Batman as conservative movie

Though, as we posted, the Democrats are making a big deal of the villain in the new Batman movie being named “Bane,” as in Romney’s Bain Capital, John Boot reports that the film is explicitly, unabashedly Reaganite, an overt attack on the Occupy Wall Street ideology:

If The Dark Knight was about the War on Terror, The Dark Knight Rises puts equal force and fury behind a tale about financial crisis and revolution. It’s the first Occupy Wall Street blockbuster, and that Christopher Nolan’s film was well underway before the OWS movement even got started is a tribute to his perspicacity.

The new film is a pleasure, sprawling in its storytelling, satisfyingly brawny, and occasionally moving, particularly in a terrific final act. In addition to all of that, the movie is so unabashed about its conservative message that you practically expect it to end with a dedication to Ronald Reagan. See if you can think of the last movie you saw that shows hundreds of big-city police officers lining up against a rowdy mob — and the police are the good guys. The movie is a counter-revolutionary document with as much damnation for populist revolt as Dr. Zhivago. . . .

Thanks to corporate intrigue [Bruce Wayne has] been marginalized at his company and he’s being hassled by a philanthropist (Marion Cotillard) who wants him to pour more resources into a failed clean-energy project involving a “fusion” reactor that is not only not working but can be converted into a nuclear weapon. With Gotham City at peace, Batman isn’t needed anymore, and thanks in part to the efforts of Commissioner Gordon (Gary Oldman), he is regarded as a terrorist psychopath anyway. . . .

When Bane goes to work destroying Gotham City, he first heads for the stock exchange to cause a mini-financial crisis (which, somewhat strangely, morphs into a big action scene that is more enjoyable if you don’t think about it too much). As Selina Kyle warns, in a line that could have been written by Occupy Wall Street, “There’s a storm coming….you and your friends better batten down the hatches.” On cue, her associate Bane launches a full-on proletarian revolution in which the meek are given the support of his thug army as they strike down the rich, the police officers having been caged up. This Michael Moore fantasy, though, is treated with no sentimentality at all. Garbage immediately piles up in the streets and justice is dispensed a la Robespierre, with bourgeois dissenters being sentenced to death without trial. Only Batman, an aristocratic capitalist hero, can restore the balance.

Watching a businessman billionaire smite the forces of a nefarious rabble-rouser who purports to speak for the surly mob is a story line we can only hope to see promoted from the entertainment section to the front page this November. But until then, The Dark Knight Rises is a rip-roaring serving of wish fulfillment, the rare summer blockbuster with a lot of ideas in its head and all of them conservative.

via PJ Lifestyle » Batman, One Percenter?.

The movie opens today.  I’m on the road and can’t see it until I get back.  I’ll leave it to you readers who see it this weekend to let the rest of us know how it is.  Specifically, who is right about the movie?   Is it liberal or  conservative?

About Gene Veith

Professor of Literature at Patrick Henry College, the Director of the Cranach Institute at Concordia Theological Seminary, a columnist for World Magazine and TableTalk, and the author of 18 books on different facets of Christianity & Culture.

  • The Jones

    I agree with this post. And it is my great hope and fervent prayer that the political banter surrounding the metaphorical interpretation of this movie will lead to Mitt Romney at some point, in some situation, saying, “I’m Batman.” That would just be hilarious.

  • The Jones

    I agree with this post. And it is my great hope and fervent prayer that the political banter surrounding the metaphorical interpretation of this movie will lead to Mitt Romney at some point, in some situation, saying, “I’m Batman.” That would just be hilarious.

  • Ryan

    I hope no one claims this violent and sadistic movie.

  • Ryan

    I hope no one claims this violent and sadistic movie.

  • Carl Vehse

    The Baman movie certainly brings the evil out at least in one Colorado theater. Despite sketchy information other than the dozen dead and dozens more wounded, the FBI has “assured” Americans that this obviously planned attack was not one of terrorism.

    Next we can expect to hea how this will lead to improvements to American security, although it may require more limitations of American constitutional rights.

  • Carl Vehse

    The Baman movie certainly brings the evil out at least in one Colorado theater. Despite sketchy information other than the dozen dead and dozens more wounded, the FBI has “assured” Americans that this obviously planned attack was not one of terrorism.

    Next we can expect to hea how this will lead to improvements to American security, although it may require more limitations of American constitutional rights.

  • http://enterthevein.wordpress.com J. Dean

    Heard about the Colorado thing. Terrible.

    As to the movie itself, one of the things I like about Christopher Nolan (the director) is that, from the movies I’ve seen that he’s worked on, he tends to keep party-specific political bantering out of the plot. Inception and the first two Batman movies are like this, and I’m hoping that the third one will be as well.

  • http://enterthevein.wordpress.com J. Dean

    Heard about the Colorado thing. Terrible.

    As to the movie itself, one of the things I like about Christopher Nolan (the director) is that, from the movies I’ve seen that he’s worked on, he tends to keep party-specific political bantering out of the plot. Inception and the first two Batman movies are like this, and I’m hoping that the third one will be as well.

  • formerly just steve

    Hollywood is incapable of producing a truly conservative work. I doubt the connections in the linked article hold any less tenuous of a connection as the one purporting links between the villain and Romney.

  • formerly just steve

    Hollywood is incapable of producing a truly conservative work. I doubt the connections in the linked article hold any less tenuous of a connection as the one purporting links between the villain and Romney.

  • http://theoldadam.com/ Steve Martin

    TCM all the way.

    These newer films aren’t in the same league.

  • http://theoldadam.com/ Steve Martin

    TCM all the way.

    These newer films aren’t in the same league.

  • Tom Hering

    Nolan has stated in interviews that The Dark Knight Rises is based on A Tale of Two Cities. Dickens was a champion of social justice. His novel warned England’s rich and powerful about what could happen to them if they didn’t change their ways. So much for the idea of a thinly-veiled conservative message. Are you guys really this desperate for a conservative hero in the year of Romney? :-D

  • Tom Hering

    Nolan has stated in interviews that The Dark Knight Rises is based on A Tale of Two Cities. Dickens was a champion of social justice. His novel warned England’s rich and powerful about what could happen to them if they didn’t change their ways. So much for the idea of a thinly-veiled conservative message. Are you guys really this desperate for a conservative hero in the year of Romney? :-D

  • formerly just steve

    Tom, after all this time with these fine people here, you still don’t know what Conservatives believe?

  • formerly just steve

    Tom, after all this time with these fine people here, you still don’t know what Conservatives believe?

  • Tom Hering

    FJS @ 8, yes I do. Obama engineered Morsy’s victory. Abedin is a spy for the Muslim Brotherhood. The RNC’s platform confirms there’s an Agenda 21 conspiracy. Anuthing else I should know? :-D

  • Tom Hering

    FJS @ 8, yes I do. Obama engineered Morsy’s victory. Abedin is a spy for the Muslim Brotherhood. The RNC’s platform confirms there’s an Agenda 21 conspiracy. Anuthing else I should know? :-D

  • Steve Billingsley

    I am a conservative (and I will ignore the ignorant shots at what conservatives believe). But I am so tired of so many people constantly trying to shoehorn current political themes into every movie, TV show, book or piece of music that gets a lot of attention. The best works of art strike universal chords of meaning that go far beyond the political arguments of the moment. I have no idea where Christopher Nolan stands in the Republican/Democrat divide. I think he wisely leaves that out of his works.

    I greatly enjoyed the first 2 installments of Nolan’s Batman trilogy not because it may or may not have reinforced my own political beliefs, but because he explores themes such as fear, truth, revenge and corruption with such thoughtfulness. Can’t we sometimes have a “safe zone” where we leave this stuff at the door? Being entertained in a thoughtful way isn’t a bad thing at all. Sometimes it’s just enough to like the movie.

  • Steve Billingsley

    I am a conservative (and I will ignore the ignorant shots at what conservatives believe). But I am so tired of so many people constantly trying to shoehorn current political themes into every movie, TV show, book or piece of music that gets a lot of attention. The best works of art strike universal chords of meaning that go far beyond the political arguments of the moment. I have no idea where Christopher Nolan stands in the Republican/Democrat divide. I think he wisely leaves that out of his works.

    I greatly enjoyed the first 2 installments of Nolan’s Batman trilogy not because it may or may not have reinforced my own political beliefs, but because he explores themes such as fear, truth, revenge and corruption with such thoughtfulness. Can’t we sometimes have a “safe zone” where we leave this stuff at the door? Being entertained in a thoughtful way isn’t a bad thing at all. Sometimes it’s just enough to like the movie.

  • Tom Hering

    SB @ 10, you can’t tell when you’re being teased?

  • Tom Hering

    SB @ 10, you can’t tell when you’re being teased?

  • Steve Billingsley

    Sure, that’s why I ignored it….if I thought it was mean-spirited I would have tried to answer them…:)

  • Steve Billingsley

    Sure, that’s why I ignored it….if I thought it was mean-spirited I would have tried to answer them…:)

  • Tom Hering

    Ah, so ignorant means ignored. :-D

  • Tom Hering

    Ah, so ignorant means ignored. :-D

  • Tom Hering

    But seriously, SB, I really like your point @ 10. Bravo.

  • Tom Hering

    But seriously, SB, I really like your point @ 10. Bravo.

