It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Cops: Maine man brought loaded gun into 'Batman' flick

page: 4
18
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 04:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by mattdel
I read this and say "so what". I have a loaded weapon on me right now, with the safety off. If I choose to go to a movie, so be it. I wouldn't be the first, and I won't be the last.
This article is an attempt to make everyone with a legal weapon into a nutcase.
edit on 23-7-2012 by mattdel because: (no reason given)


in most states machine guns are very illegal, and I bet you dont pack a AK just to watch a movie. This screams of foul play on behalf of the Gov, they couldn't get the reaction they were going for so they tried again without killing anyone.

It doesnt take a genius with orange hair to see where this is going.

BTW, I pack a heater myself.....concealed....legally...everywhere I go within the law....

But its not a AK 47, and I dont carry more than 10 rounds unless I visit the hood.




posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 04:54 AM
link   
reply to post by TKDRL
 


Your deer rifle might be more powerful, but its not more effective, theres a reason all modern infantry carry assault rifles as standard.

If the guy the other day had a deer rifle you know for a fact he wouldn't have been able to pull off what he did, he might have killed a few, but even unarmed civilians could have disarmed him.

So again i'm going to ask why you need an assault rifle? why can't you use a handgun to protect your home?



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 04:58 AM
link   
reply to post by mushrooms
 


Oh, so now if it was a different gun, people would have magically disarmed him

No I don't know for a fact it wouldn't have been worse, actually it might have been much worse, the bullets would have travelled farther, meaning people in even more theatres possibly hit.


I don't like handguns much for one. For two I got to jump through fifty million loops to own one, which I don't feel like doing, and can't afford right now.
edit on Tue, 24 Jul 2012 04:59:02 -0500 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 05:10 AM
link   
reply to post by mushrooms
 


Even very good shooters are not all that accurate with a handgun. Rifles are far more accurate and have greater range. They also offer more oomph than pistols generally. If you have a yard or large house it makes sense to use an assault rifle to defend the property. A lot of people in the States have large properties, well outside a pistols effective range. People will say that can hit bullseyes with a handgun at 50 yards. Maybe they can. I doubt they could at night under duress.

I would much rather use the AR with the EoTech than the Glock with night sights/flashlight. Better shot placement means less chance of hurting neighbors. More power means less shots needed.

I'm not worried about fighting off hordes of people hell bent and sampling my Domo bits, but it is nice to know if I keep missing for some reason I'm not going to have to reload for 20-30 shots. In a situation where one is defending their life the stress and fear and adrenaline is going to really screw with you. A guy could be a perfect shot, but confronted with the armed men may miss every time.

If someone were to break into my home, I would grab the gun, barricade the door, yell while calling the police and pray I wouldn't have to shoot anyone. I'd rather be a little over prepared than under prepared though. My stuff isn't worth killing someone over. It's definitely not worth me potentially getting killed. I will however shoot someone that I feel is an immediate threat to my life or my loved ones. Take the laptop, I've got insurance, I can buy another.
edit on 24-7-2012 by Domo1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 05:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by mushrooms
 


Oh, so now if it was a different gun, people would have magically disarmed him

No I don't know for a fact it wouldn't have been worse, actually it might have been much worse, the bullets would have travelled farther, meaning people in even more theatres possibly hit.


I don't like handguns much for one. For two I got to jump through fifty million loops to own one, which I don't feel like doing, and can't afford right now.
edit on Tue, 24 Jul 2012 04:59:02 -0500 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)


how many rounds can your deer rifle hold then? i don't think it compares to the 100-round magazine from the guys assault rifle the other day does it?

you think people would stand still while your reloading? and how fast can you even shoot?

its just not effective, good for hunting deer though right?



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 05:20 AM
link   
reply to post by mushrooms
 



Considering the big bad scary 100 rounder jammed...... Shows how effective those are. Those people were lucky he didn't know what he was doing quite honestly.

How fast can I shoot? Dumb question, as fast as I can pull the trigger......



