see, I was drooling all over myself with mucus pouring out of my nose and my face felt like it was on fire.... Bad isht man....

Originally posted by lacrimaererum

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by lacrimaererum

 

What makes you so sure? There are plenty of murders committed without guns. Plus, the rules of the theatre said no guns allowed. He obviously ignored those rules, so how would banning guns have been any different?

He also apparently had access to C4, Teargas, and unknown other explosives and chemicals. Those things are already illegal, but he has them.

Your presumption is ridiculous.

people defending gun ownership in light of this is ridiculous.

he shot dozens. if he didn't have a gun he could not have shot dozens. its too easy for americans.

americans need to be disarmed,

edit on Fri Jul 20 2012 by DontTreadOnMe because: trimmed quote

he wanted a gun, so he got them..........if they were illegal, he would have gotten them anyway.........just like every other person in the world who gets them and kills people, when its illegal for them to have them......

Your line of thinking isnt logical

For those pulling Columbine into this discussion, do you think it was a cut and dry case of two gunmen? I haven't researched Columbine in a long time, but I'll point you to this article: Anatomy of a School Shooting

Even more disturbing is a report that: "Dozens of witnesses interviewed by police after the crime claimed that from five to eight individuals participated in the shooting that left 15 people dead, including the killers, and more than 20 injured" (Denver Rocky Mountain News, July 29, 1999). Five to eight individuals? Dozens of witnesses?

Moving on to what is perhaps the most bizarre aspect of the case, we come now to the infamous videotape. You know, the one that was made in 1997, two years before the actual assault, and which "depicts gun-toting, trench coat-wearing students moving through Columbine's halls and ends with a special-effects explosion of the school." The one that was co-produced by "the son of the FBI's lead agent in the investigation" (Associated Press, May 8, 1999).

the shooter got arrested? that easy?

Originally posted by roadgravel
What did I miss...

The news has said all morning he had an AK-47.The chief just stated had had an AR-15.

Was that an additional weapon or has the news been wrong.

That's typical of the news media and firearms.

See chart:i51.tinypic.com...

Originally posted by Unity_99

Originally posted by Valhall
Okay, I found the answer.

www.rmgo.org...

The only places in Colorado that you can't carry a concealed weapon (with a permit) are areas prohibited by FEDERAL LAW. That would be your court houses, airports....not movie theatres. So all you would be violating would be the company policy. They could kick you out if they realized you had it, but big damned deal. In this case, you might have been kicked out in time to not be shot in the face.

That isn't correct. In fact already watched a well educated man get off without giving ID to the cops after calling the supervisor in COLORADO. Why? Because 1. OC is permitte WITHOUT a liscense, No need for a liscense.

2. OC is not sufficient grounds on its own, to have probable cause. And the police officer kept saying someone had seen the gun and phoned them. So they were trying to peddle probable cause as OC, which the man already knew the court cases and cited them.

OC without a permit legal, that is NOT probable cause to pull him over at all, unless he matches a description of a criminal they had no right to stop him.

en.wikipedia.org...

That video was great, hope to find it again.

edit on 20-7-2012 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)

WTH are you talking about? I'm talking about a permitted CONCEALED weapon. You're arguing with me about the same thing I'm saying. I said - it appears in the state of Colorado it is not illegal to violate a company's no gun prohibition if you are permitted to have concealed weapon.

geeze louise

Originally posted by roadgravel
What did I miss...

The news has said all morning he had an AK-47.The chief just stated had had an AR-15.

Was that an additional weapon or has the news been wrong.

I would say the news has been wrong. They have been wrong on many things, as is the case with things like this.

The police chief said the shooter used an AR15, 12 gauge shoot gun & 40 cal Glock. They also found an additional Glock in his car.

He also said that the guy set off 2 explosive devices that release an irritating smoke.

He also said they have no other suspects in the shooting and the media should be careful with social media. One person has already pranked a news station pretending to be the police chief and giving false info.

Originally posted by Finalized

Originally posted by ElohimJD
Sure, I understand.

I just know from the mouth of the officer pulling the bodies out of the theater shortly after arriving (anyone saying otherwise is given a false account of events) that she pulled 12 bodies that were pronouced DOA by the EMTs at the scene.

