• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Antis trying to get rich again

Rusty Young Man

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
1,548
Location
Árida Zona
Antis at it again with their frivolous lawsuits and double-speak.

If they can't get money going after the locked-up Colorado mass-murderer* and his family (they aren't rich, so why place the blame where it is due? :rolleyes:), then maybe they can go after the innocent manufacturers of inanimate objects (because "scary!").

Since they may not get money out of that case, maybe they can go after the theater that adhered to the antis' advice of having a "Gun-Free" zone and no armed guards (because having armed guards is just a paranoid, "ammosexual" idea, right?:rolleyes:).

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/05/08/colorado-theaters-security-at-issue-in-civil-trial.html

Fox article said:
DENVER – Nine months after the Colorado theater shooter was sentenced to life in prison, some victims are returning to the same courtroom in hopes of holding the suburban Denver movie theater accountable for not doing more to prevent his bloody rampage.

They say Century Theaters should have had armed guards at the packed opening of the Batman film "The Dark Knight Rises" and alarms that would have sounded when James Holmes slipped into the darkened auditorium through an emergency exit and opened fire, killing 12.

In a civil trial starting Monday in state court, 28 victims' families will argue Cinemark, which owns the theater where the shooting happened, knew the midnight blockbuster would attract at least 1,000 people and should have had guards patrolling the parking lot, where they might have seen Holmes suiting up in head-to-toe body armor in his car. The lawsuit says theater employees failed to check doors, lacked closed-circuit television cameras that would have allowed them to spot trouble and did not intervene as victims lay wounded and dying in the aisles.SNIP...
The bolding and underlining are my emphasis.


Let's see:

1) So do good guys with guns stop bad guys with guns, or not?:rolleyes:

2) I thought calling out for armed guards, security cameras, alarms, etc. was a sign of paranoia?:rolleyes:

3) Why didn't the magical "No Weapons" signs work?:confused:

4) Since Warren v District of Columbia established that public officials (such as LEOs) have no obligation to protect the individual citizen, why would UNARMED employees have that obligation?

5) Where can I buy "head-to-toe body armor"?


*Not "shooter", since that is anyone who fires any firearm. The correct term is "mass-murderer", "rapid-pace mass-murderer", etc.
 
Last edited:

Freedom1Man

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
4,463
Location
Greater Eastside Washington
Antis at it again with their frivolous lawsuits and double-speak.

If they can't get money going after the locked-up Colorado mass-murderer* and his family (they aren't rich, so why place the blame where it is due? :rolleyes:), then maybe they can go after the innocent manufacturers of inanimate objects (because "scary!").

Since they may not get money out of that case, maybe they can go after the theater that adhered to the antis' advice of having a "Gun-Free" zone and no armed guards (because having armed guards is just a paranoid, "ammosexual" idea, right?:rolleyes:).

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/05/08/colorado-theaters-security-at-issue-in-civil-trial.html


The bolding and underlining are my emphasis.


Let's see:

1) So do good guys with guns stop bad guys with guns, or not?:rolleyes:

2) I thought calling out for armed guards, security cameras, alarms, etc. was a sign of paranoia?:rolleyes:

3) Why didn't the magical "No Weapons" signs work?:confused:

4) Since Warren v District of Columbia established that public officials (such as LEOs) have no obligation to protect the individual citizen, why would UNARMED employees have that obligation?

5) Where can I buy "head-to-toe body armor"?


*Not "shooter", since that is anyone who fires any firearm. The correct term is "mass-murderer", "rapid-pace mass-murderer", etc.
Make the theaters liable for making it an unarmed victim zone. I can go for that.

Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk
 
Top