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 05:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Domo1
 


why would you need to kill someone at range? if nobody is near you then your not under any danger are you?



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 05:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by mushrooms
 



Considering the big bad scary 100 rounder jammed...... Shows how effective those are. Those people were lucky he didn't know what he was doing quite honestly.

How fast can I shoot? Dumb question, as fast as I can pull the trigger......


yeah and lucky it did jam, or the death toll would have been even higher.



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 05:30 AM
link   
All of this is constructed to begin the process of fearing the American people into handing over their guns. Period. We are going to keep seeing more incidences until the job is done. Look what happened after the underwear bomber incident.



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 05:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by OuttaHere
Isn't it obvious? This new (false flag) "trend" will eventually be used as an excuse to implement TSA-style security checkpoints in movie theaters and other public venues. It was clear to me from day one.


No. They will not waste time with TSA in movie theaters. What is going to happen is they are going to scare and convince the responsible gun owners of America to turn over their guns. You wait and see. Look what they accomplished after the underwear bomber. We have scanners and TSA pat downs in every airport now. They wasted no time moving these scanners and pat downs into place. They will do the same with guns. This is it. By 2014, we might be disarmed.



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 05:37 AM
link   
reply to post by mushrooms
 


On large property if someone is taking potshots at your house you may very well need that extra range. Even the distance of a hallway is going to be hard to overcome with a pistol when under duress. A rifle is much easier to aim effectively, much easier to make follow up shots with, and much more likely to stop a threat with one round.

I come across as a jerk and smart mouth fairly often, and for good reason but the following isn't meant in a rude way at all. Have you ever shot a rifle and pistol? The difference between shooting a pistol accurately at 20 yards and shooting a rifle well is night and day, especially under duress.

I'm rather surprised you seem OK with pistols but not assault rifles. I have a few 33 round magazines for my pistols, they conceal well and these pistols only have one purpose too.

You know I actually do appreciate that you are standing up for what you believe. So many pro gun people would just want to shout you down but you're speaking from the heart and your moral standpoint. I may disagree, but it's respectful disagreement. I appreciate that you have been so polite.



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 05:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by SpookyFoxMulder
Disarming the populace is necessary for totalitarian government control. I have no doubt that anti-gun groups will try to capitalize on these events. It's simple psychology: if you present the average joe citizen with news report after news report about gun violence, they will eventually come to the conclusion that guns are scary even though the vast, vast majority of people who own guns don't go around committing massacres with them.


If the last psyop doesn't take hold, then they will introduce a bigger scarier psyop, one that will surely make people do whatever they have to in order to feel "safe" again.



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 05:50 AM
link   
This guy is a full on idiot, why would you speed when your intending to do something as dramatic and horrible as this, it reminds me of the recent plot by Islamic extremist's in England where they intended to blow up a English Defence League protest and they had guns and a machete as'well so god only know's what there plan was, But they where idiots driving in a car with a bomb and firearms with no insurance which is a crime here in england and the majority of new police cars have anpr camera's on there car so they can read the number plate and get all the info about the car and it popped up saying no insurance if they where smart or intelligent that day could have been a massacre on equal proportion to this but luckily they was stupid



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 05:53 AM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


Oh please.. I hope we gave more sense than this.

Please no more killings.




posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 05:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Thunder heart woman
 


What psyop? Is it possible, just possible that this guy went nuts and acted on his own? I don't get why everything is someone else's fault.



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 06:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Domo1
reply to post by mushrooms
 


On large property if someone is taking potshots at your house you may very well need that extra range. Even the distance of a hallway is going to be hard to overcome with a pistol when under duress. A rifle is much easier to aim effectively, much easier to make follow up shots with, and much more likely to stop a threat with one round.

I come across as a jerk and smart mouth fairly often, and for good reason but the following isn't meant in a rude way at all. Have you ever shot a rifle and pistol? The difference between shooting a pistol accurately at 20 yards and shooting a rifle well is night and day, especially under duress.


