The youngest victims were 6 yrs old and 3 mos old?

[proud2BlibKansan]

What kind of an idiot takes small children to a midnight movie? For one thing, the sound system in theaters can damage their hearing. Now apparently, a crazed lunatic with a gun is also a risk.

How utterly stupid.

[Brickbat]

1. Many infants sleep right through all sorts of things. If new parents feel they can get out and

manage their baby at a movie, more power to them. I took my infants (0-6 months) many places because they were generally quiet, easygoing babies. And if they made a peep, I was out of there.

And six-year-olds shouldn't be at movies? Huh.

[earthside]

4. It is a PG-13 movie.

I love this rendition of the Batman story.

But they are very dark and very violent.

Frankly, unless the six year old was sleeping (and it might have been at that late hour), I would say that this movie is not age appropriate for a person that young.

[proud2BlibKansan]

10. Exactly.

How can we not be concerned about the growing violence in our society? Why expose young children?

[earthside]

23. Excellent observation.

Though some here want to charge 'censorship' if one advocates for civility, restraint and cultural standards, how are we supposed to rear children to become respectful and thoughtful adults when they are fed a diet of violence from toddlerhood on up?

I know it isn't popular to say, but grotesquely violent video/computer games with their interactive nature have simply got to have an effect on mental development. (For the same reason that a child using Crest toothpaste usual ends up using that brand for most of their life: advertising works.)

And if it was just video games, that might be one thing, however, there is gratuitous violence imaged constantly in our movies, television shows, web sites, heard in contemporary music, etc. Our politics is chockfull of advocacy for more war, for retribution against our enemies and opponents, calls hate speech 'debate', makes heroes out of the likes of Michael Savage and Mark Levin -- and to allegedly show 'tolerance' the corporate popular culture parades and celebrates people with violent tattoo images, spikes piercing body parts, and is completely accepting of profanity as part of commonplace language.

It isn't 'censorship' to practice a level of self-control for the sake of having respect for oneself and others.

I hope liberals and progressives don't fall for another fruitless debate about gun control -- when the real issue is the state of our militarized, corporatized, violent culture. We need to be voices for peace, for civility, for self-respect, for acceptance, for inclusiveness, and yes, even common courtesy towards our fellow human beings.

[proud2BlibKansan]

34. I have way too many examples to share

I see it every day at school. Some kids are completely desensitized to violence. We have had to drastically change the way we supervise them at recess. No more free play, only organized games. Too many kids think nothing of jumping on another kid, kicking them, pushing them down - all in play because they see it in video games or on TV. And then, when someone gets hurt, they are stunned and say "But I was only PLAYING!"

[Mojorabbit]

76. Great post

I snuck into a clockwork orange when I was 13 with a fake id. It actually traumatized me. I had no business being in that theater and had not been exposed to much violence at that age. That was eons ago and I have never forgotten how horribly that movie affected me.

[proud2BlibKansan]

8. We hired babysitters

No way would I have ever taken an infant to a movie theater. My DH has a hearing loss. We made a point to not do anything that would damage our kids' hearing.

[LynneSin]

28. Key word in what you said is 'MANY'

which means there are some that won't sleep thru it. And if these infants aren't sleeping then they are going to get very annoyed at the extremely loud noise coming from the movie and a chance they'll start screaming.

It's not like this was the only showing ever of the movie. If this was a 2pm matinee then so be it but taking an infant to a midnight movie is just absolutely wrong and very poor parenting choices.

[Brickbat]

35. Some won't, you're right.

Parents should definitely be honest with themselves about how their babies and children are acting. Taking an infant to a midnight movie is not, however, wrong across the board.

[LynneSin]

43. So those for everyone else in the movie theater we just have to deal with it?

There is NO reason to take an infant to a midnight movie ESPECIALLY one where it's pretty much assumed to be packed to the hilt with patrons.

This was not a one-time-only showing of the movie. Perhaps if it was the Led Zeppelin 02 concert in 2007 that could be justification taking an infant because you know it's probably the last time the band will ever do a concert together. That Batman movie will be in the theater for months.

I've been to theaters where they would have turned the couple away. Why should all the other movie patrons have to suffer because of poor parenting choices of a few.

