Thoughts & Prayers for Colorado

They're waiting until tomorrow when they have better light. There is some talk about setting off their own incendiary devices to see exactly what the setup is. They've had all manner of bomb experts looking at it all day and no one can figure out exactly what is in the apartment. They've evacuated everyone within five blocks in all directions.

To answer the questions about how he got in with all those guns:
He bought a ticket to the movie, walked right in and took a seat in the first row.

Shortly after the movie started he went out of the emergency exit door and put something in it to hold it open.

Thirty minutes later he came back in through the exit door in full kevlar, threw 2 tear gas canisters into the seats, put one shot into the ceiling and opened fire.

The guy is totally Sick
and I don't think it is about reasons at all
there is no reason in the world that can make you kill anybody innocent
was he abused ??? there are more than 3 million child who were abused and didn't go murder people
was he mentally sick?? I don't think so cause it looks like he had a well set plan and mentally sick people usually go crazy and just open fire anywhere

I say the only reason for this is terrorism he is a terrorist and as I understand you said he had explosives so he was planing something even bigger than just a gun killing
maybe blowing up something important or big to kill even more innocent people
he is Paid to cause Terror for sure

(That is my own opinion )

I read about that girl before, that's just crazy. Ugh this makes me sick.

Max:

Ted Bundy killed over 30.....he was not a terrorist
Chou killed 32....he was not a terrorist
Harris and Klebold killed 13...they were not terrorists
John Gacy killed 33....he was not a terrorist
Dahmer killed 17...he was not a terrorist
Richard Rameriz killed 14...he was not a terrorist

Not ALL mass murderers are terrorists.....and there is currently no evidence that James Holmes is one.

I suggest you refrain from spreading that kind of crap until you have the evidence to back it up.

I've seen a lot of people call him a terrorist... In the sense of inciting terror, yes. But a terrorist is defined as having a political agenda and/or using religion as the motive/reason.

Colm, you are exactly right. Culprits of heinous crimes, like the one in Colorado this morning, are essentially indistinguishable from healthy minded people unless you can get insight into all the dark pieces of their lives, but that rarely happens until after the fact. Building up to a psychotic break is like a recipe and it takes someone with a history of mental instability. There are a lot of factors. We can't predict who is actually capable of cold-blooded murder until, well... they've committed it.

"but a lot of times people come out and say things like they knew something like this could happen one day."

Britt, I believe people say these things in hindsight. It's called hindsight bias. People think the premeditated behavior of a first time criminal is more predictable than it actually is or was. Thinking you could've done something beforehand is just a way to make yourself feel guilty for something you probably had no control over (and could not have predicted).
Unfortunately I'm sure most of us can think of several people in our lives whom, if they did something terrible, we would tell ourselves, "Deep down I had a feeling they were capable of [it]. I should've done something."

Some thoughts, that's all.

-
Terrorism is an easy word to be confused by. It's been thrown around recklessly since the 9/11 attacks. Everyone should refresh themselves on what it actually means...

Don't you study this type of thing, Janey?

I get what you mean, and it makes perfect sense. I definitely get the sense of guilt when you couldn't have done anything.. and true, there are many people who have tendencies but go through their life without doing harm to a soul.

I kind of feel this way about my brother in law, that if something happened it's a "well of course, we all saw it coming" so why not do anything about it? Well he's just a pain in the butt, probably not psychotic. If something happened I wouldn't be surprised, but he hasn't done anything that authorities or doctors would see as a "big deal". It's more of a gut feeling than anything.

Keep up the insight, I love your thought of this. It makes sense.

Psychology and criminology are my passions. Studying them, that is! I think Larry has a minor in Psych? Could be wrong.
I feel the same about my uncle as you feel about your brother-in-law. Only so much we can do as non-nuclear family, unfortunately. If you're really concerned about his behavior, you should talk about it to someone whom he respects.

I have, and they agree and have tried. Unfortunately that's exactly what we get is a "well he hasn't done anything"... not yet, no.

All this tragedy, from the hands of a misguided soul, unraveling his inner pent-up fury on innocents . Whoever said killing was an act of courage or martyrdom.

