Kicking off A Firestorm Here...

[fgarvb1]

I'm going to say that fewer people were killed at the theater By firearms than would have been then if the bastard had used Bombs.

He wanted to kill them each one, personally himself.

He had the brains and probably the home made munitions to take out the whole place.

Not a very popular view I know.

 

[Recidiva]

I've said the same. That guns help someone like that keep score.

 

[oggbashan]

Statistics quoted in the UK's newspaper The Times suggest that the number of homicides by gunshot (and homicides in general) in the US has been dropping significantly over the last decade despite a massive increase in gun ownership.

The trend appears to be common to most developed countries even though, proportionate to population, the number of homicides in the US is five or more times that in the UK.

There appears to be no statistical correlation between availability of guns and homicides.

 

[bronzeage]

I'm going to say that fewer people were killed at the theater By firearms than would have been then if the bastard had used Bombs.

He wanted to kill them each one, personally himself.

He had the brains and probably the home made munitions to take out the whole place.

Not a very popular view I know.

Bombs lack that personal touch.

 

[HAL_9000]

Statistics quoted in the UK's newspaper The Times suggest that the number of homicides by gunshot (and homicides in general) in the US has been dropping significantly over the last decade despite a massive increase in gun ownership.

The trend appears to be common to most developed countries even though, proportionate to population, the number of homicides in the US is five or more times that in the UK.

Despite of, or because of?

 

[oggbashan]

Despite of, or because of?

There does not seem to be any cause and effect linking number of guns and reduction in homicides by firearms.

One cause for the reduction might have been thought to be better ER procedures so that fewer people who have been shot actually die - but the total number of people injured by firearm has reduced too.

 

[HAL_9000]

There does not seem to be any cause and effect linking number of guns and reduction in homicides by firearms.

One cause for the reduction might have been thought to be better ER procedures so that fewer people who have been shot actually die - but the total number of people injured by firearm has reduced too.

Hmmm...in fact I think all violent crimes have decreased.

Which is also counter-intuitive considering the economic climate of the past few years.

 

[Comshaw]

a few things to think on:

1) How would it have gone down (what would the body count be) had the guy used Molotov cocktails or as noted by the OP, bombs instead of bullets?

2) What if just one person in that theater had been armed and willing to use it?

3) What if many (pick your own number) people in the theater were armed and willing to use those arms?


Comshaw

 

[oggbashan]

Hmmm...in fact I think all violent crimes have decreased.

Which is also counter-intuitive considering the economic climate of the past few years.

In the UK, almost all crime statistics except theft of mobile phones, has decreased.

One theory is that criminals start by opportunistic theft from motor vehicles, and modern security devices have made that more difficult - so they don't start on a career of crime.

 

[Recidiva]

There does not seem to be any cause and effect linking number of guns and reduction in homicides by firearms.

One cause for the reduction might have been thought to be better ER procedures so that fewer people who have been shot actually die - but the total number of people injured by firearm has reduced too.

Freakanomics has submitted a theory that is this: Having abortion legal reduced the at-risk population that might turn into criminals as they grew up. If you're interested, you can check out their first book, they make an excellent case for their theory and can present it much better than I.

I live in a state that has also recently converted from tighter to less gun control and crime has also gone down.

Freakonomics is ambivalent so far on gun control, because they don't have as clear of a data set as they do on general crime.

I grew up in a culture where guns were understood and considered a tool, so I was raised by a father who chopped his own wood, shot his own game and was very Grizzly Adams. Knowing how a gun worked was the same as knowing how to feed chickens.

 

[oggbashan]

a few things to think on:

1) How would it have gone down (what would the body count be) had the guy used Molotov cocktails or as noted by the OP, bombs instead of bullets?

2) What if just one person in that theater had been armed and willing to use it?

3) What if many (pick your own number) people in the theater were armed and willing to use those arms?


Comshaw

2 and 3 - the person or persons would have had to have recognised the situation for what it was. It seems that at first some thought it was a publicity stunt as part of the movie premiere. How soon would you start shooting, in the dark, with people rushing everywhere? What is the risk of hitting an innocent movie-goer?

How many gun-toters are capable of deadly accuracy with a concealed handgun in a darkened theatre?

 

[coachdb18]

There does not seem to be any cause and effect linking number of guns and reduction in homicides by firearms.

One cause for the reduction might have been thought to be better ER procedures so that fewer people who have been shot actually die - but the total number of people injured by firearm has reduced too.

There is in fact data supporting the decrease in firearm homicides to the increase in conceal carry. The NRA has done a lot of research in this area, as have the gun manufacturers, as it is their primary business. While some will contend they don't trust their numbers, they need to have good data to support their positions, or they lose credibility as a force for gun rights.

 

[phrodeau]

Maybe the nut was pissed that the Batman movie wasn't in 3-D, so he wanted to give that audience a 3-D experience.

 

[coachdb18]

2 and 3 - the person or persons would have had to have recognised the situation for what it was. It seems that at first some thought it was a publicity stunt as part of the movie premiere. How soon would you start shooting, in the dark, with people rushing everywhere? What is the risk of hitting an innocent movie-goer?

so long as this guy was shooting, the chance of people being shot was seemingly 100%, anyone shooting back lowered that number by a factor we can't determine, depends on the training of the individual.

