Aurora theate shooting preliminary hearing

[Nighthawk]

Hello, all. I know I haven't posted here in a while, but I thought some of you may be interested in a little "boots on the ground" report of the preliminary hearing. Just to make things clear, I will never again refer to that thing by his name. He is from now on dubbed Sideshow Bob. So- I'm sure you've all heard the report. He sat in the courtroom listening to the testimony against him, and was completely emotionless. That's not quite accurate. Whatever it is that makes us human, he doesn't have it. He sat there more like a thing without a soul than a person with no emotion. Photos and descriptions don't give any real sense of just how spooky Sideshow Bob actually is. He's not crazy- he's quite lucid. He's evil. His presence gives a sense of evil. I've always believed in the human soul, and even more so now that I have been exposed to a creature who looks human, but lacks that divine spark. I was only able to stomach one day of the preliminaries- I was there on Monday with my daughter and her friend (both of whom were in the 4th row of the theater Sideshow Bob shot up) and we all decided by the lunch recess that we had had enough. The media, I have to say, have done an extremely tasteful job of covering the proceeding. The officers who testified told some rather horrific stories, and the press only gave the most basic taste of what the had to say- almost all the details were left out, particularly the stories told by Officer Blue. I've been asked by the DA in the case to come back tomorrow for the arraignment, so I will be doing that. If this thread generate any positive interest, I'll make a short post tomorrow when I get home from that.

[piperdbh]

We must tread lightly with this subject, but I can add that I was an undergrad with a man (let's call him "Jay") who is now in the same cohort of study with the person in question, and Jay agrees with your assessment, Nighthawk.

[Chas]

Sorry, but this is not about kilts is it? Even if every person in the theatre had been wearing a kilt and if every pedestrian walking passed on the outside had been wearing a kilt and if all the emergency workers who had to deal with it had been wearing kilts - the story is still not about kilts.
The story is about guns, gun crime and the aftermath, not about kilts.

Sorry, but this should not be here.

Regards

Chas

[Jock Scot]

Well, we have a music game going in this section at the moment that seems to be very popular and that has nothing to do with kilts.

I think no rule has been broken at the moment, but I can see where this thread might go, so I can imagine that the mods are watching this thread like a hawk and probably with a certain amount of trepidation!

[Chas]

Well, we have a music game going in this section at the moment that seems to be very popular and that has nothing to do with kilts.

I think no rule has been broken at the moment, but I can see where this thread might go, so I can imagine that the mods are watching this thread like a hawk and probably with a certain amount of trepidation!

But, with all respect, Jock - we don't have a rule about song titles. We do have a rule about weapons -

Rule #11
- Whenever someone brings up the subject of weapons, the discussion has always gone downhill rapidly. Because of this, we must insist that there will be no discussion, posting or photos of, weapons.
(We define 'weapon' as anything that is used to inflict damage or harm to living beings. Weapons as components of traditional or historic kilt attire, or as components of a prescribed uniform, may be exempt as long as the discussion does not become about the weapon itself or its use.)

How is this thread not about the use of a weapon?

Regards

Chas

[Jock Scot]

Sorry, but this is not about kilts is it? -------------------





Chas

How then is the popular music "Song title" thread allowed to be running at the moment when that has nothing to do with kilts? Just wondering?

As to the rest, its a can of worms of that there is no doubt, but for me I see no rule infringement---------yet.

[Steve Ashton]

This thread is posted in the Misc. section of the forum.

"- This is where our members can discuss those things in their lives not necessarily related to the Kilt. (Please keep in mind when posting here that we are a community of friends. The idea is to discuss those things which bring us together, not those that separate or divide us.)"

This thread was reported but after due deliberation the decision was that the OP's post does not violate our rules and may be posted here.

[Jock Scot]

This thread is posted in the Misc. section of the forum.

"- This is where our members can discuss those things in their lives not necessarily related to the Kilt. (Please keep in mind when posting here that we are a community of friends. The idea is to discuss those things which bring us together, not those that separate or divide us.)"

This thread was reported but after due deliberation the decision was that the OP's post does not violate our rules and may be posted here.

I ask this Steve, out of interest and not to cause mischief------and yes I do declare an interest-------that if the basic forum rules are "adapted" to take in non kilted issues in this section of a kilt website and given that there are as many different opinions as members, so inevitably there is bound to be a natural divergence of opinion on any given matter. Does that mean for example that "rule 11" issues can amicably and I stress that word, discussed here? Politics and religion will inevitably also come into the equation too.

I realise that this rule 11 is a thorny issue but to be consistent here, to allow music (which is I realise is not too contentious) aeroplanes--warplanes---for example and other non kilt related issues to be discussed and not other issues that others are interested in, but are regarded as a website no-no. Hardly consistent, I suggest. I realise full well that this is not solely an "adult" website, so I fully understand the caution and discretion aspect, but some guidance would be appreciated here.

[unixken]

I feel that the original post, as written, does not violate the rule.

That being said, the political winds in Washington D.C., the U.S. as a whole, and likely the world at large, are focusing their attention on the issue of guns (more so than on mental health and criminal behavior) as a result of this event and others of recent months. I am concerned that just one post could trigger (if you'll pardon the expression) an instant shift into that realm.

There are other forums and venues online that focus on, or run much closer to, that topic. Even if the original post does not violate rule 11 here, I feel there are ample places for the topic to be better explored, than here. Perhaps the mods could add a closing comment/explanation to the thread, and lock it to prevent further discussion, but issue no warning "points" against anyone having thus far contributed.

[davidlpope]

Nighthawk,

I'm thankful that your daughter and her friend were not physically injured. I pray for their emotional healing and for those families whose loved ones were killed.

David