Colorado movie massacre

[IPD]

Its not that big of deal in all honesty, but business is driven by what is profitable. The exchange of money is resource allocation. If money is allocated towards the purchase of weapons, be it for the military, law enforcement, or private consumption, if there is demand then a considerable amount of man-hours and raw materials will be allocated towards the development and sale of weapons.

That's money that has been diverted from purchasing something else, and represents resources, both in man-hours and raw materials, that could have been put to use somewhere else.

giving homes and food to the poor is not profitable. i don't know what crack you're smoking, but it's a ridiculous assertion that funding/labor would be better spent on charitable causes--which offer no tangible benefits in return--vice spending it on national defense, which protects our bill of rights (including yours, you bloody canuck--you rely on our strong defense, admittedly or not).

if my choice is spending my tax dollars on an insurance policy i hope i never have to use...or spending it on humanitarian aid to people who will never repay the favor in any way, shape or form (to me personally) then i choose the former--each and every time.

how you liberals can seem to forget such simple concepts as "give a man a fish: teach a man to fish" is beyond me. let's see your math for ROI (return on investment) for the sale of firearms (measured in violent crime rates) vs. your donation of money to charity (measured in the reduction of unemployment).

i won't hold my breath.

[j2k4]

Mayor Michael Bloomberg, a fan of gun control:

"I don’t understand why the police officers across his country don’t stand up collectively and say, ‘We’re going to go on strike. We're not going to protect you unless you, the public, through your legislature, do what's required to keep us safe. After all, police officers want to go home to their families and we're doing everything we can to make their jobs more difficult."

[AgentOblivious]

giving homes and food to the poor is not profitable. i don't know what crack you're smoking, but it's a ridiculous assertion that funding/labor would be better spent on charitable causes--which offer no tangible benefits in return--vice spending it on national defense, which protects our bill of rights (including yours, you bloody canuck--you rely on our strong defense, admittedly or not).

if my choice is spending my tax dollars on an insurance policy i hope i never have to use...or spending it on humanitarian aid to people who will never repay the favor in any way, shape or form (to me personally) then i choose the former--each and every time.

how you liberals can seem to forget such simple concepts as "give a man a fish: teach a man to fish" is beyond me. let's see your math for ROI (return on investment) for the sale of firearms (measured in violent crime rates) vs. your donation of money to charity (measured in the reduction of unemployment).

i won't hold my breath.

I love how you assume I only meant charitable causes...what if that money was put towards the purchase of new electronics, health products, etc. that would drive R&D in those sectors as opposed to weapons production? That is the key here...that effort and those resources aren't just being diverted from charitable causes, but all causes other than weapons production.

FYI, whether you give a man a fish, or teach a man to fish, you still have to do something about it, and that costs money. :P

p.s. when's the last time the US did anything militarily for Canada...you know, other than trying to invade us?

[j2k4]

IFYI, whether you give a man a fish, or teach a man to fish, you still have to do something about it, and that costs money. :P

Uh...what?

p.s. when's the last time the US did anything militarily for Canada...you know, other than trying to invade us?

Canada reaps more benefits by mistake than other countries do on purpose merely due to it's proximity to the US - to the extent that an attack on Canada would be considered an attack on the US; even though this is probably owed to the fact an attack on Canada would be considered an attack on America that missed...

EDIT:

Here's a detail that may serve to clarify:

http://www.globalfirepower.com/

According to that, Thailand could kick Canada's ass, so the proper conclusion is obvious.

[IPD]

are we also going to discount the fact that military R&D has brought you everything from the microwave to the PC to the internet?

i'm sure that's a bad thing. we could have been giving freebies to bums with all of that money.

[terrets]

I love how you assume I only meant charitable causes...what if that money was put towards the purchase of new electronics, health products, etc. that would drive R&D in those sectors as opposed to weapons production? That is the key here...that effort and those resources aren't just being diverted from charitable causes, but all causes other than weapons production.