  • Med Student

    I think it does in fact have some “conservative” themes, in that it shows how the rule of “the people” quickly becomes the rule of the mob. Overall, though, I agree with Steve Billingsley @10 – there’s no need to go around looking for overtly political themes in movies that aren’t overtly political. Also, the columnist needs to pay better attention to why the fusion reactor wasn’t working in the movie before he takes partisan pot shots at clean energy projects.
    Overall I enjoyed it quite a bit. It’s very different from The Dark Knight, with a very different type of villain. Now I’m really kind of hoping that Nolan will decide to another one after all…

  • Med Student

    I think it does in fact have some “conservative” themes, in that it shows how the rule of “the people” quickly becomes the rule of the mob. Overall, though, I agree with Steve Billingsley @10 – there’s no need to go around looking for overtly political themes in movies that aren’t overtly political. Also, the columnist needs to pay better attention to why the fusion reactor wasn’t working in the movie before he takes partisan pot shots at clean energy projects.
    Overall I enjoyed it quite a bit. It’s very different from The Dark Knight, with a very different type of villain. Now I’m really kind of hoping that Nolan will decide to another one after all…

  • formerly just steve

    Apparently the Paris premiere was cancelled after the shooting. Rotten Tomatoes shut down the comments section for the movie–for the first time ever, I understand. Man, if I were prone to believing in curses…

  • formerly just steve

    Apparently the Paris premiere was cancelled after the shooting. Rotten Tomatoes shut down the comments section for the movie–for the first time ever, I understand. Man, if I were prone to believing in curses…

  • http://www.redeemedrambling.blogspot.com John

    I saw it in imax, and it is truly masterful, like all of Nolan’s work. He is a great story-teller. Conservative, however, it is not. It simply presents what could happen in a tall-tale sort of way. The ugliness that surrounds what Cicero would call an “excess of freedom” is neither conservative nor liberal – it just is. And the comment about Wayne as an aristocratic savior is just absurd. The billionaire part is the huge irony that mocks the mask. Wayne doesn’t empower Batman, he hinders him. Well, his bank account helps, but you get the point…

  • http://www.redeemedrambling.blogspot.com John

    I saw it in imax, and it is truly masterful, like all of Nolan’s work. He is a great story-teller. Conservative, however, it is not. It simply presents what could happen in a tall-tale sort of way. The ugliness that surrounds what Cicero would call an “excess of freedom” is neither conservative nor liberal – it just is. And the comment about Wayne as an aristocratic savior is just absurd. The billionaire part is the huge irony that mocks the mask. Wayne doesn’t empower Batman, he hinders him. Well, his bank account helps, but you get the point…

  • Jon

    Agree with SB@10 – the movie is apolitical. One the one hand, Bruce Wayne pays less taxes than his butler, Alfred, but, on the other, he has no offshore accounts. That’s all you people need to know about Batman’s finances.

  • Jon

    Agree with SB@10 – the movie is apolitical. One the one hand, Bruce Wayne pays less taxes than his butler, Alfred, but, on the other, he has no offshore accounts. That’s all you people need to know about Batman’s finances.

  • Cincinnatus

    Nolan’s Batman films are apolitical? Hahahahaha. That’s a good one. Tell another!

    If the second film wasn’t a commentary on the George Bush administration/the War on Terror, then send me a tinfoil hat. I haven’t seen the new one–will be tomorrow morning (yes, morning)–but this trilogy has contained some particularly acute references to contemporary politics.

  • Cincinnatus

    Nolan’s Batman films are apolitical? Hahahahaha. That’s a good one. Tell another!

    If the second film wasn’t a commentary on the George Bush administration/the War on Terror, then send me a tinfoil hat. I haven’t seen the new one–will be tomorrow morning (yes, morning)–but this trilogy has contained some particularly acute references to contemporary politics.

  • Jon

    @19 You want yet another tinfoil hat? The old one getting too tight?

  • Jon

    @19 You want yet another tinfoil hat? The old one getting too tight?

  • Cincinnatus

    Jon@20:

    You probably hid a tracking device in the hat, though. So no thanks. I’m onto you.

    But seriously, Batman in the second film as a Bush avatar? The universal surveillance thing? The Joker as an anarchic terrorist?

    I’m not denying that these films speak to more universal, transhistorical themes. But to label them apolitical seems a bit dense. They’re deeply political, if not strictly partisan. After all, the surveillance question is treated with a great deal of nuance: it’s problematic (leading Morgan Freeman’s character to resign), but also apparently necessary to stopping the Joker.

  • Cincinnatus

    Jon@20:

    You probably hid a tracking device in the hat, though. So no thanks. I’m onto you.

    But seriously, Batman in the second film as a Bush avatar? The universal surveillance thing? The Joker as an anarchic terrorist?

    I’m not denying that these films speak to more universal, transhistorical themes. But to label them apolitical seems a bit dense. They’re deeply political, if not strictly partisan. After all, the surveillance question is treated with a great deal of nuance: it’s problematic (leading Morgan Freeman’s character to resign), but also apparently necessary to stopping the Joker.

  • Tom Hering

    … the comment about Wayne as an aristocratic savior is just absurd. (John @ 17)

    So he’s not the Scarlet Pimpernel in this one?

  • Tom Hering

    … the comment about Wayne as an aristocratic savior is just absurd. (John @ 17)

    So he’s not the Scarlet Pimpernel in this one?

  • SKPeterson

    Your daily dose of Grace zen:

    Poor Tom. Leslie Howard is the Scarlet Pimpernel.

  • SKPeterson

    Your daily dose of Grace zen:

    Poor Tom. Leslie Howard is the Scarlet Pimpernel.

  • Tom Hering

    Odds fish, dear chap! Here I thought he was Percy Blakeney. Sink me, I did!

  • Tom Hering

    Odds fish, dear chap! Here I thought he was Percy Blakeney. Sink me, I did!

  • Jon

    @21 maybe the most political statement is that Batman solves problems by never using a gun and never killing. No Reaganite, that.

  • Jon

    @21 maybe the most political statement is that Batman solves problems by never using a gun and never killing. No Reaganite, that.

  • formerly just steve

    Jon, #25, is that why the villains tend to resurface in later episodes?

  • formerly just steve

    Jon, #25, is that why the villains tend to resurface in later episodes?

  • Tom Hering

    Non-lethal methods are good for series and franchises. Can’t be inventing a new villian every single time. :-D

  • Tom Hering

    Non-lethal methods are good for series and franchises. Can’t be inventing a new villian every single time. :-D

  • http://enterthevein.wordpress.com J. Dean

    Jon @ 25, Batman does have guns. He just doesn’t have handguns (The vehicles are armed to the teeth).

    BTW, I have the second DK movie, and I saw nothing partisan in it. If anything, it’s political without being partisan. I think people are reading their own politics into the movies at times.

    Frankly, I’d like to see Nolan do a sequel to Inception (I even have a treatment for the plot!)

  • http://enterthevein.wordpress.com J. Dean

    Jon @ 25, Batman does have guns. He just doesn’t have handguns (The vehicles are armed to the teeth).

    BTW, I have the second DK movie, and I saw nothing partisan in it. If anything, it’s political without being partisan. I think people are reading their own politics into the movies at times.

    Frankly, I’d like to see Nolan do a sequel to Inception (I even have a treatment for the plot!)

  • Trey

    I don’t see anything liberal about it except the Wall-Street allusion. The Dark Knight resembled Bush regarding being the villain because that’s what we needed not what we want. Bruce Wayne is self-less sacrificing his life for others not trying to create a false utopia, but confronting evil. It is very similar to Luther mini-series.

  • Trey

    I don’t see anything liberal about it except the Wall-Street allusion. The Dark Knight resembled Bush regarding being the villain because that’s what we needed not what we want. Bruce Wayne is self-less sacrificing his life for others not trying to create a false utopia, but confronting evil. It is very similar to Luther mini-series.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Just for the record, I think this statement of Veith’s could be more accurate:

    The Democrats are making a big deal of the villain in the new Batman movie being named “Bane,” as in Romney’s Bain Capital…

    You know, it’s not just Democrats making a big deal out of it:

    Do you know the name of the villain in this movie? Bane. The villain in The Dark Knight Rises is named Bane, B-a-n-e. What is the name of the venture capital firm that Romney ran and around which there’s now this make-believe controversy? Bain. The movie has been in the works for a long time. The release date’s been known, summer 2012 for a long time. Do you think that it is accidental that the name of the really vicious fire breathing four eyed whatever it is villain in this movie is named Bane? …

    And there’s now a discussion out there as to whether or not this is purposeful and whether or not it will influence voters. It’s gonna have a lot of people. This movie, the audience is gonna be huge. A lot of people are gonna see the movie, and it’s a lot of brain-dead people, entertainment, the pop culture crowd, and they’re gonna hear Bane in the movie and they’re gonna associate Bain.

    Naturally, “El Rushbo” followed that up by denying he’d said what he said, and talking a lot about himself.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Just for the record, I think this statement of Veith’s could be more accurate:

    The Democrats are making a big deal of the villain in the new Batman movie being named “Bane,” as in Romney’s Bain Capital…

    You know, it’s not just Democrats making a big deal out of it:

    Do you know the name of the villain in this movie? Bane. The villain in The Dark Knight Rises is named Bane, B-a-n-e. What is the name of the venture capital firm that Romney ran and around which there’s now this make-believe controversy? Bain. The movie has been in the works for a long time. The release date’s been known, summer 2012 for a long time. Do you think that it is accidental that the name of the really vicious fire breathing four eyed whatever it is villain in this movie is named Bane? …

    And there’s now a discussion out there as to whether or not this is purposeful and whether or not it will influence voters. It’s gonna have a lot of people. This movie, the audience is gonna be huge. A lot of people are gonna see the movie, and it’s a lot of brain-dead people, entertainment, the pop culture crowd, and they’re gonna hear Bane in the movie and they’re gonna associate Bain.