I would not want to be proud to be a gun owner today or any day (never owned one anyway), nor the one who taught him how to shoot one, or the one who evoked such hate for all humanity that he showed no mercy for anyone, children, women or innocents alike. No, I would not be proud to be a parent, or his friend who showed him how to use a gun today, nor would I want to be the shop owner, who sold him my gun or gunpowder. I would bury my head in shame, for I too hold equal responsibility for what happened today.

Guns were designed only to kill, and for no other purpose.

Or protect.

The theater is a gun free zone. Law abiding people will abide by that law. Criminals, no matter what law or gun ban you put in place, will still find access. Drugs are illegal, and people still take them. Guns don't kill people, the nutjobs pulling the trigger on innocent victims do.

Spoons don't make you fat, the people who put the food on them and in their mouth do.

To blame this on guns is ignorant in my opinion. I'm a proud gun owner. I refuse to be a victim.

People who want to kill will always find ways. Don't strip the rights of law abiding citizens. You want only criminals armed? That's a scary thought, it's what would happen.

No wonder we rank #4 in this list of worldwide homicides by gun

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_wit_fir-crime-murders-with-firearms

(SOURCE: The Eighth United Nations Survey on Crime Trends and the Operations of Criminal Justice Systems (2002) (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, Centre for International Crime Prevention)

So much to speak of one of the most civilized and advanced nation in the word!
The most populous nations in the world (China, India) are not even in the list here!

No gun law/s would have prevented this shooting, nor the Columbine or the Virginia tech or most of the recent mass shootings. Here is a fuller list since 4/2005;
http://www.bradycampaign.org/xshare/pdf/major-shootings.pdf

Nor a psychological screening of the entire populations of the US! These are people who would not have been capable of carrying out such mass murders had it not been the easy availibility of legal guns. Most people who carry out such organized crimes use legal guns, because they are easy to get hold of.

1 in 5 people common people seek the help of a shrink in the US in their lifetime, so can one prevent or foresee such events entirely?

The excuse to carry legal guns at home for defense is as thin as a feather paperweight. These are not the cowboy times anymore. If guns were entirely outlawed, anyone who possessed a gun at home would indeed be easy to pick out from the crowd.

You should do a search on the study by the FBI on the number of crimes that have been avoided because of people using their concealed handgun to stop. Not shooting, just making it aware and deterring the criminal. The figure is some 750k lives saved or situations changed because of the law abiding folks.

What we need is stricter buying laws. I fully support a mental evaluation, and think it should be done every couple of yeses if you own weapons. I just bought a gun not too long ago and its just passing a background check. Tons of people can do that and still be deemed mentally unfit.

I know I've asked this before but...can't remember the answer haha!!! When you apply for a gun licence in the states do you need to give a reason for having it...eg...hunting (guess that would be a rifle of some sorts though?) If you have a licence for 1 gun can you have more than one on the same licence or do you need to reapply?

I'm sure anyone buying a gun to use in a movie theatre isn't going to tell the gun dealer that. He probably said, "for protection," and who could say otherwise? A background check isn't enough. I'm with Britt. I'm not against people owning guns legally, because guns are a major threat in our society, legally or illegally. If they weren't, there would be no reason to have one for protection. Even if you make all guns illegal, they'll still be around because they have heavily infiltrated our country over centuries. We just need tighter restrictions on acquiring guns legally, and more severe punishments for selling or purchasing them illegally.

LS, the ideal is meaningless if it's unrealistic.

Http://gunowners.org/sk0802.htm

An interesting article that has citations for all its sources.

Hellon you don't need a license to own a gun. A hunting license to hunt, yes. And then you put in for tags, its all about the animals.. not the guns.

For a concealed carry permit or license its just to conceal or carry with you without brandishing. It's for pistols and handguns.

When you buy a gun you also register with it. My name is attached to every gun I own, same as Jason. We abide by that law. You can have as many guns as you want. We have a lot because we have different guns for different kinds of hunting, and then target shooters (small guns). Pistols for each of us.. when Jasons gone at work or away hunting, I will always keep the gun by my night stand. Our neighbors house got broken into. That's scary. I'm not paranoid, just prepared.

