Two wounded in San Antonio theater shooting thwarted by security guard (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 02, 2024, 06:11:55 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Two wounded in San Antonio theater shooting thwarted by security guard (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Two wounded in San Antonio theater shooting thwarted by security guard  (Read 2153 times)
SPC
Chuck Hagel 08
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,003
Latvia


« on: December 18, 2012, 12:41:16 PM »

Not sure what the intent of this thread is. Does krazen own stock in a security guard staffing company?  Not like anybody is anti security guard.

Really? Then why did the Cinemark theater in Aurora have no security guards and a gun ban, while neighboring theaters allowed its patrons to carry guns and had a greater security force?

At the risk of getting drawn in, I'll venture to say that the Cinemark in Aurora had no security guards because it's a cheap theater and guards cost money, and had a gun ban because gun bans are good (God forgive me for this pun) security theater.

Gun bans are good security theater?

Do you consider it a coincidence that Holmes chose the theater with the gun ban rather than one closer to his home or a larger theater with more people in which he could inflict more damage?

You might want to refer to the definition of security theater:
Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Logged
SPC
Chuck Hagel 08
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,003
Latvia


« Reply #1 on: December 18, 2012, 07:27:13 PM »

At the risk of getting drawn in, I'll venture to say that the Cinemark in Aurora had no security guards because it's a cheap theater and guards cost money, and had a gun ban because gun bans are good (God forgive me for this pun) security theater.

Gun bans are good security theater?

Do you consider it a coincidence that Holmes chose the theater with the gun ban rather than one closer to his home or a larger theater with more people in which he could inflict more damage?

You might want to refer to the definition of security theater:
Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Ah. I would think that signs telling James Holmes that Cinemark is a bunch of sitting ducks would be bad security theater, given that James Holmes chose not to comply with those signs.

Security theater isn't supposed to provide actual security; it just makes boobus Americanus think they are getting security.
Logged
SPC
Chuck Hagel 08
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,003
Latvia


« Reply #2 on: December 19, 2012, 03:45:31 AM »

Not sure what the intent of this thread is. Does krazen own stock in a security guard staffing company?  Not like anybody is anti security guard.

Really? Then why did the Cinemark theater in Aurora have no security guards and a gun ban, while neighboring theaters allowed its patrons to carry guns and had a greater security force?

At the risk of getting drawn in, I'll venture to say that the Cinemark in Aurora had no security guards because it's a cheap theater and guards cost money, and had a gun ban because gun bans are good (God forgive me for this pun) security theater.

Gun bans are good security theater?

Do you consider it a coincidence that Holmes chose the theater with the gun ban rather than one closer to his home or a larger theater with more people in which he could inflict more damage?

Or maybe -- and this is what sane, responsible people think -- maybe he simply chose the theater he had the most experience visiting. Insane gunmen don't typically commit their crimes in unfamiliar locales. Maybe, when you snap to the point that you're willing to take out your insanity on a school full of innocent young children, you don't have a sane, logical plan.

Then why did he only kill himself when the police arrived? Given that it is known that the killer commited suicide when the first armed people arrived on the scene, doesn't it stand to reason that the elevated likelyhood of a shootout deterred the killer from killing any more innocents? If so, then wouldn't have armed people in the vicinity rather than several minutes away have a similar deterrent effect without the unnecessary carnage in the time it took for the police to arrive?
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.019 seconds with 10 queries.