3 others are in critical condition and may die today.

In this case, my own mother in law was one of the first responders Officer Annette Brook of the APD, she told her story to me and my wife (her daughter) and the bodies were removed early after arriving to calm the scene down.

I do however see a conection between the movie, and a possible false flag in London (exactly 1 week after this event took place, during a movie in which Bane destroys a stadium from underneath using explosives).

I just don't want many different versions going around when I am the son of one of the Officers whose actions are being misconstrude.

Thanks,

God Bless,

Bolded parts above, that is *NOT* standard operating procedure.... by removing the bodies, they potentially destroyed evidence... that isn't the correct procedure to just "calm the scene down".

Not blaming your mom, by why wasn't SOP followed?

edit on 7/20/2012 by Finalized because: (no reason given)

They reported the bodies WERE in the theater and not removed........

So i think hes either making it up or mistaken..........it was even reported that they were still there

reply to post by ManBehindTheMask


Its Too EASY

Originally posted by Milkflavour

Originally posted by zeeon
reply to post by miniatus

 

I don't support more Gun control but I do agree with your post. In bootcamp they give us a sample of tear gas. It's a part of basic training. You enter a room with gas masks on, then they fill the room with tear gas. They make everyone take off their mask, inhale for about 3 minutes - then you have to state your rank, name, SSN, and your company number (for Navy bootcamp). So it would be like - Seaman John Doe, 123-45-6780, Company 456.
Each person in the row (about 5 to 10 I believe) have to do it completely before you are allowed to leave.

It's extremely difficult. Alot of guys were puking their guts out. You can't see anything - your eyes literally fill up and you can't and/or don't want to open them. You literally have to just blurt out your info and hope the next guy can do it as well.

So in essence I believe you are correct in that it would be highly unlikely for someone without a gas mask in an enclosed environment subject to tear gas to clearly, fatally shoot an assailant in body armor. Just don't see that happening.

Didn't know they did that in the states as well, they do it in the British army, been there myself... And I've got to agree, a tonne of that stuff in a confined space is horrendous.... I couldn't see, I was drooling all over myself with mucus pouring out of my nose and my face felt like it was on fire.... Bad isht man....

Yeah man, you said it. I forgot about that but yeah snot runs down your face, you can't see or breathe or concentrate. I highly doubt someone could have gotten a shot off on the assailant in those types of conditions.

reply to post by Finalized


Why does that surprise you? Eyewitness testimony is notorious for being all over the map. In the heat of the moment people see things and can't remember what they saw or perhaps made a mistake in what they observed.

Originally posted by senselessness
reply to post by theabsolutetruth

 

That has to be wrong... I think someone misheard, or misspoke. I was listening and didn't hear that.

I just listened to it on BBC news. FBI updated the info. I wouldn't post it if it wasn't from a legit source.

www.bbc.co.uk...

At least 12 people have been killed and 59 wounded in a shooting at a midnight cinema showing of the new Batman film near Denver, Colorado.

Police revised down the death toll from 14 earlier. They said 71 people, including the deceased, had been shot in the incident at the Century 16 multiplex cinema.

Originally posted by lacrimaererum

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by lacrimaererum

 

What makes you so sure? There are plenty of murders committed without guns. Plus, the rules of the theatre said no guns allowed. He obviously ignored those rules, so how would banning guns have been any different?

He also apparently had access to C4, Teargas, and unknown other explosives and chemicals. Those things are already illegal, but he has them.

Your presumption is ridiculous.

people defending gun ownership in light of this is ridiculous.

he shot dozens. if he didn't have a gun he could not have shot dozens. its too easy for americans.

americans need to be disarmed,

edit on Fri Jul 20 2012 by DontTreadOnMe because: trimmed quote

If America didn't have guns and this guy had zero access it just means he'd resort to explosives for his theater killing instead of leaving it for his apartment. And that's if he didn't first get one of the countless numbers of illegal guns here to use instead (that's saying his guns weren't illegally obtained).

People who want to kill will find a way to kill. Taking away freedoms from people isn't the solution.

Police chief said 71 people.

We heard those words here over TV.