[Brickbat]

45. If parents have a baby that sleeps well and is generally placid, and who are responsible enough to

take the baby out if it gets fussy, I see no reason for them not to try to and have fun at a movie premiere. I did it myself quite a bit. It's not impossible, and yes, there are plenty of parents who are irresponsible about their kids in public.

[Renew Deal]

42. Many new parents are clueless morons

Old parents too.

And a 6 year old shouldn't be at a midnight movie or a violent crime movie. This one is PG-13. Not even close to what a 6 year old should watch.

[xmas74]

56. Six year old children should be at movies,

just not that one. It's extremely violent and dark-not a good movie to take a child to see.

[AsahinaKimi]

2. KUSA Reporting the 3 month old has been released

can follow here
http://www.9news.com/video/65071045001/1/KUSA-Livestream-Red-18287

[pinboy3niner]

14. He is no longer considered a suspect

Whew!

NRA says shooter failed to take Responsible Gun-Owner training.

[TwilightGardener]

3. Some people don't like to let the fact of having children impinge on their

entertainment. That movie would be too much for a six year old, also. That said, of course, the parents are not to be blamed for not realizing they would expose their children to gunfire.

[proud2BlibKansan]

12. When my kids were young, we didn't have much of a social life

It's called being a parent. If those little people aren't important enough for you to give up your 'entertainment' then I don't know what to tell you. (Not you, I'm speaking rhetorically.)

[TwilightGardener]

17. Yep. We did take our first infant to a restaurant a few times, but he stopped sleeping through

meals by about 4 months old--and then it was a cryfest that resulted in one of us sitting in the car with the baby while the other is inside hastily eating and waiting for the check. After that, it was sitters or we stayed home and rented movies and ate pizza. Wouldn't have ever thought of taking him to a crowded, loud theater at midnight.

[laundry_queen]

68. Ditto, ditto, ditto.

I have 4 kids and never had the type of kid that would sleep through a dinner at a restaurant or a movie. I do know those type of babies exist, I just never had one.

[2pooped2pop]

5. I don't think finding fault in the victims is the right place to put

our concern.

Back 30 years ago when my daughter was an infant, her father worked second shift and we lived as though that was day shift. I would have taken her to a midnight movie.

a six year old getting to stay up late to go to the midnight movie, would have been an extremely fun summer thing to do. I would have been a little less likely to take a six year old but still could have done it.

not looking for an argument, just letting you know that it is much more common than you probably think.

[cbdo2007]

6. OP isn't saying this is the reason they got shot.

Just saying this is an observation of another thing wrong with society. I feel the same way as OP.

[2pooped2pop]

7. I do not

Just like there are different kinds of families, there are different ways that people live. I just don't think this is a big deal.

Now if it had been a school night, no. People used to take infants to movies all the time. Time matters not to an infant. Only every four hours, feed me. Now adays they often dont let infants in the theaters but back when I was young, they approached you when you went in to remind you that if baby cries, you must exit the movie. You could return of course if baby went back out.

I just don't think that this is an issue.

[proud2BlibKansan]

9. Where do you get I'm finding fault with the victims?

How can you blame a 6 yr old or a 3 mo old for being victimized by a crazed lunatic?

Their parents, however, need to have their heads examined.

[2pooped2pop]

21. the parents aren't victims?

[proud2BlibKansan]

22. Were they injured?

[jberryhill]

31. There is something emotionally wrong with you

[lillypaddle]

60. Sure is

[2pooped2pop]

32. Hell yeah

When your child is hurt or killed, is the parent injured? Hell fucking yeah. Are u not a parent? Do u not know this? Families lives are destroyed. Hell yeah, they're victims!

[proud2BlibKansan]

39. Victims who made a bad choice.

[11 Bravo]

63. Yeah, the stupid fuckers should have known that the theater would become a free fire zone!

My wife and I used to put our first child in his car seat and drive around on the Capital Beltway in the middle of the night. Sometimes it was the only way to get him to fall asleep. No doubt, if we had been T-boned by a drunk driver, and our son had been injured, some sanctimonious asswipe would have shown up here exclaiming "What the Hell kind of parents have their child out riding around in the middle of the night?"
Please! Change your user name! I'm a lib and you make me embarrassed to associate myself with the term.

[Ed Suspicious]

51. They had a reasonable expectation not to have their children shot up at a movie theater

no matter what time of day.

And yes they were injured.

How do you all get on your horse's back? They're so tall.