    Naturally, “El Rushbo” followed that up by denying he’d said what he said, and talking a lot about himself.

  • Cincinnatus

    tODD@30:

    Rush Limbaugh, as ever, is a moran. But, to be fair, Democratic publicists were the one’s who started the whole Bane/Bain affair with their ludicrous comparisons. That was three days ago, if I recall. Rush began responding two days ago.

    Again, if I’m remembering correctly. And that’s not to say that Rush’s remarks aren’t equally absurd. But Rush is an entertainer, paid to make outlandish/moronic/provocative claims. Democratic campaign operatives should be a bit more intelligent. I mean, the creator of the Batman films himself has explicitly disclaimed the Democratic interpretation.

  • Cincinnatus

    tODD@30:

    Rush Limbaugh, as ever, is a moran. But, to be fair, Democratic publicists were the one’s who started the whole Bane/Bain affair with their ludicrous comparisons. That was three days ago, if I recall. Rush began responding two days ago.

    Again, if I’m remembering correctly. And that’s not to say that Rush’s remarks aren’t equally absurd. But Rush is an entertainer, paid to make outlandish/moronic/provocative claims. Democratic campaign operatives should be a bit more intelligent. I mean, the creator of the Batman films himself has explicitly disclaimed the Democratic interpretation.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Cincinnatus (@31), I’m not intimate with the details, but the Limbaugh transcript I linked to is dated July 17, which would be three days ago. It is also notably lacking in accusations of what the Democrats had already done, and instead appears to traffic solely in assumptions of what they would do.

    Feel free to provide evidence of your own claims, but I don’t see it.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Cincinnatus (@31), I’m not intimate with the details, but the Limbaugh transcript I linked to is dated July 17, which would be three days ago. It is also notably lacking in accusations of what the Democrats had already done, and instead appears to traffic solely in assumptions of what they would do.

    Feel free to provide evidence of your own claims, but I don’t see it.

  • Cincinnatus

    tODD:

    Yeah, I might be wrong. And I don’t care enough about Rush’s reputation to seek evidence to prove my claims.

    Partisanship continues to sink to new lows.

  • Cincinnatus

    tODD:

    Yeah, I might be wrong. And I don’t care enough about Rush’s reputation to seek evidence to prove my claims.

    Partisanship continues to sink to new lows.

  • Grace

    Deadline Hollywood

    UPDATE: Warner Bros Pulls Trailer Of Gangster Shooting Up Movie Theater

    By NIKKI FINKE | Friday July 20, 2012 @ 9:38am PDT

    “EXCLUSIVE … UPDATE 9:30 AM: Warner Bros is now telling me that its outside non-studio spokeswoman failed to tell me the whole and accurate story about the process that led to the studio taking down its offensive Gangster Squad trailer this morning. A Warner Bros executive now tells me how the studio was scrambling to deal with the Aurora theater shooting crisis in the pre-dawn hours of the morning. Then, at 5 AM, one of the top distribution execs remembered that Warner Bros’ Gangster Squad trailer was playing “loose” this weekend timed to the studio’s The Dark Knight Rises release in about 30% of domestic theaters. (“Loose” means that theaters had been asked to play the trailer which was not paired with The Dark Knight Rises.)

    ANOTHER EXCERPT

    “This morning I called on Warner Bros to take this trailer down immediately. The studio’s response to me? “There’s a meeting about this and then a decision will be reached.” I just received the call that the trailer is being pulled.<striike But only after I complained. And yet movie moguls wonder why so much of the country hates Hollywood values where money trumps everything, even during the Aurora theater shooting tragedy. Here’s the horrible clip which no one at Warner Bros should have allowed to be made, much less released, in the first place:

    http://www.deadline.com/2012/07/warner-bros-paired-dark-knight-rises-with-trailer-of-gangster-shooting-up-movie-theater-which-studio-didnt-take-down-until-i-complained/

  • Grace

    Deadline Hollywood

    UPDATE: Warner Bros Pulls Trailer Of Gangster Shooting Up Movie Theater

    By NIKKI FINKE | Friday July 20, 2012 @ 9:38am PDT

    “EXCLUSIVE … UPDATE 9:30 AM: Warner Bros is now telling me that its outside non-studio spokeswoman failed to tell me the whole and accurate story about the process that led to the studio taking down its offensive Gangster Squad trailer this morning. A Warner Bros executive now tells me how the studio was scrambling to deal with the Aurora theater shooting crisis in the pre-dawn hours of the morning. Then, at 5 AM, one of the top distribution execs remembered that Warner Bros’ Gangster Squad trailer was playing “loose” this weekend timed to the studio’s The Dark Knight Rises release in about 30% of domestic theaters. (“Loose” means that theaters had been asked to play the trailer which was not paired with The Dark Knight Rises.)

    ANOTHER EXCERPT

    “This morning I called on Warner Bros to take this trailer down immediately. The studio’s response to me? “There’s a meeting about this and then a decision will be reached.” I just received the call that the trailer is being pulled.<striike But only after I complained. And yet movie moguls wonder why so much of the country hates Hollywood values where money trumps everything, even during the Aurora theater shooting tragedy. Here’s the horrible clip which no one at Warner Bros should have allowed to be made, much less released, in the first place:

    http://www.deadline.com/2012/07/warner-bros-paired-dark-knight-rises-with-trailer-of-gangster-shooting-up-movie-theater-which-studio-didnt-take-down-until-i-complained/

  • Grace

    Should Read @ 34

    ANOTHER EXCERPT

    “This morning I called on Warner Bros to take this trailer down immediately. The studio’s response to me? “There’s a meeting about this and then a decision will be reached.” I just received the call that the trailer is being pulled. But only after I complained. And yet movie moguls wonder why so much of the country hates Hollywood values where money trumps everything, even during the Aurora theater shooting tragedy. Here’s the horrible clip which no one at Warner Bros should have allowed to be made, much less released, in the first place:

    http://www.deadline.com/2012/07/warner-bros-paired-dark-knight-rises-with-trailer-of-gangster-shooting-up-movie-theater-which-studio-didnt-take-down-until-i-complained/

  • Grace

    Should Read @ 34

    ANOTHER EXCERPT

    “This morning I called on Warner Bros to take this trailer down immediately. The studio’s response to me? “There’s a meeting about this and then a decision will be reached.” I just received the call that the trailer is being pulled. But only after I complained. And yet movie moguls wonder why so much of the country hates Hollywood values where money trumps everything, even during the Aurora theater shooting tragedy. Here’s the horrible clip which no one at Warner Bros should have allowed to be made, much less released, in the first place:

    http://www.deadline.com/2012/07/warner-bros-paired-dark-knight-rises-with-trailer-of-gangster-shooting-up-movie-theater-which-studio-didnt-take-down-until-i-complained/

  • reg

    Carl @ 3,
    You say “Next we can expect to hea how this will lead to improvements to American security, although it may require more limitations of American constitutional rights.”

    You are right, a few victims every few months/weeks.days of yet another madman and/or criminal being able to get unlimited access to automatic guns and other weaponry is a small price to pay for our right/need to buy unlimited quantities of military grade arms. Heck consider the dead victims’ blood just a little more water, watering the tree of liberty. No need for any hee haw or other reevaluation as to whether this is good or wise.

  • reg

    Carl @ 3,
    You say “Next we can expect to hea how this will lead to improvements to American security, although it may require more limitations of American constitutional rights.”

    You are right, a few victims every few months/weeks.days of yet another madman and/or criminal being able to get unlimited access to automatic guns and other weaponry is a small price to pay for our right/need to buy unlimited quantities of military grade arms. Heck consider the dead victims’ blood just a little more water, watering the tree of liberty. No need for any hee haw or other reevaluation as to whether this is good or wise.

  • formerly just steve

    reg, you see the strawmen in your argument, don’t you?

  • formerly just steve

    reg, you see the strawmen in your argument, don’t you?

  • Grace

    Gun control won’t stop this type of madness.

    I don’t know what can be done to curb the most violent, evil films, being made from Hollywood. It’s become more sadistic every year. It’s almost as if, there is a race to see which studio can produce the most vile film, and then hope the bucks roll in like a tidal wave.

    There are a lot of sick, disturbed people. What they see and observe, most likely makes it worse. I don’t believe for a moment, that those who are well adjusted benefit from such vile films, as well. It’s like visiting the garbage dump, wading through the smell, bugs, and rats, and then expecting it has no influence on you. But it does – in the case of visual observance of horrific acts, the mind becomes used to it – no matter how normal, it once was.

    I hope, that this horrific event last night, will have an impact on all film makers, producers, etc. People have become so tuned to evil, that they now seek it with anticipation.

    God have mercy on us.

  • Grace

    Gun control won’t stop this type of madness.

    I don’t know what can be done to curb the most violent, evil films, being made from Hollywood. It’s become more sadistic every year. It’s almost as if, there is a race to see which studio can produce the most vile film, and then hope the bucks roll in like a tidal wave.

    There are a lot of sick, disturbed people. What they see and observe, most likely makes it worse. I don’t believe for a moment, that those who are well adjusted benefit from such vile films, as well. It’s like visiting the garbage dump, wading through the smell, bugs, and rats, and then expecting it has no influence on you. But it does – in the case of visual observance of horrific acts, the mind becomes used to it – no matter how normal, it once was.

    I hope, that this horrific event last night, will have an impact on all film makers, producers, etc. People have become so tuned to evil, that they now seek it with anticipation.

    God have mercy on us.

