Holmes vs. crowded theatre coincidence?

Random Coincidence or Divine Message?

  • Random Coincidence

    Votes: 1 50.0%
  • Divine Message

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Natural Cause and Effect (same problems cause both)

    Votes: 1 50.0%

  • Total voters
    2
  • Poll closed .

emilynghiem

Constitutionalist / Universalist
Jan 21, 2010
23,669
4,178
290
National Freedmen's Town District
Here is a question I posted on another forum, and wonder if
“Lincoln-Kennedy Conspiracy theorists” are going to jump on this one also:

do you believe it is just "coincidence" that
* Oliver Wendell HOLMES Jr. is famous for saying not to SHOUT FIRE in a crowded theatre (with regard to limits on First Amendment rights)
* While James HOLMES has just become famous for OPENING FIRE in a crowded theatre (reopening debates on Second Amendment rights)

====================================================
RE: Former graduate student James Holmes, 24, is accused of opening fire in a theater in a Denver suburb. The shooting also injured 58 people.
=================================================
Do you believe in divine order and that no coincidences just randomly occur,
or do you believe it is just "coincidence" that
* Oliver Wendell HOLMES Jr. is famous for saying not to SHOUT FIRE in a crowded theatre (with regard to limits on First Amendment rights)
* While James HOLMES has just become famous for OPENING FIRE in a crowded theatre (reopening debates on Second Amendment rights)

Random coincidence, or do you believe God is trying to point out something?
That in both cases you can't just have unbridled freedom without check,
but that the laws such as 1st and 2nd Amendment still need to be
exercised or interpreted WITHIN the spirit of Constitutional laws or contract?

=========================
"Shouting fire in a crowded theatre" is a popular metaphor and frequent paraphrasing of Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.'s opinion in the United States Supreme Court case Schenck v. United States in 1919. The paraphrasing does not generally include the fact that falsely shouting fire to highlight that speech which is merely dangerous and false which can be distinguished from that which is truthful but also dangerous. The quote is used as an example of speech which is claimed to serve no conceivable useful purpose and is extremely and imminently dangerous, as they held distributing fliers in opposition to a military draft to be, so that resort to the courts or administrative procedures is not practical and expresses the permissible limitations on free speech consistent with the terms of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.
 
Last edited:
Actual, what we should have coming out of the closet today are
Bush-Obama Conspiracy theorists:

1. Bush was accused of misleading Congress to declare war outside of Constitutional authority
2. Obama was accused of abusing Congress to imposed health care mandates outside of Constitutional authority

3. Anti-Bush protestors accused of being anti-American, instead of having valid objections against the war in Iraq after 9/11 caused by Saudi terrorists
4. Anti-Obama opponents accused of being racist, instead of having valid objections against health care bill protested by single payer, pro choice, prolife

5. Bush accused of favoring big corporate interests in the guise of free enterprise and democracy
6. Obama accused of favoring big corporate interests in the guise of green energy and health care reforms

Oh wait, that’s not a conspiracy theory.
That’s the Green Party platform, sorry my mistake!

Here is a question I posted on another forum, and wonder if
“Lincoln-Kennedy Conspiracy theorists” are going to jump on this one also:

do you believe it is just "coincidence" that
* Oliver Wendell HOLMES Jr. is famous for saying not to SHOUT FIRE in a crowded theatre (with regard to limits on First Amendment rights)
* While James HOLMES has just become famous for OPENING FIRE in a crowded theatre (reopening debates on Second Amendment rights)

====================================================
RE: Former graduate student James Holmes, 24, is accused of opening fire in a theater in a Denver suburb. The shooting also injured 58 people.
=================================================
Do you believe in divine order and that no coincidences just randomly occur,
or do you believe it is just "coincidence" that
* Oliver Wendell HOLMES Jr. is famous for saying not to SHOUT FIRE in a crowded theatre (with regard to limits on First Amendment rights)
* While James HOLMES has just become famous for OPENING FIRE in a crowded theatre (reopening debates on Second Amendment rights)

Random coincidence, or do you believe God is trying to point out something?
That in both cases you can't just have unbridled freedom without check,
but that the laws such as 1st and 2nd Amendment still need to be
exercised or interpreted WITHIN the spirit of Constitutional laws or contract?

=========================
"Shouting fire in a crowded theatre" is a popular metaphor and frequent paraphrasing of Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.'s opinion in the United States Supreme Court case Schenck v. United States in 1919. The paraphrasing does not generally include the fact that falsely shouting fire to highlight that speech which is merely dangerous and false which can be distinguished from that which is truthful but also dangerous. The quote is used as an example of speech which is claimed to serve no conceivable useful purpose and is extremely and imminently dangerous, as they held distributing fliers in opposition to a military draft to be, so that resort to the courts or administrative procedures is not practical and expresses the permissible limitations on free speech consistent with the terms of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.
 
