Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Money and Bribery in Politics is in large part responsible for the Colorado Theater Shooting

Posted 8 years ago on July 24, 2012, 12:23 a.m. EST by Endgame (535)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

We all know corporations and other big money entities and individuals control Washington and our politics unfortunately. This also includes the NRA and the rest of the gun lobby.

Our political system = if you have large sums of money you get to buy and or scare politicians to get what you want. So elected representatives basically become slaves and protectors of the NRA. And of course the NRA are only looking out for the profits of Gun Manufactures they are sworn to protect. Because of this we have come to the point where in spite of all of the gun violence and death in this country from guns we can't even have a common sense discussion about common sense gun control in this country anymore without being automatically being labeled anti gun or anti 2nd Amendment. There is no middle ground anymore with most of the NRA crowd. Even though in reality there is a huge space for middle ground.

I am pro gun. But I feel there is no reason for someone to be able to own automatic/semi automatic/assault rifles/military grade weapons. None. And I think hiding behind the 2nd Amendment in justification of owning these guns are bogus. The Constitution says that we have the right to bare arms. But why do we put that into context when we refer to surface to air missiles,rocket launchers, grenades, etc but we don't for high powered guns? That makes no sense at all.

In 1994 over 80% of Americans were in favor of more gun control. Fast forward to now its only 44%. The gun lobby has bought off many politicians over the years. Because of that we rank extremely high on the amount of gun deaths in this country. Even more than Yemen(terrorist hot bed country). Over 100,000 gun deaths per year in this country(2010 figures). Over 500 young people killed by guns in this country since 2008.

And on top of that it is so easy to buy these guns through loop holes and black markets. No back ground checks necessary. Cheap bullets. And we wonder why so many people are dying...

And to the people that say we shouldn't politicize these shootings. The fact that these people are able to get a hold of these military grade weapons and cheap bullets to kill people happens because of politics. You can't talk about one without the other.

Yes crazy people are always going to have ways of killing other people no matter what. But does it make any sense to make it so easy for those people to kill large amounts of people at once? Usually part of the reason they build up the courage to do these things is because its so easy for them to get the guns to do it.

It always comes down to money and bribery in politics. This is what Occupy should be focused on fixing.



Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 8 years ago

Well said.

Elect progressives. Vote out pro nra politicians

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 8 years ago

THe USA is the number one exporter of weapons on the global scale.

[-] 1 points by friendlyopposition (574) 8 years ago

You're argument is fine and all - but if I understand the situation correctly, the lunatic had an "assault" rifle, 2 handguns and a shotgun. 3 out of 4 of his weapons of choice would still be available even if "military" style weapons had greater controls.

[-] 1 points by Endgame (535) 8 years ago

So are you saying he would of been able to kill the same amount of people with non automatic handguns and a shotgun compared to an automatic assault rifle?

[-] 1 points by friendlyopposition (574) 8 years ago

First of all, there is no information to support that the rifle was "automatic." I'm confident it was still one bullet per trigger pull. I think stories from the theater would support that. The rifle would considered "semi-automatic" just like the handguns. That shotgun, depending on how it is loaded - can deliver 9 pellets per trigger pull, with 5 shells he would have 45 projectiles before it is done.

So yes - he could still do a lot of damage in a confined space with lots of people.

[-] 2 points by Endgame (535) 8 years ago

The AR-15 comes in semi automatic and full automatic. The civilian version of that gun is the semi auto so its safe to assume thats the one he had. The glocks he had reportedly were not automatic. Given the amount of people he shot in such a small time frame I think its also safe to say that the AR-15 was his primary weapon. Especially with hearing the reports that he was firing the gun so much it reportedly jammed.

But this goes so much further than just what happened in Colorado. The amount of people that die from automatic weapons(and weapons(legal and illegal) in general) are insane. And what makes this incident even more sad is that this dude legally bought his rapid fire killing machines. And because of that he was able to kill more people.

[-] 1 points by friendlyopposition (574) 8 years ago

When you say "automatic" do you mean semi-auto and full-auto together? If so, then i wold agree. Lots of people die from semi-automatic handgun fire every year. The instance of people dying from "fully automatic" is rare - but the potential for damage is great if one is involved in a shooting. My point is - ban 'military' style rifles if you want, but it isn't going to prevent incidents like this from happening. And yes, I think the potential is there for him to kill just as many people without that rifle.

[-] 0 points by Mooks (1985) 8 years ago

Not to mention the fact that he built explosives using things that no one is considering banning.

The original poster is shamelessly trying to use a tragedy for political purposes.

[-] 3 points by VQkag2 (16478) 8 years ago

No shame in trying to find solutions to these tragedies.

Some people simply run to the barricades with their guns and cry "from my cold dead hands" They are also using this tregedy for their own political ends. And further, to maintain the massive overarming of this country. they put there gun entertainment above human life.

"I loves ma guns" "I loves ma guns"


[-] 1 points by Endgame (535) 8 years ago

No I am simply stating the fact that our terrible gun laws(thanks to our corrupt political system) allowed for this guy to legally buy weapons that caused even more people to die.

No one is arguing that he wouldn't have been able to kill people if the assault weapons ban was in place. But it doesn't make any sense for us to give more power to crazy people like that.

It is ridiculous to make it easier to kill mass amounts of people with military grade weapons. Yes he could have used explosives he built but he didn't. Its only logical to come to the conclusion that if you make it more inconvenient for people like him to do what he did less people would build up enough "courage" to go through with it.

[-] 0 points by Porkie (-255) 8 years ago

Believe it or not, much to the chagrin of collectors, Obama HAS restricted some imports. But beyond that, the Fed is powerless because regulation is a state rights issue. Colorado does have the ability to ban assault weapons; they have chosen not to.

Most guns deaths, by the way, are of two forms: homicide and suicide.

Personally I am not in favor of further empowering either this government or the gangstas; both have expressed a willingness to take from us everything we have.

[-] 0 points by Porkie (-255) 8 years ago

Well the truth is that Colorado CAN restrict firearms in this manner; they have chosen not to - regulation is a state rights issue.