How many gun-toters are capable of deadly accuracy with a concealed handgun in a darkened theatre?

Most could hit him in that light, not so dark that the conditions are any better for him than they are for you. You can see pretty well in the theaters I've been in.

 

[RoryN]

I'm going to say that fewer people were killed at the theater By firearms than would have been then if the bastard had used Bombs.

He wanted to kill them each one, personally himself.

He had the brains and probably the home made munitions to take out the whole place.

Not a very popular view I know.

I'm seriously having a hard time figuring out what your point is.

(Your real point.)

 

[oggbashan]

...
Most could hit him in that light, not so dark that the conditions are any better for him than they are for you. You can see pretty well in the theaters I've been in.

You have a better opinion than mine about the accuracy of handgun users, especially using the small sized guns that can be concealed.

He was using an assault rifle and large calibre guns. His targets were anyone. The person with concealed-carry had to hit him to kill or disable and injure no one else. The average law-enforcement officer would have difficulty doing that.

 

[coachdb18]

You have a better opinion than mine about the accuracy of handgun users, especially using the small sized guns that can be concealed.

I conceal carry either a .357 Magnum most times, and occasionally a .44 Magnum. Are these what you call 'small guns'?

He was using an assault rifle and large calibre guns. His targets were anyone. The person with concealed-carry had to hit him and no one else.

In a theater where the distances are within 25 yards, my normal range distance, I typically place all my rounds within a 5" circle with a 2"barrel .357, and within a 3" circle with my 4"barrel .357 and/or my 4" barrel .44 Magnum....

How much experience do you have conceal carrying and shooting with handguns?

 

[RoryN]

In a theater where the distances are within 25 yards, my normal range distance, I typically place all my rounds within a 5" circle with a 2"barrel .357, and withing a 3" circle with my 4"barrel .357 or .44....

Wow - you've really put some thought into this.

So, which theater are you planning on shooting up?

 

[Comshaw]

2 and 3 - the person or persons would have had to have recognised the situation for what it was. It seems that at first some thought it was a publicity stunt as part of the movie premiere. How soon would you start shooting, in the dark, with people rushing everywhere? What is the risk of hitting an innocent movie-goer?

How many gun-toters are capable of deadly accuracy with a concealed handgun in a darkened theatre?

Does it really matter? Ever been shot at? If someone had started shooting back at the perp, whether or not they hit him, it would have given him pause and most likely caused him to stop and run. That scenario wouldn't have saved all those people, but more then likely saved some.
Besides, what's a better option: 1) Laying between theater seat rows waiting for someone to put a bullet in you, or 2) A chance to fight back.
Me......I like option 2.

I conceal carry either a .357 Magnum most times, and occasionally a .44 Magnum. Are these what you call 'small guns'?

In a theater where the distances are within 25 yards, my normal range distance, I typically place all my rounds within a 5" circle with a 2"barrel .357, and within a 3" circle with my 4"barrel .357 and/or my 4" barrel .44 Magnum....

How much experience do you have conceal carrying and shooting with handguns?

Yep. At 25 yards ,off hand, I can put all six rounds from my 2" barreled AMT .38 super backup in a man sized silhouette target. But then the target ain't shooting at me either.
I watched two police officers with 20 years experience between them, fire 21 rounds at two Pit bulls and miss with all of 'em. Returning fire on someone who's shooting at you, ain't gunna be picture perfect like on a range.

That said, those Pit Bulls also didn't have the cognitive ability to understand what was going on or what would have happened if one of those rounds hit it's mark. Most people do.


Comshaw

 

[clutch1]

Maybe the nut was pissed that the Batman movie wasn't in 3-D, so he wanted to give that audience a 3-D experience.

Too soon dude, funny but too soon.

 

[bronzeage]

You have a better opinion than mine about the accuracy of handgun users, especially using the small sized guns that can be concealed.

He was using an assault rifle and large calibre guns. His targets were anyone. The person with concealed-carry had to hit him to kill or disable and injure no one else. The average law-enforcement officer would have difficulty doing that.

In the US, all concealed gun carriers pay close attention to Sylvester Stallone, Bruce Willis and Arnold Schwarzenegger movies. There is always a scene where the hero must confront the bad guys while not shooting innocent civilians. You want find a gun carrier who thinks he can't do the same.

 

[clutch1]

In the US, all concealed gun carriers pay close attention to Sylvester Stallone, Bruce Willis and Arnold Schwarzenegger movies. There is always a scene where the hero must confront the bad guys while not shooting innocent civilians. You want find a gun carrier who thinks he can't do the same.

And in august they'll be in the same movie.

 

[bronzeage]

And in august they'll be in the same movie.

It certainly helps their credibility on all their other fantastic claims.

 

[clutch1]

It certainly helps their credibility on all their other fantastic claims.

I may have to throw my support behind Sly, and go see this one in the theater.

 

[koalabear]

In the US, all concealed gun carriers pay close attention to Sylvester Stallone, Bruce Willis and Arnold Schwarzenegger movies. There is always a scene where the hero must confront the bad guys while not shooting innocent civilians. You want find a gun carrier who thinks he can't do the same.

Don't worry bronze, if a gunman gets you, I wouldn't worry about hitting you.