12 killed, 50 wounded at Aurora movie theater

[mlp]

There is nothing wrong with bringing an infant to the movies. Let's not completely alienate families from society.As I said above, I brought my 4 month old to the '89 batman. I put cotton in her ears so the sound was muffled.

Now, shooting people in the theatre is abnormal.

That's not what I was addressing. I was addressing Elaine's contention that infants and toddlers sleep so well at the movies that it's wonderful parenting to take them to midnight shows of special effects type movies.

But to your point - is there a good reason to take a small child into a venue where you have to put cotton in his ears for his comfort?

 

[AspireToExpire]

I think that all good parents should set up large screen TV's with surround sound in their babies' and four year olds' rooms and blast special effects movies all night long. It's so conducive to good sleep that it's downright negligent to not do that.

I have read studies that even allowing an infant to hear adult themed television negatively affects them. It is foolish to assume otherwise when we are all intelligent enough to gather the things we experience form whom we become. Is it the worst thing in the world to let it happen? No. But hardly having one's priorities sorted when you drag not one but two of your small children out at that hour to watch an adult themed movie you want to watch.

It just makes little to no sense to me as a parent to protect them from germs, out of control people yelling, smoke, curse words yet sit them in a theater for a long *** film when they should be in their beds regardless if they are sleeping through the night or not. At 4 months old, some infants are more than capable of sleeping several hours each time they are put to bed. Poor excuse for a lapse in parental judgement.

 

[Ansciess]

which I already answered. Twice.

As I explained, babies that age are not sleeping through the night, nor are they particularly sensitive to noise, and they're vision is much poorer than an adults vision, thus a movie at midnight is actually less disruptive to a 4-month-old than an adult or teen. In fact, the damage a movie like that (due to violence on screen and midnight timing resulting in sleep deprivation) is worse for a teen than for a 4-month-old.

Well they took a 4 year old too. And then the guy left the baby on the floor of the theater. And drove away.

Any criticism for that?

 

[shyvas]

Well they took a 4 year old too. And then the guy left the baby on the floor of the theater. And drove away.

Any criticism for that?

It's hard to believe that a parent or even an adult would do this.

 

[SuicideBlonde]

http://news.yahoo.com/names-victims-emerge-colo-theater-rampage-052035147.html

Names.

 

[ElaineV]

Well they took a 4 year old too. And then the guy left the baby on the floor of the theater. And drove away.

Any criticism for that?

No. They're still all victims. They deserve sympathy. Period.

Besides, the way someone behaves when being shot at is not a reasonable basis from which to determine that persons moral character.

 

[mlp]

No. They're still all victims. They deserve sympathy. Period.

Besides, the way someone behaves when being shot at is not a reasonable basis from which to determine that persons moral character.

When someone leaves his infant and young child behind and not only runs to get out of harm's way himself, but then actually drives away, that's not a reasonable basis from which to determine his moral character?!

Wow. Just wow.

 

[mlp]

Well they took a 4 year old too. And then the guy left the baby on the floor of the theater. And drove away.

Any criticism for that?

I think that being a parent trumps any potential criticism. Parenthood provides a sort of overarching grant of immunity. It's even O.K. to use your kids as a human shield, because if you're being shot at, well, you're not just a parent, you're a victim. Or maybe those are pretty much synonymous.

 

[ElaineV]

I think that being a parent trumps any potential criticism. Parenthood provides a sort of overarching grant of immunity. It's even O.K. to use your kids as a human shield, because if you're being shot at, well, you're not just a parent, you're a victim. Or maybe those are pretty much synonymous.

These are victims. It does not matter how they behaved before, during, or after the shooting. The shooter is the person who deserve the blame. He is the one who KILLED people. The vicitims did not cause this tragedy. No matter what you think of them, they are VICTIMS.

One of those dead is a 6 year old girl. Her mother is now paralyzed. You want to criticize her, too, because she brought her 6 year old daughter to a midnight showing of a somewhat violent film?

 

[ElaineV]

Studies show the vast majority of YOU would stand idly by as someone else beat, raped, or killed another person. The vast majority of YOU would not do a damn thing to help the person. Your instinct is to freeze or run, not rescue. Despite whatever you may think, you are human and humans behave this way. Countless studies prove it.

You can stand back and criticize, blame the victim all you want, but the fact is that a lot of you wouldn't behave any better if you were in that situation. Feel free to comment if you have actually been shot at in a movie theater and your instinct wasn't to run away.

 

[mlp]

Studies show the vast majority of YOU would stand idly by as someone else beat, raped, or killed another person. The vast majority of YOU would not do a damn thing to help the person. Your instinct is to freeze or run, not rescue. Despite whatever you may think, you are human and humans behave this way. Countless studies prove it.

You can stand back and criticize, blame the victim all you want, but the fact is that a lot of you wouldn't behave any better if you were in that situation. Feel free to comment if you have actually been shot at in a movie theater and your instinct wasn't to run away.

