Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Shooting at Batman screen in Colorado.


Malin
 Share

Recommended Posts

what possible conspiracy theories could be conceived about this situation? the guys was a fucking cornball, who went so far as to die his hair red and call himself the joker. who purposefully becomes a ginger?

 

this whole story needs to fuck off and people need to let the families do their mourning in private, I personally don't need any more coverage than what I got at 7am when I woke and caught the headlines on the am news. not where he acquired the guns from, who he talked to, whats inside his apartment, a reenactment of his moves that night. none of that information would enhance my life one bit.

 

fuck this guy to hell, should have turned one on himself like those columbine faggots

 

I've already seen one floated that has claimed he wasn't working alone. Also questioned a grad student on social assistances ability to afford upwards of $10,000 worth of guns/ammo/tactical equipment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This forum is supported by the 12ozProphet Shop, so go buy a shirt and help support!
This forum is brought to you by the 12ozProphet Shop.
This forum is brought to you by the 12oz Shop.
  • Replies 414
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

THIS IS WHAT IM Talking about...

 

 

The word "terrorism" is politically and emotionally charged,[3] and this greatly compounds the difficulty of providing a precise definition. Studies have found over 100 definitions of “terrorism”.[4][5] The concept of terrorism may itself be controversial as it is often used by state authorities (and individuals with access to state support) to delegitimize political or other opponents,[6] and potentially legitimize the state's own use of armed force against opponents (such use of force may itself be described as "terror" by opponents of the state).

 

 

OF COURSE THOSE PEOPLE MENTIONED ABOVE ARE WHITE TERRORIST.

i never said it has NEVER happened before..

 

“Oh he’s just a gunman…not a terrorist..” that is a fucked up way to think.

Terrorist is a word used to describe anyone that brings about terror to the people and this man, ladies and gentleman, was definitely a terrorist

 

Have terrorists been associated this much with a specific religion that even some people would go to such an extent to term the attacker a gunman and not a terrorist?

 

What this goes to show is just that bad, sick and cruel people are everywhere, can belong to any religion and can be of any skin color. These things are obviously not what define a terrorist, but rather, it is the thinking and actions of a person that do make the difference.

 

Fighting wars across the border just is not the answer to anything and with the recent chain of events involving fucked up killings in a country like the United States, world leaders should stop and think for a moment whether there nations are better off this way or not. Is spending of billions of dollars on wars in Afghanistan and Iraq along with planning out many more against nations like Iran and Pakistan really the answer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pfffffffffft

 

I think you have some valid points, but I think perhaps your agenda regarding the discussion of foreign politics is not the most pertinent with regards to this current event.

 

This is an event that happened in the states, and the accused perpetrator appears to be an american citizen. I agree, completely that there are issues with fairness of reporting when it comes to crimes committed by "visible minorities" or people of certain geographical backgrounds.

 

I think perhaps that a larger issue at hand is the use of these instances by the media, lobbyists and government as a means to pursue or further strengthen elements of control within society.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

THIS IS WHAT IM Talking about...

 

 

The word "terrorism" is politically and emotionally charged,[3] and this greatly compounds the difficulty of providing a precise definition. Studies have found over 100 definitions of “terrorism”.[4][5] The concept of terrorism may itself be controversial as it is often used by state authorities (and individuals with access to state support) to delegitimize political or other opponents,[6] and potentially legitimize the state's own use of armed force against opponents (such use of force may itself be described as "terror" by opponents of the state).

 

Show me one definition that doesn't argue that it is the use of fear as a means to create a reaction of some one OTHER than the people being attacked. IF you cannot find that your theory of terrorism is inaccurate.

 

I can dig up more definitions of terrorism that come from academics from all persuasions than I can govt definitions. And again, they will all have one thing in common; the creation of fear to elicit and response from another party.

 

 

“Oh he’s just a gunman…not a terrorist..” that is a fucked up way to think.

Terrorist is a word used to describe anyone that brings about terror to the people and this man, ladies and gentleman, was definitely a terrorist

 

So Ted Bundy was a terrorist, the Hillside Strangler was a terrorist, the Virginia Tech Killer was a terrorist, the Colombine killers were terrorists, Wade Frankum and MArtin Bryant were terrorists?

 

No, they were serial killers and mass muderers. Their aim was to fulfill their own urges to kill, not to create fear. A terrorist's tactic is to create fear to pressure a change in policy, not simply to murder some one.

 

Have terrorists been associated this much with a specific religion that even some people would go to such an extent to term the attacker a gunman and not a terrorist?