[JI7]

66. their injury is probably greater than if they had been shot and killed themselves

[Marrah_G]

74. Thier infant was shot, probably intheir arms....yes they are victims.

[laundry_queen]

69. a 6 year old at a midnight movie is one thing

a 6 year old at a VIOLENT PG-13 midnight movie is another.

[lillypaddle]

11. Please don't blame the parents

for this.

[proud2BlibKansan]

13. Well, perhaps they've learned a lesson.

We can only hope.

[Brickbat]

15. What's the lesson?

[Marrah_G]

16. What lesson do you learn from having your 3 month old gunned down?

WTF?

Your post is fucking sick.

[cyberswede]

19. Ugh - I agree with you that a 6 y.o. is too young for this movie

... but your comment about the parents learning a lesson is repugnant.

[proud2BlibKansan]

26. I'm sorry you feel that way.

But these parents were obviously idiots for taking small children to a midnight movie. Maybe they will no longer do that. I call that a lesson learned.

[cyberswede]

44. I think the consequence (child being shot) far outweighs the infraction (taking child to a movie)

...which is why I have trouble with the insensitivity of your statement.

At worst, the parents should "learn their lesson" by having a cranky kid the next day, not by having to endure a trip to the ER for a bullet wound.

[proud2BlibKansan]

46. Was the child shot?

I heard on CNN the baby was injured by pepper spray.

[morningfog]

30. WTF? The lesson that they shouldn't take their kids anywhere a maniac might shoot them.

Your post is illogical.

[lillypaddle]

50. What????

I can't believe you just said that.

[GObamaGO]

58. Because everytying is truly this black and white

Shame on you for blaming the victims (the parents who brought their kids) to the movie last night.

[Pithlet]

72. A new low. Even for you n/t

[jberryhill]

18. They would have just slept right through it

[proud2BlibKansan]

24. Even asleep, that baby's hearing could be damaged.

[jberryhill]

27. This is a really inappropriate subthread

However, sound pressure levels in a lap in a theater and below the level of the seat backs is nowhere near the same as sitting upright and unobstructed.

Get off it.

[lillypaddle]

62. Well, let's shoot the little mofo

teach the parents a damn lesson!

[Comrade_McKenzie]

20. Having kids shouldn't be an end of your fun...

These parents will go through enough without bashing them.

[Sirveri]

71. Get a babysitter then.

Detaching the entire shooting thing from this, taking a three month old to the movies sends the message that the parents care more about their entertainment than about what's best for their child or for those around them. Can't get a midnight sitter so you can go hang out with your friends, oh well, you're a parent and have responsibilities now. But instead they bring something that will scream and cry at every loud explosion and gun shot and screw up the movie for every other person around them. All because it was all about them. Now if it doesn't affect those around them, I typically can let that slide, but I've been in plenty of theaters lately where people just don't give a damn about anyone else in the theater. Screaming starts and you can hear them smacking the shit out of the kid. Or they spend the entire time talking shit to their friends, or on their phones or whatever the hell they're doing. It's not us not wanting them to have fun, it's us wanting them to respect their neighbors and civil society.

[Romulox]

25. What role does desensitization to violence at a very young age play in these kinds of crimes?

How can one help but wonder?

[proud2BlibKansan]

29. Yes, there's that too.

I teach 6 year olds. I don't think this movie is appropriate for children that young. But my first thought was the impact on their hearing. Maybe because my DH has a hearing loss, this was something we considered when our kids were young.

[Romulox]

37. At 6, I never lived in a such a dark world. My batman had "ZOW!" bubbles. I don't think I could've

contextualized the violence, since, even at 6, I was keenly aware of a huge amount of injustice in this world.

[2pooped2pop]

47. I imagine you teaching kids this exact age

is why you immediately saw the parental flaw in the situation. I do think though that saying it after the fact, does not help and feels really cold.

If indeed there is a serious danger to kids hearings in a midnight matinee, then that would apply to the afternoon matinee of the kiddie cartoon as well then?

Anyway, I just think you saw a parental no-no and jumped on it, as being a teacher kind of trains you to do. Then instead of realizing how cold hearted you were sounding, you decided to defend it with more crap. I'm sure as a teacher your second thought would have been to reach out to the parent, even if not your first thought.

[proud2BlibKansan]

48. I believe the noise would be louder for a movie like Batman than for a cartoon.

And I was thinking of the baby's hearing when I mentioned hearing damage. Probably not good for the 6 year old either but the baby is at higher risk.