  • P.C.

    reg,

    I can think of two states where, most likely, there would have been less victims (no not California or New York) than the horrible tragedy in Colorado this morning. Florida and Texas have a much more lenient, yet still very strict, concealed weapons permit process. If there had been legally armed citizens in that theater I can only guess that the type of individuals I know that have these concealed weapons permits (in most cases, retired military) they would have put a quick end to this calamity.

  • P.C.

    reg,

    I can think of two states where, most likely, there would have been less victims (no not California or New York) than the horrible tragedy in Colorado this morning. Florida and Texas have a much more lenient, yet still very strict, concealed weapons permit process. If there had been legally armed citizens in that theater I can only guess that the type of individuals I know that have these concealed weapons permits (in most cases, retired military) they would have put a quick end to this calamity.

  • formerly just steve

    P.C., while I can agree with your sentiment, I think the tear gas, or whatever it was, would have made it hard for even the seasoned concealed-carriers to respond.

  • formerly just steve

    P.C., while I can agree with your sentiment, I think the tear gas, or whatever it was, would have made it hard for even the seasoned concealed-carriers to respond.

  • reg

    FJS,
    You mean Carl?

  • reg

    FJS,
    You mean Carl?

  • reg

    P.C,
    You mean Massachusetts right. Strict gun laws, fewer mass murders.

  • reg

    P.C,
    You mean Massachusetts right. Strict gun laws, fewer mass murders.

  • http://www.redeemedrambling.blogspot.com John

    Dr. Vieth –
    Please ban tODD for using profanity.
    Thanks.

  • http://www.redeemedrambling.blogspot.com John

    Dr. Vieth –
    Please ban tODD for using profanity.
    Thanks.

  • P.C.

    fjs,

    Marines and soldiers are trained to accurately shoot in exactly those combat types of conditions with tear gas, smoke, and other pyros going off.

    reg,

    Ain’t a whole lot of shooting tragedies in Florida or Texas, either.
    I sure would rather have the opportunity to defend myself, and you, by the way, than be a victim.

  • P.C.

    fjs,

    Marines and soldiers are trained to accurately shoot in exactly those combat types of conditions with tear gas, smoke, and other pyros going off.

    reg,

    Ain’t a whole lot of shooting tragedies in Florida or Texas, either.
    I sure would rather have the opportunity to defend myself, and you, by the way, than be a victim.

  • Cincinnatus

    John@43:

    Um, what are you talking about?

  • Cincinnatus

    John@43:

    Um, what are you talking about?

  • P.C.

    Grace @38,

    You nailed it, exactly. However, we both know that Hollywood will continue with producing this junk. That’s why I refuse to go to “R” rated films of any kind. “PG” in many case isn’t much better.

  • P.C.

    Grace @38,

    You nailed it, exactly. However, we both know that Hollywood will continue with producing this junk. That’s why I refuse to go to “R” rated films of any kind. “PG” in many case isn’t much better.

  • helen

    “Bane” is a Batman character dating to 1993. It’s also an English word for destruction/danger/personal nemesis going much further back. E.g., see Lord of the Rings

    When did Mitt appropriately name his company?

  • helen

    “Bane” is a Batman character dating to 1993. It’s also an English word for destruction/danger/personal nemesis going much further back. E.g., see Lord of the Rings

    When did Mitt appropriately name his company?

  • Grace

    P.C.

    I’m not sure this time around. The theaters are not as full as they used to be. In order to lure more people, the theatre industry has put in large comfy chairs, serves special food, wine and beer. Of course one must be over 21, no children allowed. It’s been a boost of sorts, but not a home run. The price is much higher.

    Getting back to my original point; this is, the largest mass murder in our history. That will have a profound effect on MOST people, and I believe that Hollywood will be very reluctant to cross over the line – even going so far as taking 50 steps back. The violence, gut renching films have become a cult in themselves. Add to that drugs, sex mixed with violence.

    Film makers have been teetering about for some time, this is not going to be forgotten, not by anyone. Those who attend films are going to be on edge. Even to those who crave this type of entertainment will be leary of what might happen next.

  • Grace

    P.C.

    I’m not sure this time around. The theaters are not as full as they used to be. In order to lure more people, the theatre industry has put in large comfy chairs, serves special food, wine and beer. Of course one must be over 21, no children allowed. It’s been a boost of sorts, but not a home run. The price is much higher.

    Getting back to my original point; this is, the largest mass murder in our history. That will have a profound effect on MOST people, and I believe that Hollywood will be very reluctant to cross over the line – even going so far as taking 50 steps back. The violence, gut renching films have become a cult in themselves. Add to that drugs, sex mixed with violence.

    Film makers have been teetering about for some time, this is not going to be forgotten, not by anyone. Those who attend films are going to be on edge. Even to those who crave this type of entertainment will be leary of what might happen next.

  • http://caughran.blogspot.com Jeremiah Caughran

    I’m not sure that Nolan is trying to be political or not, per se. I think he is just trying to be sensible. Batman cares more than anything about justice. Therefore, it is just as wrong for the rich as it is the poor to break the law. All are equal and without excuse when they do wrong. You see that in the first film. The Waynes are philanthropists. They are stinking rich, but they desire to use their wealth to a greater end, that being helping those less fortunate. The simple end of making my own life better is not what the Waynes were about.

    Batman seeks for justice to prevail even at the extreme cost to himself. This is apparent in the second film. He is willing to take the fall and let Gordon lie in order to create a safer Gotham. He takes the sins of Harvey Dent onto himself so that all might benefit. I’m not necessarily sure that this has to be taken in a political way, but can simply be taken as how life is sometimes.

    I think that the new movie is phenomenal. It puts forward themes that are thought provoking when reflected on, but also shaping for those who don’t take the time to reflect. If there is a political message, it is that wealth isn’t intended only for those who make it, for their own gratification, but is meant to help others in their needs. A few weeks back the former Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Carey, had an editorial about how previous generations of the rich tended to use their money for the good of others, yet that is not the story today, sadly. I think that the Batman trilogy taps into that very thing, maybe purposely, maybe not, but simply because there is a deep truth behind it and I find that Nolan is trying to get at truth and reveal it to those who watch these movies.

    Well, that’s my two cents…

  • http://caughran.blogspot.com Jeremiah Caughran

    I’m not sure that Nolan is trying to be political or not, per se. I think he is just trying to be sensible. Batman cares more than anything about justice. Therefore, it is just as wrong for the rich as it is the poor to break the law. All are equal and without excuse when they do wrong. You see that in the first film. The Waynes are philanthropists. They are stinking rich, but they desire to use their wealth to a greater end, that being helping those less fortunate. The simple end of making my own life better is not what the Waynes were about.

    Batman seeks for justice to prevail even at the extreme cost to himself. This is apparent in the second film. He is willing to take the fall and let Gordon lie in order to create a safer Gotham. He takes the sins of Harvey Dent onto himself so that all might benefit. I’m not necessarily sure that this has to be taken in a political way, but can simply be taken as how life is sometimes.

    I think that the new movie is phenomenal. It puts forward themes that are thought provoking when reflected on, but also shaping for those who don’t take the time to reflect. If there is a political message, it is that wealth isn’t intended only for those who make it, for their own gratification, but is meant to help others in their needs. A few weeks back the former Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Carey, had an editorial about how previous generations of the rich tended to use their money for the good of others, yet that is not the story today, sadly. I think that the Batman trilogy taps into that very thing, maybe purposely, maybe not, but simply because there is a deep truth behind it and I find that Nolan is trying to get at truth and reveal it to those who watch these movies.

    Well, that’s my two cents…

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    John (@43), if you need to tattle to Dr. Veith, his email address can be found via Google search. As he’s traveling right now, he might not be checking the comments thoroughly.

    That said, like Cincinnatus (@45), I have no idea what you’re talking about.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    John (@43), if you need to tattle to Dr. Veith, his email address can be found via Google search. As he’s traveling right now, he might not be checking the comments thoroughly.

    That said, like Cincinnatus (@45), I have no idea what you’re talking about.

  • Grace

    Los Angeles Times

    ‘Dark Knight Rises’ shooting: Skip the blame game and take action
    By Kenneth Turan, Los Angeles Times Film Critic July 21, 2012

    “Twelve dead. Dozens wounded. The victims: the audience at the first midnight showing of “The Dark Knight Rises”at a theater in Aurora, Colo. If you are deeply involved in the movies, this tragedy feels personal, like a death in the family.

    It feels personal in part because film people know in their bones that this horror and devastation came at a high point for those in the crowd. They were doing what they loved, enjoying the pure exhilaration of being among the first to see an extraordinary film they had been looking forward to for months. And then this.

    But the deaths in Colorado feel personal for a deeper, more disturbing reason. They bring up the question that not only doesn’t go away but comes back stronger each time it’s raised: Does violence on-screen encourage violence off it? Are the movies we love poisoning our culture, our society, our very minds?”

    ANOTHER EXCERPT

    “Still, it is impossible to be surrounded by the 21st century’s blood-soaked cinematic culture and not wonder what effect it’s having on us. It is impossible to live in a world where so many ultra-violent films exist that they’re broken down into genres — slasher films, splatter films, torture porn — and not feel queasy at the very least.

    If these questions sound familiar, it’s because they are. They get raised every time an atrocity like the one in Aurora takes place, and the movie business’ response is always the same: Not us, we’re not to blame, it’s someone else’s fault.

    READ THE REST: http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/moviesnow/la-et-mn-dark-knight-rises-skip-blame-take-action-kenneth-turan-20120721,0,7569830.story

    A most eloquent article -

  • Grace

    Los Angeles Times

    ‘Dark Knight Rises’ shooting: Skip the blame game and take action
    By Kenneth Turan, Los Angeles Times Film Critic July 21, 2012

    “Twelve dead. Dozens wounded. The victims: the audience at the first midnight showing of “The Dark Knight Rises”at a theater in Aurora, Colo. If you are deeply involved in the movies, this tragedy feels personal, like a death in the family.