 

I have no idea what you are talking about but have you ever heard of the IRA, FARC, ETA, The Shining Path, The Red Brigade, November 17, The Weathermen Underground, Narodnaya Volya, Animal Liberation Front, Deep Green Resistance, etc. etc.?

 

All terrorist groups, many still highly active. Only the IRA could be claimed to be related to religion but that's a long bow to draw for a few decades now. All the rest, not a thing to do with religion.

 

So fucked if I know what you're talking about, mate.

 

What this goes to show is just that bad, sick and cruel people are everywhere, can belong to any religion and can be of any skin color. These things are obviously not what define a terrorist, but rather, it is the thinking and actions of a person that do make the difference.

 

Fighting wars across the border just is not the answer to anything and with the recent chain of events involving fucked up killings in a country like the United States, world leaders should stop and think for a moment whether there nations are better off this way or not. Is spending of billions of dollars on wars in Afghanistan and Iraq along with planning out many more against nations like Iran and Pakistan really the answer?

 

 

Ok, now you've gone in to la la land here.

 

This guy geared up, went in to a cinema and killed/wounded a whole bunch of people. The reason people aren't reacting the same way as they would if it was an act of terrorism is because it's over. The dude got caught, so there is no fear of follow on attacks. It's sad, it's fucked up and wrong, but its not scary because there is no threat to us.

 

If it was a terror attack the message would be "there will be more attacks until you [insert demand here]". That means every time we go to a cinema, get on a train or go to the shops we have to wonder if we will be next. We would experience terror/fear and demand our govt does something about it so we don't have to fear being blown up.

 

The killer was caught. He was acting alone without demands, the danger has passed and thus a different reaction out of people. NOT that he's white and "one of us".

 

The reason why you can't see this is because you have a misconception of what terrorism actually is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I can dig up more definitions of terrorism that come from academics from all persuasions than I can govt definitions. And again, they will all have one thing in common; the creation of fear to elicit and response from another party.

 

 

 

 

 

 

You just answered you own question and proved my point.

 

thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But what response was he trying to elicit?

 

Again, I see your point that terrorists come in all shapes and sizes. I think everyone does. But simply because that's true doesn't make him a terrorist. A lunatic and a killer, sure, but unless it comes out that he was trying to raise awareness about gun control or something...I don't agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Answered my own question? I didn't have a question!!??!!

 

Terrorism is creating fear among the population to force the govt to change policy. That's what it is and the way anyone that matters conceives it.

 

However, I get the idea no matter what is said you are set on your course regardless what anyone says.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

dude elicited terror, destruction and distributed death HENSE THE WORD TERROR IN TERRORist..

dude terrorized those poor people..

dude elicited a response from the media and law enforcement to tighten security at other batman premieres across the nation...raising the level of fear.

 

dude is a terrorist along with all those other names like crazy, psycho, nutjob..

a political terrorist?.. that is still undetermined

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The press and police should conceal this guys ID[/color]/photos/manifesto if he has one so other crab niggas out for fame stop pulling this shit.

 

That would just unleash a flood of conspiracy theories[/color].

 

what possible conspiracy theories could be conceived about this situation? [/color]the guys was a fucking cornball, who went so far as to die his hair red and call himself the joker. who purposefully becomes a ginger?

 

 

Lets see... dude walks into movie theater dressed in swat gear and armed with military style weapons and bucks 80 or so people killing 12.

Government hides dudes identity.

If you can't see an avalanche of conspiracy theories coming out of that scenario, espescially in this day and age, then you're a fucking retard.

 

 

how is the govt hiding dudes identity? [/color]his face and name have been on the web and tv news hours since late yesterday morning??

 

no conspiracy here, they're probably only downplaying his identity so as not to give him his undeserved fame and/or protect his family from nuts seeking retribution.

 

even if they were concocting a conspiracy what the fuck could it possibly be? there was no political/social aspects to this, it wasn't an abortion clinic, none of the victims were senators, and his middle name isn't hussein. don't be a fucking retard

 

 

FacePalm_picard.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

in your eyes using your examples...

if someone held up a krispy kreme doughnut shop and demanded that doughnuts should be made illegal because they are too high in fat content. is he a terrorist?

 

he has a political agenda..right?

he is causing terror.. right?

 

 

would the media portray him as a nutjob or a terrorist?

 

you get my point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Get the facts, bruh. He was posted near the exit and was taking people down as they were trying to flee the theatre, people reacting to their fight or flight instinct. I doubt in the confusion and chaos going on anybody had any time to coordinate a tackle effort against this guy.

