After every major shooting, the gun control advocates can be counted on to ask "NOW can't you see the need for gun control?" But does gun control really make sense?
Would gun control have prevented this slaughter? I doubt it. Guns will continue to be available for the person determined to get one, and the kind of person who does something like the Colorado movie theater shooting would be determined.
The problem isn't the weapon, it's the intent, and there are plenty of other ways to kill. There are even plenty of ways to kill en masse. A bomb brought into the theater could have killed more as could an incendiary device. In other contexts, there's poisoning food or water.
Is the cause of gun violence really the availability of guns or is it the nature of the people who use them? Other countries have similar or greater rates of gun possession (I believe both Israel and Switzerland have higher rates), but they don't have nearly the rate of gun violence.
The difference in gun violence between Switzerland and the United States comes down to the difference between the Swiss people and Americans, and I don't see Americans changing in any fundamental way anytime soon.
Not trying to think like a nutjob right-winger here, but the asymmetric insurgency model has proved to be effective against modern militaries.
Mostly against intruders from other countries. As for internal strifes, like Libya and Egypt, such insurgencies require broad support from the public. I don't see that ever being the case in the United States.
What would have really prevented this massacre would be to cancel this tsunami of stupid template-made money-grabbing marvel "movies" that have spawned in the last decade that plague every movie theater all year round. Nobody wants to see 2370419 batman, spiderman and transformers reboots and trilogies. It drives them crazy. See? Who on earth thinks these cheesy b-movies are worth watching anyway? That gunman wasn't crazy, the movie goers were.
I think the answer to who wants to see these movies is obvious: lots of people.
If you think that Christopher Nolan makes B movies, then you are the one who is crazy.
It is definitely an A movie. Maybe a half hour too long (2:45 mins as it stands) and you can't understand much of what Bane says. But with Anne Hathaway in tight-fitting clothes...who cares? In many ways, she's the most interesting character in the movie. I can see some Catwoman movies coming in the future.
@Amanda - I think you may have missed the premise behind the Hallie Berry Catwoman - it was shown in a short series of flashbacks in the movie, that due to, if I recall correctly, some kind of ancient Egyptian (they worshipped cats) magic, the power of the Catwoman periodically descends upon a particular woman and gives her these additional powers, much as it would have seemed to have done with both the Hallie Berry character AND Selena Kyle.
I come from a long line, of reasonably successful, hunter gathers. And all I got was fluffy body hair, a low heat tolerance, and the craving for well prepaired dead animal parts.
@Amanda - RE: "Catwoman does not have any superpowers."
Not entirely true - granted, she doesn't fly or see through walls, but she has a cat-like agility, speed and reflexes, and according to Pfiffer's Catwoman in the Batman movie, 9 lives.
And just in case you wonder why a grown man should know so much about Catwoman - no, I do not live in my mother's basement and read comics all day - I have daughters and take them to see movies that show women superheros get the bad guys, in other words, I'm preparing them for dating. It never hurts for a girl of 10 to learn that a knee to the knards is not always a bad thing --
(You're probably right about the Berry movie, but during the flashbacks, wasn't Selna's name mentioned as being among those upon whom the "power" was vested?)
@Amanda - you were faulting the "Catwoman" movie because the lead character was not Selena Kyle - I simply defended the movie, saying that it explained itself by maintaining that an ancient Egyptian power, from time to time, settled on particular women, which could be extended to include Selena Kyle. At the same time, I realize it was intended as a stand-alone movie, not necessarily having any direct relationship (other than an inferred one) to Ms Kyle.
Visiting the link you provided, I found something interesting:
"For many years Catwoman thrived, but from September 1954 to November 1966 she took an extended hiatus due to the newly developing Comics Code Authority in 1954. These issues involved the rules regarding the development and portrayal of female characters that were in violation of the Comics Code."
If you really want to further your education - and what nerd wouldn't? - I suggest you check out the link in the above paragraph - Comics Code Authority - very interesting!
Comic book publishers went bankrupt because Big Brother decided to protect us from ourselves - no wonder Orwell wrote 1984!
BTW - I have a pair of horn-rimmed glasses I could send you, to complete the nerd effect, but unfortunately, they come equipped with a rubber nose and big, bushy eyebrows, and I doubt that's the look you're going for --
I'm not sure how much of a compliment I'm paying you when I say this, but you've definitely out-nerded me.
It's a comic book movie. Buncha guys in ridiculous costumes running around and beating stuff. Really there is no difference between any of these comic book movies and those fake tv wrestling shows, with those guys in colorful costumes running around fake beating each other, with a ridiculously bad story too. Hey if you're into that kinda stuff, fair enough. I'm not.
Used to be we had heroes like rambo and john mcclane, now it's some guy in a bat themed halloween costume that fakes his voice when he wears a mask like a teenager trying to get into a bar. Yeah, really cool.
And yes nolan makes shitty movies, do I even have to mention prestige and inception?
Anyway sorry for hijacking the thread.
Now, really, there is a difference between the Batman movies and the pro wrestling shit. NOBODY really believes Batman is real, unless they are (excuse the expression) batshit crazy. Some non-crazy people still believe wrestling is at least somewhat legit.