    It feels personal in part because film people know in their bones that this horror and devastation came at a high point for those in the crowd. They were doing what they loved, enjoying the pure exhilaration of being among the first to see an extraordinary film they had been looking forward to for months. And then this.

    But the deaths in Colorado feel personal for a deeper, more disturbing reason. They bring up the question that not only doesn’t go away but comes back stronger each time it’s raised: Does violence on-screen encourage violence off it? Are the movies we love poisoning our culture, our society, our very minds?”

    ANOTHER EXCERPT

    “Still, it is impossible to be surrounded by the 21st century’s blood-soaked cinematic culture and not wonder what effect it’s having on us. It is impossible to live in a world where so many ultra-violent films exist that they’re broken down into genres — slasher films, splatter films, torture porn — and not feel queasy at the very least.

    If these questions sound familiar, it’s because they are. They get raised every time an atrocity like the one in Aurora takes place, and the movie business’ response is always the same: Not us, we’re not to blame, it’s someone else’s fault.

    READ THE REST: http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/moviesnow/la-et-mn-dark-knight-rises-skip-blame-take-action-kenneth-turan-20120721,0,7569830.story

    A most eloquent article -

  • Grace

    From the Los Angeles Times article above @ 51

    “But the deaths in Colorado feel personal for a deeper, more disturbing reason. They bring up the question that not only doesn’t go away but comes back stronger each time it’s raised: Does violence on-screen encourage violence off it? Are the movies we love poisoning our culture, our society, our very minds?

    My answer is YES –

    All one needs to do, is look around, read the news. Violence has become all to common.

    What becomes common, doesn’t have the same effect. That’s a terrible mark upon our culture, morals, values and our communities, but most of all the children, the young people who must live here, and grow old, as things become even worse.

    Violence, be it sexual, taking the life of another, robbery, drugs, gangs, are common place, no matter what socio economic strata one lives in.

    What one sees, be it on TV, film, or the social interaction at school, it has a devastating effect on those who are addicted to observing violence on screen, or elsewhere.

    How can anyone condone such entertainment, that bruises, and blinds, corrupts, and hurts, the very minds of our children and oursleves?

  • Grace

    From the Los Angeles Times article above @ 51

    “But the deaths in Colorado feel personal for a deeper, more disturbing reason. They bring up the question that not only doesn’t go away but comes back stronger each time it’s raised: Does violence on-screen encourage violence off it? Are the movies we love poisoning our culture, our society, our very minds?

    My answer is YES –

    All one needs to do, is look around, read the news. Violence has become all to common.

    What becomes common, doesn’t have the same effect. That’s a terrible mark upon our culture, morals, values and our communities, but most of all the children, the young people who must live here, and grow old, as things become even worse.

    Violence, be it sexual, taking the life of another, robbery, drugs, gangs, are common place, no matter what socio economic strata one lives in.

    What one sees, be it on TV, film, or the social interaction at school, it has a devastating effect on those who are addicted to observing violence on screen, or elsewhere.

    How can anyone condone such entertainment, that bruises, and blinds, corrupts, and hurts, the very minds of our children and oursleves?

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Grace (@48) said:

    Getting back to my original point; this is, the largest mass murder in our history.

    Um, no. Not even close. What?

    As for your prediction about less-violent films, okay. Just pencil in on your calendar, a year from now, “Gloat to tODD about how Hollywood has made notably fewer and less violent films, just like I predicted.”

    Also, I don’t know about your part of California, but both Texas and Oregon have had theaters that serve food and alcohol for several decades now. It’s not exactly new.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Grace (@48) said:

    Getting back to my original point; this is, the largest mass murder in our history.

    Um, no. Not even close. What?

    As for your prediction about less-violent films, okay. Just pencil in on your calendar, a year from now, “Gloat to tODD about how Hollywood has made notably fewer and less violent films, just like I predicted.”

    Also, I don’t know about your part of California, but both Texas and Oregon have had theaters that serve food and alcohol for several decades now. It’s not exactly new.

  • Grace

    tODD @ 53

    “Also, I don’t know about your part of California, but both Texas and Oregon have had theaters that serve food and alcohol for several decades now. It’s not exactly new.”

    No, it’s not new – but it is very up-scale. The choice in food is gourmet, the wine and beers are not the regular variety – the seating is more of what you would find, if you were invited, to a special screening at a studio.

  • Grace

    tODD @ 53

    “Also, I don’t know about your part of California, but both Texas and Oregon have had theaters that serve food and alcohol for several decades now. It’s not exactly new.”

    No, it’s not new – but it is very up-scale. The choice in food is gourmet, the wine and beers are not the regular variety – the seating is more of what you would find, if you were invited, to a special screening at a studio.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    P.C. said (@44):

    Ain’t a whole lot of shooting tragedies in Florida or Texas, either.

    This is probably an easier claim to make if you don’t actually do the research. There have been at least three mass-murders in Texas in the past fifty years, more than in most states. There was the UT massacre (16 dead), the Luby’s massacre in Killeen (24 dead, 20 injured), and the Ft. Hood shooting (13 dead, 30 injured).

    That last one does tend to put a dent in your argument that “Marines and soldiers are trained to accurately shoot in exactly those combat types of conditions”. I mean, they are, but, like most people in such a situation, they’re caught off-guard by such a scenario. After all, Hasan’s shooting didn’t take place in a dark theater with tear gas and/or smoke grenades. He started shooting in the middle of the day in the middle of a military base, where there was not a shortage of armed people. It’s not enough to have someone “packing” in the presence of a shooter to prevent him from doing major damage.

    If an entire military base wasn’t enough to stop Hasan from killing 13 people, what makes you think one armed guy in a theater would have significantly altered what happened today?

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    P.C. said (@44):

    Ain’t a whole lot of shooting tragedies in Florida or Texas, either.

    This is probably an easier claim to make if you don’t actually do the research. There have been at least three mass-murders in Texas in the past fifty years, more than in most states. There was the UT massacre (16 dead), the Luby’s massacre in Killeen (24 dead, 20 injured), and the Ft. Hood shooting (13 dead, 30 injured).

    That last one does tend to put a dent in your argument that “Marines and soldiers are trained to accurately shoot in exactly those combat types of conditions”. I mean, they are, but, like most people in such a situation, they’re caught off-guard by such a scenario. After all, Hasan’s shooting didn’t take place in a dark theater with tear gas and/or smoke grenades. He started shooting in the middle of the day in the middle of a military base, where there was not a shortage of armed people. It’s not enough to have someone “packing” in the presence of a shooter to prevent him from doing major damage.

    If an entire military base wasn’t enough to stop Hasan from killing 13 people, what makes you think one armed guy in a theater would have significantly altered what happened today?

  • Grace
  • Grace
  • Tom Hering

    Grace, Aurora isn’t “the largest mass murder in our history” as murder involves death. (Aurora: 12 dead. Virginia Tech: 32 dead.) But yes, it’s the largest mass shooting. (Aurora: 12 dead + 59 wounded = 71 victims. Virginia Tech: 32 dead + 17 wounded = 49 victims.) So your link @ 56 doesn’t support your statement.

  • Tom Hering

    Grace, Aurora isn’t “the largest mass murder in our history” as murder involves death. (Aurora: 12 dead. Virginia Tech: 32 dead.) But yes, it’s the largest mass shooting. (Aurora: 12 dead + 59 wounded = 71 victims. Virginia Tech: 32 dead + 17 wounded = 49 victims.) So your link @ 56 doesn’t support your statement.

  • http://lawgospelaction.wordpress.com Neil Wehmas

    While I like the article as a whole, and completely agree with it, I have one complaint. The Democrats are not the only one’s claiming that Bane equates Mitt Romney. Rush Limbaugh was actually the one who made the biggest noise about this. I haven’t heard a single Democrat make the comparison (personally), but many people heard/knew about Limbaugh’s comparison. Rush made himself sound like an idiot.

  • http://lawgospelaction.wordpress.com Neil Wehmas

    While I like the article as a whole, and completely agree with it, I have one complaint. The Democrats are not the only one’s claiming that Bane equates Mitt Romney. Rush Limbaugh was actually the one who made the biggest noise about this. I haven’t heard a single Democrat make the comparison (personally), but many people heard/knew about Limbaugh’s comparison. Rush made himself sound like an idiot.

  • http://lawgospelaction.wordpress.com Neil Wehmas

    Grace,
    1) The violence may or may not be increased. We think it is because of the internet and 24 hour news, but it may not be in reality. Al Capone never watched violent movies, nor did Ganghis Khan or those who carried out the inquisitions or the violent men of the Wild West.
    2) Movies do not cause violence. Study after study debunks this. Rather, it has been repeatedly discovered that these violent tendencies were already there. Simply getting rid of violent movies, will do nothing. (Possibly, it could created different problems in our culture.) There is an entire culture that is the problem.
    3) There are a lot of causes. They may have a lousy homelife. Their parents may be violent towards them. Perhaps, their parents are divorced. Maybe it is the bullying at schools. Maybe they got heavily influenced by the wrong types of people. There is an increasing love for anarchist groups in this country. The internet is a wonderful vehicle for passing on dangerous ideas. Something about that person’s personality or the chemicals in their brain, something lead to them to be more inclined than others to commit these atrocities.