[2pooped2pop]

49. perhaps so but still cold to say in light of the circumstances.

todays lesson, whatever it may be, is not Don't take your kids to an adult action film because it might damage their hearing.

[Enrique]

33. maybe they thought their kids would have fun

and maybe they would have had fun were it not for this tragedy which no one could have imagined.

[Bettie]

36. I wondered that too....

But, you never know why people do stuff.

And you can't really blame them for not expecting the crazed lunatic with guns.

[scheming daemons]

38. at a casino near where I live, there are signs on each floor of the parking garages that read...

"It is unlawful to leave a child unattended in a vehicle"

The simple fact that a casino feels the need for such a sign... That some parents have to be told that you have to give up your gambling fix if you can't find a babysitter.. Is an indictment on our society.

When you have young kids, YES you have to give up on some conveniences as fun if you can't find a baby sitter.

Taking a 6 year old to a violent movie at midnight is parental neglect.

Taking a 3 month old to ANY movie is insensitive to the other patrons. If the baby cries, you disrupt those around you. If you need to get up to take care of the baby during the nearly 3 hours running time of the movie, you disrupt those around you.

If you can't find a babysitter, then you stay home. It is called being a responsible parent and consideration for other people.

I have two children, both in their teens now. When they were infants, we gave up being able to do certain things when we couldn't find a sitter. That's life. When they were 6, they weren't being exposed to PG13 violent action movies.. Their brains aren't ready to process that yet. That borders on parental negligence.

No .. Parents shouldn't have to worry about being shot at when they go out to a movie with their kids... But there is no good excuse for taking a 6 year old or 3 month old to a midnight premier of a loud PG13 action movie. None.

[proud2BlibKansan]

40. +1

You said it better than I did.

Thank you.

[LiberalCatholic]

53. So true

I was just talking to the hubby and we were discussing all the things that we have not done because we could not get a sitter...no regrets. My heart goes out to the parents and certainly they could not have imagined, nor do they deserve, the horror that they lived through (did they live?). But the reality is that a PG-13 movie at midnight is not where a 3 month old and a 6 year old belong.

[pinboy3niner]

41. Let's blame the victims and their parents!1!!

[Ed Suspicious]

52. This thread is violence against rational thought. I wouldn't let MY six year old in here. n/t

[LanternWaste]

54. I can't in good conscience, pretend I have enough relevant information to know

I can't in good conscience, pretend I have enough relevant information to know what was in the minds o9f the parents... however, I imagine many others would like to think themselves clever enough to draw a valid conclusion based on zero knowledge, and then judge them as idiots in a petulant and self-validating manner.

[Gormy Cuss]

73. +1

[RebelOne]

55. The 3-month-old is fine. Not a victim as reported by Colorado TV news. n/t

[WCIL]

57. This could just as easily have happened

at the 4pm showing of Brave. While it is a choice many of us wouldn't make, I'm not sure what scolding the parents is supposed to do, and I'm really confused about what lesson they are to learn.

[Mimosa]

59. Sound at theaters today is twice as loud as when I was a kid

Apart from the Aurora mass murder tragedy, dragging kids out at 12am because you want to see a movie is incredibly selfish. Not to mention immature.

Driving home at 2:30 am is less safe than driving home at say, 7:30 pm. Traffic accident stats back it up.

[progressivebydesign]

61. why should parents be inconvenienced by having small children? sigh...

Seriously, I miss the times when I was growing up when parents acted like adults. You got a babysitter, or you didn't go out. Period.

[Ed Suspicious]

64. Whatever. I took my kids out to a late night Harry Potter showing because we thought it would be

fun for the family. We did this because it would be late night and it made it more of an event. I shouldn't care that you think me a bad parent for this decision but I never for a second imagined the level of sanctimony over the idea. I guess I'm shocked that this non-issue is an issue at all.

[rug]

65. This is like complaining about the salad on the Titanic.

[Bucky]

67. thank you

and Amen.

[noamnety]

70. Can you explain the relevance of the time of day?

If your complaint is about sound levels, shouldn't the question be what sort of idiot takes children to the movies?

I'm unclear on why a midnight movie would be worse for them than a matinee.

[woo me with science]

75. Here is the answer to your question, in another thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=979964