FYI, whether you give a man a fish, or teach a man to fish, you still have to do something about it, and that costs money. :P

p.s. when's the last time the US did anything militarily for Canada...you know, other than trying to invade us?

So what your saying is, advancing healthcare and technology is more important than surviving and protecting your family, friends, and strangers?

What about all the money spent on porn, drugs, expensive cars, big houses, fast cars, jewelry, and crap we don't need. These are the problems, not guns, at least guns have a legit and meaningful use.

Ya you could talk about the likely hood of using it compared to how much you spent, but blah blah blah. Is your life really worth ~$500 it costs for a gun? Would you rather have $500 or your wife/daughter/son still alive and well? Would you pay $500 to stop a rapist from getting at your wife/daughter/girlfriend?

I just don't get why people are opposed to guns, I can understand if guns weren't in the hands of criminals, but still there are criminals that will fuck you up and rape you without a gun. It's like your saying you are going to take the risk to not eat remotely healthy, to eat only candy or McDonald's, and see how long you live. Sure you could make it 80 years, but will you? Whats the likely hood?


Let me say it again and restate it. It's all about survival and protecting what you've earn, your livelihood, your family, your resources, and your rights.





ps. AO, I would love it if you would try to respond to this post instead of ignoring it like post #50

[AdamVR4]

Looks like it's males that are committing these mass homicides.

The overwhelming maleness of mass homicide - CNN.com

Make males illegal?

[IPD]

Looks like it's males that are committing these mass homicides.

The overwhelming maleness of mass homicide - CNN.com

Make males illegal?

he also says that men start wars. in that case, his argument is that we should only elect women to political office.

[AgentOblivious]

he also says that men start wars. in that case, his argument is that we should only elect women to political office.

[J. Fast]

Well, here's the latest bunch of bullshit stemming from this. Widespread panic caused by some narcissist. Can't carry holstered in the open, or concealed, anymore without somone making a big deal about it. This man was arrested, and the entire 9 screen theatre was evacuated, all because some irrational woman called the police because some guy was sitting and enjoying a movie with a weapon, holstered, in the open. He was cited even though he's a CW holder. There were no "no weapons signs". Absolute law abiding citizen... total bullshit!

THORNTON, Colo.—A man was arrested and nine theaters were evacuated after someone carried a gun into a multiplex in Colorado, police said.
James Mapes, 48, of Northglenn was taken into custody Sunday after patrons reported he was carrying a handgun strapped to his waist. He was released after being cited and given a summons.

Mapes told the Denver Post (Man arrested after bringing gun into Thornton movie theater - The Denver Post) he has a concealed weapons permit issued by the Arapahoe County Sheriff's Office in 2003. He said he has lived in the area for nine years and gone to movies at the Cinebarre theater dozens of times carrying a pistol openly and concealed.

"I was a threat to no one, I didn't threaten anybody," Mapes said.

Mapes was issued a citation for displaying a weapon and alarming another person after about 40 people were evacuated, Thornton police spokesman Matt Barnes said Monday.

"We had people fleeing the theatres, with people yelling there was a man with a gun," Barnes said.

Theaters across the country have been jittery after 12 people were killed and 58 others were wounded or injured at an Aurora movie theater on July 20 during a showing of the Batman film "The Dark Knight Rises."

Colorado prosecutors filed formal charges Monday against James Holmes, a former neuroscience student accused in the theater attack.

Prosecutors were reviewing the case involving Mapes and the charges might be dropped if they determine he was complying with Colorado's concealed carry law that allows people who pass background checks and get training to carry guns in most circumstances, Barnes said.

Mapes told the newspaper he was in a darkened theater for about 15 minutes viewing "The Watch," when the lights came on and the show stopped. He said a woman sitting nearby took a cellphone call then said aloud that someone in the movie complex was seen carrying a gun.




Read more: Man arrested after gun brought into theater - The Denver Post Man arrested after gun brought into theater - The Denver Post