    We fight movies because it is something seemingly easy and tangible to target. However, the truth is that it will do nothing. Our world has been violent long before movies. It was violent before the printing press was able to pass along violent books. The simple fact is that we live in a fallen world, corrupted by sin. When you choose to fight movies/TV/music/video games. It may be like blaming and treating a paper cut for someone who has cancer.

    Really we should look in the mirror, “How is it that I am contributing to a corrupt world like this? What am I saying and doing to others?” All of us are capable of great evil. For some, it may actually be the forced abstinance from violent media that will push them over. What will push you over? However, you contribute. However, you are capable of evil. Bring it before the Lord, confess your sins. Receive his forgiveness. Turn over a new leaf, and act in such a way that you desire change. Instead, be loving, gentle, and kind to all people.

  • http://lawgospelaction.wordpress.com Neil Wehmas

    Grace,
    1) The violence may or may not be increased. We think it is because of the internet and 24 hour news, but it may not be in reality. Al Capone never watched violent movies, nor did Ganghis Khan or those who carried out the inquisitions or the violent men of the Wild West.
    2) Movies do not cause violence. Study after study debunks this. Rather, it has been repeatedly discovered that these violent tendencies were already there. Simply getting rid of violent movies, will do nothing. (Possibly, it could created different problems in our culture.) There is an entire culture that is the problem.
    3) There are a lot of causes. They may have a lousy homelife. Their parents may be violent towards them. Perhaps, their parents are divorced. Maybe it is the bullying at schools. Maybe they got heavily influenced by the wrong types of people. There is an increasing love for anarchist groups in this country. The internet is a wonderful vehicle for passing on dangerous ideas. Something about that person’s personality or the chemicals in their brain, something lead to them to be more inclined than others to commit these atrocities.

    We fight movies because it is something seemingly easy and tangible to target. However, the truth is that it will do nothing. Our world has been violent long before movies. It was violent before the printing press was able to pass along violent books. The simple fact is that we live in a fallen world, corrupted by sin. When you choose to fight movies/TV/music/video games. It may be like blaming and treating a paper cut for someone who has cancer.

    Really we should look in the mirror, “How is it that I am contributing to a corrupt world like this? What am I saying and doing to others?” All of us are capable of great evil. For some, it may actually be the forced abstinance from violent media that will push them over. What will push you over? However, you contribute. However, you are capable of evil. Bring it before the Lord, confess your sins. Receive his forgiveness. Turn over a new leaf, and act in such a way that you desire change. Instead, be loving, gentle, and kind to all people.

  • Cincinnatus

    Grace,

    You’re posting some weapons-grade nonsense today. Do you have a license for that stuff?

    What you say if I told you that violent crimes rates in the United States have been precipitously declining for about two decades, even as movies have become progressively more violent? In fact, the FBI claims our violent crime rates (403.6/100,000 in 2010) are at “historic lows,” lower than they’ve been since 1970 (396.0/100,000). Meanwhile, the murder rate has almost halved since then. Again, in that time, movies have become much more popular and much more graphically violent.

    I know what point you’re trying to make, Grace, but it’s a stupid one. This isn’t the “largest mass murder” in history (American history? all of history), as tODD has noted. And there is no evidence whatsoever that there is a directly causal link between violent movies and the actions of this solitary twisted individual. Maybe he was inspired by movies. Or maybe he was just a sick person. We may never know.

    In fact, statistical evidence says exactly the opposite: since movies have gotten more violent, but violent crime rates have decreased, movies apparently have nothing to do with actual violence. In fact, using your logic, violent movies actually prevent real violence.

  • Cincinnatus

    Grace,

    You’re posting some weapons-grade nonsense today. Do you have a license for that stuff?

    What you say if I told you that violent crimes rates in the United States have been precipitously declining for about two decades, even as movies have become progressively more violent? In fact, the FBI claims our violent crime rates (403.6/100,000 in 2010) are at “historic lows,” lower than they’ve been since 1970 (396.0/100,000). Meanwhile, the murder rate has almost halved since then. Again, in that time, movies have become much more popular and much more graphically violent.

    I know what point you’re trying to make, Grace, but it’s a stupid one. This isn’t the “largest mass murder” in history (American history? all of history), as tODD has noted. And there is no evidence whatsoever that there is a directly causal link between violent movies and the actions of this solitary twisted individual. Maybe he was inspired by movies. Or maybe he was just a sick person. We may never know.

    In fact, statistical evidence says exactly the opposite: since movies have gotten more violent, but violent crime rates have decreased, movies apparently have nothing to do with actual violence. In fact, using your logic, violent movies actually prevent real violence.

  • reg

    Cincinnatus,
    Don’t onfuse Grace with facts. Her anecdotal, facile pontifications have far more “truthiness” than what all your evidence shows.

  • reg

    Cincinnatus,
    Don’t onfuse Grace with facts. Her anecdotal, facile pontifications have far more “truthiness” than what all your evidence shows.

  • Tom Hering

    You know, we all watch comedies. How come most of us can’t tell a joke well? Or have ever felt compelled to become stand-up comedians?

  • Tom Hering

    You know, we all watch comedies. How come most of us can’t tell a joke well? Or have ever felt compelled to become stand-up comedians?

  • http://www.redeemedrambling.blogspot.com John

    Oh, sorry, guys, I guess that humor was a little far out there. I was referring to R*sh. :-)

    tODD @55 – I think your comments would have to be put in some kind of statistical framework to mean anything – controlling, say, for population size, for example. Also, comparing the Colorado shooter to a trained suicide militant like Hassan is probably not the best. And there WAS a shortage of armed people in that situation. You aren’t allowed to carry on base. There are MPs, but everyone else has to check weapons. And Hassan chose the deployment area, where returning or shipping soldiers are guaranteed to have zero weapons.

  • http://www.redeemedrambling.blogspot.com John

    Oh, sorry, guys, I guess that humor was a little far out there. I was referring to R*sh. :-)

    tODD @55 – I think your comments would have to be put in some kind of statistical framework to mean anything – controlling, say, for population size, for example. Also, comparing the Colorado shooter to a trained suicide militant like Hassan is probably not the best. And there WAS a shortage of armed people in that situation. You aren’t allowed to carry on base. There are MPs, but everyone else has to check weapons. And Hassan chose the deployment area, where returning or shipping soldiers are guaranteed to have zero weapons.

  • http://www.matthewcochran.net/blog Matt Cochran

    I’m sympathetic to conservatives on this one because the movie can’t help but look pro-conservative in comparison to what Hollywood usually puts out. But it’s not pro-conservative.

    Having seen the movie yesterday, I’m happy to report that it is not particularly political. Political values are shallow values, which is why overtly political movies usually just aren’t very good. Good movies reach so far deeper than politics that although they may contain political commentary, they end up transcending that commentary and making it part of something far more important. Both conservatives and liberals will find some of their values crystallized in the film because ultimately conservatives and liberals are all humans and have the same law written on their hearts even if sin has twisted that law in different ways.

    I see Tom mentioned that the movie is inspired by Tale of Two Cities, and that certainly seems to be the case. Where I think he goes wrong is in imposing modern notions of “social justice” on Dickens. Tale of Two Cities is a classic work that goes way too deep to be boxed into modern partisan politics. The Dark Knight is the same. It is decidedly anti-occupy-wall-street in the same way that Tale was certainly anti-revolutionary. In both, the “revolution” is ugly, brutal, and offers nothing but destruction and false hope.

    This must not, however, be read to imply that either one is “for” the other side. Tale is not kind to the French aristocracy and Dark Knight is not kind to wall street or capitalism. Each work describes a corrupt society which is corrupt precisely because both “sides” are rotten. Virtue and decency are found in the individuals who know something deeper and pursue something more than what either “side” has to offer. If either “side” wins, everyone loses. Both Batman and Bane buck the trends of their natural “side.” But whereas Bane hates people because they’re infected by the culture’s wickedness and wants to destroy them, Batman loves people despite the infection and wants to pull them out of it.

    Conservatives and liberals will both find their sides represented in this movie somewhere and cheer when the other side gets zinged. If they’re shallow, they will assume the movie must be on their side, where all goodness is located, simply because the movie is very good. But the movie is too good for that.

  • http://www.matthewcochran.net/blog Matt Cochran

    I’m sympathetic to conservatives on this one because the movie can’t help but look pro-conservative in comparison to what Hollywood usually puts out. But it’s not pro-conservative.

    Having seen the movie yesterday, I’m happy to report that it is not particularly political. Political values are shallow values, which is why overtly political movies usually just aren’t very good. Good movies reach so far deeper than politics that although they may contain political commentary, they end up transcending that commentary and making it part of something far more important. Both conservatives and liberals will find some of their values crystallized in the film because ultimately conservatives and liberals are all humans and have the same law written on their hearts even if sin has twisted that law in different ways.

    I see Tom mentioned that the movie is inspired by Tale of Two Cities, and that certainly seems to be the case. Where I think he goes wrong is in imposing modern notions of “social justice” on Dickens. Tale of Two Cities is a classic work that goes way too deep to be boxed into modern partisan politics. The Dark Knight is the same. It is decidedly anti-occupy-wall-street in the same way that Tale was certainly anti-revolutionary. In both, the “revolution” is ugly, brutal, and offers nothing but destruction and false hope.

    This must not, however, be read to imply that either one is “for” the other side. Tale is not kind to the French aristocracy and Dark Knight is not kind to wall street or capitalism. Each work describes a corrupt society which is corrupt precisely because both “sides” are rotten. Virtue and decency are found in the individuals who know something deeper and pursue something more than what either “side” has to offer. If either “side” wins, everyone loses. Both Batman and Bane buck the trends of their natural “side.” But whereas Bane hates people because they’re infected by the culture’s wickedness and wants to destroy them, Batman loves people despite the infection and wants to pull them out of it.

