"Batman Massacre"

[Gravekeeper]

It's quite a stretch to assign him enough rationality to try to decide whether or not anyone would shoot back, but not enough to think that mass murder is a bad idea.

Its not a stretch at all seeing as he not only went to great lengths to plan this ( perfect location, body armour, gas mask, guns purchase at different stores in different states ) but also used breach tactics by throwing in tear gas canisters first before he entered himself.

He went through a lot of trouble to ensure no one would be capable of fighting back. I can't imagine his choice of location didn't likewise consider that.

[Nekojin]

He went through a lot of trouble to ensure no one would be capable of fighting back. I can't imagine his choice of location didn't likewise consider that.

I have to agree. Cinemark's "no guns allowed" policy isn't exactly a secret. It's not much of a leap to believe that he knew that, and it factored into his decision on which theater to hit.

[Amanita]

Reading about knee jerk crap like a ban on costumes really bothers me, being the cosplayer that I am. I found myself thinking "How long before people start looking at us cosplayers like we're the next mass murderers, the way people started looking at anyone vaguely goth after columbine?"

Really, knee jerk crap like that doesn't help security. It just punishes a group of people who have done nothing wrong, and in fact (if they're dedicated enough to spend the time and $$$ on a costume, and then come out at midnight) are some of the most dedicated moviegoers, and the last people who would ever do a horrible thing like this. Not to mention the fear it puts into the public consciousness of us cosplayers- encouraging people to make the unhappy association of person in costume=psychopath. As if we sometimes were not misunderstood or maligned enough.

I guess this is a classic case of "DO SOMETHING!" When shit happens, there is the pressure to be seen "doing something". Doesn't matter if it's silly, foolish, or outright counterproductive. Just be seen doing something.

[siead_lietrathua]

@amanita: ya.. i'm in other forums where they are mentioning the mask ban as a good thing. just reminding them that, since he came in initially uncostumed/masked, snuck out the backdoor, and slipped back in when armed in an unseeable location that no costume ban would have been effective in this case.

one thing i am loving is that all batmanfans i've been in contact with are unanimously hating on this guy. there's even FB petitions to have Christian Bale go visit the hurt kids in the hospital in the batman suit, just to cheer them up.

[draco664]

I guess this is a classic case of "DO SOMETHING!" When shit happens, there is the pressure to be seen "doing something". Doesn't matter if it's silly, foolish, or outright counterproductive. Just be seen doing something.

Yup.

1) Something must be done.
2) This is something.
3) Therefore, it must be done.

Problem is, number 2 is the pet project of the person making the decision. You can always pick it by asking yourself if the ban had been in place beforehand, if the original incident would still have taken place.

[AdminAssistant]

there's even FB petitions to have Christian Bale go visit the hurt kids in the hospital in the batman suit, just to cheer them up.

I saw that on reddit, and I agree with most redditors that Bale shouldn't be pressured into doing something like this. (Chances are he's already started to slim down for the new Tesla/Edison film anyway). They already shut down the PR machine for the movie, which is appropriate. I'm sure Colorado has a local cosplayers group who could arrange something.

[Beckpatton]

While I understand that a large number of Americans are fiercely protective of their 2nd Amendment rights, and many feel the need to carry a gun for their own protection, not just because they can, but because they feel they have to. I don't understand why high calibre assault rifles are available for sale to the general public.

They are a killing weapon, not a protection device.

I am Australian, and as you most likely know we have very strict gun laws, and as such we don't have much in the way of gun culture. To me the idea of owning any gun is foreign, so I have a hard time understanding the pro gun logic at all. I do understand that America is a country that will most likely never ban guns, I don't see that ever happening. But I don't understand people so oppposed to any changes in gun laws at all. People who get so defensive when I suggest banning certain types of guns.

Really, what purpose does an assault rifle serve?

It would be much easier to take down a crazed psycho reloading his handgun after a few shots, than one firing hundreds of rounds at a time! (and yes I know handguns can be reloaded fairly quickly, but the fact is they do have to stop and reload!)