 

The same argument can be hand for people who have conceal and carry permits, which are apparently aplenty in Colorado - why didn't anybody in the theatre have one on them?

 

And it was two cannisters of tear gas from all the accounts I've read. Tear gas/smoke bomb, same thing man. It makes your eyes sting and its hard to breathe, what difference would it ultimately make.

 

The fact that you're defending everybody just allowing themselves to be slaughtered just goes to prove my point when I said "what the fuck is wrong with people these days?"

Congrats, you're a pussy just like everyone else.

 

Your vision of America as being some gun toting old west is comical.

Even if there were people in that theater who had conceal carry permits, most stores and venues have it clearly posted that it's a felony to have a gun on the premises so that legally carried gun would most likely be left in the car.

 

And every account I read said it was a smoke bomb.

You may have read somewhere that it was tear gas, but in none of the photos or cell phone video of the people leaving the theater or being interviewed by the cops did you see anybody coughing, choking or trying to wash their faces off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right, either run directly at the guy in a bulletproof vest with several automatic weapons, or drop down and try to get the fuck out via the interior theater entrance.

 

It's a no brainer, those spineless faggots should have just charged him, he probably would have only killed about 4 or 5 more people before someone got ahold of him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

in your eyes using your examples...

if someone held up a krispy kreme doughnut shop and demanded that doughnuts should be made illegal because they are too high in fat content. is he a terrorist?

 

he has a political agenda..right?

he is causing terror.. right?

 

 

would the media portray him as a nutjob or a terrorist?

 

you get my point.

 

Terror is a tactic.

 

In your example the person is using terrorism to force the govt to change policy. so yes, he is a terrorist.

 

That doesn't preclude him from being a nutjob too though. As for how the media would treat him, yeah, sure they would call him a loony, but I'm sure they'd still hand the terror tag on him as well.

 

 

 

I wrote a paper years back arguing that given the currently accepted general definition of terror - use of fear to force the govt to enact a particular policy - that there should be 3 kinds of terror: political terror - using fear to force public policy, financial terror - basically extortion or using fear as a weapon for financial gain, and social/emotional terror - shit like kidnapping some one's kids out of revenge.

 

I understand that terrorism is politicised and the reason there is no universally agreed term is becasue govts don't want to agree that there is such a thing as state terrorism, otherwise they may be prosecuted with that definition. I also understand that the media are fickle, irrational and unfair (as well as not a source of measured debate and/or analysis). I'm not arguing that.

 

I'm just arguing that causing fear/terror is not what is generally considered as terrorism. Otherwise all serial killers, mass murderers, pedophiles, armed robbers, home invaders, etc. will also be categorised as terrorists. So then how would you separate your bin Ladens, FARC, Una Bombers, IRA and so on from some one who holds up a bank?

 

The definition you pose is so broad that it becomes too wide and ambiguous to be any good, it covers most violent criminals. And I'd suggest people who set of explosives in public transport killing hundreds and threaten to kill thousands more and undermine a democratic government deserve much greater attention and sanction than some piece of shit that goes on a one off thrill kill. Can't have the same definition, resource allocation and consequences for two people who's crime and agenda is so radically different. Just doesn't work.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

he probably would have only killed about 4 or 5 more people before someone got ahold of him.

 

My point exactly.

4 or 5 verses 12 dead and 71 wounded.

Dude had a hundred round drum, if he was a better shot there would have been a lot more than 12 killed.

I'm surprised he only killed 12 regardless of his marksmanship or lack thereof.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Your vision of America as being some gun toting old west is comical.

Even if there were people in that theater who had conceal carry permits, most stores and venues have it clearly posted that it's a felony to have a gun on the premises so that legally carried gun would most likely be left in the car.

 

 

here in new york that is pretty much false, no stores or venues have signs posted saying it's a "felony" to carry your legal guns there. it's only unlawful in government buildings and schools, and i think state parks. stores can have policies, but a store policy isn't a state law. there's a dollar movie theater near me that has a "no firearms" sign posted, but that doesn't mean im going to leave my shit in my car just because the theater has a sign.

 

in my head i like to think i woulda tried to shoot the dude but who knows when it really comes down to the situation. the guy had badass armor on, not like my .380 would do much to it anyway

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My point exactly.

4 or 5 verses 12 dead and 71 wounded.

Dude had a hundred round drum, if he was a better shot there would have been a lot more than 12 killed.

I'm surprised he only killed 12 regardless of his marksmanship or lack thereof.

 

 

 

 

 

So basically you're saying you would go all Batman The DAOrk Knight on him if you were there?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

asiSAl.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...