So...you need to register for hunting because of the animals but...you can have as many guns as you want to possibly kill humans?

LS I just saw your edit. We have a shady gang in my town, some involved I grew up with. I own my gun legally. They have felonies so they cannot have a gun in their presence or registered to them. Guess where I can get a gun without having to register it? With the criminals.. so you make it 100% more difficult to buy a gun in a store all ya want, but black market sales will sky rocket.

Hellon I don't kill humans :) most people who own guns don't. I'm not saying the system isn't flawed, it is and should change.

I also have a bow and arrow. That could potentially kill a person as well. I didn't have to do anything but hand over payment to get it. Guns aren't the only weapon that can kill people. Criminals don't usually follow law.

Yeah, I have a taser gun and a crossbow. Not to mention throwing knives, a BB gun, a samurai sword, and pretty damn sharp kitchen knives that will cut through meat like butter. I didn't register for any of these deadly weapons.

You have a crossbow?! We can't use them to hunt here in Oregon, so no one here has one.

What is the chance that you will be able to use a gun, when they decide to strike, none to 0.001%. But that is besides the point. If the police new that the only people on the street who carry the guns need to be brought in, it would be lot easier. Putting more fire to kill fire only works to fuel more.

This guy bought 3 or 4 guns (including an assault rifle), and the gunseller/s did not hesitate to ask him why? Looks like they were more interested in making money! Compare it to a DWI offense. If you had one and drove around and had another, do you folks think that he/she will be able to get away with it.

Also, if you really want to play with a gun (sports), you go to a shooting ally, or supply them at the point where they go hunting (e.g. rent them in the areas with permits). Why carry them around on you or keep them at home for children to get fascinated/inquisitive? There are many ways to achieve the same purpose without carrying them on you.

Jane..." taser gun and a crossbow. Not to mention throwing knives, a BB gun, a samurai sword, and pretty damn sharp kitchen knives that will cut through meat like butter."

^ None of these weapons that you own Jane are capable of "mass murder' so I am OK with these as self defense individual weapons, but not the assault or automatic weapons.

I got to retire now for the night. Enjoyed discussing, but do not agree. I will wait till the next big event, using legal guns again, and then we can have another round at it. :)

Yes...I know Britt...I was just trying to remember what was said in the past. Guess you all know by now how hard it is for me to comprehend having a gun...having numerous guns, in fact. So...what are the laws for storing them at home? Here...well I'm not sure about all the legalities about owning one or more but...you have to have a steel cabinet bolted to the floor...and X amount of locks on it. I think the kids who done the Columbine shootings got their weapons from home?

I carry because I will not be a victim. Do you really not get that taking away guns from law abiding citizens doesn't mean the criminals will give them up too?

And yes, if I have a gun on me and someone starts shooting, I definitely have a chance to draw. I can draw and shoot in under three seconds. I took an extensive handgun course so I could be as safe as possible, know my gun, and know how to use it properly.

Hellon I see it like utensils. I use a different one for different purpose. You do not have to lock them in a safe. We do. None of our guns are loaded except for the one that is by our bedside, there is no bullet in the chamber. We lock our bedroom door when were not home, or if kids are over so they never have access to it. When we have kids of our own we've already discussed we will not keep it loaded at all, and as the child gets older, we will change it as needed.

Yes they did get their weapons from home, sadly. It's about parenting, too. Our kids will absolutely never have access until they prove themselves responsible, take them through the training with our local sheriff department, and even then only be allowed possession with our presence. They won't know the combo to the safe. I didn't know my Dads, he always had a gun in the home.

Can I ask ANOTHER question haha....when americans go shopping is it the norm to take you gun with you? Some friends of mine recently visited Texas and were gobsmacked at the amount of people just walking around...armed! I've been to LA but never seen anyone with a gun. If you do...is it on your person (body) or in your purse? The reason I'm asking..and this scares the shit out of me...the only people we seen here in Australia openly carrying arms are the police and security guards (the ones who fill the ATM machines) The one filling the machine is obviously busy..but armed.. the other one (also armed) stands facing him with his arms folded. I don't know how many times I've thought...someone could just grab your gun and cause havoc....ATMs are usually in busy centres...I want them to have their hands over their holsters...you know..precaution? The cops...well the stand in the MacDonalds queue with a similar stance....scary indeed!