I'd say get rid of guns entirely, but I know I'm dreaming! Gun culture is completely different over there compared to here, and I know a majority of gun holders do the right thing. But at least get rid of the assault weapons America, give your people a chance!


ETA: I also agree that people should stop pressuring Bale to visit the victims. Yes it's a nice idea and I'm sure the fans would be cheered up by an opportunity to meet him, as I assume they would be fans. However the way people are calling for it almost makes it seem like the Batman franchise is somehow responsible for this heinous act. This gunman is using the publicity of this film for his own agenda, it could have just as easily happened at The Avengers or some other similar blockbuster. Plus asking him to appear in costume seems a little inappropriate. I don't think any of the victims want to have a masked man approach them anytime soon!


My condolences to the people of Aurora.

[AdminAssistant]

This isn't a gun control issue. I hate to be 'that guy' but look at what this guy did to achieve his plan. The legality of the weapons would not have stopped him. He would have gotten them. Or he would have planted a bomb. Or something. The attacker is either mentally ill or completely sociopathic. (My money is on the latter.) You can't attach a normal sense of reason or ethics on that.

The best thing we can do is mourn the loss and stick this guy in a quiet dark room while giving him as little attention as possible. And no, we shouldn't kill him. Killing him for his crime only gives his act the attention and validation he was seeking. Let him sit and rot for 60 years.

[Ginger Tea]

I saw the joke in this post last night but was too tired to comment and have not read past this page or so, so will edit in anything else I feel to add.

He dyed his hair red and just called himself the Joker.

The Joker's the one with the green suit, right? Who keeps asking riddles?

No that's the Penguin, the Joker dresses like a cat, but I probably got it wrong so forget about it /sadpanda

Now the movie itself might be a factor in the whole movie violence bladebla, what would the general reaction be if he had done this during a showing of Magic Mike or any other new release?

[bex1218]

Big box office films ike The Avengers and Batman would create an uproar. It has a huge following of people. Magic Mike or any other non awaited films, not so much.

[insertNameHere]

While I understand that a large number of Americans are fiercely protective of their 2nd Amendment rights, and many feel the need to carry a gun for their own protection, not just because they can, but because they feel they have to. I don't understand why high caliber assault rifles are available for sale to the general public.

They are a killing weapon, not a protection device. ....

not to completely sidetrack, the real purpose of the 2nd amendment is to be able to overthrow the goverment hence, why American citizens need high powered assault rifles. All the states have different regulations on firearms along with some national stuff. It is very hard to legally purchase a fully automatic assault rifle that people mostly associate with crime. However, semi-automatic are easy to acquire. My state (OH) has regulations an capacity of magazines for guns. I am not allowed to be capable of firing more than 31 times without needing to reload. Which an AR-15 typically has 30rd mags, think Glock runs in normally around 10-15 depending on caliber. As someone previously stated even without a gun he could have built a bomb with widely available items, then went a stop farther and ran people over with a big truck as they fled. SO now, we need to ban trucks because someone used them for mass killings and it is dangerous to let people own them.

For the hind sight aspect. Yes it is a horrible idea to engage a body armored gunman and have innocent bystanders everywhere. but if you charged the guy from his blind spot, or laid in wait, He probably could have been stopped at a much lower body count. But honestly which is worse. "12 Dead, 71 Injured" or "3 Dead, 12 injured and the guy who stopped the attacker only injured/killed 2 additional people". In an ironic look, when dealing with war on terror the general public accepts much higher amounts of collateral damage and friendly fire.

[TheHuckster]

but if you charged the guy from his blind spot, or laid in wait, He probably could have been stopped at a much lower body count.

The problem with that is:

a.) He's in a crowded movie theater. When you're facing the seats from the front, you can see what everyone is doing, and while it's dark and smokey, he can still probably tell quite easily if someone from the seats is sneaking up on him.

b.) If you do get within his blind spot, you're most likely close enough to him to get hit by friendly fire from people in the seats.