    Conservatives and liberals will both find their sides represented in this movie somewhere and cheer when the other side gets zinged. If they’re shallow, they will assume the movie must be on their side, where all goodness is located, simply because the movie is very good. But the movie is too good for that.

  • Grace

    From my post @ 48

    “Getting back to my original point; this is, the largest mass murder in our history.”

    I meant to write “the largest mass shooting in our history” – the word “murder” was used INSTEAD OF “shooting” – I hope you can all forgive my error, because that is what it was.

    Thank you

  • Grace

    From my post @ 48

    “Getting back to my original point; this is, the largest mass murder in our history.”

    I meant to write “the largest mass shooting in our history” – the word “murder” was used INSTEAD OF “shooting” – I hope you can all forgive my error, because that is what it was.

    Thank you

  • Cincinnatus

    Ok, Grace. The Colorado massacre is the largest mass shooting in American history (not all of history).

    So what? What’s your point? That Batman made him do it?

  • Cincinnatus

    Ok, Grace. The Colorado massacre is the largest mass shooting in American history (not all of history).

    So what? What’s your point? That Batman made him do it?

  • Grace

    Cincinnatus @66

    “So what? What’s your point? That Batman made him do it?”

    My point was made @48 -

  • Grace

    Cincinnatus @66

    “So what? What’s your point? That Batman made him do it?”

    My point was made @48 -

  • Cincinnatus

    Grace@67:

    I don’t see a point in your comment @48. I tried, but I can’t find one. Is your point that theaters shouldn’t serve beer or provide comfy seats? Or are you insinuating that movie studios are going to stop making violent movies sometime soon?

    If either or both of those claims were points your were trying to make, they’re both absurd. First of all, I don’t know what theaters serving beer and high-end concessions has to do with anything, much less a mass murder–so we can probably throw that line of argument aside.

    As for violent movies, I’ve already demonstrated why those are largely irrelevant to cultural violence @60: the numbers don’t back up your implications on this point. That said, move studios will continue to produce violent movies as long as there is money to be made doing so. And boy is there money to be made…

    /Just caught a matinee showing of the new Batman film. It was pretty good.

  • Cincinnatus

    Grace@67:

    I don’t see a point in your comment @48. I tried, but I can’t find one. Is your point that theaters shouldn’t serve beer or provide comfy seats? Or are you insinuating that movie studios are going to stop making violent movies sometime soon?

    If either or both of those claims were points your were trying to make, they’re both absurd. First of all, I don’t know what theaters serving beer and high-end concessions has to do with anything, much less a mass murder–so we can probably throw that line of argument aside.

    As for violent movies, I’ve already demonstrated why those are largely irrelevant to cultural violence @60: the numbers don’t back up your implications on this point. That said, move studios will continue to produce violent movies as long as there is money to be made doing so. And boy is there money to be made…

    /Just caught a matinee showing of the new Batman film. It was pretty good.

  • Grace

    Cincinnatus @ 68

    Your so called ‘questions are nonsense. You’re looking for an argument. LOL

  • Grace

    Cincinnatus @ 68

    Your so called ‘questions are nonsense. You’re looking for an argument. LOL

  • Cincinnatus

    Grace@69:

    I’m absolutely looking for an argument–from you, not necessarily with you. What’s your argument? It seems you’re suggesting that violent movies somehow directly cause animals like this Holmes fellow to go out and commit mass murders. Is that correct?

  • Cincinnatus

    Grace@69:

    I’m absolutely looking for an argument–from you, not necessarily with you. What’s your argument? It seems you’re suggesting that violent movies somehow directly cause animals like this Holmes fellow to go out and commit mass murders. Is that correct?

  • http://enterthevein.wordpress.com J. Dean

    Saw the movie tonight. I didn’t get any particular political bent out of it, although if one REALLY wants to read into it, one can extract subtle jabs taken on both sides of the political aisle.

    BTW, I liked it, but I thought the second one with the Joker was better.

  • http://enterthevein.wordpress.com J. Dean

    Saw the movie tonight. I didn’t get any particular political bent out of it, although if one REALLY wants to read into it, one can extract subtle jabs taken on both sides of the political aisle.

    BTW, I liked it, but I thought the second one with the Joker was better.

  • P.C.

    Todd @55,

    You are correct concerning the three massacres in Texas within the past 50 years.

    The U-T massacre obviously wouldn’t have made a difference whether or not the citizenry was armed since Whitman was a sniper. Perhaps the Luby massacre would have if there were armed citizenry in that restraurant (perhaps that county had stricter concealed carry permit requirements, but I don’t know). You are incorrect to think that on an Army base everyone is armed, especially those whom are seeking medical attention in a clinic. Soldiers are only armed when they are on manuevers, usually with blanks, unless they are at the rifle range or doing specialized training that require actual ammo. The civilian base police responded to the Fort Hood massacre and wounded Hasan.

    You said, “If an entire military base wasn’t enough to stop Hasan from killing 13 people, what makes you think one armed guy in a theater would have significantly altered what happened today?

    My point is that if I was in that type of situation like Aurora, I (and others that I associate with) would sure like the opportunity to defend myself, my loved ones, and anyone near me with a legal concealed carried permitted weapon.

    I’m sure you feel the same way…dad.

  • P.C.

    Todd @55,

    You are correct concerning the three massacres in Texas within the past 50 years.

    The U-T massacre obviously wouldn’t have made a difference whether or not the citizenry was armed since Whitman was a sniper. Perhaps the Luby massacre would have if there were armed citizenry in that restraurant (perhaps that county had stricter concealed carry permit requirements, but I don’t know). You are incorrect to think that on an Army base everyone is armed, especially those whom are seeking medical attention in a clinic. Soldiers are only armed when they are on manuevers, usually with blanks, unless they are at the rifle range or doing specialized training that require actual ammo. The civilian base police responded to the Fort Hood massacre and wounded Hasan.

    You said, “If an entire military base wasn’t enough to stop Hasan from killing 13 people, what makes you think one armed guy in a theater would have significantly altered what happened today?

    My point is that if I was in that type of situation like Aurora, I (and others that I associate with) would sure like the opportunity to defend myself, my loved ones, and anyone near me with a legal concealed carried permitted weapon.

    I’m sure you feel the same way…dad.

  • DonS

    tODD @ 55: Regarding the Ft. Hood shootings, you would certainly think the troops on base are armed, but it is not the case, typically. See http://www.policemag.com/channel/weapons/articles/2009/12/unarmed-victim-zones.aspx

    The soldiers in the shooting zone were unarmed. Unfortunately.

  • DonS

    tODD @ 55: Regarding the Ft. Hood shootings, you would certainly think the troops on base are armed, but it is not the case, typically. See http://www.policemag.com/channel/weapons/articles/2009/12/unarmed-victim-zones.aspx

    The soldiers in the shooting zone were unarmed. Unfortunately.

  • reg

    P.C. and Don S.,
    You guys remind me of Ralphie’s fantasies of what he would be able to do if he just got his Red Ryder bb gun for Christmas, saving the world from all sorts of knaves. Please!

  • reg

    P.C. and Don S.,
    You guys remind me of Ralphie’s fantasies of what he would be able to do if he just got his Red Ryder bb gun for Christmas, saving the world from all sorts of knaves. Please!

  • reg

    ps- You’ll shoot your eye out.

  • reg

    ps- You’ll shoot your eye out.

  • fws

    and the Lutheran Confessions have to say about all this batman stuff….

    “concerning ethics, nothing can be demanded beyond Aristotle, “

  • fws

    and the Lutheran Confessions have to say about all this batman stuff….

    “concerning ethics, nothing can be demanded beyond Aristotle, “

  • P.C.

    reg @74 and 75,

    Hmmm. Let’s see. Over 30 years of going to the rifle and pistol ranges, tear gas and smoke chambers, and putting 2.75″ rockets and 7.62mm on target, I sure wish I would have the opportunity to defend myself against evil from the likes of James Holmes. BB guns just won’t do the trick.

    ” ps- You’ll shoot your eye out.” The object, reg, is to shoot the other guy’s eye out.

    Now go back to being a victim.

  • P.C.

    reg @74 and 75,

    Hmmm. Let’s see. Over 30 years of going to the rifle and pistol ranges, tear gas and smoke chambers, and putting 2.75″ rockets and 7.62mm on target, I sure wish I would have the opportunity to defend myself against evil from the likes of James Holmes. BB guns just won’t do the trick.

    ” ps- You’ll shoot your eye out.” The object, reg, is to shoot the other guy’s eye out.

    Now go back to being a victim.

  • Cincinnatus

    Honestly, guys, the question of gun control is totally irrelevant to the Aurora massacre.

    Fact: Concealed carry likely wouldn’t have prevented this shooting. Clouds of tear gas make it hard for the well-meaning and well-armed citizen to aim accurately in a room full of screaming fellow citizens. I’m not opposed to concealed-carry in the least, but the idea that this shooter would have been stopped sooner or even deterred in the first place by the thought that someone else in the theater might have a gun is naive. He was wearing full tactical body armor, after all. Oh, and lest I forget: concealed carry is already fully legal in Colorado.

    Fact: Additional gun regulations certainly wouldn’t have prevented this shooting. If this evil, evil man hadn’t been allowed to purchase rifles at the gun store–as I purchase my rifle–he would have shown up with illegal guns. Or he would have strolled into the room carrying pipe bombs and killed even more people. The fact that guns were more easily accessible than they might have been is not the cause of this massacre–not even remotely.