Oregon is different than Texas. Some people do take it everywhere unless its a school or a public building. I always have mine in my car.

The point of a.concealed is you shouldn't know if someone is carrying. It is to be concealed on their person. So in a holster covered by a jacket, in a pocket or purse etc. Here if your gun is not properly fastened and concealed (and you carry the permit to prove you can have it) you get fined and potential gun revoked for a set amount of time.

When I get pulled over (not often! Lol) I place my hands on the wheel automatically and let the police know I have a permit to conceal and I do have a weapon on my person and where. Then I show them my permit and were good to go.

I don't mind the questions lol. I'm speaking for Oregon of course, I don't carry in other states as I do not know their laws. If I'm going to another state I will learn first if I decide to take my gun.

I know we don't understand the others thought process but its nice to have discussion without the OMG YOU'RE A PARANOID FREAK WHO WANTS TO KILL ME reaction. Lol I've never had to use it and I pray to God I never, ever have to.

It's a very serious crime to take a police officer's weapon. Then again, if you're going to take his gun, you're probably not concerned with what's criminal!

I would not feel comfortable having a gun myself, but I'm not against others having one if the restrictions and laws are tight enough, and if their intentions are "honorable." I will only have a gun if my dream of becoming an FBI agent is realized :)

Yes, I have a crossbow. Should've seen the look on my dad's face when he found out I have one, hahaha (he hates weapons). It will shoot arrows right through a thick, wooden door.

Britt, I'm glad you've considered the precautions you will take when you have children.

The handgun course I took was from a cop, and they are VERY aware of who checks out their weapons and always assume someone could try to take their gun and use it against them. They practice (first with fake guns, then real and never loaded) at the course the length of time it takes you to draw. Cops are FAST.

Oi. What made you get the crossbow? Do you ever use it?

He is NOT a terrorist?

LMAO

What is he called then?

a killer who murders innocent civilians???????????????????????

Let me see....... a 'killer' ?

UGH, please.
That's pathetic.

Lol
Its not crap Miss
and If I know English right then Terrorist is somebody who cause terror under anyway
maybe by killing or by kidnapping
mass kills are always terrorists cause they cause terror for long time
aren't u afraid cause it might happen again??

Terrorism is not bound to only some people
anybody who kills Innocent people on Purpose is a terrorist

Well that is what you think of terrorist??

and he shouldn't have to have political agenda or religious reasons

what separate religious reasons for killing from any other reason for killing??
it is all killing after all
the only difference is when you kill people on purpose or not?
and all the mass killing is on purpose
terrorism isn't a randomly thrown word
serial killers are there but serial killers kill many but one by one
and how can you prove that all the people you mentioned above weren't terrorists?? just cause they didn't tell they are???
what is the so called evidence you seek for to tell that a person is terrorist???

Can I..once again ask another question..regarding ammunition...is it limited? Are you allocated so many rounds per month for example and...do you have to trade in what you used them for?

My brother owns an assault rifle, bought 200+ rounds in one day. So it might be limited in some states, but not here in Utah. Another odd thing is said rifle is allowed in all states, but his hand gun isn't. Do we have some odd gun laws, yes. And while we try to limit sales to mentally disturbed, convicts etc., its hard to tell sometimes. That and they can always get something on the black market.

Max and LP, go look up the dictionary definition of what a terrorist is. This guy is an f-ING nutjobs mass murderer. But the dictionary by definition speaks of due to a political or religious reasons. That's not me saying it. Yes, he incited terror, and yes I get that connection. But technically unless there is a political or religious agenda, he won't be pegged a terrorist. Not my definition.

Hellon in Oregon you can buy four boxes of rounds (50 in each box) a day. You have to show your license and they write it down as well as the kind you're buying. What they do from there I'm not sure

Yeah, whatever.