I haven't been shot at, but a couple of springs ago, a tornado touched down unexpectedly in the meadow next to the house. No warning until the windows started bowing in and out, the overwhelming roar, and all of the cats started screaming. One of my parrots was sitting with me. I ran to put him into the hall closet where he would be safe from flying glass, then I pulled the other birds' cages away from the windows, then I ran around chasing cats to the door leading into the basement. Then it was over, and I ran outside to check on the ducks, chickens and bees.

It was a year later before I realized that the thought of going into the basement hadn't even crossed my mind once. My fear was all for the animals in my care who depended on me. I'm not a courageous person - I think mine was the perfectly natural reaction of someone who has others who are dependent on them in a dire situation.

So I think this is a guy whose concern is first and foremost his own wellbeing. He's not someone who should have been a parent, and he's not someone who can ever be counted on.

Someone who puts his baby down to be trampled or shot, because he's afraid the baby's crying will draw attention to himself - beneath contempt. And I don't have any particular respect for those who would defend his actions as "natural" either.

 

[ElaineV]

Is any American surprised by mass shootings anymore?
I have to say it surprises me in a way that it's getting this much press. This kind of thing has happened many times before, and will happen again, there's no question about that. And unlike Australia, which put in serious gun control laws after the Port Arthur massacre, America shows no sign of changing no matter how many of these we have.

It got press because it is unusual. I suppose it must seem like in the US we all carry guns and shoot each other all the time, but that's not reality. I live in a gun-friendly state (as in lots of people I know have guns and they can carry them around to public places no problem). Yet I have never witnessed any kind of shooting whatsoever. *knock on wood* It is extremely uncommon for people to go around shooting other people!

Now, I personally am all for tighter gun control laws. But you have to remember that the US population is 13 times larger than the Australian population. Disregarding any other factors, we're simply 13 times more likely to have these kinds of incidents than you are.

But to your point - is there a good reason to take a small child into a venue where you have to put cotton in his ears for his comfort?

FYI, it's never a good idea to put cotton in a babies ears. If you want to protect their ears from loud noises then you should use earplugs. Cotton can get stuck and cause an infection and hearing loss.

 

[AspireToExpire]

Is there any reason in particular we keep having it thrown at us that the people in that theater are victims? I'll point out that WE were not the gunman nor are WE "the bad guys" who care less about victims or babies or victims who happen to be babies for sharing a differing opinion than yourself.

 

[AeryFairy]

Interuppting Mod Post!

Keep it friendly, please - no personal attacks.

 

[mlp]

Telling someone to shut up and personally attacking them isn't exactly a logical discussion on current events.

Oh, I don't mind being personally attacked. From some quarters, I consider it a badge of honor.

ETA:
And Elaine, I guess I need to apologize - I know how extremely sensitive you are about everything relating to parenting, and I should have realized that you couldn't take sarcasm without losing your cool.

That being said, I wish you would focus more on the welfare of children rather than the rights of parents to have their lives disrupted as little as possible by their choice to become parents. I don't have much patience for the latter.

 

[AspireToExpire]

 

[Ansciess]

These are victims. It does not matter how they behaved before, during, or after the shooting. The shooter is the person who deserve the blame. He is the one who KILLED people. The vicitims did not cause this tragedy. No matter what you think of them, they are VICTIMS.

I think these are separate things we're talking about. No one is saying that any of those people is not a victim of the shooter. No one is saying they deserved what happened to them or caused it. But someone can simultaneously be a victim of a shooter and have questionable parenting ability.

Say there's a battered woman. She might also beat her children. She's a victim of her abuser, but she's also a perpetrator to her kids. Both things can exist simultaneously.

 

[Calliegirl]

I do have a daughter and had her father put her on the floor and run from someone shooting in the area, I would have told him to keep on going and don't ever come back. I would have considered that moment to be when he decided to terminate his parental rights.

 

[led.boots]

That's not what I was addressing. I was addressing Elaine's contention that infants and toddlers sleep so well at the movies that it's wonderful parenting to take them to midnight shows of special effects type movies.

But to your point - is there a good reason to take a small child into a venue where you have to put cotton in his ears for his comfort?

Well, I raised my children a little differently than most, I suppose. My kids were breastfed, and went with me most places when they were tiny. They napped fine in the sling and if they weren't happy or became disruptive, we left.

And ElaineV, I'm not sure they had infant-sized earplugs in the '80's, but thank you for the helpful parenting advice. I'm sure it wasn't meant as a criticism of my parenting.

Edited to be less bitchy.

 

[mlp]

Well, I raised my children a little differently than most, I suppose. My kids were breastfed, and went with me most places when they were tiny. They napped fine in the sling and if they weren't happy or became disruptive, we left.

And ElaineV, I'm not sure they had infant-sized earplugs in the '80's, but thank you for the criticism of my parenting by trying to protect my kids' ears decades later

I think the sling close to the body is actually a wonderfully comforting and nurturing way to manage infants.