James Holmes To Face Death Penalty...
:clap2:
James Holmes' Victims Applaud Death Penalty Plan: 'I Want Him Dead'
April 1, 2013 - Friends of Aurora shooting victims applauded prosecutors' decision today to seek the death penalty for James Holmes, with one friend saying he wanted to be in the room if Holmes is executed.
"I don't know if it's painful. I want him dead. I just want to be there in the room when he dies," Bryan Beard said outside the Colorado courthouse. "He took one of my friends from this Earth. Death equals death." Beard's close friend Alex Sullivan was one of the 12 people killed in the shooting on July 20 last year. It was Sullivan's 27th birthday. Prosecutors from the Arapahoe County District Attorney's Office said at a hearing today in Aurora, Colo., that they will seek execution for Holmes if he is convicted. "For James Eagan Holmes, justice is death," District Attorney George Brauchler said in court. A couple of victims' relatives cried. Holmes' parents were also in court. He looked at them when he came in. After the announcement, Holmes' father nodded his head and put his arm around his wife.

Brauchler said his office has reached out to 800 victims and that he had personally spoken with relatives of 60 victims who died and were injured. Brauchler said he didn't speak to anyone about the decision. "They are trying to execute our client and we will do what we need to do to save his life," public defender Tammy Brady said in a voice shaking with anger. "We are asking the court not to rush this." Holmes was swiveling back and forth in his chair during the discussion of the trial date. Judge Carlos Samour, the case's new judge, set the trial date for Feb. 3, 2014, but the date could change if the defense finds it is not ready early next year. "I want to be aggressive in moving this case along, and at the same time I want to make sure it's done right," Samour said. The decision follows several days of wrangling between the defense and prosecution over Holmes' offer to plead guilty in a bid to avoid the death penalty.

ap_james_holmes_mi_130327_wg.jpg

James Holmes sits in the courtroom during his arraignment in Centennial, Colo.

Despite the announcement, experts predict a long road ahead for Holmes, 25, and the case. "When the government tries to kill one of its citizens, you do everything you can to keep it from happening so I expect the road to trial will be a long process," former head of the Colorado public defender's office David Kaplan told ABC News today. "Hopefully the prosecution will keep an open mind to bring closure that will be of benefit to everyone," he said. Holmes' defense attorneys said on Wednesday that he was willing to plead guilty and spend the rest of his life in prison in order to avoid death row. But prosecutors rejected the offer and criticized the defense for what prosecutors called a "calculated" move for attention. "The circumstances surrounding the filing of the Notice indicate that it was filed for the intended purpose of generating the predictable pretrial publicity," prosecutors wrote in their response to the defense's filing.

Holmes is accused of killing 12 people and wounding at least 58 when gunfire erupted in an Aurora theater last July during a midnight screening of "The Dark Knight Rises." Holmes' physical appearance has evolved over his time in prison, visible only in rare court appearances. He has gone from wild, Joker-like orange and red hair in his first appearance to his most recent look of brown hair and a shaggy beard. He has sometimes looked bug-eyed and confused and other times so despondent and drowsy that people questioned whether he had been drugged. Family members are divided on whether Holmes should get death, according to investigative sources. Some are philosophically opposed to the death penalty, others support it and still another group wants death for Holmes, but they don't want to endure a trial.

Source
 
Last edited:
What's sad to me was I thought a benefit of keeping the death penalty was using it as leverage to compel convicts to plea guilty, settle and cooperate with authorities, and/or even agree to restitution for life to the victims or survivors in order to get life in prison. Too bad.
I thought they could get more out of this guy, than spending millions just to execute him.
 
Here is a question I posted on another forum, and wonder if
“Lincoln-Kennedy Conspiracy theorists” are going to jump on this one also:

do you believe it is just "coincidence" that
* Oliver Wendell HOLMES Jr. is famous for saying not to SHOUT FIRE in a crowded theatre (with regard to limits on First Amendment rights)
* While James HOLMES has just become famous for OPENING FIRE in a crowded theatre (reopening debates on Second Amendment rights)

====================================================
RE: Former graduate student James Holmes, 24, is accused of opening fire in a theater in a Denver suburb. The shooting also injured 58 people.
=================================================
Do you believe in divine order and that no coincidences just randomly occur,
or do you believe it is just "coincidence" that
* Oliver Wendell HOLMES Jr. is famous for saying not to SHOUT FIRE in a crowded theatre (with regard to limits on First Amendment rights)
* While James HOLMES has just become famous for OPENING FIRE in a crowded theatre (reopening debates on Second Amendment rights)

Random coincidence, or do you believe God is trying to point out something?
That in both cases you can't just have unbridled freedom without check,
but that the laws such as 1st and 2nd Amendment still need to be
exercised or interpreted WITHIN the spirit of Constitutional laws or contract?

=========================
"Shouting fire in a crowded theatre" is a popular metaphor and frequent paraphrasing of Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.'s opinion in the United States Supreme Court case Schenck v. United States in 1919. The paraphrasing does not generally include the fact that falsely shouting fire to highlight that speech which is merely dangerous and false which can be distinguished from that which is truthful but also dangerous. The quote is used as an example of speech which is claimed to serve no conceivable useful purpose and is extremely and imminently dangerous, as they held distributing fliers in opposition to a military draft to be, so that resort to the courts or administrative procedures is not practical and expresses the permissible limitations on free speech consistent with the terms of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.

:rolleyes:

You're slipping, Emily...
 
did he plan every detail-yes

did he pick the closest theater -no

did he pick the most crowded one-no

did he pick the one that had

a gun free zone sign-yes

of the seven theaters showing that movie

that night

only one was a gun free zone
 

Forum List

Back
Top