I'll just go now mass murder 50 people because I'm bored, or a psycho, or whatever... (OTHER than politics/religious motives)...

But please, I'm not a Terrorist.

Spare me a break, people. Just wake up from what your governments are bestowing upon you. TERRORISM doesn't need a Thesaurus or a Dictionary. It needs a little....... LOGIC ?? I really feel sorry for all of those who still refuse the fact that he is a TERRORIST.

NOTHING MORE THAN A

TERRORIST

TERRORIST

TERRORIST

Ter.. Ter.. Ter.. TERRORIST

XD

You can define it how you want, I'm defining it by actual definitions. Logic is, he is a psychopath who murdered people.

Screaming terrorist or not isn't going to bring those who were killed back, and screaming terrorist isn't going to the change anything. No point in arguing over semantics.

Usually, one is deemed as a terrorist when his/her motives are associated with either religious or political agenda. One who is a threat on a national level.

James did not do it with the intention of terrorizing people. He was merely venting/channeling his frustration. He can be deemed as a psychopath for obvious reasons. Upon more investigations his motives will come forward. I'd like to know what drives intelligent people to act out in such a manner overnight. I understand the physiological turmoil. But what incident drives them or that one piece of conversation that they are unable to swallow. All the activities they did prior to deciding, to vent chaos.

Here is a good example.

At Columbine High School, just 15 miles away from Aurora. On 20 April 1999 two students, Eric Harris, 18 and Dylan Klebold, 17 opened fire in the school, killing 12 classmates and a teacher before committing suicide.

^ This could be a personal grudge. Revenge of some sort. These students most certainly are not terrorists.

Anyways. Most of us are like ticking time bombs. It takes just one bad day for us to loose it. As the Joker says:

"I've proved my point. I've demonstrated there's no difference between me and everyone else! All it takes is one bad day to reduce the sanest man alive to lunacy. That's how far the world is from where I am. Just one bad day. You had a bad day once. Am I right? I know I am, I can tell. You had a bad day and everything changed."

Why are you even trying, people?

He killed over 10 ppl, and injured over 30

so he has intentions to kill more...

whatever, I'm even done in arguing over this lame subject.

when he (or other freaks) kill more ppl @ ur theaters, just be sure to call him a murderer, not a terrorist... (case closed)

because thesaurus.com doesn't agree with the logical definition.

No ones arguing, LP.

I like the quote from the Joker, but he's not entirely right. Someone has to have the right combination of personality traits to let "one bad day" trigger a psychotic break. People who score high in neuroticism and low in agreeableness are at higher risk of committing crimes that harm others. This is in relation to the Five Factor model that boxes all possible personality traits into 5 broad domains. I would guess the theatre killer scores high in openness, conscientiousness, and neuroticism; low in extroversion and agreeableness. When you find extremes in these traits, it's more telling. High neuroticism correlates with a low threshold for stress. Also, it's important to realize that not all psychotic breaks result in violent behavior. Sometimes a psychotic break involves nothing more than delusional thinking or severe depression. Men of course are more prone to physical aggression than women are. Their tendency to have a violent psychotic break is higher.
The conscientiousness and planning undergone by the theatre killer is what is most interesting. At what point did his fantasy of killing people, "I could do this" or "I want to do this," turn into, "I will do this." Most people have violent, totally socially unacceptable thoughts (from time to time). What makes us healthy people is that we are able to have these thoughts without ever making them a reality, and we can also control or suppress these thoughts if they are too overwhelming.
Serial killers spend their entire lives becoming more and more consumed or obsessed with their fantasies, with a tenuous grip on the conscious world. The importance of this fantasy life eventually overcomes the importance of reality.
What has to be considered with the theatre killer is his murders were not spaced out (and he did not have an escape plan as far as we know). He's not a serial killer; he's a mass murderer. A serial killer is defined by having killed 3 or more people over an extensive timeframe, I think of over a month.
I'm tired of typing, so here's an interesting link for you to check out on what leads a mass murderer to commit mass murder:

http://boston.com/community/blogs/crime_punishment/2011/01/
the_real_causes_of_mass_murder.html