Having several people with guns in the audience fire to the front of the theater during absolute mayhem where other people are probably climbing over eachother to try to escape is going to result in a lot bloodshed, and while the assailant will most likely not survive, people are probably going to be shooting at him well after it's over, and in that time, any bystander could get unnecessarily hurt or killed. I really don't think the casualty count will really be all that different.

People are going to be asking how we can prevent something like this in the future, and the answer isn't as simple as "give everyone guns." That's about as short-sighted as putting TSA in charge of tickets.

I'm not talking about this from a gun-control point of view, really. If people want firearms for hunting or protection, go for it, but to say that it will prevent any nut from causing bloodshed in an enclosed space is incorrect, IMO.

[evilfarmer]

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?f...type=1&theater

This is a photo I have seen passing around FB and it seriously pisses me off. Just by looking at the photos you can see that the gun owners that stopped the robbers were in a bright area while the theater would have had poor visibility.

I am working on getting my cc permit and I can honestly say I would have hit the floor before I would have tried to fire at what might have been a shooter since it was extremely crowded with a panic-stricken crowd.

[Beckpatton]

the real purpose of the 2nd amendment is to be able to overthrow the goverment hence, why American citizens need high powered assault rifles.

Yes and back when the 2nd amendment was written that was a possibility. Do people really think in this day and age that the US will ever need to "declare war on it's government and overthrow it" isn't that what elections are for?

So again I ask, why the need for assault rifles. You want to protect yourself fine, but a 100 round magazine assault rifle is for murder pure and simple not protection.

and yes if the guns weren't available he could have tried other means like a bomb, but for all we know he could have blown himself up in the process, and 12 people would still be alive.

If he'd used a truck to run everyone over, no one would be calling for the eradication of trucks. That is not their purpose. A trucks job is to carry people and cargo from one location to another.

An assault rifle's ONLY job is to kill!

[BlaqueKatt]

I don't understand why high calibre assault rifles are available for sale to the general public.

Really, what purpose does an assault rifle serve?.

what purpose does a hummer, SUV, or Jeep serve(two of those are military vehicles available to the public), it would be much easier if everyone drove a honda civic.

I tried to have a discussion with another aussie about it, and they didn't get it-

First off "assault rifle" is a term coined by the anti-gun lobby, and latched onto by the media, it is an essentially meaningless term, but words are powerful, and they can be used to control, usually through fear.

Secondly, the "so called assault rifles" are defined by purely cosmetic features that have zero bearing on the operation of the firearm.*(Assault weapon (semi-automatic) refers primarily (but not exclusively) to firearms that possess the cosmetics of an assault rifle)

Thirdly, I would likely be more comfortable shooting an AR15(and did have one with a wood stock for deer hunting) simply because I am comfortable shooting an M16A2 due to having been in the military, I know it inside and out, I can field strip it and reassemble it in under 60 seconds.

Finally, it's about freedom of choice, just because I see no need for me to drive a hummer, own a rifle with similar specs to the military, have unrestricted access to abortion or birth control, doesn't mean that by extension of my lack of need translates to your lack of need for any of these things.

I ride a bicycle, I have never needed a car, my husband drives a nissan sentra, his friend drives a lotus elise, his boss has a hummer, they are all used for the same purpose(getting from point a to point b, less than 10 miles in the city), and they chose what they wanted, even if it was overpowered(the lotus) or unncecssary(the hummer).

*seriously the ruger mini 14 "ranch gun", or "varmint gun"(primarily marketed to exterminate coyotes and jackrabbits), has the exact same inner workings of the SCAR16, only one is considered an "assault rifle", but they are essentially the same rifle, only difference is cosmetic. I have fired both, there was no difference in them to me, though if I were to purchase one I'd go for the ruger, because a prefer wood stock to polymer.

the mini 14

the SCAR 16(civilian model of the SOCOM)