    Thus, not only is using this event for political grist deeply insensitive, it’s also shallow and misguided.

  • Cincinnatus

    Honestly, guys, the question of gun control is totally irrelevant to the Aurora massacre.

    Fact: Concealed carry likely wouldn’t have prevented this shooting. Clouds of tear gas make it hard for the well-meaning and well-armed citizen to aim accurately in a room full of screaming fellow citizens. I’m not opposed to concealed-carry in the least, but the idea that this shooter would have been stopped sooner or even deterred in the first place by the thought that someone else in the theater might have a gun is naive. He was wearing full tactical body armor, after all. Oh, and lest I forget: concealed carry is already fully legal in Colorado.

    Fact: Additional gun regulations certainly wouldn’t have prevented this shooting. If this evil, evil man hadn’t been allowed to purchase rifles at the gun store–as I purchase my rifle–he would have shown up with illegal guns. Or he would have strolled into the room carrying pipe bombs and killed even more people. The fact that guns were more easily accessible than they might have been is not the cause of this massacre–not even remotely.

    Thus, not only is using this event for political grist deeply insensitive, it’s also shallow and misguided.

  • fws

    fact:

    a consistent reading of the second amendment gives me the right to possess nuclear and biological weapons as an citizen.

  • fws

    fact:

    a consistent reading of the second amendment gives me the right to possess nuclear and biological weapons as an citizen.

  • Cincinnatus

    fws:

    Fact: No it doesn’t. Not by any current interpretations, even the “loose” one maintained by the Supreme Court.

    Though I do think it’s problematic that it’s generally illegal to own military grade weapons (i.e., guns)–often even for law enforcement officers–though one of the original purposes of the Second Amendment was to enable the people to counter the coercive force of government. The founders considered it theoretically problematic that a government would be better armed than its citizens.

    But that idea is long, long dead. A consistent reading of the Second Amendment does not require a nuclear weapon in the home of every citizen. No constitutional right is considered absolute. Similarly, a “consistent” reading of the First Amendment doesn’t give you the right to shout “fire” in a crowded theater or to sacrifice human children as part of your religion.

  • Cincinnatus

    fws:

    Fact: No it doesn’t. Not by any current interpretations, even the “loose” one maintained by the Supreme Court.

    Though I do think it’s problematic that it’s generally illegal to own military grade weapons (i.e., guns)–often even for law enforcement officers–though one of the original purposes of the Second Amendment was to enable the people to counter the coercive force of government. The founders considered it theoretically problematic that a government would be better armed than its citizens.

    But that idea is long, long dead. A consistent reading of the Second Amendment does not require a nuclear weapon in the home of every citizen. No constitutional right is considered absolute. Similarly, a “consistent” reading of the First Amendment doesn’t give you the right to shout “fire” in a crowded theater or to sacrifice human children as part of your religion.

  • reg

    Cincinnatus,
    While I do favor gun control, the point of my posts at 74-75 was to show how ridiculous PC’s “I would have saved the day with my trusty Magnum 357″ fantasy is. You summarized my point well in the first paragraph of your comment @78.

    P.C.-I do not feel, nor do I hold myself out as being a victim-where did that come from? Did my comment hit a little to close to home?

  • reg

    Cincinnatus,
    While I do favor gun control, the point of my posts at 74-75 was to show how ridiculous PC’s “I would have saved the day with my trusty Magnum 357″ fantasy is. You summarized my point well in the first paragraph of your comment @78.

    P.C.-I do not feel, nor do I hold myself out as being a victim-where did that come from? Did my comment hit a little to close to home?

  • P.C.

    Cincinnatus,

    Excellent points @80

    Although Holmes was wearing body armor and wearing a helmet, portions of his head and his face were vulnerable. Even with body armor, it hurts to take a round and can be very disorientating. Police officers and our military have been killed in the line of duty even though they were wearing full body armor. And even though Colorado may have a legal concealed carry law doesn’t mean that they are easily obtainable to upstanding citizens. In California it is extremely difficult, nearly impossible, to obtain a permit, especially in the more populated counties. The Sheriff is the approving authority.

    Reg,

    I never said anything about “saving the day.” Although you are right, a .357 magnum in the hands of a trained, permitted concealed carry owner would of probably stopped some of that carnage.

    As stated numerous times, I would just like to have the opportunity to legally protect myself and my family with a pistol if confronted with this type of evil. You can put your head in the sand but I would rather do what I have been professionally trained most of my life to do…protect the weakling.

  • P.C.

    Cincinnatus,

    Excellent points @80

    Although Holmes was wearing body armor and wearing a helmet, portions of his head and his face were vulnerable. Even with body armor, it hurts to take a round and can be very disorientating. Police officers and our military have been killed in the line of duty even though they were wearing full body armor. And even though Colorado may have a legal concealed carry law doesn’t mean that they are easily obtainable to upstanding citizens. In California it is extremely difficult, nearly impossible, to obtain a permit, especially in the more populated counties. The Sheriff is the approving authority.

    Reg,

    I never said anything about “saving the day.” Although you are right, a .357 magnum in the hands of a trained, permitted concealed carry owner would of probably stopped some of that carnage.

    As stated numerous times, I would just like to have the opportunity to legally protect myself and my family with a pistol if confronted with this type of evil. You can put your head in the sand but I would rather do what I have been professionally trained most of my life to do…protect the weakling.

  • Tom Hering

    From the reports I’ve read, it’s easier to get a permit in Colorado than it is in most other concealed-carry states. So one has to look elsewhere for the reason why no one in the theater was armed.

    Would it have helped if someone had been? It might have made things worse. A dark theater filled with smoke or tear gas is literally a “fog of war” situation. Would an armed audience member have targeted the right person as Holmes? Would a second armed audience member have targeted the first armed audience member once he/she started returning fire – thinking he/she was Holmes? Things could have got messy real fast.

  • Tom Hering

    From the reports I’ve read, it’s easier to get a permit in Colorado than it is in most other concealed-carry states. So one has to look elsewhere for the reason why no one in the theater was armed.

    Would it have helped if someone had been? It might have made things worse. A dark theater filled with smoke or tear gas is literally a “fog of war” situation. Would an armed audience member have targeted the right person as Holmes? Would a second armed audience member have targeted the first armed audience member once he/she started returning fire – thinking he/she was Holmes? Things could have got messy real fast.

  • DonS

    Tom @ 83: Merely having a state law that permits concealed-carry is not the end of the issue. Businesses still have the right (as they should) to prohibit firearms on their property. Apparently, according to the blog world, Cinemark Theaters has a no firearms policy, probably explaining why no one else in the theater. Google it, and you will see this point over and over again.

    Unfortunately, the shooter disregarded Cinemark’s policy. As they always do disregard attempts at gun control.

  • DonS

    Tom @ 83: Merely having a state law that permits concealed-carry is not the end of the issue. Businesses still have the right (as they should) to prohibit firearms on their property. Apparently, according to the blog world, Cinemark Theaters has a no firearms policy, probably explaining why no one else in the theater. Google it, and you will see this point over and over again.

    Unfortunately, the shooter disregarded Cinemark’s policy. As they always do disregard attempts at gun control.

  • DonS

    reg @ 74: Huh? The only point I made on the thread was that it was a shame that the military personnel on the base at Fort Hood were not permitted to carry their sidearms. Certainly, were they allowed to, Major Hasan’s body count would have been substantially lower, if he had even hatched his plan at all, given the odds against him.

    Our highly trained military are hardly “Ralphie”.

  • DonS

    reg @ 74: Huh? The only point I made on the thread was that it was a shame that the military personnel on the base at Fort Hood were not permitted to carry their sidearms. Certainly, were they allowed to, Major Hasan’s body count would have been substantially lower, if he had even hatched his plan at all, given the odds against him.

    Our highly trained military are hardly “Ralphie”.

  • reg

    Don if I painted with too broad a brush in lumping you with lone ranger P.C, forgive me. I may have jumped the gun.

  • reg

    Don if I painted with too broad a brush in lumping you with lone ranger P.C, forgive me. I may have jumped the gun.

  • http://caughran.blogspot.com Jeremiah Caughran

    @reg: Pun not intended, right?

  • http://caughran.blogspot.com Jeremiah Caughran

    @reg: Pun not intended, right?

  • DonS

    reg @86: Thanks. I hadn’t weighed in on the concealed carry issue, except with respect to Ft. Hood, which is a special case, since clearly troops would be effective in using their weapons were they carrying them.

    I favor carry laws, don’t get me wrong. I think, in general, they deter crime, though I also believe businesses that are not comfortable with weapons have every right to keep them out of their establishments. However, in this case, I’m with Cincinnatus @ 78 — I doubt that it would have helped if one or more patrons had been armed. The element of surprise, darkness, tear gas, high-powered weapons, and body armor would have made for a difficult defensive situation, and possible unintended hits on other patrons.

  • DonS

    reg @86: Thanks. I hadn’t weighed in on the concealed carry issue, except with respect to Ft. Hood, which is a special case, since clearly troops would be effective in using their weapons were they carrying them.

    I favor carry laws, don’t get me wrong. I think, in general, they deter crime, though I also believe businesses that are not comfortable with weapons have every right to keep them out of their establishments. However, in this case, I’m with Cincinnatus @ 78 — I doubt that it would have helped if one or more patrons had been armed. The element of surprise, darkness, tear gas, high-powered weapons, and body armor would have made for a difficult defensive situation, and possible unintended hits on other patrons.

  • Pete

    Tinfoil hat?

  • Pete

    Tinfoil hat?


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X