No i've never used either, but I realise how an assault rifle is more effective. That's exactly why I think they should be controlled, because of how deadly they can be in the wrong hands. Especially the clip sizes, allowing 100 round magazines is just scary to me.


I'm rather surprised you seem OK with pistols but not assault rifles. I have a few 33 round magazines for my pistols, they conceal well and these pistols only have one purpose too.


Yeah well i'm not talking about an outright gun ban, I think that would be crazy, thats why i'm not mentioning handguns, because I mean the US has so many guns in circulation, it would be a pretty much impossible to remove them all and would probably do more harm than good.

I imagine a huge black market would suddenly open up and that would pretty much only serve the criminals.


You know I actually do appreciate that you are standing up for what you believe. So many pro gun people would just want to shout you down but you're speaking from the heart and your moral standpoint. I may disagree, but it's respectful disagreement. I appreciate that you have been so polite.


Well the same really, its just a debate, nothing personal. I can understand someone wanting to protect themselves and their own family. I just think you have to draw the line somewhere, and to me assault rifles/100 round magazine clips, they are just unnecessary.



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 06:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by mattdel
I read this and say "so what". I have a loaded weapon on me right now, with the safety off. If I choose to go to a movie, so be it. I wouldn't be the first, and I won't be the last.
This article is an attempt to make everyone with a legal weapon into a nutcase.
edit on 23-7-2012 by mattdel because: (no reason given)


Yes, it is perfectly normal to carry loaded weapon while in movie theater. Makes everyone more safe....

This is just BS... just as some people are making comments such as 'they should ban pencil and pens as they might be used as weapons as well'.

Well, I have a chance against attacker with pen and pencil, bigger chance of survival then if attacker has automated weapon/gun.


I just can't buy this BS, it is not normal and never will be. If you feel insecure in society, you should look for professional help, not gun.

Guns should be harder to get, more under control and people should not be allowed to carry guns around, just because they feel insecure.
edit on 24-7-2012 by SuperFrog because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 06:36 AM
link   
reply to post by jd0Fengland
 


What if he wanted to be stop before he does something so stupid?



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 06:40 AM
link   
reply to post by mushrooms
 





No i've never used either, but I realise how an assault rifle is more effective. That's exactly why I think they should be controlled, because of how deadly they can be in the wrong hands. Especially the clip sizes, allowing 100 round magazines is just scary to me.


I have yet to get a magazine for any of my rifles that exceeds 30 rounds. Primarily because I know they jam up and really are rather useless. At what point do you feel a magazine holds too many rounds?




Yeah well i'm not talking about an outright gun ban, I think that would be crazy, thats why i'm not mentioning handguns, because I mean the US has so many guns in circulation, it would be a pretty much impossible to remove them all and would probably do more harm than good. I imagine a huge black market would suddenly open up and that would pretty much only serve the criminals.


But your issues with rifles still exist with pistols. I have a number of 9 mm Glocks and it's very cheap and easy to get magazines with a 33 round capacity. Very easy to hide one and very easy to hide the magazines. In a crowded place I think someone would be just about as effective with a Glock and a few 33 round mags as they would with an AR. I've yet to have a Glock jam up when using a 33 round mag.

Granted the rifle is more accurate and has more power, but the ability to smuggle a Glock into a place like a theater or stadium puts it on par with the rifle in my opinion.

I feel sort of gross talking like this.

I agree that an assault rifle is going to be more devastating in a crowded environment, but I still think someone with a deer rifle and a modicum of skill would be able to murder scores of people and evade capture much longer.

I believe gun crimes committed with assault rifles are still less than 5% of all gun crimes. That includes things like modifying the gun incorrectly, people accused of domestic abuse owning guns etc. They make up such a tiny portion of gun crimes in this country that it's hard for me to even entertain more regulation.



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 06:40 AM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


I don't believe it is "safe to say" any of that, because -- REALISTICALLY -- there is no force, short of magic, capable of disarming the US, voluntarily or otherwise.



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join